"\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=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ae6f3ef75a9fb067a1f24a2f2f6dbc49\u0022\u003EWednesday, 4 March 2026\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EThe Speaker\u003C/span\u003E took the Chair at 2 p.m.\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e8bc83af89a760fdfd0034a1f0025f2c\u0022\u003EStart of Sitting Day\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c74490bd48a85f9a0703a33ead4c03b4\u0022\u003EKarakia/Prayers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022 data-id=\u0022abac53e3bd1e0d07c3dda1501526398d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022abac53e3bd1e0d07c3dda1501526398d\u0022\u003ETEANAU TUIONO (Assistant Speaker) (14:00)\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EE te Atua kaha rawa, ka tuku whakamoemiti atu m\u0101tou, m\u014D ng\u0101 karakia kua waihotia mai ki runga i a m\u0101tou. Ka waiho i \u014D m\u0101tou p\u0101nga whaiaro katoa ki te taha. Ka mihi m\u0101tou ki te K\u012Bngi, me te inoi atu m\u014D te \u0101rahitanga i roto i \u014D m\u0101tou whakaaroarohanga, kia m\u014Dhio ai, kia whakaiti ai t\u0101 m\u0101tou whakahaere i ng\u0101 take o te Whare nei, m\u014D te oranga, te maung\u0101rongo, me te aroha o Aotearoa. \u0100mene.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EAlmighty God, we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests, we acknowledge the King and pray for guidance in our deliberations, that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom and humility, for the welfare, peace, and compassion of New Zealand. Amen.\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00229529402e848c2eaae2b6e56ca6695eab\u0022\u003EVisitors\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b4e9e353a44f9b652d5b178192a68ee8\u0022\u003EVanuatu\u2014Speaker of the Parliament of Vanuatu\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022 data-id=\u0022e4bc93b1414fbfdb001035de62556fdc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e4bc93b1414fbfdb001035de62556fdc\u0022\u003ESPEAKER (14:01)\u003C/span\u003E: I am sure members will want to join with me in welcoming the Hon Stephen Felix, who is the Speaker of the Parliament of Vanuatu, to my left, and his delegation, who are in the gallery.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EApplause\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThe Rt Hon Chris Hipkins enters the Chamber\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6d9c33148b5ee7c31a944173846506c\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That was well done, Mr Hipkins! Sometimes it\u2019s good to go through the revolving door of life on someone else\u2019s shove.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002250bda90e0486bc7f6338002bb2244c29\u0022\u003EPresentation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002267b4d7c5c8786a06cc3b20ee2067e5fe\u0022\u003ESelect Committee Reports\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022 data-id=\u0022856fbab5ed7c15a9f75de4776fa19f0d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022856fbab5ed7c15a9f75de4776fa19f0d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER (14:01)\u003C/span\u003E: No petitions have been presented. No papers have been delivered. Two select committee reports have been delivered for presentation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220668128c55cbec9647bd5d9682e33972\u0022\u003ECLERK (14:01): \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003EReport of the Education and Workforce Committee on the petition of Paul Bakker\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003EReport of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on three stewardship reports from the Treasury.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f3711f0ae323a8902e986ab0bba2ce6\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The stewardship reports are set down for consideration.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00228bfb952ac6f8f4df81257c0109d4ebc5\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222bc47422f1b30a0fd30bf6c709691c4c\u0022\u003ENg\u0101ti Ruapani mai Waikaremoana Claims Settlement Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00226da4b1bdc23f899724dcc096d5722cdb\u0022\u003EIntroduction\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022 data-id=\u002267cbbb15c600f1b27cc2451c4edbbb66\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002267cbbb15c600f1b27cc2451c4edbbb66\u0022\u003ESPEAKER (14:02)\u003C/span\u003E: The Clerk has been informed of the introduction of a bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e6b69761eb6099f88d33e57c58e4f4a2\u0022\u003ECLERK (14:02): \u003C/span\u003ENg\u0101ti Ruapani mai Waikaremoana Claims Settlement Bill, introduction.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fab0ba466b4661142db65e90118e7fd5\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The bill is set down for first reading. We come now to oral questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00222b9a7f3f5fd05b6708800824c1f20697\u0022\u003EOral Questions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00229d462a9565d6b3d55b0f0180203ecfda\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cf9135e459acb97b8d38ed9e6052a55e\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 1\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022 data-id=\u0022e1a08ed6b95c34bc44f41f275411f60f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e1a08ed6b95c34bc44f41f275411f60f\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the Opposition) (14:02)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by all his Government\u2019s statements and actions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022 data-id=\u00220b3e4f53b942c2f0aa207123cb358a02\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220b3e4f53b942c2f0aa207123cb358a02\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister) (14:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214993eab4ecf402a52c3814a3a9d5a0e\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by his Government\u2019s decision to build a multibillion-dollar liquefied natural gas (LNG) import facility, at a cost of billions of dollars, which every Kiwi household will pay through his Government\u2019s new proposed gas tax, in light of the 50 percent spike in LNG prices just this week, following the recent drone strikes in the Middle East?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254c32d0a63d5d01d9729c4a3f85aa566\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, international commodity prices rise and fall. That\u2019s inevitable. You don\u2019t change your approach or strategy just because of that. What I can say is that banning oil and gas put a chilling effect on this country. The Lake Onslow project, at $17 billion\u2014to be delivered in 2037 at $8,000 a household\u2014and $800 megawatt per hour wholesale electricity prices means that we have a failed energy policy. We have dry-year risk, and, as a result, this has actually been a good move, because it has lowered the forward electricity prices by about $25 since we made that announcement. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230801d0acbf391b0987fdb0afabeaa46\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e36d5ae0a0814e13144d6a8f8626cd32\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just before you start\u2014that is to be the last of the general barrage that is to be heard in the House today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222468c236d82ca21cbd292ffa0a4c033d\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Did the Government assess the risk of a major supply or price disruption before committing New Zealand households to pay for an LNG import facility?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022762e92406a4c4bd5660748a0bdd3ee1e\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: I reject the characterisation of that question, because this is about lowering power bills by about $50 for every single household in this country. This is a backup source of energy, so that we don\u2019t end up in the situation that the member and his Government created last time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289946533665b5849f221c44656226175\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Did the Government assess, or did it not assess, the risk of a major supply or price disruption?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f34e0eebbb714cf5d6d92f3e875a6bea\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a natural thing that LNG prices go up and down as a global commodity price, but, irrespective of that, it is still the right answer to make sure we have a backup option to deliver dry-year risk, so we take the risk premium down\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002239b1e8138da963f901db1c5aef7af91e\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Name one economist!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c07cc512b90ca9a5587ab8bfee4e068d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, Prime Minister. That has to stop. That\u2019s ridiculous, calling out at that level across the House. It doesn\u2019t matter how much you call out; the answer won\u2019t change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d7e0a3362728cfedd27b581b5d9eead4\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Is the National Infrastructure Plan released by his Government wrong when it says it isn\u2019t clear that importing LNG would lower average electricity prices?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229d236ace80d828e07203571637f0667\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Look, no disrespect, but I\u2019m not taking lectures from that member on energy policy. I saw some wonderful comments that we should be more independent and have an independent energy policy. Well, actually, the actions of that member\u2019s Government created an importation of Indonesian coal and didn\u2019t actually create the independent energy policy that we are creating through an \u201Cand, and, and\u201D approach of lots of initiatives. As you have seen since the announcement of the LNG facility, on top of the announcement that we will follow the mixed-ownership model companies investing in thermal firming energy, we have seen a $25 reduction in forward electricity prices in the futures market, and that\u2019s a good thing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022144b45e36bcfbc3fd316669aa67c1d2b\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Mr Speaker, in all of that, like most of what the Prime Minister\u2019s been saying this week, there wasn\u2019t actually an answer. The question was about the National Infrastructure Plan and the fact that it said that LNG would not lower average electricity prices. The Prime Minister didn\u2019t even mention the National Infrastructure Plan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221bcd39b87818e92afaa17e9d215e5057\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right, but, of course, a lot of people across the House were calling out loudly and unhelpfully, which doesn\u2019t make it easy for me to listen to the question. I\u2019ve got a new sound bar in front of me and I have to put up with an awful lot more than I have up until now, but I would suggest that the Prime Minister might consider the question and focus on the answers to future questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229db2da8cc26958138f687c3a50556b15\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Was the Frontier Economics report, commissioned by his own Government, wrong when it said that importing LNG solely for the purpose of insuring against dry-year risk didn\u2019t make economic sense?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222764cfb31394ffbb4ce04cd3f2de5619\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not the only thing that this Government is doing. This Government is wanting to deal with dry-year risk, because why? It adds a risk premium into consumers\u2019 power bills. So, by doing a series of things that actually increase supply and optionality, we end up de-risking the dry-year risk and lowering the risk premium that\u2019s present in power bills. And, on the back of this, we end up lowering power bills for every household by $50, instead of loading them up by $8,000 for a 2037 Lake Onslow at $17 billion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208d15a33a0fd2df2c9f0e9c5fc582017\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister think that energy independence is a good thing, and what have been some decisions that have degraded that independence?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d260b3b1ac7f0fa6ebb0ae71cb9f723e\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: I do think energy independence is a good thing and that\u2019s what this Government is delivering. I noticed the member raised that this morning or yesterday, but, again, he caused a situation where we are not energy independent. He ended up banning oil and gas, and, as a result, we import Indonesian coal, and we actually are reliant on others rather than being reliant on ourselves. I don\u2019t take lectures from that member, because it was an abject failure. The Labour-Greens energy policy was a total failure. He knows it, he\u2019s trying to gaslight his way through it, and we\u2019re not having it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022234d545a75ea45ff4f0e838d06fb4223\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224fb966ac7882b4edb9df078604fa13b6\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: When was the last commercially viable gas find in New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d24ba6993735a3ace484f482c4c21074\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m sorry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002269d8322cc1a6b89b392b4a26110868af\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Mr Speaker, I\u2019m seeking your advice because, as we\u2019ve discussed much in this term of Parliament, truth and veracity of the facts that are stated in this House are incredibly important. The Prime Minister has consistently made a causal connection between the ban on offshore oil and gas exploration, and the prices of energy, yet all of the data and evidence shows that the average time it takes to go from exploration to production is 16 years. That is, if we did not see that come into effect in 2018\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022705e3361fdf8d28f21770379c61b787b\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re going to listen to the whole point of order again; they\u2019re heard in silence. They are often a lot more brief than the member was offering the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c2626bcabcb0764ea21799d23ad5713e\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, seeking your guidance. When we have a situation where the Prime Minister has so consistently asserted a causal connection between the previous Government\u2019s decision to ban offshore oil and gas exploration, to energy prices that were experienced, yet we know\u2014because the data and the evidence which Governments are then provided with shows it\u2014that the average amount of time it takes to go from fossil fuel exploration to production is 16 years, and if the ban did not come into effect in 2018, new offshore oil and gas would not come online until the 2030s.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002206b78de64734e4e3d171224534e201fb\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s all good. Good. I got the point but I have to say that it\u2019s not a point of order because you are calling attention to a debating matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2162d63662d1ef29f7d102d68fb63e8\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: A fresh point of order. Mr Speaker, I just draw your attention\u2014I\u2019m sure you have many longer memories than mine\u2014of the way Speakers have held order in the House by shutting down such ridiculous debating points masquerading as points of order, before a member was able to disrupt the House making them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f920cdb9ba0ea52a2305d2004e99235b\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, well, thank you for your advice; I do appreciate the regularity of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022564daef68ac61ac6385a0495d8f07f6f\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Was the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment wrong when he said that importing LNG could leave Kiwis worse off because it would discourage investment in cheaper renewable sources of electricity generation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e9cb3e3a76921fd52a30503b8c98634c\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, he was, because, actually, we have taken a policy in our Government that we table the advice, and then we make some decisions. What we don\u2019t do is create an $800 megawatt per hour cost that ends up shutting down mills, and low and middle income working New Zealanders lose their jobs. That\u2019s exactly what that member did\u2014economic vandal, arsonist, now complaining about the fire that we\u2019re putting out that he created.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee21619936cf086fcff4fcde7e4e62da\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry. Just a minute. You can\u2019t make those sorts of comments at the end of an answer. That\u2019s going beyond a debating point, to actually being a personal insult and it cannot be done.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002250a1634adb3c3d81da20c69ec3cfb452\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. The record is abysmal and you\u2019ve got to understand context.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225bd9b39a76d495bf1f3924268cd258a1\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s now, with all due respect, challenging the Speaker, and it\u2019s not a wise thing to do, because even Prime Ministers aren\u2019t beyond being removed from the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225faf510f7c86a506d9c3c0d5214c418f\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: How can something that increases energy supply and brings down household power bills actually increase costs to households, or is that just Labour logic?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b650391fa7d7f5f55a225a45dce95c8e\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, again, the issue that we\u2019re dealing with is that a risk in a dry year\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d3373237f3ccf892b68c0012a113da3\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Keeping in mind that only moments ago that very member was pleading with you to make sure that points of order were valid, surely the same logic must apply to questions. You mustn\u2019t allow a question that is, even in its own wording, having a crack at the Opposition, not setting up the Prime Minister to do so himself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221effc69b5f2dade0072ec864414c566f\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right, and I was going to refer to Speaker\u2019s ruling 181/4\u2014I think it is\u2014that would back that as well. So we\u2019ll move on to the next supplementary question from the Rt Hon Chris Hipkins.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227be68ca27777dbf827ce38eddbf06a81\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Why is he so sure that tying the price of electricity in New Zealand to volatile international LNG markets will leave Kiwis better off, when the Government didn\u2019t even consider any renewable energy alternative options?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223c977a95768ee8df2024804d2b80226\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the great thing is that we are experiencing a renewables boom in this country, and that is because of fast-track consenting, a one-stop shop which that member\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bcbc50bbf8cc54fdcbc46f3272d162c4\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: Answer the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb1451a152e3204ffe028cb61e3a8471\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, sorry. The man is trying to answer the question. Please don\u2019t call out with inane comments like that. Have you finished?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219506b932fa3660f861f46c4d18b482a\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, yeah. I\u2019m happy to stop.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a99e70f4725f3ee5c31d57e9f8654dea\u0022\u003EFinance\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e61e9bb6392aac7b5cb3bb4694139020\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022 data-id=\u0022d99eb1efa3ca64f7bac1713896a31d25\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d99eb1efa3ca64f7bac1713896a31d25\u0022\u003ECAMERON BREWER (National\u2014Upper Harbour) (14:12)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Finance\u003C/span\u003E: Are events in the Middle East impacting the New Zealand economy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022f636e95006955ec388b0ae88e9e945e6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f636e95006955ec388b0ae88e9e945e6\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (14:12)\u003C/span\u003E: It is a little early to say whether the conflict is having a significant impact on the economy yet. As I said yesterday, there is likely to be an impact, but what that is and how quickly things get back to normal will depend on the nature, severity, and duration of the disruption arising from this conflict.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3b060e614c64d270ba198bae848a983\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Inflation\u2019s nothing to do with international factors, remember?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ceebdd3791b516688308a4017cf196b4\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: I note that I am being continuously barraged by the Leader of the Opposition. I think New Zealanders take this issue very seriously, and I do too, and\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221f63683353be59882086d636d505f8e\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Can\u2019t blame international factors!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f35f780a487e4824679bf6e1e2cffd0\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014I think it is important that I convey these messages to the House, and I think it would be useful if the Leader of the Opposition quit his barrage. Key channels by which events in the Middle East could affect New Zealand are an increase in oil prices, shipping and air disruptions, freight costs, demand for New Zealand exports, and risk aversion in financial markets that affects the New Zealand dollar and global growth. To what extent those channels operate is yet to be seen. The Government is monitoring events closely.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b6510aeb8a439c59b7e3cd4f58f1c90c\u0022\u003ECameron Brewer\u003C/span\u003E: How did markets react overnight?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d20290df8b6919eaa99550a0b4c909e7\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Brent crude oil ended the day at US$82 a barrel, up from around $72 before the weekend. Global equity markets fell, with the S\u0026amp;P 500 down 0.7\u00A0percent and the Nikkei down 3.1 percent. We are observing volatility in these numbers during the course of trading hours. The New Zealand dollar is 0.5c lower against the US dollar compared to yesterday. So there is evidence of a risk of sentiment in the markets, with investors leaning towards safety rather than wanting to take risks in the current environment. However, these market movements have been relatively modest so far. In part, this reflects the fact that it is too soon to tell how prolonged the conflict and any economic disruption will be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d249610d5061dd524335108d9f80ae62\u0022\u003ECameron Brewer\u003C/span\u003E: What could the conflict mean for inflation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c8cdbfa8472d120e8517aec03c869fe\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: In its February Monetary Policy Statement, the Reserve Bank forecast annual Consumers Price Index inflation to fall this year towards 2 percent. However, it did note that geopolitical events could put upward pressure on tradables inflation through higher oil prices and a lower New Zealand dollar. Tradables inflation has been driving the recent uptick in inflation but was expected to fall over the coming year. Whether there is any further upward pressure from events in the Middle East conflict depends on how that conflict plays out and for how long, and I hope that the Opposition share with me the seriousness of these issues and the need to take them seriously.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216e9b1586cbffca791f6639be43b722c\u0022\u003ECameron Brewer\u003C/span\u003E: How is New Zealand placed to deal with global volatility?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022daed029ccfb6cf12c5d0c61a1bfa9c60\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: New Zealand is well placed. We have sound fundamentals: a resilient banking sector and a floating exchange rate that helps buffer shocks. This morning, Stats NZ released the latest data on the merchandise terms of trade, which is the ratio of the prices we get for goods we export, compared to the prices we pay for imports. Right now, the terms of trade are at record highs in a series that goes all the way back to 1957. New Zealand\u2019s current account deficit has narrowed considerably. It was 3.5\u00A0percent of GDP in the September 2025 quarter, compared with 9 percent in December 2022. That makes New Zealand a more resilient country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222fc3f04c0aa8847d0308c65d9e225c4f\u0022\u003EFinance\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a94d02b211b32dd5b6542f4111f29b0a\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u00227f0479b9ec9977b2a11e812e097cd9cd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227f0479b9ec9977b2a11e812e097cd9cd\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (14:16)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Finance\u003C/span\u003E: Does she stand by all her statements and actions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00226bf4c693265fb849771663fe8d2bb66f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226bf4c693265fb849771663fe8d2bb66f\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (14:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, in the context in which they were given, including my statement yesterday that the member \u201Cwishes to return to the monetary policy framework that resulted in New Zealand\u2019s highest period of inflation in recent history\u201D. At a time of heightened global instability, proposing to dilute the Reserve Bank\u2019s focus on inflation is the last thing New Zealand needs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb18d56db19d199f6da5c5a791b453ec\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: When can Kiwis \u201Cexpect to pay less for home-grown food at the checkout\u201D as she has promised them since 2023, given the price of butter is up 78\u00A0percent, mince is up 32 percent, and milk is up 22 percent from two years ago?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b6f2719101d61e8c71fadd39cee07bed\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: It is difficult to compare what is the case now with what would have been the case under the policy settings of the last Government, but I am confident that the measures this Government has taken have meant that prices have been lower than would otherwise have been the case. In the video the member refers to, there are five things I said a National Government would do. We would stop adding costs to farmers: tick\u2014achieved. We would make sure they had the workers they need: tick\u2014achieved. We would bring Government spending under control: tick\u2014that\u2019s what we\u2019re doing. We would focus the Reserve Bank on fighting inflation: tick\u2014that is what we\u2019ve done. We would let people keep more of what they earn with our plan for tax reduction: tick\u2014we delivered tax relief.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214249d0aeac55fc0f9e39a57b2cff53d\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: How much has the average weekly grocery bill fallen since her statement on 26 August 2025 that the Government\u2019s next steps would \u201Creduce food prices for Kiwis\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226133d495ec64398121e1523e66fda308\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: The member is being, I think, quite disingenuous. It is clear from my statement and the work that the Government is doing that our plan is about ensuring that prices in the future would be lower than would otherwise be the case. If the member disagrees with me that increasing competition in the grocery sector is a good thing, she should say so. If she disagrees with me that increasing competition would put more downward pressure on prices than would otherwise be the case, she should say so. I stand by this Government\u2019s view that increasing retail competition in the grocery sector could result in a situation in which prices are lower than would otherwise be the case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad62fbe722a040eaaecf9b885e04d175\u0022\u003ERt Hon Christopher Luxon\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e171262245ee7cf9cadc8eb01080609\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019s given up on trying to answer them\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227e4b0f692099e54de5576aa68bed196\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Hang on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204ff83d37c1cba1eaa8c64cd797f6173\u0022\u003ERt Hon Christopher Luxon\u003C/span\u003E: Has she seen any reports of economists recommending deflation in an economy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002257adab78a974b89b25a49bd9949cce67\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: I would say that, across the Parliament, there seems to be quite a lot of confusion about the monetary policy framework and how it works. For example, I did see some quotes from one member of this House today that suggested that if we had lower interest rates and lower unemployment, there would be no effect on inflation. I suggest that member read an economics textbook.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b71faa89abe231ec8e02b2ed1b3b6f63\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: When she told New Zealanders she was on a \u201Cmission to deliver better grocery prices for Kiwis\u201D, was that a similar promise to her promise to 21,000 families that they would receive a $250 tax cut?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fbbbdd14991b975c4f7aee79194fffc8\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: That was a commitment that I stand by.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f8aff39b43b7714865fcf1d060a90b04\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: How many families have actually received a $250 tax cut?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c59d25ef2438379241ef66636de14b05\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: The member knows full well that she is correlating two separate statements. One statement, which the Government made very emphatically, and which we have delivered on, where we said that we would deliver a tax package, which would deliver up to $250 of tax relief for families\u2014delivered. The second statement was around how many families would receive a payment of $150 a fortnight under FamilyBoost. I want to thank the member for joining the National Party in voting for the legislation which we introduced to expand the generosity of that scheme to ensure that thousands more families would receive that level of support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d00aedb432b36ca35f681f7e296e8a1\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: Is the reason she gets so defensive when confronted with her own broken promise to reduce food prices because she knows she will never ever deliver on it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b70cdcadea5c13c9e3d400413962877a\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: No, I don\u2019t feel defensive. When the other side of the House are having to misconstrue statements and duck away from misrepresentations they have made in this House, they are the ones who are clearly in trouble.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00226b9837fd650a939a7f04b0f7c653e2ba\u0022\u003EChild Poverty Reduction\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022eb86df00a81a203779876ef3f096db61\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 4\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c4ca4cc5411f4905b1e974d906283186\u0022 data-id=\u002241da43e01737a0a0c43fdd24287bca27\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4ca4cc5411f4905b1e974d906283186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002241da43e01737a0a0c43fdd24287bca27\u0022\u003EMARIAMENO KAPA-KINGI (Te Tai Tokerau) (14:21)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister for Child Poverty Reduction\u003C/span\u003E: What immediate actions is the Minister taking to stop the escalation of the 170,000 tamariki experiencing child poverty and hardship, particularly for M\u0101ori, who make up a quarter of this number across Aotearoa?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u0022710baf70deabd8b63611ebe363326914\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022710baf70deabd8b63611ebe363326914\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Child Poverty Reduction) (14:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Our Government is committed to taking action to reduce child poverty by fixing the basics and building the future for all young New Zealanders. Reducing child material hardship is a priority in our Government\u2019s child and youth strategy. We have made a number of changes to improve the lives of Kiwi families, including increasing the in-work tax credit, lifting the threshold for Working for Families, providing working families with tax relief, and introducing FamilyBoost to make childcare more affordable. Our Government is focused on practical solutions, including breaking cycles of welfare dependency, creating more jobs, and improving educational outcomes to help keep children out of poverty in the long term.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4ca4cc5411f4905b1e974d906283186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f79a0de19fe508ac26ef505a72218a6e\u0022\u003EMariameno Kapa-Kingi\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Minister commit to urgent pre-Budget actions for regions like Te Tai Tokerau, where around 9,500 tamariki are living in material hardship, and, if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fdbc03176acff4b31bebf17d71a7c2d0\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: I accept that there are many families who are doing it tough right now. While it would be nice to have said that we had inherited a set of economic circumstances that made it easier for people and families to get ahead, that is not the case. In Budget 2024, our Government prioritised reducing the number of children in poverty with the measures that I outlined before to lift 17,000 children out of poverty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4ca4cc5411f4905b1e974d906283186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f2976e8167aebab9376d2856fca9cf4\u0022\u003EMariameno Kapa-Kingi\u003C/span\u003E: What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that child poverty and hardship do not begin before birth, following reports from Te Tai Tokerau - based midwives that expectant mothers are missing antenatal care because they cannot afford basics such as food and transport?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e19134203b9a0e83ada02f7f2738e4c\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for her question. That is why the second of the three priorities in the child and youth strategy is the first 2,000 days. We know how critical it is for children to do well. I would encourage any families who are challenged to seek assistance from a variety of agencies who can provide assistance during the first 2,000 days.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002247a88a22498e4a208a43347635748943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f73b754d146c04972c2aada28411663\u0022\u003ET\u0101kuta Ferris\u003C/span\u003E: What specific supports, if any, has the Minister directed to the combined Tasman, Nelson, Marlborough, and West Coast regions, where an estimated 6,200 tamariki are living in material hardship?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228fe70ddf23e7d22ed0a48c8d9dfcb596\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I would repeat that the very first Budget that this Government delivered in Budget 2024 was to lift 17,000 children out of poverty, with measures like increasing the in-work tax credit, lifting the threshold for Working for Families, providing working families with tax relief, and introducing FamilyBoost. I accept that there are families and children who are facing incredibly challenging times right now. That is why our Government\u2019s focus is on growing the economy, creating more jobs to enable more families to do well and to reduce the harm and hardship that they currently face.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002247a88a22498e4a208a43347635748943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e55ddd80cf53ea18972e93052b0827be\u0022\u003ET\u0101kuta Ferris\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister still maintain that her Government\u2019s current approach is sufficient in addressing child poverty in Waitaha, or Canterbury, when they\u2019ve reported that there are an estimated 21,000 tamariki again living in material hardship?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022130663b4e1a5561487b4d27bb8898089\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, yes. That is why we need to have a growing economy so that there are more job opportunities, and there are more opportunities for families to get ahead under their own steam. That is how we reduce harm and we reduce hardship: by reducing the number of children who are growing up in benefit-dependent households.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222d89b6814bb717eb6bc9edae2eb1a80f\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d0ed4f69e9bc7190f9bcd6efbfb0a108\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 5\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022 data-id=\u00224d331ec655655228876db8a2242cdf45\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224d331ec655655228876db8a2242cdf45\u0022\u003ECHL\u00D6E SWARBRICK (Co-Leader\u2014Green) (14:25)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EE tautoko ana ia i ng\u0101 k\u014Drero me ng\u0101 mahi katoa a t\u014Dna K\u0101wanatanga?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EDoes he stand by all of his Government\u2019s statements and actions?\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022 data-id=\u0022efee2276bb0c2705bb198e4112806462\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022efee2276bb0c2705bb198e4112806462\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister) (14:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225162d5887b12b0ebef64d43524af6bde\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Prime Minister use his power to apply\u2014that is, to enact or to enable\u2014automatic extensions to visas of those who are currently in this country impacted by the unfolding conflict in the Middle East, as he assumed was the case in his answer to me in question time yesterday?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226ec57cfda71cfb7cab2753f6913ef7da\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: That is a matter for the Minister of Immigration; I encourage the member to direct her question to her.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022655ddf1959ed308089aac2d7b07ef615\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Why\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] I thought I was talking to the Prime Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002290ba8d05880082267ab34700d3fdae29\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, what was that comment?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a9bdbbfc6478ef3f96aa75daa24282d5\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: I said that I thought that I was talking to the Prime Minister. Apologies\u2014I\u2019m waiting for silence in the House before I continue my questions, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228447fc54b7cf28b2e6d94fa0ff6c32a6\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re waiting for silence\u2014how\u2019d that go for you 20 minutes ago?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a2d351ebb248a2fd1755946d3b8a3803\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a minute\u2014calm down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227608f76e2adc2840bb791fba6588273c\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Why does the Prime Minister accept the Trump administration\u2019s word for the legality of its attack on Iran, stating, \u201CIt\u2019s up for them to provide the legal evidence and justification for these strikes.\u201D, when Russia made exactly the same argument under Article 51 of the UN Charter when it invaded Ukraine and we, correctly, did not accept that justification?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240780c5a5a75506031a8a7af0b847b33\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I think it\u2019s a bit disgraceful and embarrassing for the member to compare Ukraine with Iran. But, again, as I said yesterday, it is up for the Israelis and the Americans to give justification for the legality of their strikes. We are not party to the information or intelligence that they have received. It would be wrong of New Zealand, either way, to jump to conclusions. We need fact and evidence to be produced, and that\u2019s what we would reasonably expect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223677ce9cb541203421bfe7ff6a191f01\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Has he asked for briefings or advice on the use of New Zealand - launched satellites from Rocket Lab, which has the US Space Force as a customer, and whether they are being used to support the US attacks on Iran, and, if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c36cbb5937d16a67e2f912be5c573f71\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I can assure the member that all New Zealand intelligence collected or shared is actually in accordance with New Zealand law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d423a5e85b84537056086fc1669a5842\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Prime Minister commit to transparency for all New Zealanders on what biometric information may be shared and what safeguards will be in place before his Government moves to sign us up to the Enhanced Border Security Partnership?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ebe2e397f65fd6494e7f1a412e00230c\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Our officials are talking to the Americans. They are free to set their own requirements as they need, and, of course, those official conversations are ongoing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236a92e31846962a5a7d3b4be1e28ca78\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Why did he call comments on the critical minerals partnership \u201Cfrothy\u201D and \u201Cspeculative\u201D in response to our questions in February 2026, when our parliamentary written questions have exposed that he was briefed by his officials on those very negotiations between Aotearoa New Zealand and the USA for this back in November 2025?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec041243f4baca05876b8cdb223ab39b\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, as I\u2019ve previously said\u2014and I\u2019ve said publicly\u2014this is a Government that wants to develop a critical minerals sector. It\u2019s very important that we do. Why is it? Because it\u2019s critical minerals that appear in electric vehicles; it\u2019s critical minerals that appear in solar panels. We\u2019ve got a lot of them, and we want to be independent, and we want to develop that sector. So we have ongoing conversations with a number of parties around the world that want access to critical minerals, as you would reasonably expect, but we have not made any final decisions, and, when we do, the member will find out about it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c1bd1486ad59096f94ec101bc2d90395\u0022\u003EHealth\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022433e5c21a2b41669bf11b66a6bfd8dc7\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022 data-id=\u00226f19ee20f0aa63ff2438374284057bd8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226f19ee20f0aa63ff2438374284057bd8\u0022\u003EHon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) (14:29)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Health\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree with Health New Zealand that \u201CNew Zealanders expect that companies involved in healthcare have secure systems and platforms that safeguard their private information\u201D; if so, what steps has he taken to get assurance that all companies involved in healthcare have cyber-secure systems?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022 data-id=\u0022b22d95561e9a8c21cc545efb47b943a3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b22d95561e9a8c21cc545efb47b943a3\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN (Minister of Health) (14:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. The Government expects all organisations that handle New Zealanders\u2019 health information, including private providers, to meet the highest standards to keep that information safe. Following recent incidents involving private digital health providers, I asked the Director-General of Health and the chief executive of Health New Zealand to write to providers across the sector reminding them of their obligations to meet cyber-security and privacy standards and to safeguard patient information. I\u2019ve also asked the Ministry of Health to undertake a review of the security and resilience of digital systems used across primary care to ensure appropriate protections are in place. More broadly, this Government recognises that cyber-security threats are increasing and we must constantly strengthen our systems and protections. That\u2019s why we invested an additional $9 million in Budget 2024 and a further $10 million in Budget 2025 to strengthen cyber-security capability within Health New Zealand. Across Government, work is also under way to strengthen New Zealand\u2019s overall cyber-security posture. In addition, the Minister of Justice has asked for advice on potential changes to the penalty regime for privacy breaches under the Privacy Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235cb7dac68a5a352c5c309f20addc93d\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: What action has he taken, including potentially through the review he mentioned in the answer to the primary question, to ensure that Health New Zealand has assurance that the providers it contracts are meeting Te Whatu Ora\u2019s cyber-security standards set in 2023?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002263e670947400375bf92defe1129d66e2\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m advised that Health New Zealand contracts for new or updated services, including enforceable expectations in relation to privacy and data-sharing expectations, with references to the Health Information Security Framework as a set of guidelines and controls, the Health Information Governance Guidelines for the safe use and sharing of health information, and enforceable information-sharing agreements meeting the Public Service information sharing standard, underpin all new and renewed data-sharing arrangements that Health New Zealand enters into. Overall, we have inherited a situation which Health New Zealand is now ensuring they\u2019re actively responding to and improving as they go through this process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e5ae70d1bed3fb3176950ef259f011a\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: Has he taken any action to ensure that work on strengthening primary care cyber-security occurs now, rather than five years from now, as specified in the digital investment plan he recently published?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002267f22548254ccad2428f6d00b2bb9f88\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, as I said, there are a number of actions under way, including the review, which is going to look at what actions need to be done in response to the two high-profile incidents. The Minister of Justice is also looking at reviewing the Privacy Act and the penalty regime, since I believe our penalties in New Zealand are woefully inadequate when it comes to the comparison with other countries and they need to be increased. That is an issue, which, again, the previous Government didn\u2019t address\u2014we\u2019re now looking at it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022313268c9e7bc616ba4bd77151febcc34\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree with Tracy Watkins, who said, \u201Cgovernment oversight \u2026 is a basic expectation when the state allows private contractors to hold intimate medical histories of its citizens.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a47e2cf34a69b5e60d96ee0cc85236aa\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, we have inherited a system, and we are working with the system that the last Government put together when they amalgamated 20 district health boards into Health New Zealand and forgot to actually fix the basics. We\u2019re fixing the basics, we\u2019re increasing the monitoring, and, as I said, we\u2019re now taking a number of actions to ensure improved oversight of our data and digital systems across New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c444efb8afa3ed83e939b63b85773951\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. It was a\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c22637f748fb6658d4dc161a90e4b87\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Hold on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bef4523bc5ed6864d78f1ef71e661218\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: It was a straight question about where responsibility for these matters lie, and the Minister immediately launched into an attack on the last Government\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f99321bdfab6e45d3fff981b99813d7\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: An inaccurate one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7de27c548883d171a87f4be144ad7b0\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014an inaccurate attack on the last Government\u2014rather than actually addressing the question that New Zealanders care about, which is: what is he doing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221d14dfff593d18896c7dd9f55a158964\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the way I heard it, he was talking about a situation that he took over as Minister, which he is able to do under our Standing Orders, and was presumably about to come to the point of the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c5a17c265a2ad5a1f5c92e8933bbdc4d\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the question was in relation to Tracy Watkins\u2019 piece in the papers on the weekend. I agree that there is a need for increased oversight. We have inherited a system where the previous Government amalgamated the district health boards into Health New Zealand. They failed to fix the basics. We are now doing exactly that, and, as I said in all of my previous answers, there are a number of actions being taken by either the Ministry of Health or Health New Zealand to improve the situation when it comes to digital capacity and the protection of patients\u2019 data. Is the system perfect? No. Is there more work to do? Yes. That is across Government that we need to do that, and we\u2019re committed to doing just that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022178f5ab471178cece2b2796a06aca81c\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: Why does he continue to answer questions about cyber-security by placing the blame on private companies or deflecting the blame on to the Opposition when important responsibilities clearly lie with his Government?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219f7764dff796b80cba804e42aa31407\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: The answer is that obligations sit in a number of places including, under the Privacy Act, on private companies, and, ultimately, the penalty regime in New Zealand is woeful and it needs to be fixed. That\u2019s one of the areas that we\u2019re actually addressing. It\u2019s all well and good for the former Minister on the other side of the House to sit there and complain, but we inherited a system from her, which we are now fixing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00224475802b1d927b42b3316d3653e040d0\u0022\u003EFinance\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002268e9cb8a762dd19867118acc26a6df1b\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 7\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022ef965e823407cd18cfd5ab99e66430df\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ef965e823407cd18cfd5ab99e66430df\u0022\u003EMIKE BUTTERICK (National\u2014Wairarapa) (14:36)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Finance\u003C/span\u003E: What recent announcements has she made regarding KiwiSaver?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00222542cf9ba9f09420c8cd434c43dc93bd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222542cf9ba9f09420c8cd434c43dc93bd\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (14:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Last week, the Government announced we will remove barriers that prevent many farm and other rural workers from using their KiwiSaver accounts to buy their first home. The current settings are not fair to rural communities. We\u2019re making a technical change to the KiwiSaver Act that will enable service tenancy workers to buy a first home while living in employer-provided housing. The changes also build on an existing provision, which already allows farmers to use their KiwiSaver to buy a home, by allowing them to do so through a trust or partnership so long as they live on the farm and exercise majority control and ownership of the commercial entity. This a tweak to the settings to make it fairer for rural New Zealanders. Rural New Zealand spoke, and we listened.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022390dfe7f4f86fbe878429b1acf796cff\u0022\u003EMike Butterick\u003C/span\u003E: Why are these changes necessary?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022464ef977f04f82272a46270639dcfdd5\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Under the current rules, Kiwis can withdraw their KiwiSaver to buy a first home if they intend to live in it. However, the current rules ignore the practical realities for workers in rural communities. Many people working in service tenancies are provided housing as part of their employment. These workers have, effectively, been locked out of using their KiwiSaver to purchase a first home elsewhere. Current rules also require a first home to be bought in the buyer\u2019s own name. However, most farms are purchased through companies, partnerships, or trusts, meaning many aspiring farm owners have been unable to use their KiwiSaver even though the rules imply that is possible. These changes address both issues and better reflect the reality of rural and service life.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022639950398ed3f3e2b12d968ace7c3417\u0022\u003EMike Butterick\u003C/span\u003E: What feedback has she heard from the rural sector about these changes?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aa6b6944680267abca36390ad0034c77\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: The feedback\u2019s been great. Federated Farmers have described this as a major win for young farmers and \u201Ca huge step forward for the next generation of farmers.\u201D One Wairarapa farmer labelled the announcement \u201Cright on point and another example of the Government doing what\u2019s practical for the people.\u201D Joseph, a member of Growing Future Farmers, said, \u201CIt gives me good incentive to save and put money aside because there\u2019s an opportunity now, as opposed to before, when there wasn\u2019t.\u201D While another rural worker simply said, \u201CThat\u2019s awesome. I\u2019m going to go hard on my KiwiSaver now.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c2ed8f6c28381e77f0f01b1879f9e1d9\u0022\u003EMike Butterick\u003C/span\u003E: What do these changes mean for rural New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225772a1cbf4cd9e5f97fd800389f46719\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: These are targeted, practical changes that maintain KiwiSaver\u2019s core purpose while making the scheme fairer for rural communities. They deliver on the Government\u2019s commitment to back rural New Zealand and remove unnecessary barriers. Legislation is expected to be introduced in the middle of this year. This is not a policy born in the mind of a Wellington official; it reflects the commercial reality of modern farm ownership and rural employment and ensures KiwiSaver continues to support New Zealanders into their first homes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00228043602328b4406ca2c9971489f7308c\u0022\u003ESocial Development and Employment\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f28d436beb8171454d77398b199e3935\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 8\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u0022dde6eae8301b717b7619fe4658cf93d5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dde6eae8301b717b7619fe4658cf93d5\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (14:39)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister for Social Development and Employment\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Social Security (Accident Compensation and Calculation of Weekly Income) Amendment Bill impact ACC claimants who have survived sexual violence, survived abuse in care, and survived traumatic head injuries; if so, how many?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u0022c8b16fc9beeed30f3bb47428569b134b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c8b16fc9beeed30f3bb47428569b134b\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) (14:39)\u003C/span\u003E This bill will ensure that there is equitable treatment across all people who received ACC payments, whether ongoing, weekly, or backdated. Everyone will have their supplementary assistance assessed by the same rules. The bill is confirming the current policy intent, so this will not change the way people are treated from previous practice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ae21b58c2a4960eea176bec068120929\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Look, Mr Speaker, I put this question as a primary on notice, specifically asking about three groups of people and whether they were impacted and how many. At no point was this actually addressed or answered. It was put on notice, which is why I\u2019m really confused about the fact that neither of these groups or the amount of people within those groups was even mentioned.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f447127b9a565a249e50b15e704251c9\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Do you want to speak to the point of order?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002251e420fb304b508c73c6711486b8afb6\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: In the legislation that has been introduced and had its second reading in the House, it referred to 37,000 people who had an ACC-related debt established related to supplementary assistance. The Ministry of Social Development (MSD) does not have the specific reason for each ACC claim, nor should they. It is private information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ca647a8eb0b5682931b4309341edfe8\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: Does she accept the briefing given to the Social Services and Community Committee by ACC that showed a sample of people affected by this bill that demonstrates that within that sample, the largest group of people affected are sexual violence survivors?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002220859f2e6e3d506407cd78ef946c7f83\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m the Minister for Social Development and Employment. I\u2019m not the Minister for ACC and I wasn\u2019t in the select committee when the ACC appeared this morning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228795c50e57f7d8f6b04d9ba22fc8a9c4\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: Does she not think it\u2019s her responsibility to understand and recognise that the bill she\u2019s shepherding through will put sexual violence survivors into large debts?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022117a3a6e1ffcd931b5518d0b3b8cda88\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: I think it might be helpful if I explain to the House the origins of this bill, and it relates to an overpayment where somebody has received a backdated payment from ACC while they have been receiving MSD assistance throughout that time. When the final amount of the backdated payment is known, that may then reflect an overpayment to MSD. That is what this bill is fixing. There is no distinction either on the ACC side or on the MSD side as to what the ACC claim was for, nor should there be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e047d26afb48ac7726f52d2c111c4d5\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: Will she support amendments to exclude sexual violence survivors, abuse in care survivors, and people who may be pushed into hardship as a result of these debts?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220059fae49bfc58369cbd14c3e194cb66\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: I accept that there will be a range of reasons why people are claiming ACC, and some of those are incredibly challenging and traumatic, but this bill is simply fixing a situation where there has been an overpayment with MSD with benefit and supplementary allowance payments that are made while someone is waiting on an ACC claim to be settled. There should be no difference in MSD support between someone who is paid weekly ACC versus someone who gets a backdated payment. This is about making it fair and equitable and not treating two separate groups of ACC recipients differently.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232759ac173e633f80e335b72bbf421f9\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: Why, throughout all her comments on this bill and in the House, has she not mentioned that this bill will create and entrench large debts for survivors of sexual violence, and has instead described them as engaging in \u201Cdouble-dipping\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002277f5baf05590291602a65db5c59ba43e\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I refute that. I\u2019ve never used that expression in terms of the recipients or the people affected by this bill. There is no change in terms of what currently happens. There are a range of reasons\u2014ACC payments is one, where it\u2019s backdated, where clients of MSD are overpaid. They have a responsibility to taxpayers to repay that debt, and MSD, when they have conversations about when a debt has been created, they talk to the person about how that debt can be repaid and over what period.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222d90a20f217dca4dd48d821927bdc55a\u0022\u003EJustice\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002274ae19cfc6a2fe0326d8e27684c27852\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u00224bce1309093847c7a2a1405091eee57d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224bce1309093847c7a2a1405091eee57d\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (14:44)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Justice\u003C/span\u003E: What action is the Government taking to address disorderly behaviour in our communities?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u0022a8dcb58e8aec26411751fd3aa1a837b1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a8dcb58e8aec26411751fd3aa1a837b1\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (14:44)\u003C/span\u003E: The Government has announced that it will be providing police with powers to issue move-on orders to deal with disorderly behaviour in public places. Our main streets and public places have been blighted by disruption and disturbance, leading to our communities becoming places of intimidation and dysfunction. Now, that has been obvious to anybody that\u2019s visited our main streets in recent times. Fixing the basics of law and order means, in this case, reclaiming our public places for the enjoyment of those who live there, work there, and visit there. It\u2019s about wanting all New Zealanders to feel safe and secure in our communities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002267197e99b01f48ae37ae46976970a9aa\u0022\u003ECarl Bates\u003C/span\u003E: How will move-on orders work to address disorderly behaviour in our communities?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e2a3c884e0370dcf649399f6c8bf541f\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: The Government has agreed to amend the Summary Offences Act to allow police to issue move-on orders that will require a person to leave a specified area for a specified amount of time and to move on a reasonable distance from the area if they are displaying disorderly, disruptive, threatening, or intimidation behaviours. The move-on orders will also apply to those who are obstructing and impeding someone entering a business, breaching peace, all forms of begging, and those who are intending to inhabit a public place. We\u2019ve got many tools which we use to help people who are in need, but we need some extra tools to reclaim our streets for the enjoyment of those who live and work there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022428c2abb7abd3c1223046b24da64f76b\u0022\u003ECarl Bates\u003C/span\u003E: Why is the Government taking action to address disorderly behaviour in our communities?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220265affe61bbd06d8d202eb30b3dffc0\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, because we want Kiwis to enjoy vibrant, welcoming, and safe town centres. A survey conducted late last year found that 91 percent of operators in Auckland CBD were being negatively affected by rough sleeping and begging, and 81 percent believed the CBD was not in a good state to attract more people and more investment. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] By giving the police extra tools to move people on who are disorderly, our streets will be safer and cleaner, and those who legitimately need help will continue to have every opportunity to receive it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dcbc28a9e4f22148dbc028f62ac89497\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just to remind people in the House that the constant calling out across the House is well outside what is accepted for interjection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228ecfd6ec9e02079c06719bf2889d3d0b\u0022\u003ECarl Bates\u003C/span\u003E: What feedback has the Minister seen on addressing disorderly behaviour in our communities?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa9db0927de6226173bb5e145d7c742f\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I\u2019ve seen a lot of feedback, including this comment from Ian Wright at Queen\u2019s Arcade, who said, \u201CIt\u2019s very much about holding people to account, drawing the line in the sand and saying we\u2019ve actually got a right to be here too, the people, the visitors, we want to be safe and secure\u201D. And this one from Will on Facebook, saying: \u201CFantastic new policy. My 70-year-old mum works in the CBD every day and is terrified\u201D. Well, I can tell Will that help is on its way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00221de7578866963d1bac3f74b66e0831a8\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 8 to Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u002264e659eaff5f6bc36ea168e3e4831144\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002264e659eaff5f6bc36ea168e3e4831144\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (14:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you so much, Mr Speaker. I\u2019d just like to seek your guidance briefly on that last supplementary\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231d058ad36226db21482e46fd6a131cf\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, no\u2014no, no. Make your point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cea2cc4a90f61df20d38c49fc026ccea\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH\u003C/span\u003E: OK. The Minister for Social Development and Employment refuted the assertion that she had described people as engaging in \u201Cdouble-dipping\u201D. In quotes on 25 February, in an article from Stuff, she did just that. I\u2019m at a bit of a loss as to what we are supposed to do when she gives quotes to media outlets saying one thing, and refutes that very same thing in answers to a question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222598d0e4bc21d774bab56cfa1792d553\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, you\u2019ve made your point. The only response\u2014I\u2019ll hear from Louise Upston.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u002215521c6d13db5820295a85aa9ef97fcf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002215521c6d13db5820295a85aa9ef97fcf\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) (14:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, what is reported in the media isn\u2019t always accurate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022013e864e615bfa34240e4a98ce9c89f0\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: There are remedies\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] excuse me\u2014available to the member, as the member well knows. But we will now be moving on to the Hon Ginny Andersen with question No. 10.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022624f489074a8c99aa8a8f827f699e046\u0022\u003EPolice\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022933df803694487ed02ecf63dfede5843\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 10\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022 data-id=\u0022e25ae2416ee14fb878b18a805c5d4e14\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e25ae2416ee14fb878b18a805c5d4e14\u0022\u003EHon GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour) (14:48)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Police\u003C/span\u003E: Are there more or fewer individuals on the National Gang List since he took office?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022b4c4045141f31c053ae54e31e69e8e17\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b4c4045141f31c053ae54e31e69e8e17\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (14:49)\u003C/span\u003E: From the end of 2017 to the end of 2023, the National Gang List grew at an average rate of 1.8 members per day. It has grown since then at an average rate of 1.4 per day. Had the Government that oversaw a rate of 1.8 per day been re-elected, there would be nearly\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bef95dcf7b50d5e848599ee4141b7dbf\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, no, that\u2019s not\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f11133c671ac60884992c522f9e2afd\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL\u003C/span\u003E: \u201410,800 gang members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a1d86d49450a16f13c081a0bb3367ea1\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, you can\u2019t\u2014no, no, just stop there. That\u2019s enough of that. Have you got another supplementary?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f692d80b857bba4bcfab6fe7d6b01e80\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: Why did he fail to keep the Prime Minister\u2019s commitment of fewer gang members than police officers?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221fcc60d51ffe6e004b13f316dc02728\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL\u003C/span\u003E: Well, this Government hasn\u2019t failed on the Prime Minister\u2019s commitment to make New Zealand a safer place, and New Zealand is a safer place. We don\u2019t have gang members taking over provincial towns. We don\u2019t have gang members taking over public spaces and public roads. We don\u2019t have gang members intimidating members of the public with their gang patches. All of that has changed under this Government. That was the commitment the Prime Minister made, and we\u2019ve delivered on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227cab8bb7884a20aa50da27fae5a7dd7\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: Why are gangs better at recruiting members than he is at recruiting police officers? [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHolds up graph\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d67c496f965aeac5d0e2566dd3d160a\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EIt\u2019s upside down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db362b36d8b6276eabe62c63800fc578\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the good news is\u2014yeah, I think the graph was upside down; just double-check it. The good news is that our police are doing an outstanding job at recruiting new police officers. We\u2019ve never had such a strong pipeline. We\u2019ve got police officers coming back from Australia and we\u2019ve never had more police officers step up and want to return to the job, and so we\u2019re in a very good space. In relation to gang members, yep, you\u2019re right: there\u2019s three more gang members in New Zealand than there are police officers. But the good news is this: help is on its way. Next Thursday, 59 police officers will graduate, and there\u2019ll be 56 more police officers than gang members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ef882822d991d282296e5afb6da2b09\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: How does gang membership outpacing police officers under his watch fit in with his promise to restore law and order?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222bd6aa0b0ff126697a6cc36cb9ab7fa4\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL\u003C/span\u003E: Let me give you some of the numbers: in 2025, there were over 100,000 police foot patrols\u2014that is nearly double on 2023. This number here\u2014that wasn\u2019t reported on \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003E1News\u003C/span\u003E, but is a very important figure\u2014is there are 49,000 fewer victims of violent crime and there is a 22 percent reduction in serious repeat offenders. Ram raids have also dropped by 85 percent. I think the results that this coalition Government is delivering are outstanding for public safety. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022057171aa6e7eec76b5563fb79a4a7136\u0022\u003EHon Paul Goldsmith\u003C/span\u003E: Regarding the people\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a7db3171ac1854b689be0232cdfad60b\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just wait until your own team give you a bit of respect to hear the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242943ea74287b99ada56e1d9442ea0e4\u0022\u003EHon Paul Goldsmith\u003C/span\u003E: Regarding gang members, is it his policy to fund gang members to run drug rehabilitation schemes, as was the case when we came into Government?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ecb5b3f3c23a066bdd25a1c78e84c729\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL\u003C/span\u003E: No, it\u2019s not, and I\u2019ll be interested to see with the coming election whether there are announcements from the Opposition that they intend to fund gang members again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229ac49da0bbc83c88a24d7531a52c4a2\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s good\u2014no, wait on\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b87fcd5720afe982a69711eac2d65799\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL\u003C/span\u003E: The one thing I would say is this: in relation to the outstanding results that this Government has delivered around the reduction of victims of serious crime, that is a good thing. We know that we\u2019ve got a lot more work to do, and we\u2019re just getting on with that work. I made a Facebook post the other day in relation to what I thought was pretty unbalanced reporting from TV ONE, and one of the responses was from a man, Kevin Coutts, a legendary retired dog handler from Rotorua. He said, \u201CYou can\u2019t reason with stupid, Mark. Also, what does it matter if gang members outnumber police? We\u2019ve fronted up to gang members who have outnumbered us, and always come out on top. Keep up the good work, mate.\u201D Thank you, Cooter. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228024bc66449ad587382af0488d5d85ee\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Ginny Andersen\u2014and no one else.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002213fe502a402a0a952cd5a20d4c9ad6bb\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: Did he, any member of his office, or any person acting on his behalf make contact with the Television New Zealand board regarding the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003E1News\u003C/span\u003E reporting on the National Gang List that aired last Thursday?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240c495474f52af13c964ac7f1318eecb\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL\u003C/span\u003E: As a result of the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003E1News\u003C/span\u003E reporting last week in relation to what was a really important announcement for the country\u2014and that was to report on the Government\u2019s progress on not only delivering more beat units but also dropping that number around the victims of serious crime\u2014I put up a Facebook post saying that I thought that the reporting was unbalanced. There was a big response to that throughout New Zealand, and, as a result, I received a call from a senior TV ONE person to apologise and say that they realise that they have to operate on a social licence and that they were sorry for that reporting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb7cd74f0429c2859834068812e7b2b4\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The question that Ginny Andersen asked was quite specific: it was whether he or anyone under his instruction had contacted a board member of Television New Zealand. Now, he referred to a senior member of Television New Zealand; he didn\u2019t indicate whether that was a board member or not\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022420e25b32f51f4d1493e8227f271addd\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, just a minute\u2014someone\u2019s talking while we\u2019ve got a point of order being taken.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022814ed80f855cd6ed4cb0aba7c711431c\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: Trying to help.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a379dadf864484767cb60adcb2fe857d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I beg your pardon?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022858884ef82f777b56060839d4963df20\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: I was trying to help.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227dffd9e366d70accb6547cf0e7b34e7d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Your help, in this case, is not particularly required. So just quiet\u2014and start your point again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022807dcf794eda2a1174bca09195d5c69b\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: The question was a very simple one. It was around whether he or someone he\u2019d instructed or communicated with on his behalf, I think it was, had contacted a board member of Television New Zealand. He referred to a senior person within Television New Zealand. That doesn\u2019t actually address the question of whether it was a member of the Television New Zealand Board, which is what the question was, and it is material whether or not this was a member of the board.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022252d4232290ca9171c29335244a9f3b9\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, I can clear that up and be categorical and say that, no, I did not contact any member at TVNZ, including a board member. I was contacted by a senior member of TVNZ\u2014not a board member. I could name them but I won\u2019t. I think it might be out in the public anyway. But they were very clear and very definitive and very apologetic for what had happened, said that they understood that they operate on a social licence, and that was the end of the conversation. Move on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002248ff10f50ef608f35abaae0157f5aca5\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: Is he aware that it would be illegal for him or anyone acting on his behalf to direct TVNZ regarding their content?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227dbbef610c8d997ae0f40a7c7ec2f6d0\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I just answered, and I\u2019ve been very clear about the fact that I was contacted by a member of TVNZ with an apology, because it appears the only ones in this country that don\u2019t realise that crime is improving is Labour and TVNZ.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cecebae9a9f1ca85330c90f4a2c50692\u0022\u003EHealth\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00223c42a51207e588926569a7bf2babb3db\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 11\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022 data-id=\u0022a68ee1501ccf47bd8f1ea89e924c3a72\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a68ee1501ccf47bd8f1ea89e924c3a72\u0022\u003EDr VANESSA WEENINK (National\u2014Banks Peninsula) (14:56)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Health\u003C/span\u003E: What recent announcements has he made on the use of AI scribes in emergency departments?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022 data-id=\u00229a3127d68dd74768f37c8b4091d15a46\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229a3127d68dd74768f37c8b4091d15a46\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN (Minister of Health) (14:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Artificial intelligence (AI) scribe technology is now live in all emergency departments (EDs) across New Zealand with the rapid roll-out making it available to 1,250 ED doctors and front-line staff complete\u2014250 more than originally announced following a successful pilot last year. This places New Zealand among the fastest health systems in the world to move from a pilot to nationwide front-line use in our emergency departments of AI scribes. This is a major milestone in reducing administrative burden and freeing up front-line clinicians to focus more on patients. This is what a decisive, outcomes-focused Government looks like.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c5d49d81ea247899688f7a2a4acb432\u0022\u003EDr Vanessa Weenink\u003C/span\u003E: What impact has AI scribe technology had on productivity and patient flow in emergency departments?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222fd714bf70a9f22acc928e179ec837c1\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: The early results are encouraging. Doctors using the AI tool during the initial pilot were able to see, on average, one additional patient per shift due to time saved. That means faster care for patients, shorter waiting times, and reduced pressure on busy clinicians. The Government is focused on fixing the basics and building the future, and that means practical, real-world improvements that translate directly into faster treatment and shorter waits for patients.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229381e4f7e1bdc64457daf23d97abf263\u0022\u003EDr Vanessa Weenink\u003C/span\u003E: What feedback has he seen from front-line staff about the nationwide roll-out?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221288067fff4759d57a7d5800efa31ffa\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: After just one month of use at Middlemore emergency department, 80 percent of surveyed staff said the AI scribe improved productivity or efficiency, and 84 percent said it had a positive impact on their overall experience and wellbeing during shifts. That tells us this technology is not only improving patient flow but also supporting the hard-working clinicians on the front line. By cutting down time on paperwork, we\u2019re freeing up clinicians to focus on what matters most: treating patients.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d6e078c27e59630ee3fdc5ff33e4cf3\u0022\u003EDr Vanessa Weenink\u003C/span\u003E: What further steps is the Government taking to expand the use of this technology?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022723dbd35cfba50b8711c63242c73c77b\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: Following strong interest from clinicians, Health New Zealand\u2019s progressing approval of more than 1,000 additional licences, predominantly for use by mental health teams. This Government is committed to delivering modern, digital tools that make a real difference. AI will never replace clinical skill or judgment, but it will increasingly support front-line healthcare staff. That\u2019s why we will continue investing in digital technology that puts patients at the centre of the healthcare system, improving access to care, and delivering better health outcomes for New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00223157d3cbef8fbda77323420e92625e14\u0022\u003EHealth\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00222a92db8031454dfbf7bfb3dc2d0d0630\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 12\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022 data-id=\u002206fff560b9da0a9fb0f8eaf660706ccc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002206fff560b9da0a9fb0f8eaf660706ccc\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (14:59)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EAssociate Minister of Health\u003C/span\u003E: What announcements has she made regarding tobacco and vape sale compliance?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u0022482db2724c8ed983668f887705fb4729\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022482db2724c8ed983668f887705fb4729\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health) (14:59)\u003C/span\u003E: The Government has taken effective and practical steps to reduce harm from smoking and vaping, particularly among our young people. Today, I announced a major increase in compliance activity, which supports the law changes we made last year to ban disposable vapes and increase penalties for sales to under-18-year-olds. Health New Zealand more than doubled store visits and controlled purchase operations, targeting illegal sales to minors in the last year. Compliance is strong, with upwards of 90 percent of retailers doing the right thing, but a small group of bad actors are holding us back and we need to stop that, which is why we have seen infringement notices more than double over the last year. The infringement efforts have been boosted with the recruitment of an additional 18 compliance officers, with most of them starting work in the last 12 months.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ccf16109fe2c4c5c2a6d3036a4dcc72\u0022\u003EAndy Foster\u003C/span\u003E: How does this sit alongside other efforts to combat youth smoking and vaping?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad59727270abcfa387c19317c23971b9\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: Last year, the Government passed the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products Amendment Bill, which banned disposable vapes, increased penalties for selling to minors, and tightened retail visibility and proximity routes. The great news is that youth smoking rates are very low and vaping rates are declining, and we want to maintain those trends. That is why I\u2019m pleased that, on Monday, we announced the extra funding for Smokefreerockquest and Smokefree Tangata Beats. These programmes promote a smoke-free and vape-free lifestyle and support wellbeing for our young people. This funding of $550,000 a year is part of a $5.3 million investment towards marketing and quit-smoking campaigns that help toward the Government\u2019s goal to reduce smoking rates and, hopefully, will mobilise the wisdom of our non-smoking young people to guide and encourage the stubborn older smokers who we are trying to reach.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227072702ab7a8af69f5f6819582e6810d\u0022\u003EAndy Foster\u003C/span\u003E: What next steps is she considering?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e577e70a348f248c7aaf764d0720cee2\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: As I\u2019ve said before, our challenge and focus continues to be getting people to quit smoking. Thankfully, we know our young people aren\u2019t starting; most smokers are now over 40, and we need to reach them to help them quit. There are three areas I want to progress: effectively targeting these smokers with information and support that works\u2014some of that is being done really well, especially by providers working in the M\u0101ori and Pacific communities, but we can do more; secondly, mobilising the entire health sector to support the smoke-free goal and providing clear factual information; and, finally, improving the regulatory regime so that it reflects the relative harm of products, has appropriate controls, and is enforceable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002275339cdaa63deddc407431aedd280978\u0022\u003EAndy Foster\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223ceaa79e86cc15bbde6fc0c46205fde\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary question\u2014Andy Foster. A concise answer would be good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d07969c164b591639ebf35a9755fbe75\u0022\u003EAndy Foster\u003C/span\u003E: What will this mean for the regulatory environment?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002220a475bd50b31aa9873333dd6a331a35\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: I am actively working on the regulatory environment with officials. The main considerations are that we have to avoid the pitfalls of introducing a product without regulatory safeguards. The key thing will be to have a regime that is coherent and workable. There is currently a tougher regime for vapes than there is for cigarettes, and we have seen the adverse effects manifest in Australia, where illicit tobacco is the largest part of the market. The wrong settings can and will create unintended outcomes, and we will fix it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d55456cc455bee497dc9d476a37e3b0\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: Is it her expectation that enforcement action will be taken when firms that are not specialist vape retailers undertake the home delivery of vapes?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fddac2f4199be1cc223cf399872d8a53\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: In terms of enforcement action, I am encouraging all activity that is not compliant to be addressed. We welcome complaints to be received by the compliance officers, and they are actively increasing. That is why we have seen a more than doubling of compliance infringement notices, and any non-compliance will be addressed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e31059ecd213c6d1ec6f36392e22bff1\u0022\u003EDebates\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a82722cf66f38bfaff4a4d870c8b7793\u0022\u003EGeneral Debate\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00228cbd25d1ced5c0c28ede2ee6f6812b15\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228cbd25d1ced5c0c28ede2ee6f6812b15\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (15:04)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the House take note of miscellaneous business\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe meet, members, at a time of heightened global uncertainty. We watch, as New Zealanders, our television screens and watch conflict erupting across the Middle East. These events are not abstract for New Zealanders. We feel deeply for those affected directly, for the loss of life and the feelings of insecurity that are being experienced by people across the Middle East. We feel for those New Zealanders so very far from home and uncertain about how they will return. We also contemplate what all of this means for us here at home. It is clear that the escalating tensions involving Iran place real pressure on global shipping lanes, on energy markets, on fuel prices, and on the trade routes that our exporters rely on. We realise that all of this has potential to flow through to the cost of freight, the price at the pump, and the confidence of businesses the world over in making investment decisions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is too soon for us to know what those implications will be for New Zealand, let alone, actually, to know what those implications will be for the world. We note with some gratitude that, so far, the effects on international markets and on oil prices have been more muted than some may have predicted, but we are conscious that many events are yet to unfold, and we know that very much depends on the duration, scale, and intensity of the conflict that follows.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs the Prime Minister has made clear, New Zealand is engaging very closely with like-minded partners\u2014Australia and Canada\u2014and we are very focused on protecting our economic and trade interests. In a world like the one we occupy, resilience is a necessity. Fiscal discipline matters now more than ever, energy security matters now more than ever, and economic credibility matters now more than ever. If I can reflect, I feel more grateful than ever that New Zealand is a few islands at the bottom of the world, surrounded by ocean, and very, very far from the conflict that has broken out. Our children, unlike those in the Middle East, do not fear a missile flying over their school. May that ever remain the case. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen these global risks arise, households don\u2019t ignore their budgets; they look carefully at what is coming in, what\u2019s going out, and how they can buffer against the shocks. New Zealand deserves a Government that does the same, one that tells the truth about the books; costs its promises properly; sets out a clear, long-term plan; and responds decisively to the challenges that we face. I must point out that what no New Zealander can afford is a Government that responds to every challenge with these phrases: \u201CNot today.\u201D, \u201CWe\u2019ll announce that later.\u201D, \u201CNo decisions have been made.\u201D, \u201CYou\u2019ll have to wait until after the Budget.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is the sum total of what we received from the Opposition, and then what we received is a desire to change dramatically some of the underlying fundamentals that provide New Zealand\u2019s economic security\u2014to rip away the inflation-busting mandate of the Reserve Bank and revert to a policy experiment that corresponded with the period of highest inflation in recent history, 33 months out of target; to recklessly remove the Investment Boost tax policy that is credited with bringing forward investment in firms; to reimpose the tax policy that corresponded with a period of rents rising excessively and driving New Zealanders into more hardship; to restore a pay equity scheme with no idea of where the $12.8 billion to fund it would come from; and to say that there is no plan for energy security other than hoping that it rains. I asked this House, \u201CPlease, Opposition, take New Zealanders seriously.\u201D We are living in a serious time, and that demands a serious response.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022 data-id=\u0022472773001be41e8d6933e47c970f9aea\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022472773001be41e8d6933e47c970f9aea\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY (Labour) (15:09)\u003C/span\u003E: The Karori amateur theatrical society wouldn\u2019t even take that on. That was the worst attempt at acting that I have seen since Christopher Luxon tried to ask a question at question time. This is where they are at now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Prime Minister is a dud, the finance Minister has no credibility, and they are lashing around for relevance. They have only one option, and that is to blame everybody else. That is the guts of that speech. She\u2019s just shitty because she\u2019s got nothing to complain about. That\u2019s all they want to do. They want us to release policy so that they can talk about that instead of defending their appalling record.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey don\u2019t want to talk about unemployment going up. They don\u2019t want to talk about costs going up. They don\u2019t want to talk about rates, insurance, food, all of which have gone up. They don\u2019t want to talk about the fact that the minimum wage has not kept up with the cost of living. That is their record. That is why, whenever they stand up, they never talk about their record. That is why Christopher Luxon is floundering, and that is why Nicola Willis is under pressure. All they want is a distraction.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou saw this\u2014didn\u2019t you?\u2014last week when Chris Hipkins delivered his state of the nation speech and made a clear commitment that the next Labour Government, soon to be elected in a few months\u2019 time, will be focused on one thing as its main priority, and that is affordability. The best that they could come up with\u2014this is the best that they could come up with\u2014was that the speech was written by AI. That\u2019s it! Then some journo went and checked it out: no, it wasn\u2019t written by AI, but Nicola Willis\u2019 speech was.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI mean, how thick can you be when you think, \u201CI know, I\u2019ve got a zinger! I\u2019m going to say it\u2019s AI, and I am going to be hilarious!\u201D and then it turns out that, actually, you were the one who used AI to write your speech?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022678b125a4980f26a826aaad5e53031b9\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: AI wrote the joke.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a2ae5a6467b73c9aca020a1a54807d63\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, AI wrote the joke. I mean, they probably should use AI to write their jokes, because they don\u2019t know what a decent joke is. They think they\u2019ve got a zinger. They walk back to their office and high-five the mirror, but that\u2019s the only reaction they get. They are woeful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, what New Zealanders want to hear from this Government is a track record on delivering on the things that matter to them most. We know that the thing that matters to New Zealanders most is the cost of living. Why haven\u2019t they come up with something that they can point to after two years? They don\u2019t do it, do they? Every time that we ask them a very simple question\u2014do you remember, during the election campaign, they promised that families in this country would receive $250 in support? We have been asking Nicola Willis and Christopher Luxon every week for two years to show us the numbers of people who have received $250. Do they answer? No, because the answer is: zero. It is yet another broken promise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey ran around in their election campaign promising to reduce food prices. There is a list as long as my arm of examples where Nicola Willis and Christopher Luxon promised to reduce food prices, and then when Barb Edmonds asked them to defend themselves and defend their policies, which have had the opposite direction, they have a crack at her personally. That is the modus operandi of this Government: when you back them into a corner, holding them to account on the promises they made and their lack of record in that area, they have a crack at the person asking the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe old saying \u201CPlay the ball, not the person\u201D, right? All they have is having a crack at people personally. Then, when you turn it around, they cry foul and say, \u201COh, they\u2019re having a crack at me.\u201D It\u2019s like that kid at school who used to poke you and poke you and poke you; you\u2019d tell them to bugger off, and then they\u2019d go and cry to the teacher. That is Nicola Willis to a tee, and it is Christopher Luxon as well. This is what happens when you have a Government with no record to stand by and that is not focused on the cost of living.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m willing to make a wager, such is my background: I reckon this Government, when they front up at the election campaign and they say, \u201CLook over here, look over there, what about these guys, what about those guys? Don\u2019t look at us; look at them.\u201D, New Zealanders will go, \u201CNo, you\u2019ve had your chance.\u201D, and they\u2019ll give them the flick.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022683ccb036051c025f7627884cbbc2b5a\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The member who\u2019s just resumed his seat, the Hon Kieran McAnulty, said that we should play the ball and not the person, but earlier in his speech, he used a term, and I\u2019m sure you might remember it: \u201CShe\u2019s just \u2026 \u201D. I just ask: does it help Parliament to normalise that sort of language that normally would be considered unparliamentary? I wonder if the member cares to withdraw it. It\u2019s up to him, but I just think someone ought to consider that, because it brings down the standards for all of us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e6df251582b16e99d0a58f9d8b480646\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah. That\u2019s a term that\u2019s been used in the House before. It was not directed at the member; it was describing a position. That\u2019s the subtle difference. I\u2019m sorry, I\u2019m caught by history here. For the sake of decorum, it might be a good idea to withdraw it, but that\u2019s up to the member. We\u2019ll go to the Hon David Seymour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022 data-id=\u0022dbb188292cec066b438e27fecf3c4b1d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dbb188292cec066b438e27fecf3c4b1d\u0022\u003EHon DAVID SEYMOUR (Deputy Prime Minister) (15:15)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, thank you, Mr Speaker. It is, certainly, a difficult time for the world as we watch an unpredictable conflict unfold on the other side of the planet. It\u2019s been a difficult six years for many New Zealand households that, I would say, began at a time that we\u2019re about to commemorate, actually, for the seventh anniversary, our nation\u2019s tragedy in Christchurch. At these times, it can be easy to politicise and point the finger, but sometimes what we need to do is ask ourselves some really fundamental questions that might tell us where to go and which way to point in times of uncertainty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve been thinking about one question, a very simple one: how is wealth created? It may seem like a simple question, it may seem like an obvious question, but the question of how wealth is created tends to divide the political spectrum. On the other side, we get an answer that is simple, appealing, and wrong. Their answer is simply that they can take money off someone else, usually with a new tax, and give it to you. If you listen to the rhetoric of the Green Party, for instance, or Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori especially and often the Labour Party, what they often say is: your problems have been caused by someone else\u2019s success, and if you vote for us, we will take their money off them and give it to you. The problem is they misunderstood the question. If the question was: what is the fastest way to get some money? Then, they\u2019re right; just take it off someone else. Any bank robber knows that. But this problem with socialism\u2014as it\u2019s been said by a very famous person\u2014is that eventually you run out of other people\u2019s money. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe, on this side of the House and in the ACT Party, know the real answer to how wealth is created, and that is that people come together in a beautiful thing, and it\u2019s called business. It brings together four types of people who each need something that the other has and they trade value for value to get stronger together. You have entrepreneurs with dreams that they want to make a reality, but they can\u2019t do it by themselves. They come together with workers who have their time and talents to give but maybe don\u2019t have the idea or the thing to work with to create a product. Those two come together with investors who have saved and put aside their money carefully, but they want to get a return from having done that. Those three people\u2014entrepreneurs and workers and investors\u2014come together to provide something for customers that those customers couldn\u2019t make for themselves. The beauty of all this is that nobody is forced to be part of any business, but when people come together voluntarily, they innovate, they experiment, they take risks, and they discover new ways of doing things that allow all of us to live happier, healthier, and wealthier lives.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo often we hear that business is some sort of evil\u2014and they include farms in that, and they beat up on them\u2014but the truth is that we actually need that beautiful human cooperation to become wealthier and to find better ways ahead. Business also needs some things from Government. For example, we need to be safe so that our shops won\u2019t be robbed and our things won\u2019t be stolen and we won\u2019t be beaten up going to the shop or walking to work. That\u2019s why I\u2019m proud to be part of a Government that\u2019s seen crime decrease by 22 percent, already, in the two years through the measures that we\u2019ve taken.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe need to get rid of red tape so that people in business don\u2019t spend their time asking for permission and complying and being inspected and told no. That\u2019s why I\u2019m proud we\u2019re making it easier to get money in from overseas with the Overseas Investment Act. Simon Court, here, is helping replace the Resource Management Act with a law that says \u201Cyes\u201D more often. We\u2019re removing things like crazy employment laws that say a person who\u2019s in the wrong can none the less be compensated on a technicality when they\u2019re fired. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAll of these things are designed so that beautiful cooperation\u2014where people come together off their own volition to do together what they can\u2019t do alone\u2014can continue in a virtuous circle of becoming wealthier so that our country can prosper and face difficult times from a position of strength. People, as they go into the election this year, should ask themselves a simple question before they vote: do these guys know where wealth comes from, are they trying to take my values, or are they just trying to nick my money? If the other side took that approach, all of us would be a lot wealthier and better off. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022334b3d07113c34dd7132df8efd6eaa74\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022334b3d07113c34dd7132df8efd6eaa74\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Energy) (15:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. This country is built on energy. From the mighty hydro dams, the Rankines at Huntly, and the renewables being built at record pace by this Government, every home and business in this country relies on energy, and abundant and affordable energy is the only way that our economy can grow. But that is under threat due to an incoherent policy from the Labour Party. This is the party that in 2018 banned oil and gas exploration, which directly led to the energy crisis we are experiencing now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EToday, like the burglar returning to the scene of the crime, that same Labour Party is championing the same policy. They have not learnt their lessons. Chris Hipkins has had a rather convenient memory lapse. He started to talk about energy independence when he is the very reason we don\u2019t have it. If he really believes in energy independence, he should lean over and have a chat with his spokesperson, the Hon Megan Woods, and tell her to stop talking about banning domestic gas exploration again. Labour have not learnt their lessons.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe legacy of the oil and gas ban was evident two years ago when businesses and households were being hit by power price spikes. Our most efficient gas-fired power plants were running at half capacity while prices surged. The legacy of the last Government can be seen right here, right now, at the back of Huntly, where over a million tonnes of imported coal are sitting there making up for a lack of gas. I\u2019d encourage every member on the other side of the House to go there and take a look, because that\u2019s your energy legacy and that\u2019s our energy future if that lot gets back in.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s a lot that has been said in this House about liquefied natural gas (LNG), but it is important to reflect on what people are saying in the real world. For the sake of time, I\u2019ll give you just one example, from John Harbord, the chair of the Major Electricity Users\u2019 Group: \u201CThe status quo is a useful alternative to consider. Not doing something to secure future of gas supply would be to roll the dice with New Zealand\u2019s economy. People might debate whether the LNG import terminal is the best option, but the pragmatic reality is we needed to do something and the Government has.\u201D The other side of the House is proposing nothing because they\u2019ve got nothing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s been a volatile time worldwide, with significant uncertainty, yet the future price of electricity has dropped significantly since this Government\u2019s announcement. As of 3\u00A0March, the future price of electricity in this country is down by around 10 percent to 15\u00A0percent following our announcement. Every dollar of that helps in the back pocket of a Kiwi business or household, and we cannot risk going back. It is completely irrational and outrageous to propose that we do not get gas to be able to make electricity in this country in a dry year. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is no surprise that if you do nothing, you get nothing, but that is the policy coming from the Labour Party. It is irrational and it is destructive, potentially, to the New Zealand economy. We saw that destruction play out in reality in 2024. Spot prices of $800 a megawatt hour put Kiwi workers out of business. It ruined Kiwi households and it ruined livelihoods. That is the legacy of a Government that does not have a rational energy policy, does not have a pragmatic understanding of energy\u2014full stop\u2014and we cannot let our economy fall into the hands of those who will roll the dice on our future for the sake of a good political bumper sticker policy. We cannot afford Labour. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u00220fb7232bebc73c07254187f0067ecf89\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220fb7232bebc73c07254187f0067ecf89\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (15:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Kia ora, Mr Speaker. I wanted to use this time for the House to spare a moment for Chris Bishop. He\u2019s had a really hard few weeks. We had the Infrastructure Commission report come out and he read the evidence. They said, \u201CDon\u2019t pay money for shiny things. Focus on what you\u2019ve got now.\u201D, and he said, \u201COh, maybe we should look at reconsidering the Mt Vic Tunnel project.\u201D Then his colleague Nicola Willis came over the top of his decision making and said, \u201CNo, we\u2019re definitely building the tunnel.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, the Minister has tried to save face when it comes to housing in our country and tried to plan and zone for more housing in Aotearoa, because the reality is he\u2019s cancelled and delayed 3,000 K\u0101inga Ora public homes, he\u2019s gutted the construction industry, and he\u2019s brought back no-cause evictions which will make renting more insecure for the million-plus New Zealanders that rent their homes. Then he\u2019s had his colleagues in Auckland come over the top of him again and say, \u201CActually, we want 400,000 fewer houses in Auckland.\u201D, completely putting a stop to his ambitions to build more housing in New Zealand. So he\u2019s actually taken us back when it comes to the amount of housing available in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe most embarrassing recent blow for the Minister of Housing is that we found out that he has been overruled by his colleague Paul Goldsmith now, who has chosen to completely ignore official advice from the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Housing, who told them that they are not on board with the move-on orders. I don\u2019t know what that advice is because the Government doesn\u2019t actually want to share it with us, but I\u2019m going to look into my crystal ball and assume that the advice probably says that housing people is a lot cheaper than throwing people in prison. The advice probably says that homeless people don\u2019t have $2,000 to pay a fine, therefore they will end up in prison. It probably also says that there\u2019s not even room in the prisons to accommodate the growing number of people that this Government has made homeless. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey ignore advice over and over again. The Government doesn\u2019t know how to use their taringas. They continue to ignore advice. They ignored the advice when officials said, \u201CHey, if you limit access to emergency housing, you\u2019re going to make more people homeless.\u201D But they did it anyway. When the Government said, \u201CHey, we might delay thousands of public homes.\u201D, they ignored the advice that said this will make people homeless. No-cause evictions: \u201CThis will make people homeless.\u201D They don\u2019t care because they don\u2019t care about advice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAgain, Goldsmith overruled and put Chris Bishop in an embarrassing barrage of actions by his colleagues, undermining him. I feel sorry for Chris Bishop because what that shows me is that it doesn\u2019t pay to be thoughtful and to reconsider your decisions when you have access to new information when you\u2019re in the National Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou\u2019d think that his Associate Minister, Tama Potaka, who\u2019s supposed to be ending homelessness, would actually help him out here, but he\u2019s obviously asleep at the wheel. When I wrote to him about a new report about w\u0101hine M\u0101ori experiencing homelessness in Wellington City, Tama Potaka didn\u2019t even have the courtesy to reply to my message.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe can\u2019t keep having these massive pendulum swings where the National Party and its Government make decisions that make people homeless and create crises, and then progressive Governments come in with limited time to try and fix those issues and we keep swinging back and forth. We need cross-party consensus that homelessness is not OK and that the most cost-effective, humane way to deal with it is to house people, not to put people into prison.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut I know that side of the House doesn\u2019t understand that because you don\u2019t talk to real people; you sit in your Crown limousines and you drive past them. But if you spoke to them, you\u2019d understand. They don\u2019t know that there are pregnant woman rough sleeping right now who want to keep their babies, who will birth their babies on the street. They don\u2019t know that homeless people are the most at-risk people in town\u2014period. They don\u2019t know that women prefer to sleep in town because if they sleep in a park or under a motorway, they will be raped and beaten. They don\u2019t know that every person who is on the street is not necessarily homeless but is in the grips of mental health and drug addiction crises. They don\u2019t know that children sleeping on the streets are often coming straight from State care or are coming straight out of an abusive household.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMaybe they do know that, which is why move-on orders will apply to people as young as 14. How disgusting is that? Talk to people. They\u2019re right there in every single township. Ask them why they\u2019re there and they\u2019ll tell you it\u2019s as a consequence of your decisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022add09b8e4be649e6d72c9d3f69d6e88b\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I\u2019m feeling a little admonished here, but the Hon Scott Simpson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f537d6f7e9d0407792892b239af9ec7f\u0022 data-id=\u00225ca53ef166852474c453edb25311f0d2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f537d6f7e9d0407792892b239af9ec7f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225ca53ef166852474c453edb25311f0d2\u0022\u003EHon SCOTT SIMPSON (National\u2014Coromandel) (15:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. The opening contribution in this general debate today was from the Minister of Finance, who set out, I thought, a very clear picture of the task that was ahead of this coalition Government in terms of maintaining a steady ship, focusing on economic prosperity, and growing a thriving economy for New Zealand and New Zealanders during a time of geopolitical uncertainty and turmoil.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s in that theme that I want to make a contribution this afternoon that relates to my portfolios of ACC and also commerce and consumer affairs. Everything that my colleagues on this side of the House, through this coalition Government\u2014everything that we\u2019re trying to do is about trying to make New Zealanders richer. If we are to achieve everything that we want and desire as New Zealanders in a First World country, if we want the schools, the roads, the education system, the police force, the defence force, and everything that we aspire to wanting, we need to grow our economy and we need to have a wealthier economy, so much of the work that I have been doing in the commerce and consumer affairs portfolio has been very focused on that type of work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to just draw the House\u2019s attention to the fact that it is almost one year since this House passed the customer data legislation that creates the opportunity for what has become euphemistically known as open banking, but it goes so much further than just open banking. So that was the piece of legislation that created the framework that allows our customer data information\u2014data that is often tightly held by big commercial entities\u2014to be shared with trusted, accredited third-party providers who can take that information, analyse it, and then give it back to us as consumers in a meaningful, real, tangible way that enables us as consumers to make wiser, better decisions about how we spend our money and where we place our resources.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the first sector of our economy to be given the treatment under this piece of legislation, if I can put it that way, was the banking sector. Those regulations came into effect on 1 December last year. I\u2019m pleased to report to the House that we are, I think, about 90 percent of the way there in terms of getting this framework established. The reason I say 90 percent is because some of our second-tier banks are going to take a little bit longer. They don\u2019t have the same resource and the same technology available as the big banks have. We gave Kiwibank an extra few months to sort their opportunity out as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m looking forward to the new, exciting, and imaginative fintech solutions that are going to be available to New Zealanders via this open banking customer data legislation framework, but that\u2019s not where it stops. We\u2019ve already indicated as a Government that the next cab off the rank in terms of using this piece of legislation will be in terms of open electricity. I heard the Minister for Energy speaking about some of the challenges that the nation faces in terms of energy sustainability, in terms of providing security for our energy needs as we face a winter coming up and also a potential dry winter in years ahead. Open electricity is the next cab off the rank, and then, frankly, I\u2019m open to bids as to what might next be an appropriate sector of our economy to open up in the same sort of way. This is all about reform that has meaningful implications for New Zealand consumers and that delivers real results to them, so that\u2019s just one part of the work that we\u2019re doing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of some changes to the Commerce Commission, we\u2019re going to be looking at how their governance structure works\u2014a more traditional governance model. We\u2019re going to be giving the Commerce Commission some ability to look at things like creeping acquisitions and killer acquisitions and we\u2019re going to be able to put into statute for the first time a statutory definition as to what predatory pricing is. Now, predatory pricing has been illegal for years, but we haven\u2019t had a statutory definition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EACC is a big part of my portfolio work. I will be speaking more fully about ACC\u2019s work, but I\u2019m pleased to say that the first initial results of their turn-around plan are producing positive results and we\u2019ve got to a point where we\u2019re seeing the best results in many years in terms of rehabilitating New Zealanders, getting them back to independence, and that\u2019s got to be good for those people, it\u2019s good for the system, and it\u2019s good for New Zealand. There is a lot of work yet to do, but I\u2019m hopeful and optimistic about the future of ACC. The Minister of Finance gave a great speech and I recommend to members who didn\u2019t hear it to give it a listen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022 data-id=\u00220b1ff522098528cfa56b0e4bab0db259\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220b1ff522098528cfa56b0e4bab0db259\u0022\u003EHon GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour) (15:36)\u003C/span\u003E: T\u0113n\u0101 koe e te M\u0101ngai o te Whare. I think it\u2019s time we had a talk about the real-life impact of the cost of living, of the high unemployment in New Zealand\u2014not just in the numbers that we hear from the Minister of Finance and Economic Growth but from people in New Zealand about what that means in their day-to-day lives; what that actually means for a family in New Zealand or even in the Wellington region.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe unemployment scene in this region alone: there are 10,000 fewer jobs in the Wellington region due to cuts, due to construction companies, due to liquidations, due to people having their lives and their livelihoods lost at the feet of the decisions that this Government has made that have directly impacted upon them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen someone has lost their job, the cost of living bites even harder. For one family that I spoke to recently in my area in Wainui\u014Dmata, for some time, the main earner in their family, their father, had lost his job in construction. Not long after, Chris Bishop cancelled a whole lot of K\u0101inga Ora builds right across the region. He lost his job working in construction and after a period of time waiting to find employment and being unsuccessful, he took up a job in Australia working in construction there. They\u2019ve got two children at high school here and so they did not want to take them out of school, so he now is in a better situation to be working in Australia, sending money home to the Hutt Valley and also coming back every few months, when he can afford to, to see his family.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is families that are divided up and down our country because of the cost of living crisis, because of unemployment, and because wages quite simply cannot pay for food in New Zealand anymore. In my own family, my oldest son has moved to Melbourne to find work there because he cannot find work that pays enough in the Hutt Valley. My brother is a trained schoolteacher who now has a child, but he lives in China because the wages in China for a primary school teacher are far higher than they are here in New Zealand. That means that our family is divided. That means my parents don\u2019t get to see their grandchild. That means, like many other families up and down New Zealand, families are divided because New Zealand\u2019s living standards are failing to keep up with the basic needs of Kiwis, and that is unacceptable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe harsh reality of what has happened under this National Government is 240,000 New Zealanders have left over the past two years\u2014240,000 New Zealanders have left. That is an absolute disgrace in terms of building a country, in terms of keeping our people who are bright, who offer opportunity and hope. They are being sent offshore in record numbers because they are given nothing to hope for here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat did we see only last week? We had a brand-new institute set up by the Government only a year ago. We saw the newly formed New Zealand Institute for Bioeconomy Science cut 134 jobs. That is including scientists, including some of the very people that are able to develop products such as golden kiwifruit, which now earns our economy billions of dollars. Now those people are being fired by the Government in more Public Service cuts. The very people that offer the opportunity of economic growth and making our economy work smarter, they are the ones being laid off. They are the ones being driven overseas. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, this Government has absolutely no solutions to these problems. How do we know this? Because they keep asking us for policy ideas; keep saying, \u201COh, what\u2019s your policy ideas, Labour? We\u2019d like to know some because we\u2019ve got none.\u201D Well, I\u2019ll give you a few. It should be more affordable for New Zealanders to live here. That starts with healthcare; that means that you can go to your local doctor and get a free GP visit. In fact, you can have three a year. If people get their health problems sorted out sooner rather than later, then that might just start to fix our broken hospital system because people who put off that important primary healthcare at their local GP means that it causes bigger problems down the line. The number one solution, if you\u2019re wanting it, to help New Zealanders with the cost of living right now: what we would like to see is three free GP visits. That will help; that\u2019s real.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe want a more affordable New Zealand but more than anything we want a New Zealand that offers our kids hope. We want our people staying here and building a future here, and that\u2019s, sadly, what National will never deliver.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b3410b728cb84eb295c253e2648ca0c8\u0022 data-id=\u0022d662b1e9081ca12ade0bbfb17156d4fb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b3410b728cb84eb295c253e2648ca0c8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d662b1e9081ca12ade0bbfb17156d4fb\u0022\u003ESCOTT WILLIS (Green) (15:41)\u003C/span\u003E: If anyone needed an example of how sensationally idiotic this Government\u2019s actions are, liquified natural gas (LNG) is it. No sooner had the Government made the decision to subsidise further fossil fuel dependence than the US and Israel attacked Iran. US and Israeli war-mongering has resulted in the Strait of Hormuz being, effectively, closed; choking in energy exports; and triggering high prices for oil and LNG. European gas futures have surged more than 40 percent; Asian LNG prices are up about 40 percent; oil prices have surged past $79 a barrel and are expected to go past $100 a barrel. Yet Christopher Luxon\u2019s Government is yet to see the writing on the wall with its plan to make us reliant on LNG.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWho is left to pick up the tab? Who is left to pay? It\u2019s regular Kiwi households who, quite frankly, have had enough. Kiwis will not only pay through high electricity bills but also through more extreme weather events. Goodness knows we\u2019ve had enough from this Government! Christopher Luxon seeks to make us hostage to the global price of LNG when Kiwis are already hurting from austerity. Businesses and manufacturing are closing, and gentailers are simply going to pass that cost on, because electricity prices rose 12\u00A0percent in the last 12 months and are predicted to rise another 5 percent this year, before any uptick from LNG. Lines charges are set to go up again from April. We can\u2019t separate this from the cost of living. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EKiwis aren\u2019t so stupid that they\u2019ll believe the Government\u2019s gaslighting on electricity prices when power companies are making record profits, and it doesn\u2019t have to be this way. Kiwis are looking for leadership, not a Government kowtowing to Trump with his climate denialism. The Government\u2019s billion-dollar blunder can still be avoided if Christopher Luxon will admit the mistake and engage with us on solutions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt was clearly a mistake to prioritise LNG without seriously considering any alternatives. It\u2019s mystifying that the Government rejected official advice on boosting household solar and batteries and still refuses to release 47 official documents detailing the solar advice received. Dalgliesh \u0026amp; Associates were the peer reviewers of the Frontier report. They made it clear that dry-year risk is really a market issue because, here in Aotearoa, we have significant firming resources available right now, today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow it\u2019s an opportunity to walk back the LNG decision, when will the Government walk back this decision? When will the Government engage on long-term, durable solutions? We need to say RIP to LNG, and yes to energy security through our abundant renewables and greater energy efficiency. The Government should have given equal weight to assessing other factors that contribute to the dry-year risk premium, such as the market power, the delayed build, and our untapped energy-efficiency potential. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo provide a window for a portfolio of measures and new investments, we can pre-contract Huntly to run, if required, with biomass. The Government can require the current renewables pipeline to be built at pace. These immediate actions would create a window for new investments and to finalise the New Zealand Battery Project work\u2014the portfolio. Government has all the tools at its disposal. Why won\u2019t it use them? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we\u2019re seeing this week is a Government that cannot plan, cannot prepare, and cannot deliver energy solutions. It cannot condemn an illegal war; it cannot protect households from price gouging; it cannot listen to its own officials on solar; and it cannot see that the billion-dollar bet it has placed on LNG is unravelling before the ink is even dry on the paper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis Government has a choice: keep doubling down on fossil fuels that are already failing or it can change course. It can invest in solar that its own officials said would work, and back homegrown energy. We should be more resilient, not more exposed. The path to affordable, secure energy is not through a billion-dollar gas terminal linked to the world\u2019s most volatile shipping routes. We need a Government that backs homegrown energy for the people who live here. We need a Government that will act for our people, for Kiwis; not a Government that will act for the corporates. Kia ora.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022 data-id=\u0022bb9aebedfa62dd24ff15194775431114\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bb9aebedfa62dd24ff15194775431114\u0022\u003ESUZE REDMAYNE (National\u2014Rangit\u012Bkei) (15:46)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229971fdf5125edaa9afcba66689032bbd\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: What did you get up to in the diary?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022963f38af4d8656bb8d2cfc504b9fcf73\u0022\u003ESUZE REDMAYNE\u003C/span\u003E: On Sunday, on a truly stunning Wairarapa day\u2014just for you, Mr McAnulty\u2014at local MP, awesome MP, Mike Butterick\u2019s farm, Nicola Willis made an announcement that we are we are fast tracking changes to KiwiSaver; changes that will literally change lives. Since 2010, Kiwis have been able to withdraw from their KiwiSaver account to help buy their first home, but the current legislation says that it must be their principal place of residence. That last bit\u2014principal place of residence\u2014has locked thousands of people off the property ladder.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOur Government knows what a great motivator it is to be able to buy your first home with your KiwiSaver. We know it encourages and incentivises saving for young people, and we also know how much of a benefit it is in your retirement if you own your own home, in terms of your health, wellbeing, financial security, and your social benefits. Sunday\u2019s announcement was about levelling the playing field for thousands of hard-working Kiwis across New Zealand; people in service tenancies who, as part of their employment contract, live where they work: military personnel, doctors, clergy, teachers, police officers. The numbers tell the story: 235 education workers, 240 police, 850 defence staff.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn 2024, a Federated Farmers survey said that about 73 percent of dairy farmers, 66\u00A0percent of sheep and beef, and 51 percent of arable had farm workers who lived on their farm. If you extrapolate that out, it is literally thousands of people who have been locked out of the opportunity that their city cousins have.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to take you back a few years. The flame was lit for me when Tirrell, our stock manager on the farm, came to us and said he had a problem. He had money in his KiwiSaver account; he was keen to buy his first home but he wasn\u2019t allowed to. I didn\u2019t believe him. I checked with the bank manager. The bank manager said Tirrell was right, and it was a problem for Tirrell and it didn\u2019t seem fair to us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I talked about this when I was campaigning in 2023. I put a member\u2019s bill in the ballot in 2024: the KiwiSaver (First Home for Farmland and Service Tenancy Tenants) Amendment Bill. Our rural Nats got behind it too; we\u2019ve got real strength in numbers, National Party MPs in this Parliament. We are all determined to champion rural issues and solve problems, and this was a problem that needed solving.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EKarla DeWitt from Te Aroha, Danielle Hoffman from Morrinsville; passionate and vocal advocates for change. We weren\u2019t alone in this pursuit. Mike Osborne in Kimbolton used to ring me regularly, so did Simon Perry in Hunterville. Federated Farmers had it on their wish list. It was number three of the 12 policy priorities they had for the 2023 election. I\u2019d especially like to acknowledge Richard McIntyre and Oliver Ibbotson and our local Manawat\u016B/Rangit\u012Bkei Chair Ian Strawn for their advocacy and their occasional robust debate on the issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EKarl Dean, the national dairy chair, was at the announcement on Sunday, which was great, and Wayne Langford led the charge. People across the country have been advocating for these changes to KiwiSaver. I\u2019d like to say a huge thanks to the Minister of Finance, Nicola Willis, for driving this initiative and for picking it up as a Government bill. Thanks also to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, Scott Simpson, and to our coalition partner, too. One other part of the bill that I didn\u2019t mention is that it also allows first-time farm buyers to put their KiwiSaver balance towards the purchase of a farm and a home where they\u2019ll live, but in the name of a commercial entity. As Minister Scott Simpson has said, this change reflects the commercial reality of modern farm ownership. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI stand here incredibly proud to be part of a Government that backs rural and provincial New Zealand\u2014the engine room of New Zealand\u2014that backs hard-working Kiwis to get ahead, and that is relentlessly focused on fixing the basics and building the future. The last word, I think, has to go to Tirrell. As Mike Hosking said on his breakfast show last year, this is Tirrell\u2019s bill, and so I\u2019m very grateful for the motivation. Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220fe7508c7b8a47378c4c88fe1ce69fcb\u0022 data-id=\u002215afcdd9adaf4e1999c6357d57723f32\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fe7508c7b8a47378c4c88fe1ce69fcb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002215afcdd9adaf4e1999c6357d57723f32\u0022\u003ECUSHLA TANGAERE-MANUEL (Labour\u2014Ikaroa-R\u0101whiti) (15:51)\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003ET\u0113n\u0101 koe, Mr Speaker. Otir\u0101, t\u0113n\u0101 t\u0101tou katoa\u003C/span\u003E. Ikaroa-R\u0101whiti brings the light to Aotearoa each and every day, but, boy, does this Government try hard to dim it. Ikaroa-R\u0101whiti is dealing, as is Aotearoa, with the broken promises of this National-led Government. Do you know what we haven\u2019t heard for a while? \u201CBack on track\u201D, because even the members opposite know that we\u2019re well off the track; in fact, we\u2019re on a fast track backwards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet\u2019s take a tour of Ikaroa-R\u0101whiti to demonstrate exactly how far off the track we are. We will start in the south, at Wainui\u014Dmata, an area where food banks are now struggling\u2014struggling to make ends meet. The very organisations established to serve the communities are struggling to provide. What they have noticed is that the promise of this Government to help the squeezed middle has been an absolute lie. This Government, instead of closing the wealth divide, has actually created a whole new class of p\u014Dharatanga\u2014of dependants\u2014a class where people who are working two jobs are struggling to make ends meet and requiring the services of food banks, who are struggling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, where shall we go next? How about Wairoa? In Wairoa, we know it was hammered by Cyclone Gabrielle, as if that was not enough\u2014and no doubt that\u2019ll be debated in the planned infrastructure debate coming up next\u2014since then, there has been zero aged-care in Te Wairoa. It\u2019s not just the high unemployment driving families apart; when our elderly have to leave their communities and their families, that impact is massive, not just on the wh\u0101nau and not just on the physical, mental, and spiritual health of the patient, but, of course, for the community losing all that intellectual property. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet\u2019s skip back further, up to Heretaunga, in Ng\u0101ti Kahungunu. This Government likes going on about housing and saying how wonderful it was that they moved people out of motels\u2014to where? Housing looks like different things to different people. Some people were very grateful to have a caravan at a camping ground. Well, now the Heretaunga camp has closed, more people are going to be pushed out to goodness knows where. We know they cannot afford the standard rent in this country\u2014so then what? Now, with the move-on law, they\u2019re going to be flushed out and probably sent to prison, where we\u2019re going to end up paying a lot more to keep them. How out of touch can you be to not understand the basic needs of your constituents? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, where shall we go? Let\u2019s talk about the East Coast, and, of course, it would be remiss of me not to while we\u2019re talking about the infrastructure bill coming up. The request from the people of Te Araroa, Wharekahik\u0101, P\u014Dtaka\u2014who still live every day with the fragility of State Highway 35\u2014is simply: \u201CPlease, do not forget us.\u201D \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EE hika m\u0101!\u003C/span\u003E This flood happened on 21 January, and there has been one announcement. They want some hope, some indication that the major arterial line through the East Coast, which services not only the economy but is a major health access solution for our wh\u0101nau there\u2014please remember them. A good feed of KFC is awesome, wh\u0101nau, but it ain\u2019t going to fix our roads. We\u2019re going to need a lot more buckets of KFC to fix State Highway 35!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat said, with the limited time I have, I want to end in the Wairarapa, where my team had a wonderful couple of days at the end of last week. We spent time at P\u016Bkaha, a great example of co-governance and partnership, and where we got to hear the phrase \u201CTino Rangit\u0101netanga!\u201D and witness the blessing of \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EKurahaup\u014D\u003C/span\u003E waka, who had our tipuna Wh\u0101tonga at the taurapa. Why that sat with me and why it\u2019s so special is that while this Government may waste time debating ridiculous legislation that seeks to undermine the spirit of our communities, you will fail, because the mana sits in each and every community. \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003ET\u0113n\u0101 t\u0101tou\u003C/span\u003E. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022 data-id=\u00223d11b953499de6adf5d5ea228b3ca060\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223d11b953499de6adf5d5ea228b3ca060\u0022\u003EDAVID MacLEOD (National\u2014New Plymouth) (15:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I can\u2019t help but admire the passion that Cushla Tangaere-Manuel has for her province. I have similar passion for my province, for Taranaki.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet me tell you a little bit about the history of Taranaki. Did you know that 1865 was when the first oil was found in Taranaki? Down by Port Taranaki, it was and\u2014guess what!\u2014today, we still have oil sheens come on to the harbour, on to the water. People think that there\u2019s been a leak off a ship or something like that. It\u2019s not, because it\u2019s coming out of the ground. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is how significant oil and gas is in Taranaki, but guess what\u2019s happening today! Our economy is diving. We have got unemployment happening\u2014there are actually, prospectively, 3,300 people who are going to be losing their jobs because of the trajectory of oil and gas demise in our province. Our GDP is diving. We have a very proud province, with the fact that we had the second to highest GDP per capita in New Zealand for many, many years, behind only this place here\u2014Wellington\u2014with all the politicians and everybody else, and all the others who are down here. The fact is that we\u2019ve been striving very good; that is now diving as a result of the demise of oil and gas. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat\u2019s happened with oil and gas? Well, in 2018, we had a policy announcement from the other Government that actually took away the exploration of oil and gas. They did preserve it on the land of Taranaki, but, I can tell you, the decision knocked the confidence right out of the companies that we need to keep the lights on and keep the energy going here in New Zealand. It was a travesty. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I respect the fact that Governments of the day have the right to be able to create policy, but I do not respect policies that have been derived with no quality process to back it up. It was a fact that when that policy was announced in 2018, no officials and no industry knew anything about it. Wouldn\u2019t you think it would be right to go and talk to the people that know the most about this, and at least talk about what are the potential ramifications of such a policy? Well, that Government did not do it, and it was a travesty. Do you know why it was a travesty? Not because of the energy complications we have to our country at the moment\u2014I\u2019ll talk to that\u2014but also the fact that the world started to look at New Zealand differently. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand was looked at as being a reliable place to be able to develop policy. We did the right thing: we did a lot of research, and we were very careful about how we developed policy. That was the first time we had a major policy that presented out of the blue. It was the Prime Minister of the day\u2019s \u201Cnuclear moment\u201D, I think she called it. It was incredible, and the demise of that is shown today. Taranaki is wearing the brunt of it, and\u2014guess what!\u2014energy-wise, New Zealand is wearing the brunt of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet\u2019s talk about energy. This is about gas, primarily. First of all, let\u2019s understand coal. We\u2019ve got this big stockpile of coal, and the Minister for Energy spoke to it. It\u2019s currently sitting at 1.2 million tonnes of coal. Now, you might think \u201CWell, that\u2019s a lot.\u201D, but how much is that? If you think of the big ship that brings coal into this country, that\u2019s 35,000 tonnes. If you think about a truck that\u2019s on the road with an \u201CH\u201D on it, they can carry about 35 tonnes on it, so one shipment is 1,000 trucks to get it there\u2014down to Huntly\u2014for it. That\u2019s one shipment. If you want to get 1.2 million tonnes of it, this is in the realms of about 35 of those shipments, to actually get that. This is an immense mountain of coal\u2014and what is it replacing? It is a firming energy, because we don\u2019t have enough reliable natural gas. It\u2019s a burning fuel that is said to be at least 40 percent cleaner than coal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, when I look at the fact sheet, back in the day, when Labour brought in that particular policy, they said this was for environmental reasons. How can it be environmental reasons when you\u2019re taking away gas and generating electricity, and you\u2019re replacing it with coal? Unbelievable. We need to restore the confidence of finding indigenous natural gas. We\u2019ve had to, as a Government, announce a liquified natural gas policy because we\u2019re struggling to regain the confidence in natural gas being found here in New Zealand, and that side of the debating chamber are holding the country to ransom\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u2014with regards to high electricity prices and a quality, secure energy network. We need to get\u2014I even hear it from the Green member, that we need a long-term energy strategy. I can\u2019t argue with that. But when you\u2019re being dictated to by the Opposition that they won\u2019t allow for oil and gas in the future, that leaves the very question of how strong our network\u2019s going to be. We\u2019ve got to be better than that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022 data-id=\u00226dfbdd682c0adaa36f12a96d123ab429\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226dfbdd682c0adaa36f12a96d123ab429\u0022\u003ETODD STEPHENSON (ACT) (16:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I want to talk about something important today, and that is medicines. Not structures, not slogans, not press releases\u2014medicines\u2014because when someone is sick, nothing else matters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve been really lucky to have joined the Hon David Seymour over the last few weeks as Pharmac has made a series of announcements about new treatments for New Zealanders. For those people who need those medicines, it\u2019s not about politics; it\u2019s about hope. When a cancer drug becomes available that wasn\u2019t there before, it\u2019s not a policy win; it\u2019s actually about a family getting more time together\u2014people will be able to spend more time with their loved ones. When a chronic condition gets a treatment funded, that\u2019s not a line in the Budget; that\u2019s about someone being able to get out of bed, go to work, be independent, and contribute to New Zealand. When a rare disorder finally has a treatment option, that\u2019s not about bureaucracy; it\u2019s actually about a parent, and a person in our society being able to breathe again\u2014being able to relax and actually enjoy their life. That\u2019s what fixing what matters in health looks like.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor too long, our health system\u2019s been drifting; it\u2019s been focused away from patients. Obviously, this week we\u2019ve been discussing refocusing our health system with the Pae Ora (Healthy Futures) Act changes. We\u2019ve become obsessed with structure and ideology, and that\u2019s not what we want in health; we want it to actually be about patients.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo let me be clear: ACT has been clear that the health system needs to deliver quality, timely care to New Zealanders, and that means actually focusing on outcomes. We\u2019re very proud of the changes we\u2019ve made with Pharmac and actually changing that organisation to make sure it\u2019s delivering for New Zealanders who need important medicines. New Zealanders deserve treatments not based on identity or politics or what box they have to tick. Illnesses don\u2019t discriminate; they can hit a family at any time and an individual at any time. Access shouldn\u2019t discriminate, either. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EActually, healthcare is one of the biggest costs to Government. There\u2019s a lot of pressure, obviously, facing our healthcare system, and when some medicines aren\u2019t funded, that means people aren\u2019t actually getting the treatment and can contribute to society in the way they want, and also can\u2019t spend time with their families and loved ones. That actually affects our whole society. People may not be able to work; they may not be able to earn wages, pay taxes. They may not be able to care for their children, their loved ones. It also often means more interaction with the healthcare system\u2014going to hospital, visiting GPs, putting more pressure on our system. So, when we fund treatments, we often relieve pressure on other parts of our health system, which is really, really good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELast night, I was actually lucky enough, along with my Government colleague Nancy Lu from the National Party, to join an online meeting that was in relation to triple-negative breast cancer. For those who know a little bit about breast cancer, if you get a diagnosis of triple-negative breast cancer, that is actually very, very serious. There are less treatment options if you have a diagnosis of triple-negative breast cancer. We were invited to join this meeting by Catherine Cooke. Some of you across health may have been lobbied by her. Catherine is a very, very ferocious advocate for trying to get another treatment funded in New Zealand for triple-negative breast cancer. We were very lucky to actually hear the stories from some amazing women: Dr Stone, Ellie, Jackie, Imogen, Annette. They were able to talk about their experience with breast cancer and, actually, what having treatments means. So I want to acknowledge Catherine for all her advocacy\u2014and if she does send you an email and does request the meeting, you should take it and learn more about what she\u2019s trying to campaign for.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut, look, I want to say that this Government is committed to more treatments for New Zealanders, we are committed to ensuring Pharmac is fit for purpose, and we are committed to ensuring that we actually have a healthcare system where we invest upfront to actually ensure New Zealanders have the health outcomes, are able to contribute to society, and really be able to raise their families and live the lives they want. That\u2019s what fixing what matters in healthcare means. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002255687306bceeda3e2d11bed6cee7dc5e\u0022\u003ESittings of the House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022016cf80630070e06f4fd734e70dbcd43\u0022\u003EExtended Sitting\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022 data-id=\u002240f750dc74e303c32d9827830878338a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002240f750dc74e303c32d9827830878338a\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP (Leader of the House) (16:06)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the sitting of the House today be extended into tomorrow morning for the committee of the whole House stages of the Public Finance Amendment Bill, the Social Security (Accident Compensation and Calculation of Weekly Income) Amendment Bill, the Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Bill, the Legislation Amendment Bill; and the interrupted debate on the second readings of the Healthy Futures (Pae Ora) Amendment Bill, and the Financial Markets Conduct Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fa10ab81b32d3d5f1d3c3525fc884e91\u0022\u003EDebates\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00225fb0c8f3ec3618d3a2645985d3af6bea\u0022\u003EDebate on the National Infrastructure Plan\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022eb90395dcb534893d3d4fbc089b36003\u0022\u003ESpecial Debate\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022 data-id=\u00227ed8e8d2f5f3f306e83068f7c54b25df\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227ed8e8d2f5f3f306e83068f7c54b25df\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER (16:07)\u003C/span\u003E: We now come, members, to the special debate and the debate on the National Infrastructure Plan, arranged by the Business Committee under Standing Order 80.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022 data-id=\u0022ff5e18787c632de4d15b92687b62c01b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ff5e18787c632de4d15b92687b62c01b\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP (Minister for Infrastructure) (16:07)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat this House take note of the National Infrastructure Plan\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe National Infrastructure Plan is a wake-up call for many people in this House and, indeed, I would say, in New Zealand. It came about because the Government was elected on the idea of establishing a 30-year national infrastructure plan for the country. Rather than write that plan ourselves through the Treasury and through other Government agencies, we tasked the independent Infrastructure Commission with coming up with the plan. I think that was very important, and it\u2019s given the plan a degree of credibility and independence that, I think, has been widely welcomed by many members of this House and, indeed, many members of the public.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s worth noting that we\u2019ve had national infrastructure plans before\u2014there was one back in 2010, I think, and then there was another one in 2011\u2014but they were, if I can be so bold as to say, largely politically generated documents. This is a plan that actually takes an independent, clear-eyed assessment of the state of our system and what needs to change. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey have made a compelling case for change. We face significant challenges as a country: ageing stock; backlog of maintenance and renewals; an ageing population; and increased exposure to natural hazard events, as members of the House know so well from recent days, weeks, and months. The system we have is underperforming. One common quote or statistic that has been used a lot is that we\u2019re in the top 10 percent in the OECD for spending, but the bottom 10 percent for what we get for our spend. I\u2019ve been shocked since becoming infrastructure Minister at the state of asset management: fourth to last in the OECD for asset management. Central government agencies not following basic rules on basic investment management\u2014agencies who don\u2019t have asset registers, don\u2019t have long-term investment plans, don\u2019t do the basics. What that manifests in is leaky police stations, mouldy military homes, rotting classrooms, and, in 2018, a hospital with raw sewage seeping into the walls. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt became a subject for political debate. I remember, back then, when I was a youthful Opposition MP, the debate was more about what we were going to do about it\u2014which is now being fixed, belatedly\u2014but, actually, we should have been asking the question: how did we get here in the first place? How did this happen? How did we end up with raw sewage? I think it was Middlemore Hospital. Getting our system right is a must; it\u2019s not a nice-to-have. I think, as everyone acknowledges, infrastructure is the enabler of economic growth and productivity, and I don\u2019t think anyone\u2019s going to disagree with that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have a proud history of infrastructure delivery in New Zealand. In the 1870s, we built a Fell system to get trains over the Remutaka Ranges, and in the mid-1900s, we built a 9-kilometre tunnel under the Remutakas. In the 1950s, we built the Auckland Harbour Bridge, and we used tolls to recoup the cost of building the bridge. In the 1960s, we built Manap\u014Duri, which generates electricity now for 600\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255c15600384aab9b9941526924aa830e\u0022\u003ECamilla Belich\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6ea2683714d58fa9fd50d37270aa01b\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: What\u2019s that? Well, it\u2019s the truth, I mean if you\u2019re arguing we didn\u2019t use tolls; we did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223bbf42a888564aeb0e31774d9db1d7bc\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: She said yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224aeba508736eaddfd83090882345cf98\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, you said yes\u2014OK. You\u2019re good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022699231ec2850a89312a00a6133682ea8\u0022\u003EShanan Halbert\u003C/span\u003E: Already paid for.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226c5529f3cb77406cea65151a8fe126cc\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: Well, actually that\u2019s the point. It has been paid for; the capital costs have been paid for, but there are ongoing running costs of the network. That\u2019s actually one of the insights of the report, Mr Halbert, which is that once you\u2019ve paid for something, it\u2019s fine, but you have to maintain it, and maintaining things is what we\u2019ve been really bad at. That little vignette from across the House actually demonstrates precisely the problem we\u2019re dealing with. The debate\u2019s not a party political debate, but it is an interesting insight into the challenges we\u2019ve got as a country. In the 1965, we built the Cook Strait cable between Benmore and Lower Hutt. We used to be world leaders. Now, we find it difficult to consent solar farms and to build new buildings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s a couple of options that are before the country, actually. One is we can just muddle along and look at the plan and say, \u201COh, yep, well, a bunch of experts have given us some interesting things.\u201D That\u2019s kind of been the status quo approach for the last few years; I call it managed mediocrity. Managed decline\u2019s another word for it\u2014it\u2019s kind of where we\u2019re at. Or we can actually face up to it, face the hard truths, and make some tough decisions on tolling, upzoning, planning, and actually get an assurance system in place so we get greater scrutiny of central government and more.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are a number of recommendations in the report that I think are very important, some of which the Government has work under way on and some of which we need to do more work on. They talk about a sustainable framework for planning. Now, we\u2019ve got Resource Management Act reform under way. The Environment Committee is ploughing through the submissions, and I\u2019ve read some of them as well. Creating a durable framework to make it easier to consent and build and maintain infrastructure is very important. It\u2019s something that I\u2019m personally committed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey talk about upzoning around rapid transit stations. It\u2019s very important that, as a country, we\u2019re able to take advantage of these large public investments in things like City Rail Link stations, Eastern Busway, Northwest Busway\u2014that will come over time\u2014and train stations in the Wellington commuter area. That\u2019s something we\u2019ve got important work under way on. It\u2019s, obviously, backwards and forwards in Auckland at the moment, but we\u2019ll get there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s a lot in the report around making better use of what we\u2019ve already got through things like managing demand on our roads. That is a word for congestion pricing and time of use pricing. Parliament, last year, passed time of use pricing legislation unanimously, and I was really pleased by that, and I was really pleased to engage with the Opposition around finding a framework that we can all accept. Having a framework is one thing; implementing it is going to be challenging. As I said when we did the committee stage, implementing it is going to get noisy, and it\u2019s going to get rough. My plea for everybody, for all decision makers in Government and Opposition, is that we have a mature approach to this, because making better use of what we\u2019ve got involves things like time-of-use charging and congestion charging, which will raise efficiency and productivity and help drive growth, but it\u2019s going to require, frankly, a degree of maturity from us all that maybe some of us\u2014all of us, probably\u2014have not displayed in the past.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy plea, also, is that we take an evidence-led approach to this. I will express a degree of frustration at the debate around the second harbour crossing in Auckland. The second harbour crossing in Auckland is going to be a project that\u2019s required at some point in the future. There\u2019s a bit of debate around when it\u2019s required, but it\u2019s going to be required. That will be the biggest infrastructure project ever built in New Zealand history by any order of magnitude. It will be billions and billions of dollars. I\u2019m not going to put a number on it, because we don\u2019t know actually how much it will cost. That\u2019s, again, another insight of the report\u2014that politicians have got to stop making announcements about things they\u2019re going to build without knowing how much they cost. Again, I say that\u2019s something we\u2019ve all got to take seriously. It\u2019s going to be billions. Now, that has to be paid for. There\u2019s a couple of answers as to how\u2014well there\u2019s a number of things in the middle, but there\u2019s kind of two choices: one is users help fund it, which is how the second harbour crossing was built in the first place; the other is that we borrow, or some combination thereof.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe idea that we\u2019d ask the good residents of Napier\u2014where I was the other day, straight after that news came out\u2014to pay higher taxes to fund the debt on the Crown balance sheet, to build a road that they\u2019ll probably never use except maybe once a year when they go up to Auckland for a weekend break\u2014that\u2019s a stiff ask for the people of Napier. It\u2019s a stiff ask for the people of Christchurch. It\u2019s a stiff ask for the people of Wellington. I\u2019m not saying that tolls are the answer to everything. They aren\u2019t, but they\u2019re part of the solution towards moving towards more user-pays things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHere\u2019s the other insight in the report that I think a lot of people have kind of woken up to in the last two weeks since it\u2019s been published: stuff isn\u2019t free. Ultimately, everything has to be paid for, and there\u2019s a range of different ways to pay for that. Ultimately, there is no magic money tree at the bottom of the garden. Public-private partnerships (PPPs) are not magic. PPPs are a procurement tool; they are not a funding tool. Again, there\u2019s some very good information in the report around that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe process from here: we\u2019re going to see what people think of the report; we\u2019re having the special debate. The Government is statutorily obliged to respond by mid-June. Our intention, as a Government, is to work up a Government response and to engage with the Opposition around that response. My hope is that we could get to some degree of consensus around many of the recommendations. Some of them are really eminently sensible recommendations. We\u2019ve already got work under way around assurance, and, as I said to the Opposition spokesperson in the House a couple of weeks ago, we\u2019re doing some thought there. We will be engaging with the Opposition around that. Then, as we move towards June and July, there will be potentially another opportunity for a second special debate on this as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECould I just take 30 more seconds, Madam Speaker, if that\u2019s OK?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022629e532efbb16435e2f3aeb43e64072e\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll grant it today in the interests of the fact that you\u2019re asking for some sort of joint effort.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f394169d0f6345407f5b305df50e997\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: I just wanted to close by saying my genuine, strong view is that it\u2019s a bit of an inflection point for the country around infrastructure. That will only be true if we listen to what the experts have been saying to us, actually, frankly, for quite a long time now: don\u2019t overpromise; don\u2019t overbuild; look after what you\u2019ve got; work out the benefit-cost ratios of things and what\u2019s actually value for money; establish a pipeline that most people can get behind, still with a bit of room for political argy-bargy, but a sustainable long-term pipeline; get the planning reform right; make better use of what you\u2019ve got; make use of the infrastructure that\u2019s already there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EYou know, if we can agree on those basic principles\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002213c5b5758cde2b9a5578f17eda22e244\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: If we can agree quickly, because you\u2019re way over your 30 seconds that you just asked for.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ffb19166d6abce0331601bb3f4d68c56\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014lock and load for the next 20 years, this Parliament will have made a massive contribution to New Zealand\u2019s future. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e4b410144cf575e597f8a50539be2e0c\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: We now have a split call with Labour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022 data-id=\u00224849c7a2cbb2cb40a772594ab68d3a19\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224849c7a2cbb2cb40a772594ab68d3a19\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY (Labour) (16:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. The Labour Party supports the work of the New Zealand Infrastructure Commission and commends it on the production of the National Infrastructure Plan. It\u2019s long been clear that infrastructure has not been done well in this country. That\u2019s why, under the previous Labour Government, the Infrastructure Commission was established. That is why we have always lent our support towards the work of this plan. We saw it as a natural progression of the work that we\u2019ve done when in Government, and, frankly, that is what the sector wants to see. The very clear message from the sector\u2014and when I say the sector, I don\u2019t just mean infrastructure. It is every sector; about 17 that are referred to in the plan who are sick and tired of the stop-start carry-on that they have seen in this country for far too long.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think we\u2019ve actually seen in recent debates in this House\u2014and for about 30-odd seconds the Minister\u2019s contribution there\u2014that we are prone to wading into arguments amongst ourselves when, actually, the sector just wants to see where we can agree, and the National Infrastructure Plan sets a pathway there. We have to be realistic, though; we\u2019re not going to agree on everything. But surely we can make genuine efforts to agree on the settings by which infrastructure is assessed and funded and delivered in this country. If we can make genuine inroads in getting to that point, we will provide a lot of the certainty that the sector is after.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, if we\u2019re honest with ourselves, we will recognise that there are broadly two reasons why projects get cancelled. We\u2019ve seen it in recent history. They either get cancelled for political reasons, like we saw with the ferries, or they get cancelled because an incoming Government realises that all the promises and announcements that were made by the previous Government haven\u2019t actually been funded, and there\u2019s no plan by which to fund them. Both of those things can be avoided if we do one simple thing, and I don\u2019t propose this as a criticism; I propose this to improve the work that the Infrastructure Commission does. If all Crown infrastructure went through the independent assurance process that the Infrastructure Commission has set up, then we will go a long way to avoiding the cancellation of projects that we have seen in the past. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, if we all just take a moment to reflect on our own communities, we all know of a project that was stopped. We all know the disruption that caused, and we know the human impact on those that have lost jobs, many of whom have had to leave and go to Australia because there wasn\u2019t that certainty for their employer to keep them on or to take on new employees or to upskill the staff that they kept. It is about confidence and about certainty, and one way to assure that is if we get the settings right, then it doesn\u2019t actually matter what is going to happen at an election, because they know that infrastructure projects have been properly assessed and nothing has been promised without an ability to pay for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI agree with the Minister that we need to move away from that, but let\u2019s identify the elephant in the room: there has been $56 billion of transport commitments made by this Government and there is a $30 billion hole in how to pay for it. Minister Bishop has admitted that himself, so this isn\u2019t a political statement; it is a statement of fact. He has now started making speeches publicly acknowledging that and indicating that the promises they\u2019ve made probably won\u2019t be happening on the time frame that they originally said, and good on him for doing that. But that is one step of probably about a dozen that need to be made to avoid that in the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe simply cannot have a situation where, for electioneering purposes, many regions in the country are promised a big new infrastructure project without that having a proper independent assessment and without a genuine plan on how to pay for it. If the Government was willing to require all Crown infrastructure, including the New Zealand Transport Agency, to go through the independent assurance processes of the Infrastructure Commission, we can have an informed debate\u2014us as a Parliament\u2014and respective Governments can make informed decisions and we will avoid the stop-start carry-on, because Governments won\u2019t have the political grounds to cancel things or they won\u2019t have inherited decisions that were based on a lack of information, and the sector and those that work in it can have the certainty they\u2019ve been asking for.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022d693b6e9dfddba45b84f9372f516101f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d693b6e9dfddba45b84f9372f516101f\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (16:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Just before I continue the thought trail of the previous speaker, the Hon Kieran McAnulty, I want to just acknowledge my grand-auntie, Auntie Kolotita in Samoa. She turned 100 yesterday\u2014so she is older than lots of the infrastructure in New Zealand. The Prime Minister of Samoa was very gracious to be at her party yesterday, so I just want to say \u003Cspan lang=\u0022sa\u0022\u003Emanuia lou aso soifua tin\u0101\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI go back to the infrastructure problem that we have here in New Zealand and why this plan actually will give us hope as a country. That\u2019s what I believe this plan will set out. The problem we have in New Zealand is not how much we spend on infrastructure; it\u2019s the actual fact that we do not get value for money for what we spend and we do not look after our assets properly. Successive Governments have all had a part to play in this, and my genuine hope as the spokesperson on finance for the Labour Party is that we get a bit closer to removing the politics, so that New Zealand can have the infrastructure we deserve.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe know there is a whole big plan, a pipeline of work that\u2019s under way, and this particular plan actually sets out how much is in that pipeline. There are 11,925 projects currently under way by both the Government or local government. This costs $275 billion in planning or delivery. That is the size of the problem that we have at the moment, and 98 percent of that pipeline are smaller projects which are worth less than $100 million. This plan sets that out very, very clearly, and that work in relation to finding out what projects there were in the whole of the country started back in 2020, and it was important that that picture started to be built. I want to acknowledge the previous Minister of Finance, Grant Robertson, who first of all set up the Infrastructure Commission in 2018 and then asked them to, basically, go around the country and figure out how much New Zealand has under way and what we need to do, because you don\u2019t know how big your problem is until you actually measure it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen what happened was, in 2022, the Infrastructure Commission set out a strategy, so that, therefore, gives a sort of a pathway as to what the next steps are. I do want to acknowledge Minister Bishop, who did continue the work, kept the Infrastructure Commission, and that is just as important\u2014the fact that he kept the independent Infrastructure Commission, and, therefore, refined the pipeline, and now we get to this plan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s so important to make sure we set out that history, because, over time, the hope is that the politics is out of this so that we can keep our workers here, because what we\u2019ve seen in the last two years is the loss of 18,000 construction sector roles\u2014and this is not a political statement; this is a fact. This is what happens when you stop, start, review, pause, and cancel projects. That is the result: we lose our most skilled and capable, and, therefore, when the actual infrastructure starts to wind up, supply and demand comes in and we start to pay more, and that is, effectively, again the problem that this plan starts to try and address.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe plan builds on the vision that the Infrastructure Commission hope to have delivered on from their initial strategy back in 2022. The number one thing I heard when I was the spokesperson on infrastructure for a bit in 2024 was that the sector was screaming out for the politics to be taken out. They were screaming out; they screamed out so much. They wrote to the Prime Minister in May 2024 asking him to please talk to the Opposition, find a bipartisan way to do this, because we are losing our most skilled workers, and, when they say \u201Cskilled\u201D, it wasn\u2019t just the people who were digging the holes or holding the lollipop signs. New Zealand was losing our best engineers. We were losing our best architects. It didn\u2019t help that sometimes they\u2019ve cancelled projects and we lost some of our best geoseismic engineers. But this plan gives me hope and it\u2019s on all of us in this House to work as closely as possible to deliver it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022897ecda7d49b25c6cba2be3e1eae9cbf\u0022\u003EPersonal Explanations\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022625ff380c084f509684b4b0978b546b7\u0022\u003EAnzac Day Amendment Bill\u2014Correction\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022 data-id=\u0022f35ead8eb264c92a02643f72d7bb219b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f35ead8eb264c92a02643f72d7bb219b\u0022\u003EDr VANESSA WEENINK (National\u2014Banks Peninsula) (16:29)\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to make a personal explanation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ecb070451220b6eb80119d4dafa1710f\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe9306248ffa7d470f0ce8d35dee7826\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry. Madam Speaker, there needs to a description as to what the explanation is for. Could we get a description as to what the explanation is for?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f569ea7b56eb31c710052bc2135e0d49\u0022\u003EDr VANESSA WEENINK\u003C/span\u003E: OK. Yeah, sure; sorry. I wish to correct a statement that I made during the second reading of the Anzac commemoration bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d6bf99a6dbb453b47db96145238d339\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: So there was no objection to that request? OK; thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022510db1259726b3d11eb4f4cb3256de2a\u0022\u003EDr VANESSA WEENINK\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker, During that address, I stated that civilians served in Bong Son; I should have said Quy Nh\u01A1n. I\u2019d like to shout out to Peter Stitt for pointing it out to me. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002241cf42f85f367e18697ed5c2343e4c4b\u0022\u003EDebates\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b6008c21972f63e47cf1fa52638bf8de\u0022\u003EDebate on National Infrastructure Plan\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002206b51d5daf58dbc46cdb19b9cfcc348b\u0022\u003ESpecial Debate\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000412\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022 data-id=\u002273387fe89ff652752c0ae54aa4d0c6ed\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002273387fe89ff652752c0ae54aa4d0c6ed\u0022\u003EHon JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green\u2014Rongotai) (16:29)\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003ET\u0113n\u0101 koe, Madam Speaker. T\u0113n\u0101 koutou e te Whare.\u003C/span\u003E I really welcome this debate, I welcome the National Infrastructure Plan that has been delivered to Parliament, and I, absolutely, welcome and congratulate Minister Chris Bishop on the work that he has done and the wero he has put out to all of us to work together to have a more sensible and informed plan for long-term infrastructure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIronically, I think if you went back to when I first came into Parliament in 2011, one of the reasons I talked about for getting involved in politics was the conviction that we could do so much better on infrastructure. Our buildings could be warmer and dryer, we could be using more renewable electricity, we could have better public transport, and it would benefit literally everyone in the country to do those things, but it required changes in policy and funding and it required some political leadership in order to achieve that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m sure many New Zealanders have had the experience of going overseas and staying in houses and finding that, actually, it\u2019s possible to be in a house that doesn\u2019t cost a fortune to run, and yet it is warm and dry; or perhaps of going to a city overseas of the same size as towns and cities in New Zealand and finding really excellent, affordable public transport, or, potentially, even going to places where bikes are a normal way to get around, and where 30 or 40 percent of trips in a city might be by bike and all the kids are still walking and biking to school. The thing about taking this smarter approach to infrastructure is that it\u2019s better fiscally for New Zealand, it\u2019s better economically for New Zealand, it\u2019s better for our environment and our climate, and it\u2019s better for our people, and so I absolutely think it\u2019s something that we should be able to find a way to agree, across the House, on how to do that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do think that what\u2019s laid out in the National Infrastructure Plan gives us some really important information that we have to take seriously, and also some recommendations on long-term system shifts. The number one recommendation is to lift hospital investment because we have an ageing population and we haven\u2019t kept up with hospital investment for some decades. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second one is completing catch-up on renewals in the water sector and restoring affordability. I\u2019m aware that the Wellington region, and particularly my electorate, is facing the end of life for some of our waste-water treatment plants and it has a significant need for renewal of assets. One of the challenges that I think we need to address is funding. Yes, it\u2019s possible that user charges could pay for some of it, but that might actually be quite difficult in the short term, and local government simply hasn\u2019t had the share of Government revenue that\u2019s needed to be able to invest in infrastructure. Thirty-three\u00A0percent of our GDP is central government taxation, and only 4 percent is local government, and local government is responsible for a lot of really important infrastructure. I think there\u2019s a role for central government to ensure that local government has the revenue sources it needs, or devolved funding, for some of these important infrastructure upgrades that are needed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe third recommendation is implementing time-of-use charging and fleet-wide road-user charges. I think that is really important, and it will change some of the prioritisation and sequencing of some of the projects that the Government currently has\u2014I mean, I\u2019d highly recommend that everyone looks at this. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust bringing it back, and speaking for the Green Party, I\u2019d say that everyone in New Zealand wants long-term thinking and wants the system to be better. We need to meet the challenge of climate change, we have to reduce emissions, we have to adapt to the storms that are already going to come, and there are ways to create sustainable systems that actually reduce costs for New Zealanders while also reducing pollution and emissions and also improving the environment in which we live in a way that protects us from future storms, but it requires change to how we have done things, and what I have found is that there is a certain path dependency. There\u2019s always a constituency for the status quo, and so it\u2019s very easy for politicians to campaign against changes. I think that we all need to recognise where some changes are going to benefit all of us or most of us, and then we all have a role to play in showing that political leadership and helping explain what the long-term benefits of those changes will be. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other reality is that there\u2019s a certain political economy around new projects and megaprojects, and that is very well referenced in this report. It says that we have \u201Cmore megaprojects in planning than the country can realistically fund or deliver, [so] providers need to prioritise low-cost, incremental upgrades over waiting for expensive, fully formed solutions. This is especially important in health and transport, where megaprojects threaten to crowd out other priorities like essential maintenance and renewals.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESomething that I think we all need to recognise is that it\u2019s a lot sexier to campaign on a new project, but, actually, everybody\u2019s lives and cost of living can be improved by smaller improvements that are harder to point to, but are necessary. I\u2019ve seen someone reference recently that nobody really welcomes or notices a bridge that didn\u2019t fail, and so you tend not to have politicians campaigning on maintenance and renewals. This report is saying that we have to use what we have better and we have to focus on maintaining and renewing, and I would say that the power to do this is in the Government\u2019s hands\u2014it\u2019s in this Government\u2019s hands. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe power to make the changes recommended in this report sits with this coalition Government right now, and we welcome the opportunity for the Minister to come to us and have a negotiation around what is going to be pared back and what we could do instead. Just to put it in context, there\u2019s $56 billion worth of State highway projects that were campaigned on by the National Party, who assumed it would only be $17 billion. Now, we know it could be $22 billion to have a fully grade-separated, four-laned road from Warkworth to Whang\u0101rei, and just the first stage of that is probably $4 billion. That project hasn\u2019t been submitted to the infrastructure priorities list for assessment, and, as I understand it, the Government is intending to sign a public-private partnership for the first stage of that project before the next election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClearly, the information around the cost of the project has substantially changed since the party signed up to the coalition agreement promising it. If we want to take seriously the recommendations in this report and the idea that we should have a cross-party approach to long-term infrastructure, then the Government should come to the Opposition parties and we should talk about what we could do instead, and not sign future Governments up to a project that probably isn\u2019t the best use of money to get the outcomes that everybody wants. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat else could we do with $22 billion? Well, four City Rail Links\u2014I mean, the biggest, most complicated project that\u2019s going to double the capacity and transform Auckland; four of those\u2014seven fully equipped Dunedin Hospitals, seven Cook Strait ferry terminals, 150 years of Te Huia train services, or 169 times the entire walking and cycling budget across the entire country in the 2024 Government policy statement. But this is probably the most important: we could drastically lower, or potentially eliminate, the cost of power to 700,000 dwellings in Auckland and Northland by having the Government fully fund a $30,000 7-kilowatt solar and battery system. Now, that would cost the same as the new road to Northland, which will only save 10 or 15 minutes on journeys sometime 20 years in the future, if we could even pay for it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust think about 700,000 dwellings having free power, moving us off gas, and moving us off fossil fuels. It would actually be so much better for productivity and the cost of living than the project that is planned, and that is the simple fact of it. Probably even the Government\u2019s own voters\u2014the voters that voted for these parties\u2014would say, \u201CThis is actually a more sensible investment that would get us wins in a very short period of time.\u201D I mean, probably in the time that we would just be starting the construction, or maybe finishing\u2014we could definitely do this in less time than constructing even the first stage of that project.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have some very clear choices before us. I welcome Minister Bishop\u2019s work on this, and his leadership, and I say that the power to make this change that Aotearoa New Zealand needs is in this coalition Government\u2019s hands right now. Those members can be responsible, they can show political leadership, and they can do what the country wants. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220838e5f9bac748d2a59aea595e5226a0\u0022 data-id=\u00227c2034c205b47ffeba705dfa671135ae\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220838e5f9bac748d2a59aea595e5226a0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227c2034c205b47ffeba705dfa671135ae\u0022\u003ESIMON COURT (ACT) (16:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, thank you very much. I just want to offer a perspective as a civil engineer of nearly 25 years. I have worked under bridges, replacing bridge bearings, and I have worked on sea walls and other structures that are not glamorous but where, if we don\u2019t do the maintenance, things will fall into the sea or bridges will fall down. I understand this. I\u2019ve been out in all weathers at all times of the day, when other people are on their holidays, with teams of people who are dedicated to maintaining New Zealand, and that is why I\u2019m really heartened by what we see in this report. I must thank the Infrastructure Commission, led by Geoff Cooper, and Minister Chris Bishop for their leadership in delivering this plan to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis plan forces Parliament and forces all those in the infrastructure system to confront a pretty basic reality, and I think Julie Anne Genter from the Green Party laid it out. We are facing a series of choices and trade-offs. For each decision we make, there\u2019s an opportunity cost; for each decision we don\u2019t make, there\u2019s an opportunity cost; and when New Zealand is in a massive infrastructure deficit\u2014there\u2019s a list of 12,000 projects, worth $275 billion\u2014let\u2019s be honest: that\u2019s a wish list right now. If everything is a priority, it turns out that nothing is a priority, and that\u2019s why this plan really matters. Before anyone turns up to cut a ribbon or, with a shiny new shovel, to turn a sod, we\u2019ve got to answer two simple questions: what absolutely must we build and what must we maintain at all cost? New Zealand has been very poor as a nation when it comes to answering those questions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe first opportunity cost is between projects themselves. We\u2019ve heard all kinds of projects floated already in this debate, but I just want to come back to this Northland road. I drove up to Northland last week and went to the Northland Field Days in Dargaville, and I was shocked by the condition of the road. State Highway 1 had almost no passing lanes. I was crawling behind trucks and slow vehicles at 65 or 70 kilometres an hour, even where it was 100 kilometres an hour. There were potholes, the seal was broken, and that was State Highway 1. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen we left the main highway and headed up towards Dargaville, and driving out of this ghetto-like highway, suddenly we came into this incredible intersection with guard rails and extra wide sections, paint everywhere, and signs everywhere, and I thought, \u201CWhat is this miracle, in the middle of Northland\u2014in the middle of nowhere?\u201D That\u2019s an example of the previous Government\u2019s Road to Zero approach to designing roads. They must have spent millions and millions of dollars on what\u2019s basically an intersection, when all it really needed was a bit of chipseal and refreshing of the paint on the signs. It shows you that if we don\u2019t have our priorities right, we\u2019re going to waste money on things that have very little value.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne more example, and it really guts me, is Auckland light rail. I mean, what city in the world wouldn\u2019t want a decent light rail from their CBD to the airport? Well, in 2017, the previous Government promised trains to Mount Albert station by 2021, and by 2023, when they got turfed out, they\u2019d spent $200 million on a stack of reports that said that, actually, it\u2019s going to cost about $30 billion and it\u2019s going to take decades. Well, that\u2019s not how you deliver infrastructure. That\u2019s political theatre, and this infrastructure plan points out very clearly that that is no longer acceptable. New Zealanders don\u2019t accept it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe must be driven by value for money and national priorities. We know that healthcare, infrastructure, and defence, of course, right now must be a priority. Water and waste water, and, of course, transport\u2014because if we connect people in more remote parts of New Zealand and in more rural parts of New Zealand through better highways, they can get to jobs and families have education choices they don\u2019t otherwise do when the journey is unsafe and takes hours longer. That needs to be our priority.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, on maintenance, the Infrastructure Commission points out, rightly, that we must spend as much as 60c of every future infrastructure dollar on maintenance, and that\u2019s because unless we can maintain the assets we\u2019ve already got, we will end up with leaking schools; decrepit, rundown hospitals; and bridges and infrastructure that are simply not suited to the needs of our modern New Zealand. That\u2019s where, as I\u2019ve mentioned, asset management is not glamorous. It involves being under a bridge at night, trying to jack out bearings, while you\u2019re covered in dust and wearing earmuffs and PPE for hours and hours at a time, but it\u2019s the crews that do that, the councils and the public agencies that do that, and the lines companies and the private sector that do that who are the backbone of New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s also an opportunity cost when it comes to regulation because, while New Zealand sits at the top of the OECD practically for what we spend on infrastructure, we\u2019re near the bottom when it comes to bang for buck. The infrastructure plan estimates that we spend about $1.3 billion a year just on consenting under the existing Resource Management Act (RMA), which adds somewhere around 5 to 6 percent to the cost of projects. That\u2019s money lost to delay. It\u2019s lost to duplication. It\u2019s simply following a process that does not serve New Zealanders well, and it certainly doesn\u2019t help us protect the environment in those very special and unique places where we need to invest more in protecting it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe RMA is a 30-year-old law. It\u2019s going to be gone this year. We\u2019re going to replace it with new legislation based on property rights and protecting the environment where it matters, because, if we do want infrastructure, housing, energy, and better services to deliver for our future, we must make it easier to build. That\u2019s a coalition commitment that ACT is proud to have driven. I\u2019m very proud to be working with Minister Bishop in his role as the Minister responsible for RMA Reform, as his Parliamentary Under-Secretary, to deliver that for New Zealand, and we will deliver that in just a few months\u2019 time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe also need to get more from the infrastructure we\u2019ve got, and the commission\u2019s report makes that clear. We need to think about smarter tools: time of use pricing and time of use charging. Of course it\u2019s controversial. People want to know that they\u2019re actually going to be able to get somewhere at a faster pace if they\u2019re going to pay the money. We also think that beyond roads, we need to incorporate things like water meters and volumetric pricing in all of our infrastructure charging, because if there\u2019s no connection between how much water you can use and what it costs you as a household or business, of course you\u2019ll keep using it till either you run out of water or the system collapses. Some councils, like the K\u0101piti Coast District Council, and Auckland Council, through Watercare, recognised this decades ago. In some parts of New Zealand, a water meter still sounds like a bad disease, but, I promise you, you\u2019ve got to take your medicine.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe need better ways to fund infrastructure. Minister Bishop and I are sponsoring the Infrastructure Funding and Financing Amendment Bill. It\u2019s currently before the Finance and Expenditure Committee. It\u2019s intended to make it easier for councils and investors to use off-balance-sheet private capital to fund infrastructure on the basis that the people who benefit from it\u2014property owners and others\u2014will pay a levy which pays back the debt over time. It means that infrastructure can be built sooner and funded more fairly than through general taxation and rates. The coalition agreement between ACT and National also includes a commitment for long-term city and regional deals, and enabling tools such as public-private partnerships is a smarter way to procure certain types of infrastructure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFunding is still a massive problem, and speakers so far have highlighted that. That is why ACT would support capital recycling by using our lazy balance sheet to take capital from assets that the Government doesn\u2019t need to own\u2014and I\u2019ll come back to the things we must do versus the things that are nice to have\u2014and to recycle that capital into the ones we desperately do, whether that is in defence, housing, hospitals, or other vital infrastructure. Asset recycling is common. It\u2019s done by businesses, it\u2019s done by councils, and central government needs to get on to it. ACT supports it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn conclusion, New Zealand\u2019s infrastructure woes were not caused by engineers; they were caused by bad planning systems, weak funding tools, and Governments more interested in announcements than in delivery. The National Infrastructure Plan resets expectations. ACT looks forward to working with parties across the House to make sure we deliver a better outcome.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022667ed1650e2b9f32ca82d92c0918f220\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: New Zealand First have indicated that this is a split call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9d68f4e6cfc321b39414cc40f3c58c5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9d68f4e6cfc321b39414cc40f3c58c5\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (16:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I\u2019m delighted to rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak on this excellent report. I really want to thank the Infrastructure Commission for all the work, and all the other organisations that have contributed their data and information to it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to start right at the beginning, which is where they really inspire us with what we have done in the past. They say that \u201CNew Zealand has delivered world-class infrastructure before. With tremendous innovation, hard work and skill, our ancestors knitted the country together with networks of roads, railway lines, tunnels, and bridges. Tapping into the power of the earth, they built pioneering hydro and geothermal power schemes and created a single national grid\u2014connecting the two islands with what was then the longest high voltage link in the world.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis pioneering innovation, pioneering infrastructure, and can-do creativity is something that we should all be proud of, and they\u2019re holding a mirror up to all of us\u2014not just in this House but all New Zealanders\u2014and saying that somewhere along the line, we\u2019ve lost that can-do innovation and creativity and we\u2019ve become a country that says no too often. They point out that we talk about an infrastructure deficit, but that infrastructure deficit is not because of how much we spend\u2014and we\u2019ve already heard that\u2014it\u2019s because of how we spend that money. We should be seeking, they tell us, the highest value for money. There are trade-offs there, and we know that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are four key themes they talk about. The first is planning what we can afford, and the biggest area they point out as a problem area is transport. We cannot promise everything. When we go to the next election campaign, we cannot be out there promising masses and masses of capital expenditure, because we know that we cannot deliver it and we know we cannot afford it. To the Minister\u2019s credit, he is now sort of taking that back and saying that it\u2019s going to take quite a long time to deliver some of those things. What we should be promising is only those things that we\u2019ll perhaps assess, decide whether they\u2019re a good idea or not, and then think of whether we put money into a budget, rather than say that we\u2019ll promise it up front, because otherwise the thing that we know is that we\u2019ll also get the price spectacularly wrong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere have been some comments about what will probably be the biggest project in the country by a mile, and that\u2019s the second Auckland Harbour crossing. Now, if we were thinking about doing that, there is one other way you could help to try and fund that, and that is to say that we will start levying development contributions on the properties around that area that will benefit from it. That is one thing you could think about doing, and that would be long-term planning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey recommend in the transport area the greater use of benefit-cost ratios and possibly a Commerce Commission - like process, but I would also say that you\u2019d need to consider the economic benefit that can be generated by any of these projects. The one I particularly think of, seeing that it\u2019s come up several times, is the Northland road. That Northland road is not only about capacity but it is about economic opportunity for development of the Marsden Point area, the Northport development, and the horticulture development. We had Northland Inc. coming to this House last year, talking about having a $60 billion economy, which is currently an $11 billion economy, I think\u2014the poorest part of the country. That would really lift it. Potentially, those are the kind of things that we need to look at\u2014what does infrastructure deliver for our country\u2014because it\u2019s not about infrastructure; it\u2019s about what it delivers and helps us to do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second thing they talked about, and which we\u2019ve already heard about, is looking after what we\u2019ve got much better, which is the 60c in the dollar idea. Local government often gets pinged for this. They really hold the mirror up to central government. Some of our biggest agencies are the worst offenders, and we need to get better, and the idea of legislating that central government agencies must have asset management plans and be transparent about how they\u2019re delivering on that\u2014I say \u201Camen\u201D to that. That probably means we need to change some of our Budget processes so that we don\u2019t think of capital projects as operating items each year, but as long-term things which we look for.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe next area they focus on is choosing the right projects\u2014yep, that\u2019s an obvious thing to do. Making it easier to build: the consenting process has come up in the debate already. I\u2019ll pick one in particular, which is worth something like $800 million a year to our economy, and that is the Stella Passage development, which is the extra wharf capacity at the Port of Tauranga. That is our biggest export port and our second-biggest import port, and, at the moment, it has been frustrated by the consent process. It\u2019s something like six years, and that is costing this country a fortune. We need to fix those things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen we\u2019ve got reconsenting, and that\u2019s absolute madness. We\u2019re trying to run an economy with a ball and chain wrapped around our feet. We have put that ball and chain in place, and we need to get rid of those things. Of course, on this side of the House, we supported fast track. The other side of the House often complains about people leaving the country because there aren\u2019t jobs because our economy isn\u2019t performing well enough. These are the kinds of things we need to do to fix that, and I commend that part to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen we\u2019ve also been mocked about traffic management and doing work on traffic management, but the Infrastructure Commission\u2019s report notes that in terms of delivering electricity\u2014and I know that that\u2019s true for other infrastructure, as well\u2014the cost of that has tripled in terms of traffic management over the last five or six years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s a long, long way to go and there\u2019s a lot more I\u2019d like to say, but we\u2019ve got a split call here. I really do think this is a great report. It\u2019s a mirror for all of us. We need to do much, much better, and take the politics out of infrastructure planning and delivery.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022 data-id=\u002222dc588c2ccfd7f7f3f361ac79551226\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002222dc588c2ccfd7f7f3f361ac79551226\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON (NZ First) (16:55)\u003C/span\u003E: I really enjoyed having the ex-Mayor of Wellington advising Auckland and Northland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e81cec1bdf863d2970476dd0a2c380c0\u0022\u003EAndy Foster\u003C/span\u003E: Positively.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e737b8c3a7d12685b81fd9bbe63b1565\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s very good\u2014very good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI heard from the Green Party about how we need to come together as a Parliament to look at the Infrastructure Commission and the future planning for our infrastructure, and I wholeheartedly agree. It\u2019s just too important for the nation and we need to get this right. The outcome of which, if we can do it, is an integrated, multi-modal logistics and transport system. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe need the integrated, multi-modal system so that we can provide resilience and security in the long term, and this is one of the things I wanted to bring up today and focus a little more on\u2014resilience and security\u2014because, at the moment, as we\u2019ve all noticed, there is a war. The Strait of Hormuz, where a lot of our trade goes\u2014we\u2019re a trading nation. That\u2019s what\u2019s supported us for 200 years. Recently, we had a trade surplus\u2014hallelujah!\u2014and we\u2019re increasing our exports, but we are severely at risk if some of those supply chains are interrupted. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe need to ensure that our own internal resilience is absolutely supported through a multi-modal approach. For example, Marsden Point, which, when first built\u2014actually, there was a guy called Dave Culham, who started up a company called Culham Engineering, which now employs over a thousand people and it helped build the Sky Tower in Auckland. That came out of him being one of the people that was an engineer at Marsden Point. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, it\u2019s a real shame that we\u2019ve lost resilience through Marsden Point being closed down. It would have given us an option. However, what they\u2019ve done since is they\u2019ve used solar to produce hydrogen so that they can use dense energy for our trucks. This has also happened in Southland. In a recent visit to Southland, I saw that they\u2019re doing exactly the same thing, and that means that you can get dense energy to trucks, because, I\u2019m sorry, electricity will just not do it. The batteries are too heavy, they run out, and they\u2019re in trouble.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo we need to think really laterally about this stuff as to how we actually maintain our resilience. Think about food security. Food gets trucked all around New Zealand on diesel. We\u2019ll run out of diesel, if they stop us at the Strait of Hormuz, in about 20 days. How are we going to move the trucks? This stuff is so vital to our security long term, it\u2019s ridiculous. We need to come back and understand what all these things mean.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust on the Auckland Harbour Bridge, I was really interested to hear the Minister talk about the Harbour Bridge. He is another person from Wellington telling Auckland how to manage their second harbour bridge crossing. When my wife and I were in Germany\u2014and excuse me for using really bad German language\u2014we ran into a lovely lady in the middle of the Black Forest. We walked into this cafe\u2014this is 30 years ago\u2014and she said, \u201CUnd vere are you from?\u201D, and we said, \u201CWe\u2019re from New Zealand.\u201D She said, \u201CWhere in New Zealand?\u201D, and we said, \u201CAuckland.\u201D She said, \u201CAh, ah, my husband\u2014he built your Harbour Bridge. He wanted to build four lanes, but they only let him build two.\u201D So this long-term planning is actually quite important for us, isn\u2019t it? We need to make sure that we get this stuff right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBack to KiwiRail. Rail is so vitally important. I visited Port Otago just recently. They\u2019re all thinking about an inland logistics hub, and that will be supported by rail. KiwiRail\u2014I went there as a member of the Provincial Growth Fund advisory board in 2019, and it didn\u2019t look good at Hillside. Investment: you go back to Hillside now, they\u2019ve right-sized, and they\u2019re producing wagons. They\u2019re up to wagon No. 900 out of 1,350\u2014all new. We\u2019ve got Spanish rail coming. That\u2019s an example of how you can utilise integrated, multi-modal transport across New Zealand, which gives us long-term resilience, which is what I hope we all would like.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYes, Infrastructure Commission: big tick. Planning what we can afford, looking after what we\u2019ve got, and prioritising into the future\u2014that\u2019s absolutely crucial. Yes, I agree with the previous people that have said we need to take some of the politics out of this and make sure we have a good, prioritised plan for the whole of New Zealand into the future so that we are actually spending money on things that we all agree need to be prioritised. Thank you, Madam Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022 data-id=\u002263b06b5a55172014286294b465fc3d2f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002263b06b5a55172014286294b465fc3d2f\u0022\u003ERAWIRI WAITITI (Co-Leader\u2014Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori) (17:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It\u2019s actually a privilege for me to stand and speak to this particular issue and to hear all the other the speakers in the House today. Ng\u0101 mihi nui to the National Infrastructure Plan, and I just want to acknowledge all the k\u014Drero today because I think it is important that we, as a House, look at how we improve infrastructure here in Aotearoa.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve heard a lot about the fiscal implications and the impacts of improving infrastructure here in Aotearoa, but I haven\u2019t really heard about the why, and the why is ensuring that we make mokopuna decisions. If you take the fiscal part out of it and actually have what is the reason for ensuring that we have A-class infrastructure here in Aotearoa, it is because we want it to be here, we want it to last, and we want it to benefit all of our mokopuna. So if we make those decisions, I think we will be on the right track. If we\u2019re not making them for any other reason than that, I think that this House could tread well in regard to the reasons why we need better infrastructure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just wanted to read a quote from the infrastructure plan brief. It goes like this: \u201CWe don\u2019t get enough for our infrastructure dollar. The quality of our infrastructure lags relative to what we spend on it. High-level comparisons suggest we get relatively poor \u2018bang for buck\u2019 for our spend, meaning fewer kilometres of road, rail or pipe per dollar than many other countries.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u201CWe need to fix the leaks, not just keep buying bigger mops\u201D\u2014that was by Helmut Modlik, Tumu Whakarae in Te R\u016Bnanga o Toa Rangatira. What he\u2019s actually talking about, in actual fact, is the relationship, I think, that M\u0101ori have in regards to infrastructure here in Aotearoa. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we\u2019ve seen over this last term is the degradation of any relationship that M\u0101ori have with the Government, and even local government. It has an impact on local government also in regards to infrastructure. One of those is definitely the changes to the Resource Management Act (RMA), and I\u2019ll grab my tuahine\u2019s one here, n\u014D Te Tair\u0101whiti. Both she and I know the impacts of having very little and having a lack of infrastructure there on State Highway 35, and we\u2019ve felt the impacts of that in the last storm at Punaruku, in Te Araroa, in Wharek\u0101hika, in Hicks Bay, and right along down the Coast and in many other instances. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOnce upon a time on the Coast\u2014eh, e te tuahine Cush\u2014we used to talk about Bola. That was always the conversation around the tables on the Coast\u2014it was always Cyclone Bola. Well, it seems like Cyclone Bola is hitting every year, and we\u2019re seeing huge impacts on the infrastructure on State Highway 35. The ability for us to be able to move in and out, the ability to be able to fix the bridges, to fix roads, and to fix slash\u2014that doesn\u2019t just impact the infrastructure on the land but it also impacts the infrastructure in the sea and our ability to collect kai when it comes to food sovereignty and our ability to be able to live off the land and live off the sea, which many of our people have been doing for many, many years. We\u2019ve had attempts for people to build walking tracks\u2014and I\u2019ll mention Ng\u0101 Ara Tipuna\u2014along the Coast. Again, for our people there in Te Tair\u0101whiti, that was met with quite rigorous opposition in regard to that because they were left out of any of the planning and any of the discussions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe RMA is important for M\u0101ori communities because not only does it allow us to have those discussions but it also allows us to protect w\u0101hi tapu and M\u0101ori-owned land. I don\u2019t want to go down the co-governance k\u014Drero, but this is why having a relationship is important, and I saw in the report that it talks about \u201CKi a koe t\u0113tahi k\u012Bwai, ki a au t\u0113tahi k\u012Bwai.\u201D What that talks about is that you have one handle of the kete; I have the other handle of the kete, and that talks about ensuring\u2014I don\u2019t want to say \u201Cco-governance\u201D\u2014partnership under Te Tiriti o Waitangi. I think that\u2019s vitally important as we move into the next phase of infrastructure here in Aotearoa. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYes, we need pipes that will last, we need sustainable transport and solutions\u2014absolutely\u2014and we need to build climate resilience in our communities. What happened at Moa Point\u2014let\u2019s take that for an example\u2014was an infrastructure failure. That environmental disaster was a consequence of consecutive Governments failing to make mokopuna decisions, and this is what I am saying. We need to be making mokopuna decisions as we move through this particular phase of infrastructure here in Aotearoa. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to talk about the Waiariki for a little bit, while I have the opportunity. There are bloody orange cones everywhere, and there have been for a while\u2014far too many\u2014but it\u2019s not about the far too many road cones. They\u2019ve been there for far too long, and that\u2019s the issue. That\u2019s the issue\u2014they\u2019ve been there for far too long\u2014and that tells me that there has been quite weak planning in regard to access from one part of the electorate to the other. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI go to Auckland\u2014I don\u2019t like going there often, but I go to Auckland and I\u2019m not very happy with the traffic there. What we\u2019ve got is a growing population, but we\u2019ve got a very ageing infrastructure\u2014we\u2019ve got a very ageing infrastructure. Look, however you\u2019re going to get your second harbour bridge, those are probably things that need to happen in regard to infrastructure in Auckland. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAbsolutely, rail\u2014you know, when you go overseas and you go to some of those other countries, you\u2019ve got electric trains and you\u2019ve got bullet trains that go from one province to the other very quickly. Have we explored all options in regard to trains and transport? Have we looked at better options in terms of the blue highway\u2014in terms of the moana\u2014that are environmentally safe? It makes people\u2014and I can talk about Ng\u0101ti Porou and Te Wh\u0101nau-\u0101-Apanui\u2014very nervous when they talk about ports and barges and things like that down in our particular area, because we actually still have unlimited and undisturbed access to our moana. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s not like we haven\u2019t had that relationship with our moana; we have an absolute relationship with our moana, and so when people propose ports and barges on the coast, we need to make sure that the research and all the due diligence has been done to ensure that we\u2019re able to do that, because that\u2019s nothing new to the Coast. We\u2019ve had schooners going up and down the Coast. We actually had small ports in our small areas\u2014Awanui and \u014Cmaiao, Tuparoa, and even in Hicks Bay itself, and in Uawa also\u2014but that doesn\u2019t thin the fact that that M\u0101ori and M\u0101ori communities need to be part of the discussion, and Te Tiriti o Waitangi needs to be at the forefront of infrastructure here in Aotearoa. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe way that this Parliament and this House works through that is going to be vitally important to moving forward, because infrastructure in regard to rural New Zealand\u2014and I heard somebody talk about rural New Zealand and the reasons why many of the legislative changes have been made to help and to assist with the developments in rural New Zealand. They need to also include rural M\u0101ori here in Aotearoa, and I do talk about my end of the country: Te Wh\u0101nau-\u0101-Apanui and Ng\u0101ti Porou. Te Wh\u0101nau-\u0101-Apanui still own 90 percent of their whenua, and we\u2019re talking about over a hundred kilometres of coastline. We\u2019re talking about the Rauk\u016Bmara Ranges, and one side of the Rauk\u016Bmara Range is in Te Wh\u0101nau-\u0101-Apanui; the other side is in Ng\u0101ti Porou. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThese are some of the things where I think, if we\u2019re going to make decisions as a House, bipartisan decision-making in terms of infrastructure is important. But what\u2019s vitally important for Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori is that Te Tiriti o Waitangi must also play a pivotal part in regard to infrastructure here in Aotearoa. M\u0101ori land owners must be part of that conversation. M\u0101ori organisations and M\u0101ori businesses also need to be part of that conversation. If this report talks about \u201CKi a koe t\u0113tahi k\u012Bwai, ki a au t\u0113tahi k\u012Bwai.\u201D, we must both be holding the handle of that kete to ensure that we make the best mokopuna decisions when it comes to infrastructure here in Aotearoa. Kia ora t\u0101tou. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022 data-id=\u0022c4d4e33aeb13f07dfd849bc63ae6807b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c4d4e33aeb13f07dfd849bc63ae6807b\u0022\u003EDAN BIDOIS (National\u2014Northcote) (17:09)\u003C/span\u003E: The National Infrastructure Plan doesn\u2019t sugarcoat it: we face some serious challenges ahead in relation to infrastructure. This report, I think, sets the basis for some honest conversations for our infrastructure needs as a country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to focus on what I think are the three takeaways that I took from this report. The first is that we need to establish political consensus on the core infrastructure needs for our nation. Now, we know that population predictions are pretty accurate. We know where the growth is occurring in New Zealand over the next 30 to 40 years and where there needs to be schools, hospitals, and then connecting roads. We should get to a point where 80 percent of our infrastructure needs we can agree on, as a country. The rest of the 20 percent of needs\u2014OK, the other side will want more cycleways and we\u2019ll want more roads, but the core infrastructure needs of this country should be bipartisan. As the report outlined, there are lots of projects, but not a lot of funding for those projects, and so we need to, I think, get consensus. If you look around the world at countries far more developed than us and far wealthier than us, it\u2019s because they\u2019ve been able to get political consensus on the big stuff that matters in infrastructure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs has been raised, household budgets are going to be constrained, the central government\u2019s Budgets are going to be constrained, and local governments\u2019 budgets are also going to be constrained. We just don\u2019t have enough money in the kitty to fund the pipeline, and so getting consensus is, I think, the big takeaway. We do have a great time to demonstrate that with the second harbour crossing, and I do want to shout out to the opposite side for being willing to engage with the Minister of Transport to make sure that this is a bipartisan initiative.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second area, or takeaway, is about having a rational conversation around prioritising the sequencing and the sizing of the pipeline and projects. The report says, \u201CThink slow, act fast.\u201D, and if we take that literally, it means: \u201CTake the time to understand and prioritise the projects that are most important.\u201D Actually, this is where I do agree with Julie Anne Genter around understanding\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] I know; agreement across the aisle does happen\u2014about benefit-cost ratios and about understanding what are the actual benefits and costs of projects, and ensuring that we can prioritise accordingly. The report talks about there being lots of small stuff\u2014low-hanging fruit\u2014that we can do in terms of asset maintenance. It doesn\u2019t cost a lot of money, but it actually makes a big difference. Let\u2019s get that started, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe do need to have rational conversations around how we fund infrastructure. The need for funding is huge and, as the Minister outlined, the second harbour crossing, whether it\u2019s a bridge or a tunnel, is going to be multibillions of dollars and we need to fund it somehow. So let\u2019s have that discussion around who will pay for it and when we will need to pay for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe third thing is that we need to do better with what we have, and it has been a very clear takeaway from this report that we don\u2019t do asset maintenance well, and that\u2019s where focusing on the basics of infrastructure must be a priority for us as a country. If I look at my own electorate, in Northcote we\u2019ve had infrastructure projects such as new school projects at Northcote College, which is a great initiative, but that cost $88 million. That\u2019s the equivalent of two new schools that we\u2019ve just opened. We have to do infrastructure cheaper and more efficiently in this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I wish to acknowledge what this Government is doing to fix the basics and build the future around RMA reform, fast tracking key infrastructure projects, upzoning around transport locations, and making sure we\u2019re getting councils focused on the basics around water and key infrastructure, but there\u2019s more work to do. It\u2019s going to require discipline, leadership, and courage from across this House. The future of our nation depends on it. I commend this report to the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022 data-id=\u002236f237ae8673b465a4d426ba797cc296\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002236f237ae8673b465a4d426ba797cc296\u0022\u003EHon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) (17:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Well, it\u2019s a pleasure to take a call in this debate on the National Infrastructure Plan. I have been enjoying the opportunity to reflect on the thoughtful contributions from members from across the House, including the member Dan Bidois, who just took his seat.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Infrastructure Commission lays out the challenges we face as a country in remarkable depth and detail, and I am grateful for their report, but when I reflect on the conversation in this House, there\u2019s another element that we can add to the diagnosis of what\u2019s behind our infrastructure deficit and what\u2019s behind our future challenge, and it\u2019s politics. That is what\u2019s been in the background of all of the contributions, isn\u2019t it? It\u2019s that our politics is toxic to being able to achieve the infrastructure goals that our public expect us to be able to achieve. New Zealanders want roads, they want hospitals, they want schools, and they want an electricity grid that works, and yet it\u2019s too tempting for us to lean into the politics around infrastructure. That is detrimental to us achieving those outcomes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am so grateful for the thoughtful contributions that I\u2019ve heard today that suggest something else might be possible. I don\u2019t underestimate the challenge of maintaining this posture from here, though. How easy is it going to be in the next seven months to promise a road, to oppose a road, or to try and make political hay out of cancelling or promoting an infrastructure project? We know these things are very, very tempting because people like them and want them, but, fundamentally, by playing politics in that way, we undermine our whole country\u2019s ability to get anything done, because it\u2019s that politics that leads to the stop-starting on infrastructure projects\u2014get it? If we say, \u201CYeah, I\u2019m going to make a bargain about a hospital with the electorate.\u201D, and another Government changes that, then that means that it\u2019s back to the drawing board, or the effort put into that project was wasted. It\u2019s sunk costs, like they say about the Interislander ferry, and so it is our politics that is the problem.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am pleased that today we\u2019ve heard recognition from the Government of the work of the Infrastructure Commission started under the last Government. I\u2019m pleased to see how well Minister Bishop has continued to shepherd this work through, because this is our only hope for actually getting things done. It is a new way of talking about infrastructure, and a step back, in part, from some of the politics of infrastructure, into identifying those areas that we can agree on in a pipeline.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to talk about some of the statements about health infrastructure in the Infrastructure Commission\u2019s report. They spell out things that we have known for a long time. We have a low number of hospital beds compared to other countries, an ageing population, deteriorating infrastructure, and a low level of overall investment. Things must change. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat is incredibly helpful about the Infrastructure Commission is that they have put down on paper that we need 4,900 additional hospital beds by 2043. To put that into context, the number of public hospital beds now is 12,000. That is a massive increase above where we are now, and so the fundamentals of our level of investment and ambition in health infrastructure absolutely has to change, and it has to be a step change. I am so pleased to see this number in print. I have been asking for this number for the entire time in Opposition because I knew that this work was under way, but I didn\u2019t know the number. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe should not be playing games about trying to conceal these numbers from the public. If we want to change our politics, it should be in the public domain. New Zealand now knows that we need 5,000 hospital beds, and it\u2019s incumbent on all of us to create the political environment where we can get on and actually get that done. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI did prepare a longer contribution, where I was going to painfully read through my many efforts at select committee to try and get that number out of Health New Zealand officials and the many times that they dodged answering that question. I hope those days are over.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226c562dc86e974914b8878595e580f138\u0022 data-id=\u0022428c4b183d5736b2e43a30dc48edf2a6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c562dc86e974914b8878595e580f138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022428c4b183d5736b2e43a30dc48edf2a6\u0022\u003ECATHERINE WEDD (National\u2014Tukituki) (17:19)\u003C/span\u003E: I rise with great pleasure to talk about New Zealand\u2019s very first National Infrastructure Plan\u2014the first one that has been presented. I\u2019d like to commend our Minister for Infrastructure, Chris Bishop, for bringing this forward because, as we\u2019ve all acknowledged around the House today in this special debate, it is incredibly important that we do find common ground when it comes to infrastructure investment in New Zealand. We all agree that there has been a huge under-investment in infrastructure and that we certainly need to focus on the priorities of building our roads, our schools, and our hospitals and focus on the maintenance of our public infrastructure and public assets. We also need to enable private infrastructure to be built, as well, and focus on having some public-private partnerships, which, of course, are also very important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d like to take this opportunity in my contribution to look at how important these infrastructure projects are. We\u2019ve been very fortunate in Hawke\u2019s Bay to have the very first road of national significance to take off be the four-laning of the Hawke\u2019s Bay Expressway. This type of resilient infrastructure is very, very important for our rural regions across New Zealand\u2014for our export regions\u2014not only for getting our wine, red meat, apples, and everything to the port fast and efficiently, but also for the fact that it creates a lot of jobs and opportunities in our regions. That\u2019s why infrastructure drives growth, it strengthens our economy, and it\u2019s really important. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to give another little example of how we see the flow-on effect of that really strong, good, resilient infrastructure. Recently, I visited T\u016Bpore, which is a local company in my electorate. They\u2019re a roading company, and they\u2019ve just invested in a very large asphalt facility to provide the asphalt for the roads across the East Coast. This, of course, is really important because we were devastated by a cyclone recently, which really highlighted how important having resilient infrastructure is. This company has produced this new plant, and it\u2019s going to produce 1,500 tonnes of asphalt per day to meet that growing demand. Of course, this is also creating jobs and opportunities across Hawke\u2019s Bay, and so that just shows how important having resilient infrastructure is to the regions. The M\u0101ori Party touched on that earlier, because, of course, we\u2019ve seen more devastation across the East Coast, where we need to highlight how important infrastructure is to our regions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the main priorities in this report is building better hospitals and investing in our hospitals, and I\u2019d also like to touch on the investment that we\u2019ve seen in our Hawke\u2019s Bay hospital and how important it is. We\u2019ve recently opened the radiology department at Hawke\u2019s Bay Hospital. This is the beating heart of the hospital and to see the smiles on the staff\u2019s faces and to see the benefit of having a really, really good piece of infrastructure\u2014it\u2019s so important for our hospitals and for our patients. We\u2019ve also just started the construction on a new ward at the Hawke\u2019s Bay Hospital, which is also really, really important for freeing up space in our emergency department and getting better patient outcomes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, just last year, I opened Kaweka Hospital, which is a private hospital, but this just shows the benefit\u2014which is also another priority in this report\u2014of having public-private partnerships, and the way that we can get better outcomes for patients by looking at public-private partnerships. When the patient is lying on the operating table and looking up at the ceiling, I don\u2019t think that they\u2019re thinking about who owns the ceiling; they\u2019re thinking about their operation and getting that done. With public-private partnerships, we can create better patient outcomes, and this is really important. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are many things that could be discussed in this report, but I also just want to very quickly touch on the flood protection and how important resilient infrastructure is in that investment, particularly, for mitigating climate change. As we\u2019ve already heard, we\u2019re seeing these natural disasters more often, and we need to invest in mitigating climate change, and that\u2019s really important. I really commend the National Infrastructure Plan to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u0022a537f1af0bbdfc9ad252344a66b8c171\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a537f1af0bbdfc9ad252344a66b8c171\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (17:25)\u003C/span\u003E: That was a great segue\u2014thank you, Catherine Wedd\u2014because we do need to put money into mitigating climate change, and one of the biggest emitters in the country is actually cars. I\u2019m glad that this report talked a lot about roads, and that is probably what I\u2019m going to talk most about today because I do think that the Infrastructure Commission\u2019s report does paint some really hard truths for the \u201Croads of National Party significance\u201D. For those who don\u2019t know, these are 17 roading projects that the Government wants for economic growth. That\u2019s the kind of simple message that I\u2019ve understood from what they\u2019ve been saying, and I can\u2019t speak for all the roads, but there is actually just one of those projects that I\u2019m extremely interested in.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI do want to say off the back of Catherine Wedd\u2019s speech that I do acknowledge that there are regions in provincial New Zealand especially that need roads to connect them to things like hospitals\u2014we\u2019re not disputing that at all\u2014but there is one project in those 17 projects that is not needed by any means, and it also happens to be the most expensive road per kilometre that has ever been built for at least the last 26 years. I\u2019m talking about the State Highway 1 improvements here in Wellington. For those who aren\u2019t aware of this project and who don\u2019t live in Wellington, this is 2 kilometres of road\u20142 kilometres\u2014and all it does is add one lane in each direction and it adds about six to eight traffic lights in 2 kilometres of road. This is going to cost more than $1 billion\u2014$1 billion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220838e5f9bac748d2a59aea595e5226a0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222ff0cb675589f3cf4b03645ee44857ca\u0022\u003ESimon Court\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re being scammed!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d12db1130c14ce479be312165d768f83\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re being scammed\u2014that\u2019s right, Simon Court from the ACT Party. It\u2019s a scam. If you want to save money for the people of New Zealand, don\u2019t do that project. If there\u2019s anything I know about Wellingtonians, we are among the highest public transport and active transport users in the country. It\u2019s a project that nobody asked for and nobody wants in Wellington, and the reason for that\u2014and I think the report really gets at this\u2014is that we need to fix the systems that we have in place and the infrastructure that we have now, instead of focusing on new, shiny things like billion-dollar tunnels.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo kind of put that into reality for you, in Wellington\u2014actually, before I get to the reality, I would say that this is also a project with a potentially negative cost-benefit ratio. It could have a cost-benefit ratio of 0.75. That means that for every dollar we put into it, we are losing out on the benefits, and that\u2019s because the proposed second Mount Victoria Tunnel is not going to enable more housing in Wellington, it\u2019s not going to fix congestion, and it\u2019s not going to increase economic growth within the city. It\u2019s just not doing a whole lot for Wellington at all, and so we have to ask ourselves why the Government is continuing with a project that is not needed, that is the most expensive in history, and that nobody has asked for. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo give you a bit of a reality of what the report is trying to say, I think that the Mount Victoria Tunnel is a perfect example, because why is the Government spending more than $1 billion on this 2-kilometre stretch of road when bus fares in the Wellington region are set to go up by 3.1 percent from May this year? If you live in the west of Wellington, in Karori, or in the east of Wellington, in Miramar, it\u2019s going to cost you $5 per trip to get into the city centre. Our regional train network is completely underfunded and desperate for investment. Many of our popular train routes in the Wellington region have been replaced by bus replacement services, which means you have to catch multiple buses instead of catching one single train. Our train stations and train stops in the region don\u2019t have simple things like toilets, or places where you can wait and not get hit by the rain. We\u2019re at risk of losing 50 of our bus drivers because the English language visa requirements are too onerous. We don\u2019t even have solid weekend or night-time bus services. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELike, we are the capital city of New Zealand, and our public transport system is woefully inadequate but also extremely expensive, and you can see why Wellingtonians are frustrated that our transport network is falling apart. Meanwhile, the Government is proposing this billion-dollar tunnel for 2 kilometres of road that nobody asked for. This is exactly what the report is trying to say: invest in the things that people need. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust to contrast it with another form of infrastructure, Wellington Hospital goes into code red, on average, twice a day. That means there are not enough staff to look after the people coming into the waiting room\u2014and are we fixing the hospital? No. We\u2019re building the most expensive road in the last two decades that nobody has asked for. We can do better, and Wellington deserves better. Kia ora. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b618b847a57b4afb94b76eaea9e042a5\u0022 data-id=\u00224bbfcb88dd13ceebf68caa3ecea1eb43\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b618b847a57b4afb94b76eaea9e042a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224bbfcb88dd13ceebf68caa3ecea1eb43\u0022\u003EDr CARLOS CHEUNG (National\u2014Mt Roskill) (17:30)\u003C/span\u003E: I want to acknowledge and congratulate Minister Chris Bishop and the Infrastructure Commission for delivering this report to the House. Infrastructure is the foundation that supports our daily life: the roads we drive on, the water we drink, the hospitals that care for us, and the schools that educate our children.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand faces a serious infrastructure challenge. We spend a greater share of our GDP on infrastructure than many comparable countries do, but we achieve less. This is not sustainable. If this continues, New Zealanders risk missing out on the hospitals, schools, water systems, and transport networks they expect and deserve. The issue isn\u2019t just how much we spend; it\u2019s how we plan, prioritise, and deliver infrastructure. Too often, projects are delayed, costs escalate, and planning is reactive, rather than long term. This is why change is needed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe National Infrastructure Plan provides a 30-year road map to address these challenges, and it has four basic principles: one, plan what we can afford; second, look after what we\u2019ve got; third, prioritise the right projects; and, fourth, make it easier to build better. This means making honest, long-term investment decisions within our fiscal limits, it means maintaining and renewing existing infrastructure before it fails, it means assessing projects to ensure they deliver the greatest economic and social benefit, and it means improving procurement and consenting processes so that we can reduce cost and build more efficiently. In short, it\u2019s about spending smarter and achieving better results.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat does this mean to Auckland and the people in Mt Roskill? Auckland is home to more than a third of our population and it delivers a significant share of our economy, yet it faces some of the greatest infrastructure pressures. Planning what we can afford means that Auckland\u2019s major transport and housing projects can be sequenced properly, avoiding stop-start cycles. For communities like Mt Roskill, this creates certainty and ensures that growth is matched by investment in roads, public transport, and local facilities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELooking after what we have got is crucial in Auckland, where aging water infrastructure has caused disruption. Proactive renewal means fewer bypasses, fewer road closures, and less disruption to families and businesses. Prioritising the right projects means focusing on initiatives that reduce congestion and improve connectivity, that build a transport link between suburbs and employment hubs, and that allow Mt Roskill residents to access jobs more easily, with reduced travel time and lower commuting costs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMaking it easier to build better means faster delivery of housing-enabling infrastructure, schools, and healthcare facilities in growing communities. Having a more efficient construction sector reduces costs, benefiting both taxpayers and ratepayers, but it is encouraging that many of the commission\u2019s priorities are already reflected in this Government\u2019s work. Health New Zealand now has a long-term capital infrastructure plan led by record hospital investment to support our ageing population. Water reforms are under way to renew ageing systems and restore affordability. Major transport projects are being carefully sequenced. Flood resilience is being strengthened through national investment, and planning reforms enable development like key transport corridors. These steps show how we are moving from planning to delivery, and this is very important. It\u2019s all about delivering. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs I say, New Zealand spends more than many comparable nations, but we achieve less. We cannot afford to continue that pattern. The National Infrastructure Plan sets a clear direction: be disciplined, be strategic, and be long term. If we follow that path, we will not just build better infrastructure; we will build a stronger, more productive New Zealand for the generations to come. Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u002243c02aec50ec33e0291b26110c7d55be\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002243c02aec50ec33e0291b26110c7d55be\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (17:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is my genuine pleasure to take a call in this special debate on the National Infrastructure Plan. I think the conversation that we\u2019re having in this House has had incredibly thoughtful contributions from members who have taken to their feet to talk about what is something that we know, as politicians, we need to start doing differently, and the infrastructure plan that was delivered at the end of last year and released this year lays that bare. The infrastructure is difficult. It is hard. It requires a different way of us doing things than we do in the normal political cycle.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d like to congratulate Minister Chris Bishop for bringing this report to the House, and I\u2019d also like to congratulate the antecedents of this report, and I think it shows the way that we can do things differently. This is, of course, born out of the establishment of the Infrastructure Commission in 2019 by the first Minister for Infrastructure, the Hon Grant Robertson. We then went on and, in 2022, we had the first 30-year infrastructure vision. Now we\u2019re seeing the continuation of this with this first plan, and I think that that shows how this has to go beyond the political cycle. It\u2019s going to cross over multiple Governments and it is something that, as politicians and as parliamentarians, we can be proud of.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat the report lays bare and what the contributions in this House have laid bare is that we do need to do things differently, and at the core of this is a more collaborative approach. It is a more bipartisan vote or multipartisan vote that seeks to take some of the politics out, and I thought my colleague the Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall gave a very thoughtful contribution about how we need to be careful that everyday politics don\u2019t intrude in this. Even in this debate, where I think we\u2019ve had some very thoughtful contributions, we can\u2019t have missed some of the edging in of the pork-barrel politics that has underwritten infrastructure for too long in this country\u2014the thinking that being a good politician is talking about the winds in your local patch, rather than talking about that long-term strategic planning that we need to do as a country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe also need to realise that collaboration and multipartisanship isn\u2019t about the Government of the day telling other parties how it is. Genuine collaborations and genuine multipartisanship, whoever is in Government, is actually about coming together to form enduring plans that can cross Governments, that can endure, and that do set New Zealand on that long-term trajectory, because infrastructure is hard. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn Government, I served as the Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration, Minister of Housing, Minister for Energy, and, briefly, the Minister for Infrastructure, and it does not get easier. It does not matter who is in Government, it is expensive, and we lack the depth to deliver in New Zealand in terms of our sector. We need to be building that up so that we can continue to deliver a pipeline.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing that\u2019s come through is that this needs to be evidence-based, and nowhere have we seen that more than in the area of energy. What we have seen is that we know that we need to increase our renewable energy in this country and we need to have long-term plans to do it. The report from the Infrastructure Commission had the key actions in this area to lock in stable, long-term energy strategies. I think that that is critical and I implore the Government to bring through the Gas Transition Plan. Never has it been more important than in the current context this week that we do have that plan in place and that we do have that energy strategy that has been sitting in the Beehive since the Government came in, which could be delivered to do that, and to use that evidence base. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo hear the current Government dismissing the words of the Infrastructure Commission, who warn that there is no evidence that bringing in liquefied natural gas (LNG) would lower electricity prices\u2014to have this being swept away as recently as today in the House is concerning. What we have to do, as politicians, is accept there is evidence, that there will be opinions and we have to be prepared to look at that, and that we need to be prepared to take it seriously, and bipartisanship does not mean pushing through projects for which there is not political consensus when the evidence does not see it stack up, when the world is on the brink of an energy crisis in terms of the spiking of LNG prices\u2014to push on with that project.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis report gives us all food for thought. We need to work together, but we need to work together in different ways. Thank you, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022 data-id=\u0022971eaa79942d12477324c1014c681d7d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022971eaa79942d12477324c1014c681d7d\u0022\u003ECAMERON BREWER (National\u2014Upper Harbour) (17:40)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s great to rise and talk to this National Infrastructure Plan, a 30-year view on how New Zealand can better plan, fund, maintain, and deliver infrastructure. As others have said, we can be grateful to the Infrastructure Commission for the work that it\u2019s done on this report. Of course, the Minister for Infrastructure, the Hon Chris Bishop, asked them to prepare this work soon after our election and they got to it, and what we\u2019re seeing now and what they\u2019ve outlaid is nearly 12,000 projects that are at a value of $275 billion, with most of those projects unfunded. We\u2019ve got a lot of work to do and we\u2019ve got a lot of prioritisation to do, but the good news is that it doesn\u2019t start here. There\u2019s already a lot of work under way by this Government as far as national infrastructure goes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe are fast tracking. We\u2019ve seen that legislation come through and even in my own electorate, the New Zealand Transport Agency have applied for the Northwest Busway\u2019s fast-tracking application. We are improving health and education infrastructure, and you can see the work that Erica Stanford is doing around education property and the work that Simeon Brown is doing in health infrastructure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe are improving infrastructure funding and financing, and you can see that with the entity that was set up by the Minister of Finance last year, or the year before, and the amendment bill that is before the Finance and Expenditure Committee to give better tools for our Going for Growth agenda, with regard to the territorial local authorities and councils. That came before the Finance and Expenditure Committee just today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou can see the Auckland transport reforms that sit with the Transport and Infrastructure Committee. They not only will give better and greater transparency and accountability to Auckland Transport but will also set up an Auckland Regional Transport Committee, with members from both the Crown and the council, and a 30-year integrated transport plan. Again, this is long-term transport planning for our biggest city\u2014Auckland\u2014which will be 2 million people by 2033. An Auckland deal with the council and the Government is pending too, and so there\u2019s a lot of work happening. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETime-of-use charging, which is sometimes colloquially known as congestion charging, is something that the leaders of Auckland have known about and have been asking for for over 25 years. Whether it\u2019s the Employers and Manufacturers Association or the Auckland Business Chamber, and the surveys that they used to do back in the day of Michael Barnett and others\u2014when they put a survey out to Aucklanders asking \u201CWould you be prepared to pay a small toll if it meant you could get to work quicker and there was a free, viable alternative?\u201D, overwhelmingly people said yes. That is long overdue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn fact, I would argue that public-private partnerships (PPPs) are long overdue. I know that with the Land Transport Management Act in the early 2000s, when Paul Swain was transport Minister, they set it aside and tried to get the PPPs going. It took a Supplementary Order Paper by Steven Joyce to try and improve that PPP structure, and it worked to a certain extent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA great example of a PPP or a BOOT\u2014build-own-operate-transfer\u2014is Spark Arena. In 2007, a management company signed a 40-year deal, a leasehold, with Ng\u0101ti Wh\u0101tua. The council chipped in some money, the build was $94 million, and they\u2019ve got it for 40 years. In 2047, that\u2019ll be handed back to the ratepayers of Auckland for zero, and, as someone alluded to, no one really cares who owns this infrastructure, particularly if they\u2019re at Spark Arena watching \u201CTay Tay\u201D or whoever.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESwimming pools: we would love a big new swimming pool in the northwest of Auckland. Even the Labour councillor Shane Henderson said to me, \u201CI don\u2019t care how it\u2019s funded; I just want the swimming pool, as do the people.\u201D, and so there are opportunities, not just around transport infrastructure but community amenities like that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s great to see some political consensus come out of our investment summit last year and to hear some really encouraging words from the likes of the Hon Barbara Edmonds. It\u2019s great to see that we are heading towards some bipartisanship, but we do need to prioritise. With 12,000 projects and $275 billion worth of projects, mostly unfunded, we need to prioritise, and this Government is committed to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221211c15bfff800d089f6748dd94ba179\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The member\u2019s time has come to an end.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9421ab106b034f81e15df9ac41ce568\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9421ab106b034f81e15df9ac41ce568\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (17:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Kia orana, Mr Speaker. It\u2019s a pleasure to take a call, as Labour\u2019s transport spokesperson, in the special debate on the National Infrastructure Plan. I do want to acknowledge the former Government for establishing the Infrastructure Commission, and I also want to acknowledge the current Government for continuing to allow the commission to operate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a plan that is seriously long overdue, and it provides an independent lens and assessment and a view on what the infrastructure needs are for Aotearoa New Zealand now and into the future. The very clear position that is outlined in the plan is that New Zealanders are spending more and are getting less for what it is that they\u2019re spending in the infrastructure space, and in terms of infrastructure, we know that that does touch everyone and everyone has an interest in it. I understand that The Aotearoa Circle is here on precinct today. They\u2019ve got their own take on infrastructure and the needs that that carries through, as well. Defence has needs, health has needs, education has needs, and, of course, transport and others have needs, and it\u2019s transport that I want to focus my contribution on this afternoon.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen I engage with industry groups and participants in the transport space, they warn about the politically driven infrastructure that has been part of our country for quite some time. We know that that leads to cancellation, it leads to delays, and it leads to cost blowouts, and already today, in this Parliament, the ferries are a great example of that. That was, let\u2019s face it, a political call that had consequences in terms of delays\u2014we\u2019re still waiting\u2014cost implications, time, and, obviously, the nature of the infrastructure that\u2019s now in place. The other aspect of that is\u2014and this is what was referred to by the Hon Dr Megan Woods\u2014the pork-barrel aspect of politics, where we see pieces of transport kit and infrastructure that suddenly appear in marginal seats or in political electorates because it suits the individuals of the day, rather than our necessarily having a long-term look at what that looks like.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe transport sector, like others, is calling out for certainty. I get it\u2014we get it\u2014because what needs to change is that chop-change, in-out sort of nature of infrastructure that has really plagued our country for many years. People are sick and tired of that, and rightly so. When we look at building and construction, the number of people that have left this country is well over 20,000 people because of the in-out, stop-start sort of nature of the change that\u2019s in that space. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne way that we can remove the political element in the transport space is by allowing an independent lens over all of the transport-related projects and all of the projects that Waka Kotahi\u2014the New Zealand Transport Agency\u2014might want to put through. Currently, they don\u2019t do that, and there is a system that\u2019s been stood up that will allow for them to remove that political lens and to actually spit out at the other end a fair assessment and an independent assessment as to what each of those transport projects do look like.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I acknowledge and accept the Infrastructure Commission\u2019s priorities when they come to transport. For the first one around time-of-use charging, we\u2019ve supported the legislation that permits and allows time-of-use charging. Around tolls, the use of tolls needs to be in circumstances where it\u2019s not tolling an existing route and it\u2019s not tolling anything other than something that is new, and certainly not a replacement road. This Government got a very clear message around their attempt to try and toll Te Ahu a Turanga: Manawat\u016B-Tararua Highway as to why any Government shouldn\u2019t be turning its mind in that particular space, and so we support aspects in that particular rhythm.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other one is around maintenance and renewals, and this is a big focus in the report\u2014about how seriously underdone New Zealand has been and has been served as a result of not investing in ongoing maintenance and renewals. There is the upzoning and transport corridors in terms of providing some coordinated strategic approach to that, and then the final one is around the absolute need to prioritise and schedule projects. My real concern is the current suite of roads of national significance that actually have not been scheduled or prioritised, and that is a very irresponsible way to try and spend $56 billion that does not exist.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThese are examples where, yes, bipartisanship is important, but the proof will be in the pudding. On this side of the House, we are absolutely committed to doing what we can to ensure that the long-term infrastructure needs of our country are met, and we hope that the Government and others come on board with that, too.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff77460e73fae259daa41ee1f84b50a9\u0022\u003ENancy Lu\u003C/span\u003E: Madam\u2014oh, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225c479797dc4a96c502a4617ab24bbcf1\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Nancy Lu.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022 data-id=\u0022275489de30b7fb1eb55f9d6904d6d00b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022275489de30b7fb1eb55f9d6904d6d00b\u0022\u003ENANCY LU (National) (17:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, sorry about the hiccup in calling you \u201CMadam Speaker\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI was actually quite impressed with the willingness from the Opposition, who are keen to know more about the details in the National Infrastructure Plan, but there is also the willingness to work together for the long-term betterment of our country, and this is exactly why I welcome the National Infrastructure Plan that has been announced by the Government. All parties in this Parliament need to have a look at it very, very closely to make sure that we can work across party differences for the betterment of all of the population in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut may I begin with the reality that is ahead of us, for the entire country. Basically, in the past 20 years, as the National Infrastructure Plan has suggested, the country has spent around 5.8 percent of GDP each year, and, to be honest, spending 5.8 percent of GDP each year on infrastructure puts us amongst the highest-spending in GDP proportionality in all of the OECD countries. However, we rank pretty much at the bottom in terms of productivity and in terms of efficiency, and, actually, we are fourth to last in all of the OECD in asset management. In some cases, in some of our big agencies, we don\u2019t even have a full list or a good understanding of where our infrastructure is or of the status of the assets or what is supposed to come in the next one, three, or five years of maintenance plans. In plain language, we spend really big\u20145.8 percent of our GDP in the country\u2014but we don\u2019t spend well enough.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo the 30-year National Infrastructure Plan that the National Party campaigned on in 2023, in the election, is precisely to deal with that: to give a bipartisan, cross-party opportunity for all of us to come together as a Parliament and also as Government to make sure that we are delivering for New Zealanders into the next 30 years, so that our next generations are ready and can really benefit from the growth of infrastructure in New Zealand. The independent New Zealand Infrastructure Commission was set up to do precisely that. It takes away the politics so that we can focus on actually delivering for New Zealanders with taxpayer money. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the infrastructure plan, with the 30-year view, sets out very, very clearly where New Zealanders can plan\u2014very importantly\u2014to fund, and often when people think about infrastructure, we think up front about the capital cost, but it\u2019s more than the capital cost. It\u2019s also about the maintenance, the repair, and the delivery of the actual construction of the infrastructure, and these are challenges ahead of New Zealanders but also ahead of the Government to make sure that we are building practically and responsibly for the future of New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, a few of the key items that are within the National Infrastructure Plan are, for example, hospitals and the ageing population. No doubt, that is no surprise to anyone in New Zealand that our country is ageing in terms of the demographic, and so how do we plan long term and ahead of time to make sure that we are providing for the future demographic of New Zealand? The long-term investment plan into building hospitals and retirement villages, etc., is critical for us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut also it comes down to, for example, water renewals and affordability for New Zealanders in different cities, from rural areas to urban and to larger cities. The reform that we have implemented and brought in since this Government came in in 2023 was Local Water Done Well, and that is one of the best reforms, in my opinion, in that we are providing that stronger oversight with a clear cost structure so that we are able to provide better water infrastructure for everyone in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen it comes down to smarter and better transport funding, and so there is the need for legislation to move on from the time-of-use charge. That has passed, people have moved on, and we need to be able to evaluate who actually uses roads in New Zealand and who is actually relying on roads to transport goods and services and people around the country. Even, for example, with our city councils, we are moving into the more modernised electronic road-user charges.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are many, many of the big categories that are included in the National Infrastructure Plan, which the Government has made publicly available. I encourage people who are watching on TV or through the media to have a really good read, but I definitely encourage and welcome all members of this Parliament to come together, take away the politics, and really think about the next 30 years for New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022080f271ac38215b08a31b81d9e96cf67\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The time has come for me to leave the Chair for the dinner break. This debate will resume at 7.30.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 5.56 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002246d0b58a4899b79741b0789659a8b746\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Good evening, everyone. We\u2019re on the debate on the National Infrastructure Plan. We\u2019re on call No. 16.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u00222f2f8503c4a5f132c919d8e2085c24af\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222f2f8503c4a5f132c919d8e2085c24af\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (19:30)\u003C/span\u003E: T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Mr Speaker. Thank you for the opportunity to take a five-minute call in the National Infrastructure Plan special debate. I\u2019m pleased to be coming back to make this contribution, and I particularly want to make it from the perspective of what is covered in the report in terms of education.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen I was thinking about this speech, I thought one of the greatest joys as a member of Parliament is to go to an opening of a new school building or a refurbished building\u2014whole parts of schools. Some that I can recall just recently were Northcote College and a huge building that we opened there, with many, many classrooms, teaching spaces, and learning areas, and also Opononi Area School was one that I did last year and I really enjoyed going to. These are projects that mean so much to those schools and to those communities because the schools are really the heart of our communities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe can think about infrastructure, and it can seem like a bit of a dry word. We can all think about the wood, the bricks, and mortar, the roofing iron, and so on, but when we think about what it means in terms of education, these are the spaces that our children are learning in and that they spend so much of their time and their days in. It helps them to learn the skills that they need to go on to have the jobs and careers that they want in order to be contributing members of our society, but to also pursue their passions and their interests. So when we talk about the importance of having an infrastructure plan that plans for the needs of our education infrastructure, I want to echo the contributions from those around the House that are supporting the work of the Infrastructure Commission, from its establishment to the strategy that it came up with and the plan that it has now produced over many years. It\u2019s wonderful to hear support from across the House for the work that the Infrastructure Commission has done.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen I look at the report and I look at the specifics around education infrastructure, one of the interesting points that the report notes is that they are predicting a population decline of young people, and, therefore, that will impact on what the need for education infrastructure is around the country. While it makes up only about 3 percent of the spending that the Infrastructure Commission talks about, it\u2019s important, none the less. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things in the report that I think is very important for this House to take note of and for all parties to take note of is the point where the Infrastructure Commission says that whilst they do predict that there will be a population decline in terms of young New Zealanders requiring this infrastructure, there are regional variations to that\u2014so that will be particularly in Auckland and in Canterbury\u2014and so it\u2019s important that we plan for long-term growth in those areas. That needs to be done over successive Governments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt also points out that there will be regional variations in places like Northland, or Te Tai Tokerau, and Te Tai R\u0101whiti\u2014and I see our member for Te Tai R\u0101whiti here. One of the unusual things that this report points out is that the local demographics will change. For M\u0101ori, for example, the M\u0101ori school-age population is expected to grow significantly in most regions, while non-M\u0101ori school-aged populations are expected to decline in most regions, and this may increase the relative demand for schools with M\u0101ori immersion settings. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EM\u0101ori-medium education is one of the areas that has long had inequities when it comes to property and infrastructure and providing for the network. When Kelvin Davis was the Associate Minister of Education (M\u0101ori Education), we had a vision of having 30 percent of our M\u0101ori students in M\u0101ori-medium education by 2040. That was going to require new schools and more k\u014Dhanga reo to be able to make that provision, and this infrastructure plan actually says that M\u0101ori are going to have population growth in the area that will require more schools. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EM\u0101ori-medium education is an option that they are increasingly wanting to take, and so I implore all parties in Parliament tonight to take special heed of that advice from the Infrastructure Commission, because that is something that we will need cross-party support on to ensure that we can provide for those needs, going into the future. Mr Speaker, thank you for that time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002227d19573a8ba4d8283b17374978c8ea2\u0022 data-id=\u00224701ac6c56e9be939977368eb7be95fd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002227d19573a8ba4d8283b17374978c8ea2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224701ac6c56e9be939977368eb7be95fd\u0022\u003EGRANT McCALLUM (National\u2014Northland) (19:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just think, for a moment, you might like to indulge me for the first minute. I\u2019d like to acknowledge my daughter, who, exactly 26 years ago to the minute, was born. She\u2019s here in the gallery and she\u2019s celebrating her 26th birthday, so congratulations to Eve. Well done\u2014you\u2019ve survived your father for 26 years! I\u2019d also like to acknowledge her partner, Jesse May, here, who has just been acknowledged today as being accepted into the Police College, and so it\u2019s going to be another one of those joint celebrations. Congratulations to you both. Thank you for indulging me, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELook, this is a really important report\u2014a really important report\u2014and if ever there was a region that felt over the years like it has suffered from the country not having a decent infrastructure plan, it is Northland. If you have a look at the history of Northland, they\u2019ve had to fight all the way through and keep fighting to get any infrastructure investment of significance into the region. Going as far back as 1917, for a bit of a history lesson, there was a parliamentary road tour, driven by a bloke who became an MP: Colonel Allen Bell. He led a delegation of MPs, media, and officials all around the North to demonstrate the need for infrastructure investment. It shouldn\u2019t have to take that sort of advocacy to get outcomes, and so that is one of the reasons why this is so important to have a plan for the country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother bit of history, because, very shortly, we\u2019re about to embark on starting the next stage of the Northland Expressway, which has received a bit of commentary from people in the House tonight. Is that investment a wise investment? Well, for the people of Northland, it is, and that\u2019s because we\u2019re making up for generations of a lack of investment. The frustration\u2014if ever a region has suffered from the politics of infrastructure, it is Northland, because, in 2017, a road that was proposed to be built then, and significantly cheaper than now, was cancelled. Consequently, we\u2019re about to start, and so, in the not too distant future, we will be turning the sod on the next stage, to Te Hana, whereas if we had had a good infrastructure plan, we should have actually been cutting the ribbon. That is the difference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the other things which I\u2019m pleased is highlighted in the infrastructure plan is resilience, because if ever there was a piece of resilience infrastructure in Northland that needed to be replaced, it is a decent road around the Brynderwyn Hills. When that road was shut due to bad weather and Cyclone Gabrielle at that period of time, it cost our economy over $2 million per day, and I feel for the other parts of the country that suffer these sorts of events from having a lack of resilient infrastructure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just think that as we build our plans, we\u2019ve got to think that it\u2019s not only about the population base; it\u2019s also about what can be delivered for regions like Northland. When you look at the potential upsides, which have been highlighted in the report commissioned by the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research, of particularly the long-term benefits of building decent infrastructure as part of an infrastructure plan for the North, that is really, really important. When you look at the types of benefits that could come to a community that has suffered for too long in terms of its social outcomes and all the other outcomes in the North, the benefits could come from good connectivity and from good infrastructure plans. Those are the sorts of things that we are looking for.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI congratulate and I thank the members on the other side. Yes, there will always be some debate about the importance of certain infrastructure, but I think we need to keep it in the context of having a bigger benefit over a long term, not just the short-term look, because these are big, expensive projects that mean a lot to the people and to the regions that they are invested into. I\u2019d just like to say that to finish up. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, once again, happy birthday, Eve, and congratulations, Jesse. All the best. Thank you, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022 data-id=\u0022e17ac1f092fe99a7135854e68b860773\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e17ac1f092fe99a7135854e68b860773\u0022\u003EKATIE NIMON (National\u2014Napier) (19:40)\u003C/span\u003E: There is nothing I\u2019d love more than to have the last word, and to have the last word on this debate is a wonderful thing. We\u2019ve all been very excited to see this infrastructure plan come out. I\u2019ve been in transport my whole life, and so of course, naturally, I\u2019m going to talk about transport.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d just like to acknowledge, first, the Minister for Infrastructure and the Minister of Transport, who started off this debate by talking about Napier, so of course, naturally, I\u2019ll finish the debate by talking about Napier. One thing he did mention was toll roads and the future of infrastructure, how we fund it, and who should have to pay for it, and I think that\u2019s a really important topic. Secondly, my colleague Catherine Wedd from Tukituki, my good neighbour to the south, talked about the spend on the Hawke\u2019s Bay Fallen Soldiers\u2019 Memorial Hospital, which I don\u2019t need to mention a second time, but it\u2019s just worth acknowledging that again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I really wanted to talk about is the fact that in my time in transport and, certainly, in my time in politics\u2014I campaigned in 2020; I campaigned again in 2023\u2014if I had a dollar for every time someone said, \u201CCouldn\u2019t infrastructure be bipartisan? Couldn\u2019t you have a longer-term plan and a longer-term pipeline so that we had success?\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df3e6766443b46819410ad4fedf34077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223610dc1adcd9c0e983f5fc8a19868b7\u0022\u003EStuart Smith\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019d be a wealthy woman.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3c498afb9e12ec94d4904e0ca9ed05d\u0022\u003EKATIE NIMON\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014yeah, exactly; thank you very much, Stuart Smith\u2014I would be a very wealthy woman because this is something that people talk about all the time, and they say it for a number of reasons. One is that we would be able to do it all more affordably if we had a long-term plan and a long-term pipeline for contractors and for civil construction companies to be able to plan this work and to be able to do this work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESecondly, our communities would be able to make plans based on the work that we are proposing to do. In Hawke\u2019s Bay alone at the moment, the amount of proposed development of housing and industrial developments is enormous, and they are doing that because we have indicated and we have shown\u2014the spades are in the ground, the diggers are in the berms, and the cranes and the bridges are there\u2014that it\u2019s all being built. Now, these guys know that they can start planning their industrial developments and their residential developments at either end of the Hawke\u2019s Bay Expressway. This is what it means. It\u2019s vital for us to do this work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s not just transport\u2014of course, that\u2019s the thing that I\u2019ve got a lot of experience in and I\u2019m really happy to talk about\u2014but it\u2019s also in health and it\u2019s also in education, energy, and you name it. But we have to be able to agree to a long-term plan that we commit to. I was very much there in 2017, when, as the last National Government, we talked about the Hawke\u2019s Bay Expressway. It was almost all but there, and then what happened? We didn\u2019t get into Government that time, it got cancelled, and there goes another six years of that project. Just as my colleague Grant McCallum has talked about, it becomes more expensive, we have less progress, and we have had the cyclone which happened, which meant that it took two hours for people to get to work in the morning. These are the things that make a big difference. Now, we\u2019ve got progress. It\u2019s going to take a couple of years, but people see the work happening, and it makes all the difference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I just want to draw everyone\u2019s attention to another very important corridor, and that is State Highway 2 north, from Napier to Gisborne. Now, you might think that there\u2019s not a huge population north of Napier, where you\u2019ve got Wairoa, you\u2019ve got Gisborne, and you\u2019ve got Tair\u0101whiti as a region, but it\u2019s not about the population; it\u2019s about the potential, and, actually, we saw in Cyclone Gabrielle just how vulnerable that area is. If you lose the Waikare Gorge, which we did, the time it takes to get to Wairoa from Napier is 10 hours, as opposed to one and a half hours. It is fundamental, and I have been bleating on about this corridor since well before I got into politics because we have to start now. Actually, we hadn\u2019t done work to that corridor since Steven Joyce opened the Matahorua Gorge realignment. I remember going on that road in a bus and being very, very afraid that we were going to hit a truck as we went past each other on that corner, and the very same issue is the case in Waikare Gorge. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, of course, which Government has given the green light to the Waikare Gorge realignment? It\u2019s ours. But, actually, what we need is a commitment long term to saying that once we\u2019ve done the Waikare Gorge realignment, we look at the Devil\u2019s Elbow and we look at all of these other parts. We look at the Whareratas. We look at well beyond that, into the Wai\u014Deka Gorge\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df3e6766443b46819410ad4fedf34077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227713d13c842980b1908d218bbb70a919\u0022\u003EStuart Smith\u003C/span\u003E: The Hurunui one-lane bridge.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022899925700450f0a9c04d549696a02c12\u0022\u003EKATIE NIMON\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ve got a one-lane bridge on a State highway, Stuart Smith, and it is absolutely astounding. It does not mean that we have to fund this all now\u2014and we have very much talked about the affordability of doing it\u2014but we just have to have a plan that we all commit to so that in a decade\u2019s time, we aren\u2019t still here, talking about the same thing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, one thing I will go back to that the Minister of Transport and the Minister for Infrastructure, Chris Bishop, mentioned earlier is the \u201Cnot in my backyard\u201D approach. We have got to very much get real about how we are affording to pay for this and how we are going to make it happen. Whether it\u2019s a public-private partnership or whether it is tolling these roads, we can all stand by and say, \u201CDon\u2019t do it to me, but you can do it to Auckland for the Harbour Bridge.\u201D, but we\u2019ve got to get a really sensible approach to this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m pleased to have had the last word. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I commend this plan to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b88f87f7de87cacbaa69c211742f52d4\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Public Finance Amendment Bill, Social Security (Accident Compensation and Calculation of Weekly Income) Amendment Bill, Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Bill, and the Legislation Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a2ccb8ba0b11457bf09cf5f6e0289b2a\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a1ac5217dd34148365ba187a1324a364\u0022\u003EPublic Finance Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002250b7bbee6a6fd3ebca154c65b48b4e6c\u0022\u003ECommittee of the Whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a1221f8cf461acfe099afec1154742cd\u0022\u003EPart 1 Amendments to preliminary provisions and Parts 1 and 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d60b2cfbaa906949ac6960045f695771\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the House is in committee on the Public Finance Amendment Bill, Social Security (Accident Compensation and Calculation of Weekly Income) Amendment Bill, Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Bill, and the Legislation Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWe now begin with the debate on Part 1 of the Public Finance Amendment Bill. This is the debate on clauses 4 to 30, \u201CAmendments to preliminary provisions and Parts 1 and 2\u201D. The question is that Part 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022e4e4cda59da86388bbca0c04d114b5a3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e4e4cda59da86388bbca0c04d114b5a3\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (19:47)\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave for all provisions to be taken as one question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228fa1c37c1450507213340f1c1f4cede4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022fae3aaecb8ded4d56de289b4e880e457\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fae3aaecb8ded4d56de289b4e880e457\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I think, while I hope that the Minister of Finance\u2019s enthusiasm for this bill would last for the committee stage, there are actually quite a few things to get through in this committee stage, not to mention the Minister\u2019s new Amendment Paper 502, as well, which also has a few interesting bits that we would like to dig into.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to start by maybe checking with the Minister in terms of the interaction between Part 1, clause 4 and also her Amendment Paper 502, in terms of the amendment to clause\u00A06. Clause 4 mentions \u201Cnominated relevant department\u201D and also \u201Cservicing department\u201D, but what we are seeing here in the Amendment Paper from the Minister is, when we are looking at clause 6, it refers to replacing \u201Cthe Crown or an Office of Parliament\u201D with \u201Cthe Crown, an Office of Parliament, or a parliamentary agency\u201D. I just want to check with the Minister on the interaction between those; on why, for example, \u201Cparliamentary agency\u201D was included in that amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EContinuing on from that line of question, I want to draw the attention of the committee to the regulatory impact statement, noting that this is something that I didn\u2019t go through with the Finance and Expenditure Committee. One of the things that I would like to actually congratulate officials on is that this is probably one of the few regulatory impact statements where the options considered for each section are really clearly laid out, and the option that the Minister has decided to go with is also highlighted. So, I think, definitely props for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess, a broader question I want to check with the Minister, first, is that I\u2019m sure the Minister is aware that currently there is also a parliamentary inquiry into performance reporting, and that\u2019s one of the limitations that was mentioned in the regulatory impact statement, page 5. I wanted to check with the Minister: what was the rationale behind introducing this bill while the parliamentary inquiry into performance reporting is still taking place? Indeed, you know, advice and consideration\u2014if they\u2019ve been sought with the Office of the Auditor-General; so I guess that\u2019s my second question. So I have two questions for the Minister currently.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00221b219367a898973cbaf83fd989aeb47e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221b219367a898973cbaf83fd989aeb47e\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (19:50)\u003C/span\u003E: As the bill sets out, clause 4 means section (2)(1) of the Public Finance Act (PFA). That\u2019s the section that defines the terms within the Act, and it adds two new definitions: \u201Cnominated relevant department\u201D and \u201Cservicing department\u201D. That, essentially, means that interdepartmental executive boards or interdepartmental ventures are defined in the PFA as \u201Crelevant departments\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn terms of the reasons for introducing the Amendment Paper in the time since the bill was considered by the Finance and Expenditure Committee, the Parliament (Repeals and Amendments) Act 2025 has come into force, and that states that the Office of the Clerk and Parliamentary Service cease to be departments or part of the Crown for the purposes of the Public Finance Act. We now need to amend the bill to ensure it is consistent with those changes made to the underlying Public Finance Act, and the Amendment Paper includes a technical change to do this. That\u2019s what clause 6 does.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022654e87e3b0b908ecfbb766501c53a23f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022654e87e3b0b908ecfbb766501c53a23f\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (19:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, Madam Chair. I still want to focus on clause 4 of Part 1 for this particular question, and it is in relation to the new definition that\u2019s going to be inserted in the interpretation section of the current Public Finance Act. Of particular reference is that \u201Cnominated relevant department\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question I have for the Minister of Finance is: can she please provide examples of what an \u201Cinterdepartmental venture\u201D is; what they are currently; the reason why we have not provided a schedule to the Public Finance Act actually listing what those interdepartmental ventures are; or whether there has been any consideration of whether we could allow for a modification where we could actually list those interdepartmental ventures? Given this is a new definition in the interpretation section, is there a way that we could actually include those that are currently in the primary legislation and then look at an Order in Council mechanism in order to add new ones to the list? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy concern is that, currently, this is a new definition. It is really difficult to understand what is actually meant by that particular section, because when you read it, the relevant cause means \u201Cthe relevant department that has been nominated by the board of an interdepartmental venture to provide the following on behalf of the interdepartmental venture: (a) information on strategic intentions: (b) financial statements\u201D. I just want to see whether the Minister or Treasury, as part of the drafting, had actually considered whether they needed to include a schedule as part of this bill. Therefore, it is more transparent to the New Zealand public that we know exactly what an interdepartmental venture is, because I note that an \u201Cinterdepartmental venture\u201D under the current Public Finance Act has the same section given as section 5 of the Public Service Act 2020. Again, for the lawyers in the House and for the lawyers that, for any particular reason, are questioning or could do a judicial review to Treasury as to whether they have met the obligations under the Public Finance Act, they would have to go trawling through two separate Acts. Why can\u2019t we just include a schedule as part of the Public Finance Amendment Bill itself? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, whether the Minister has received any advice as to whether we could actually include the list as part of primary legislation, if not as part of the schedule; and if you did include it as part of the primary legislation, whether you could include an Order in Council mechanism?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00225be6614e4b8c046d591ad3e769f56d1c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225be6614e4b8c046d591ad3e769f56d1c\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (19:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Clauses 34 to 36 amend the reporting requirements to departments involved with an interdepartmental executive board. An example of that is the climate change independent interdepartmental executive board and/or an interdepartmental venture. We don\u2019t have any interdepartmental ventures yet, but they are listed as a schedule in the Public Service Act, and so the omission of that definition in this Act would raise questions about how it was to be reported on for Public Finance Act purposes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe member has asked about whether we should be doing this via the primary legislation or in the way that we have. It\u2019s always my view, on matters like this which are subject to change, that having the flexibility of doing it in the way proposed makes sense. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022b7630bbd38ff0e8ed7f4f03fd6ea7e91\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b7630bbd38ff0e8ed7f4f03fd6ea7e91\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (19:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you to the Minister of Finance for that elucidation. Then, therefore, if we don\u2019t have an interdepartmental venture, why are we having this change?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00224eb901c67faaf1212715cd0ecf6a578f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224eb901c67faaf1212715cd0ecf6a578f\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (19:54)\u003C/span\u003E: As I just said, they are listed in a schedule in the Public Service Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u002292c21687d855117e0198c5f2aff188dc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002292c21687d855117e0198c5f2aff188dc\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (19:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Therefore, why is that schedule not in the Public Finance Act, given you now have to have a separate cross-reference to a separate Act, when in fact there is none in the primary Act, which we are here trying to amend?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022d2d9e387b529a6ab9a0ba14bb58fff29\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d2d9e387b529a6ab9a0ba14bb58fff29\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:55)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I also want to ask a further question. I\u2019m just noting that I still have an outstanding question for the Minister of Finance. Thank you so much, Minister, for your response to my questions before. That was very clear. My question previously was around, I guess, the rationale of introducing this bill in light of the fact the parliamentary inquiry into performance reporting is still outstanding.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI want to check another question from the Minister. Understanding that, between the introduction of this bill under the first reading and then coming back to the second reading and now the committee stage, there are changes being made to the definition of \u201Cnominated relevant department\u201D and \u201Cservicing department\u201D, where the article that has been used has changed from an indefinite article into a definite article\u2014i.e., from \u201Ca\u201D to \u201Cthe\u201D. That would make sense in terms of \u201Cnominated relevant department\u201D, where you\u2019re looking at a singular, and one and only, relevant department that has been nominated. But I\u2019m curious to know why that has changed for \u201Cservicing department\u201D. Can I just get clarity from the Minister that when we\u2019re looking at the interdepartmental executive board and a servicing department, that there\u2019s only \u201Ca\u201D singular servicing department\u2014i.e., \u201Cthe\u201D department identified as the servicing department\u2014or does it still allow multiple departments to be the servicing department?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u002295f91344f5cc9e0eeed4878b3785e590\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002295f91344f5cc9e0eeed4878b3785e590\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (19:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I go back to my earlier question, which hasn\u2019t yet been addressed by the Minister of Finance, as to why we are even having a change or an introduction of a new definition into the interpretation of the Public Finance Act, given that it cross-references the Public Service Act, Part 4, Schedule 2, which actually has no listing of an interdepartmental venture.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETherefore, if the purpose of this bill was to tidy up the Public Finance Act\u2014and some bigger changes, which we can address as part of the further clauses as we go through this committee stage\u2014why was that not cleaned up, then, as part of the change as part of this bill? Given there is, when you go to\u2014again, the difficulty\u2014the Public Service Act, you go to Schedule 2, Part 4; it then refers you to section 33, which talks about the establishment and reorganisation of interdepartmental ventures, and it talks about the framework in which those interdepartmental ventures can be set up, which is through Order in Council, which was, kind of, my suggestion to an earlier point. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is: why was that not cleaned up as part of this bill? I appreciate that was a 2020 bill, those amendments that were made to the Public Service Act. There was quite clearly an intention by the previous Government to perhaps bring in, through Order in Council, an interdepartmental venture\u2014and, obviously, now, with a new change of Government, the ability and the discretion for the Minister to make the changes to the Public Finance Amendment Act through this particular bill. Had they considered cleaning it up by just removing those references\u2014or, actually, first of all, not including it as an interpretation or a new definition, and then cleaning up the cross-references to it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00224044044685aef131b4325c4fecb8fffc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224044044685aef131b4325c4fecb8fffc\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (19:58)\u003C/span\u003E: In response to the Green Party member, yes, I am prepared to address his question about the meaning of \u201Ca\u201D and \u201Cthe\u201D: yes, there is only one servicing department for an interdepartmental executive board provided for in the Public Service Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn response to the question from the Hon Barbara Edmonds: what these clauses do is amend the reporting requirements for departments involved with an interdepartmental executive board or interdepartmental venture. These departments are already defined in the Public Finance Act as \u201Crelevant departments\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c489c29cd1f73e7ea50134b89725efb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Barbara Edmonds. Before the member starts, can I please ask members to highlight which part or which clause you are referring to?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229bc6df9844f1fac44f693444ae5b48aa\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re still up to clause 4, the very first clause in Part 1. It\u2019s in relation to section 2, the amendment and the new interpretations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad5ba1b58550bdd246c93c3e29b887dd\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022f0410bf6d09f9693cb621f5e305ac58d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f0410bf6d09f9693cb621f5e305ac58d\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (19:59)\u003C/span\u003E: To the Minister of Finance\u2019s response, which is in reference to those Public Service Act schedules: again, that\u2019s a roundabout interpretation in the sense that\u2014so why do you have it? The scope of this bill was to do some specific changes to clean up the Public Finance Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ETo the Minister\u2019s response, it still doesn\u2019t make sense as to why you would keep this in there, because it\u2019s superfluous legislation, given that it\u2019s quite clear there\u2019s no intention for there to be an interdepartmental venture, unless, Minister, there is going to be a new interdepartmental venture. The reason why I ask is because, actually, this might be an amendment that we could actually table.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022e40714ecc603d24bb430b8d4b5d00296\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e40714ecc603d24bb430b8d4b5d00296\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for the Minister of Finance\u2019s response. I do want to try and look and, I guess, move to clause 5 and 6, but, again, I note that there is still an outstanding question to the Minister regarding this bill and also the parliamentary inquiry into performance reporting. Thank you, Minister, for your response to the servicing department. I think in cross-referencing with Part 3 of Schedule 2 of the Public Service Act, the specificity of a singular servicing department is understandable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMoving on to clause 5, can I just check, as a starting question, that replacing \u201Cregistered market\u201D with \u201Clicensed market\u201D which has two separate meanings, is something that is quid pro quo, as in it\u2019s a one-to-one transition from \u201Cregistered market\u201D into \u201Clicensed market\u201D and those two are, essentially, referring to the same thing and it is simply an update to the primary Act? Again, you know, this not being my area of specialisation, I\u2019m also particularly interested in learning from the Minister as well. I guess, in this case, has the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 replaced the Securities Markets Act 1988?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn to clause 6, I just want to touch on this for the time being, and I\u2019m sure others will have more questions around it. I want to thank the Minister in terms of her explanation on that in light of the recent Parliament Bill. I do want to know with the cross-heading\u2014I guess I\u2019m confused as to the difference between what is in the cross-heading of clause\u00A06 and what is defined in clause 6(1A), because in clause 6 it says \u201C(Expenses or capital expenditure must not be incurred unless in accordance with appropriation\u201D, but in 6(1A), it says, \u201Cdoes not require the Crown or an Office of Parliament\u201D\u2014or parliamentary agency in the amendment\u2014\u201Cto incur the expense or capital expenditure that it authorises.\u201D If you\u2019re looking at the subheading, am I correct to assume that it can\u2019t incur expenses that\u2019re not within the appropriation, but, in clause 6(1A), it seems to imply that it can\u2019t occur expenses that it already has authorised. I just want to check with the Minister on that clarification.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022a51a5980a2128dbf40331377bc03adde\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a51a5980a2128dbf40331377bc03adde\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:03)\u003C/span\u003E: In answer to the question\u2014repeated question\u2014from member Edmonds on the same point, the Public Finance Act and Public Service Act clearly work together. Ventures and boards are set up under the Public Service Act and those provisions remain, whereas the Public Finance Act deals with their financial accountability. Hence the cross-references are the simplest way to address that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn answer to Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s question about clause 5, what that clause is, essentially, doing is legislative repair, updating a reference to a definition in another piece of legislation that\u2019s since been repealed and replaced. It replaces the reference to the term defined by reference to the now out-of-date Securities Market Act 1988\u2014i.e., \u201Cregistered market\u201D, to the relevant term in the New Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013, which is \u201Clicensed market\u201D and that replaced the Securities Market Act in 1988. So that is simply a change of definition in the cross-referenced Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of clause 6, which the member also asked about, this clause is simply clarifying an ambiguity in the interpretation of the Act, specifying, essentially, that an appropriation does not create an obligation to spend; it creates a permission to spend, but not an obligation to spend, which is a good thing because when public agencies feel that spending is no longer necessary, it\u2019s appropriate that those dollars paid for by hard-working taxpayers can be put to purposes that are necessary rather than simply spent because of a technical requirement of the Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u00221f593a2d94dabb38a554bfcd11cfd7bd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221f593a2d94dabb38a554bfcd11cfd7bd\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (20:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, Madam Chair. Just actually carrying on from the question and the Minister of Finance\u2019s response in relation to the registered market within the meaning of the Securities Markets Act. If I go to the Securities Markets Act, \u201Cregistered market\u201D means any of the following and that\u2019s\u2014sorry, Madam Chair, just for your understanding, it\u2019s clause 5. You look at the definition in section 2 of the Securities Markets Act, \u201Cregistered market means any of the following: (a) a securities or futures market that\u2019s registered under section 36F: (b) a securities or futures market that is treated as if it were a registered market under section\u00A036ZY(4)\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI just want to clarify with the Minister: is she confident that the replacement with \u201Clicensed market\u201D, which is under a separate Act, which is the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013, covers the specificity required under section 36F and section 36ZY(4) as part of the registered markets? I\u2019m just wanting just to check because it\u2019s one of the things that we had not checked, clause by clause, as part of the select committee stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u0022a5e1a989580c1d91dbb3343669b277df\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a5e1a989580c1d91dbb3343669b277df\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (20:06)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the Minister in the chair for her answer around clause 6. I just have a follow-up question. I understand completely the Minister\u2019s explanation that an appropriation is an estimate, it\u2019s an invitation to spend. But what we didn\u2019t get the chance to explore at select committee stage is what was the kind of policy ill that this was trying to rectify. Were there examples where this was being misinterpreted by agencies, where it was seen that it was something that was creating situations where departments were spending where they may not have otherwise been if this clause had been in the Public Finance Act, or was it merely a general tidy-up of the Act, given that there were a range of revisions that were being done, and that the Minister received advice that it would be an opportune time to do that legislative tidy-up?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00229742fbb2491c3492c6d153feee5e83a3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229742fbb2491c3492c6d153feee5e83a3\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Again, thank you, Minister, for clarifying clause 6. That does make a lot of sense in terms of what the Minister of Finance  is saying: that an obligation is different from a requirement\u2014well, that a requirement is different from something that is here in this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet\u2019s look at it in terms of an agency or Crown or Office of Parliament or any of the department agencies. While this might be a change in legislation to make things clearer, is there also an expectation, then, that certain budgets are able to carry forward to a subsequent year or, if you\u2019re looking at a four-year cycle, that they\u2019re able to bank some of that? In general, whether you\u2019re in the private sector or in the public sector and you are given a budget, even though you\u2019re telling people you don\u2019t have to spend all of it, if the remainder of the budget is going to be recalled as a part of that, there\u2019s still, regardless of who it is, a desire to spend some of that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess my question is: while clause 6 is a clarification, how does the Minister think it\u2019s going to play out in practice? Does the Minister think that it is going to be able to give a better signal to agencies or better reassurance to agencies that they don\u2019t have to spend everything, but also give reassurance to agencies that things can be carried on into subsequent years?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022209512723cb3c3df2026d339ecf7f515\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just say we have been on this one clause\u2014there have been four different questions on it. I think it\u2019s been well traversed, so I\u2019d like to keep this moving, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u00223e6912e0f1a3c9c16f85609efa004441\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223e6912e0f1a3c9c16f85609efa004441\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (20:09)\u003C/span\u003E: Which clause are you referring to?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d6b06c2d939f4ebd83e594d6dcc25d6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Clause 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022304b3b85bcd3d3b1aa911190b6c9f66a\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, so clause 6. My question is, and this is the first time I have asked a question on clause 6: the amendment reads, \u201CAfter section 4(1), insert: (1A)\u201D\u2014I\u2019m thinking this is subsection 1, paragraph (a). The current drafting of the bill has that as a capital \u201CA\u201D. I just need to clarify: is this a subparagraph or a subsection? If you look at section 4 within the actual Public Finance Act, in the way that it is set out, they don\u2019t have subsections or subparagraphs; they actually set it out\u2014sorry, they do have subsection paragraphs, but I don\u2019t understand why it would be 1A rather than 1(a). That\u2019s probably the easiest, simplest way to explain, and I just need to check it\u2019s not a drafting error.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022a53c4e76da0dcc5c8eb47f76df5a5045\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a53c4e76da0dcc5c8eb47f76df5a5045\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:10)\u003C/span\u003E: In response to the question from Barbara Edmonds relating to my confidence about the definitions in clause 5: yes, based on the evidence provided to me and my faith in the Parliamentary Counsel Office.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn answer to the questions from both Megan Woods and Lawrence Xu-Nan about clause 6, the members\u2019 interpretations are broadly correct, which is that this is cleaning up on the way through something that could play out in future and ensuring that the legislation is absolutely unambiguous on that matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor the benefit of information for Lawrence Xu-Nan, there are already, outside of this clause, measures in the Budget process that allow funding to be carried from one year into the next. That occupies part of the time of the Minister of Finance. Ministers have to submit those through what\u2019s called the October Baseline Update process, and there are rules about the way in which that happens. But, obviously, it is the case sometimes that appropriations that are made by Parliament, for whatever reason, don\u2019t get used in the year in which they are intended, and Ministers then face choices about whether those funds are returned to the centre for use on new initiatives or whether those funds are retained to be used for that appropriation in the next year. Those are already built into the Budget process and the finance Minister\u2019s powers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022f0ed52d138d22707fc2f84c8ee8b471a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f0ed52d138d22707fc2f84c8ee8b471a\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Minister Willis, for your response; I truly appreciate your engagement on all of these. Also, I take your note, Madam Chair, and I\u2019m happy to move on to clause 7\u2014well, actually, I\u2019ll do clause 7 and 8 together, because one refers to non-departmental capital expenditure and the other one is departmental expenses. Just trying to get clarification on the intention of clause 7 from the Minister: when we\u2019re looking at non-departmental capital expenditure, I want to check, using\u2014let\u2019s say my main portfolio that I spend a lot of my time on is education, so when we\u2019re looking at non-department capital expenditure, the closest equivalent I can think of is when you are looking at school properties, for example. Would that be something that is considered as a non-departmental capital expenditure? But, in this case, what sort of circumstances will we be looking at when we\u2019re looking at multi-category appropriations (MCAs) when it comes to something like that, and how would you have MCAs and categories of expenditures that don\u2019t currently contribute to one single overarching purpose? Is that something that has been happening currently, which is why this clause is in there as a way of correcting or, again, clarifying what is the intention of an MCA in the first place? So that\u2019s my first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThen, looking at clause 8, I\u2019m curious as to replacing section 7C(2)(c) with a new (c), which is that when you are looking at a departmental expense appropriation, other departments may incur expenses at the same time and then be used against the appropriation at the direction of the appropriate Minister. I guess, again using the education example, Vote ERO\u2014Education Review Office\u2014is a separate appropriation, etc., but if Vote ERO is drawing on additional or is incurring expenses that normally sit under Vote Education, with the permission of the appropriation Minister, they are able to draw on the appropriation from the Ministry of Education for the work that ERO is doing but fulfills the same purpose. Is that how I\u2019m supposed to interpret clause 8, inserting new paragraph (c)?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u002273f0a01c448c7269e18d02c565801145\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002273f0a01c448c7269e18d02c565801145\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:14)\u003C/span\u003E: In answer to Barbara Edmonds\u2019 query about clause 6: yes, it is a new subsection 4(1A), not a drafting error.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn answer to the questions about clause 7, look, this is, essentially, removing a requirement for the Minister of Finance to approve the establishment of a multi-category appropriation (MCA); rather, it just allows Cabinet to do it, which both removes an administrative step from the Minister of Finance but also acknowledges that once Cabinet\u2019s approved the creation of that multi-category appropriation, it\u2019s good to go\u2014noting the Minister of Finance is a member of the Cabinet anyway. It\u2019s just an unnecessary administrative step.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of clause 8, really, the purpose of this clause, what it does, is it specifies that only departmental expenses can be incurred under these multi-category appropriation arrangements, and that resolves some uncertainty for departments about the types of expenses that have been permitted under those arrangements previously.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u00229f5a21a757bc0b6f805e8f0c13aa6787\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229f5a21a757bc0b6f805e8f0c13aa6787\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (20:15)\u003C/span\u003E: I just want to ask the Minister of Finance to clarify that process change. She\u2019s referencing clause 7, and it was the amendment to section 7B, which has been replaced. The Minister referenced that it\u2019s no longer the Minister of Finance; that now it goes straight through to Cabinet. Have I just surmised that right, Minister?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022231151632eb5b63a8b84d763ccfe3460\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022231151632eb5b63a8b84d763ccfe3460\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:15)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, yes, it\u2019s always been the case that approval has to be granted by Cabinet or joint Ministers\u2014the Minister of Finance and the appropriation Minister. So what this now says is that the requirement for the Minister of Finance to approve the establishment of a multi-category appropriation is removed. So it just aligns it with other appropriation types, which is to say there doesn\u2019t need to be that additional step.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022 data-id=\u0022908876aaf0453149841119d83f8e53fb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022908876aaf0453149841119d83f8e53fb\u0022\u003EDAN BIDOIS (National\u2014Northcote) (20:16)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220b35b920cd877d9f6acb64211fbde288\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, it\u2019s only clause 7\u2014it\u2019s only clause 7.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002244e060ede3a7da38b6c5803dc1824e5e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s ambitious.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022657dd10bca3d56cba6285bc31dce3ef1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022657dd10bca3d56cba6285bc31dce3ef1\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (20:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, clause 8, actually\u2014ha, ha! Good try, Dan. So just moving on to only clause 8 of a lot in Part 1, the appropriation limited by amount\u2014sorry, clause 8, section 7C amended, \u201CResponsibility for, and administration and use of, appropriations\u201D. I just have to ask the Minister of Finance: what is an example of an appropriation administrator? Is that at an executive level or is that at a departmental level, please?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EJust while the Minister of Finance gets some advice in relation to that, the question I have, again in relation to section 7C, which is now being amended with new section 7C(2)(c), is that if you look at new paragraph (d), \u201Cif the appropriation is a multi-category appropriation that includes 1 or more categories of departmental expenses, any other department may incur departmental expenses of the same type as the category or categories of departmental expenses in the multi-category appropriation against the multi-category appropriation\u2014(i) at the direction of the appropriation Minister; or (ii) with the agreement of the appropriation Minister.\u201D When I have a look at the current 7C under the Public Finance Act, which was actually amended in July 2013 according to the history within the actual primary Act itself, it made a particular change in that 2013 amendment bill which I just don\u2019t quite reconcile in relation to what is currently section 4. I just need to check: is the new clause 8, replacing 7C(2)(c) with new paragraphs (c) and (d)\u2014is that still in reference to section 5 of the Public Finance Act, or have I just totally misread how that amendment has happened in 2013, changes to section 5 of the Act and now in section 7C?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00225ce3ee1fe69045d572120dfc2bda0b1f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225ce3ee1fe69045d572120dfc2bda0b1f\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:18)\u003C/span\u003E: The member\u2019s now repeating the same question, just using more words. As I have made very clear, the bill removes the requirement for the Minister of Finance to approve the establishment of multi-category appropriations, leaving the approval with Cabinet or joint Ministers. The whole point here is that it is consistent with other appropriation types. In terms of administration and use of appropriations, it is for departments to use the appropriations of another department.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u002265dbafca8b5256a32ec1d1a55ea05083\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002265dbafca8b5256a32ec1d1a55ea05083\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (20:19)\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister of Finance might not have listened to the actual question; there were two totally separate questions, and so if you\u2019d like me to repeat\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002218d63672c671669bffc74e9329ea9fcc\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: No\u2014thanks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f06ba6b0521088471a977165b2d020a\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014the second question, but they were two very specific and different questions. One was in relation to just an example of what the appropriation administrator is, and the second one was actually in relation to section 5 under the current Public Finance Act and the reference to 7C(2)(c) in clause 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022b3b175f1bd457d51dd992c55d2ae6c14\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b3b175f1bd457d51dd992c55d2ae6c14\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I think I have one more question\u2014and also just, I guess, signalling to both the Chair and also to members on the other side of the Chamber that, although we\u2019re going clause by clause, we have been moving through the bill at a reasonable pace. There is quite a bit more meat in Part 1 that we want to get to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002228722f741bd040be3ce762ccb909b1db\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Xu-Nan, the Chair will determine the pace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022121f475dd2e3e923681aa79251d1d41b\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Just on clause 8, the final question I have on clause 8: I understand, when you\u2019re looking at replacement section 7C(2)(c) and (d), it says in subparagraph (i) \u201Cat the direction of the appropriation Minister;\u201D, but I\u2019m curious to know, when it says \u201Cor (ii) with the agreement of the appropriation administrator\u201D\u2014which, looking at the definition of \u201Cappropriation administrator\u201D under the Public Finance Act, it alludes to, I\u2019m guessing, the chief executive or the secretary of agency\u2014in those cases, are they simply looking at the operations of how, I guess, the multi-category appropriation or further appropriation is used? Surely the appropriation administrator doesn\u2019t have the ability to alter what is currently in the Budget and it should only fall under the Minister. I guess this is more of a clarifying question for the Minister of Finance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI do want to move on to a new section, because this is actually something that I\u2019ve found very interesting\u2014this is, I guess, starting from clause 10 to 13. Now, this is something that is not in any regulatory impact statement, nor was it explained in the explanatory note, which is the exclusion of the intelligence and security department from having to declare certain information. Or, if you\u2019re looking at, for example, in clause 13, new section 26DA(2), the end-of-year performance information on an appropriation and an audit report is not required, I see, and the intelligence and security department are exempted from having to report to the House on their end-of-year performance and appropriation. I just want to check with the Minister: this is not in the regulatory impact statement, nor was it really discussed at length, from what I can see, in the select committee report, nor can I see that in terms of the information here. How did that come about\u2014the exemption of security and intelligence agencies from reporting?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00222a24dbe0bbdd12f44c0951f41783e050\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222a24dbe0bbdd12f44c0951f41783e050\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:22)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the member Lawrence Xu-Nan is bringing a new and unwelcome definition of \u201Cpace\u201D, but I\u2019ll leave him to his own interpretation of what pace truly is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of Barbara Edmonds\u2019 question: yes, replacement section 7C(2)(c), inserted by clause 8, simply clarifies the existing section 7C(2)(c). Section 7C(2)(c) was confusing. It required application of other terms to interpret it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the question on admin and use, an appropriation administrator can be any department. Appropriation administrators are listed in the Estimates document.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the question from Lawrence Xu-Nan about the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service, it has been a longstanding feature of our public finance reporting environment that the NZSIS reporting has some secrecy attached to it, due to the nature and sensitivity of the work that they carry out and the need not to signal to those whose actions threaten the peace and stability of New Zealand what it is that we are investing in and where we are increasing our investments. These are all measures that have been taken in order to create the peace and security of New Zealand. This is not a new thing that\u2019s been introduced as part of this bill; therefore, that is why it\u2019s not included in the regulatory impact statement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002256ee791bee2059383b58bdd5cf9e0fa3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002256ee791bee2059383b58bdd5cf9e0fa3\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a few more questions for the Minister of Finance in this particular section. I understand from a national security perspective why that would be exempted, but I\u2019m just checking\u2014I guess clarifying from the Minister\u2014if it\u2019s something that\u2019s already happening, that has been taking place, but then without a legislative backing to support what the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service (NZSIS) is currently already doing, which is why it\u2019s in a bill, I\u2019m assuming it\u2019s in a bill because something needed to be clarified. That\u2019s my first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAgain, like I said, while I understand the requirement and sensitivity when it comes to national security, I do wonder, from a public scrutiny perspective, and also the ability for the public to trust the way that we are spending tax dollars, what mechanisms are still in place to ensure that the NZSIS, for example, are still doing things within the bounds that are expected from the New Zealand public.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00224b81199d0405915140d2c3af31cdec4b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224b81199d0405915140d2c3af31cdec4b\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:25)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m happy to clarify for the member Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan. It\u2019s actually the other way around, in that this amendment in this bill enhances reporting requirements, in that it removes the exemption for the intelligence and security department to provide end-of-year performance information on appropriations for audit by removing the exemption wording from section 15A(4) of the Act. That\u2019s already a voluntary practice that they do that end-of-year reporting, but it formalises that requirement. They prepare audited performance information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThis, of course, has been their response to address recommendation 5 of the royal commission of inquiry into the Christchurch terrorist attack. That amendment ensures consistency, transparency, and will foster greater public trust in the operations of security and intelligence agencies. That also relates to clauses 12 and 13 in the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022d1f502f58ff2d35a07c38d75f81bf7b9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d1f502f58ff2d35a07c38d75f81bf7b9\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (20:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. We\u2019re just up to clause 9 of 30, for Dan Bidois\u2019 notice, just in case he was wondering how many clauses are in Part 1. We\u2019re looking at \u201CSection 14 amended (Contents of Estimates)\u201D. I do want to acknowledge the Minister of Finance. She is answering every question we\u2019ve had, so thank you very much for that, Minister, because it does help the pace of the debate, as some would say.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn clause 9, which is \u201CSection 14 amended (Contents of Estimates)\u201D, when you go through the current Act, which is section 14, it basically lists through from paragraphs (a) to (h) a set of requirements for the appropriations. Subclauses (1), (2), (3)\u2014no issues with those, because, when you compare it to the changes that it makes in the current primary Act, they fit perfectly. I just had a question, though, for the Minister on clause 9(4). That\u2019s where it reads: \u201CAfter section 14(2)(c), insert: (d) the scope of the appropriation set out in the statutory provision that creates the permanent legislative authority.\u201D For those members of the committee who don\u2019t know what a permanent legislative authority is, basically, it\u2019s an approval for Government spending that continues in effect without needing an annual renewal by Parliament. Basically, it just continues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe importance of that, though, is that if you\u2019re given that power because it renews without the ability for Parliament to, basically, have to do it, there needs to be some checks and balances in relation to that. I just need to understand from the Minister, because it is a new subclause, what exactly is the mischief that this new paragraph is trying to achieve, given some of the earlier changes that are going through Cabinet, which is good, because there\u2019s still an executive check on that. It\u2019s no longer the Minister; it\u2019s whichever appropriate Minister. But in relation to that new paragraph (d), what is the mischief that they\u2019re trying to achieve by that? Unfortunately, when I checked some of the initial briefing on the bill, some of the papers that we received by officials\u2014who I need to acknowledge as well: thank you, officials, for your support during the select committee process\u2014I couldn\u2019t quite find what you were trying to achieve by this new paragraph.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022cd15e9be464246f145a988d399fcac58\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cd15e9be464246f145a988d399fcac58\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:28)\u003C/span\u003E: This responds and resolves issues where departments have previously failed to accurately reflect the scope of permanent legislative authorities, and, in doing that, we reduce the risk of unappropriated expenditure. I would note there have been several instances of unappropriated expenditure in recent Parliaments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00224d568e1a9262cc414282ace3a7a60d77\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224d568e1a9262cc414282ace3a7a60d77\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Again, thank you, Minister. I do find your answers very, very helpful, so I really appreciate it. With that, I\u2019m actually going to move on to a newer section. I think this is probably the section that received the most attention, which is starting from, I guess, clause 14.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m going to leave clause 14 for the time being, which is around the overall removal of \u201Cwellbeing\u201D\u2014removing the requirement to articulate the wellbeing objectives in Budget decision-making\u2014but I want to draw on the fact that, in light of that being removed, how do you think, in terms of what we\u2019re seeing in clauses 15 and 16 around the fiscal strategy report, the long-term objectives and the short-term objectives are also encapsulating the same essence of what the public expected from the wellbeing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason I ask this question is that, while the wellbeing has been removed, we do hear from the submitters and also from economic and legal and also community advocates that the lack of mentioning\u2014even though people can still do that, but the lack of a clear signal within a budgetary document or within the expectation of the objectives is going to leave some people worse off or leave certain communities and vulnerable communities worse off.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to check with the Minister, with that, let\u2019s say with clause 15, in terms of the variables or the alternative variables, is there anything in there that would give the indication that an aspect of wellbeing is still considered when you\u2019re looking at some of that fiscal strategy reporting? Madam Chair? I\u2019ll continue\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bddc6fc5d78a52d1b0010f2d1b225ffe\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Lawrence Xu-Nan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f993c751f38e9cb36569fbe74d8fd58b\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014thank you\u2014while the Minister is, I\u2019m assuming, seeking some advice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason I also mention this when it comes to the long-term objectives and also in terms of the wellbeing\u2014and this is something that we do see in terms of the inquiry into parliamentary performance reporting\u2014is that there isn\u2019t a clear goal in terms of outcomes and also in terms of measures. I accept that, and I\u2019m hoping that, in terms of some of the changes to the contents of the fiscal strategy report long-term objectives, we do see some of those changes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, like I said, I am concerned that possibly, at this stage, it is not considered in clause 15 under, let\u2019s say, subclause (2), inserting sections 26J(1A) and (1B), that there is anything that potentially indicates that an aspect of wellbeing is still considered. Therefore, I wanted to check with the Minister if the Minister is receptive to my amendments to this. While we\u2019re looking at total operating expense, revenue, and the balance, the level of total debt\u2014that is clear and understandable\u2014the level of total net worth potentially requires some level of calculation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also think, if that is the case, we should be adding additional variables, so my amendment is to include\u2014let\u2019s start with two of the amendments\u2014two new additional variables. One is on the level of long-term social deficit, and the other one is on the level of long-term infrastructure deficit. While it\u2019s important when looking at long-term objectives to know what that is\u2014I\u2019m sure the Minister knows way more than I do when it comes to fiscal strategy and also in terms of the debt and deficit. But one of the biggest concerns we\u2019ve seen\u2014and we just had two hours of debate on this\u2014is the fact that it\u2019s hard to evaluate the cost to New Zealand when you\u2019re looking at long-term structural deficit, whether it is social or infrastructure, so I want to check with the Minister if she\u2019s open to those two amendments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u002281a913db7cea17b3529b317889a80d32\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002281a913db7cea17b3529b317889a80d32\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:33)\u003C/span\u003E: I was going to address this question by saying it highlights a philosophical difference, but I defer to the member Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan and thank him that he acknowledges that I know much more than him in terms of fiscal strategy, debt, and deficit. Thank you. That is a rare compliment from my opponents. I agree with you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things that I do know about debt and deficit and the need for fiscal discipline is that, actually, economic and fiscal responsibility are essential to wellbeing. There can be no wellbeing without economic and fiscal responsibility, and it is a philosophical difference between us. It is my view that you can\u2019t simply keep borrowing for ever, because eventually you do have to pay, and paying becomes more expensive if you are an undisciplined economy. Treasury\u2019s estimation is based on advice they provided the previous Minister of Finance\u2014advice that he signed off on. If New Zealand incurs more than 50 percent of debt as GDP, we put ourselves at massive wellbeing risk, if you would want to phrase it that way, because it could mean that, should a shock occur which required us to have a debt buffer that we could borrow to, we would find ourselves in a debt doom spiral by which our interest bills would become so big that we wouldn\u2019t be able to fit them within our Budgets, and that could be extremely problematic to the wellbeing of New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve seen that happen in countries around the world, where it\u2019s led to them having to take drastic and Draconian measures in order to service the debt that they have to international debt markets. I simply philosophically disagree with the member\u2019s view that you can just simply keep borrowing for wellbeing. Actually, keeping on borrowing destroys medium-term wellbeing, particularly when we consider the impact on future generations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022c4f2670dfdda0f96bf3833f123679b90\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c4f2670dfdda0f96bf3833f123679b90\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I also thank the Minister of Finance, I think, but I think also the Minister brought in philosophical differences. I think part of this is a philosophical difference, but we\u2019re also aware that when we\u2019re looking at public infrastructure\u2014whether we\u2019re looking at social infrastructure such as health or education, or whether we\u2019re looking at physical infrastructure such as roads, railways, etc.\u2014at this stage, our ability to plan long term and the impact that will have on people long term is not entirely captured in the way that is structured here in clause 15 under the fiscal strategy report long-term objectives.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI guess the question is\u2014I don\u2019t think anyone is saying that we should be borrowing debt indefinitely to be able to service wellbeing, but there is a balance. Counter to what the Minister is saying, it is also the Draconian approach that certain countries have taken to reduce their borrowing and reduce their debt that shocked the system, which massively increased interest rates, which is what brought down Theresa May.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002277ff9c2dd9030bbb3c93cb37b260ac47\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll just remind the member this is not a debate; this is actually an interrogation of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b755901d9c6816fcd33e751f275744fb\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I guess it comes down to my original question in terms of whether the Minister will support my amendments to clause\u00A015(2), inserting sections 26J(1A) and (1B)\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b9469cd7c00b890a518a6971e76321dd\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister has addressed that question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256366e6528e2120a0c3fa806d76e1d5e\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: She said we have philosophical differences, but not necessarily that she will not support the amendments. The question to the Minister, I guess, posing a new question to the Minister, in terms of a different amendment of mine, which is around the fact that the Minister would also understand in terms of some of the long-term risks\u2014again, we are referring to fiscal strategy report long-term objectives. When we\u2019re looking at the long-term objectives and risks to the country, our obligation under the Paris Agreement, for example, is something that has been also discussed quite at length, particularly around nationally determined contributions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn this case, my other amendment that I will ask the Minister to consider for subsections (1A) and (1B) is also the level of climate impact fiscal risk, which is something that should also be, I think, considered or reported as part of our long-term fiscal strategy reporting. Again, while we don\u2019t want to take on additional debt\u2014and, also, I do think that debt and deficit, in this case, particularly with structural deficit, are different things\u2014we must also acknowledge that, as a country, we can\u2019t operate in isolation. With the long-term objectives of new sections 26J(1A) and (1B), inserted by clause 15(2), has that considered in there our obligation and then, potentially, the fiscal risk in terms of the international agreements that we have signed up to?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022367d3cd17170ea8980f29ca1ebf04632\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022367d3cd17170ea8980f29ca1ebf04632\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:38)\u003C/span\u003E: Clause 15 simply permits the Government to continue to use the statutory variables in the Act to express its long-term objectives, and it gives Governments some flexibility to use an alternative variable or variables in substitution, and it does that in a way that still requires major metrics to be reported on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI just want to point out to the member Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan that these are minimum requirements. There is nothing preventing the Government from setting out other goals and priorities in its Budget Policy Statements and its fiscal strategy reports, for example. In the recent Budget Policy Statement which I published, I set out very clearly\u2014I encourage the member to read it\u2014that the Government\u2019s overarching goals for its term of office are to build a stronger, more productive economy that lifts the real incomes and increases opportunities for New Zealanders; to deliver more efficient, effective, and responsive public services to all who need and use them; and to get the Government\u2019s books back in order and restore discipline to public spending. There is nothing to prevent the Government having objectives which guide its Budget decisions, and certainly that is the case with our Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u002289cb8d310853ab567ff0d5e9b8019693\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002289cb8d310853ab567ff0d5e9b8019693\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (20:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I actually want to go back three clauses because my good friend Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan, who is actually the education spokesperson and who is not the finance spokesperson, has jumped ahead three clauses, but I actually have questions on clauses 10, 11, 12, and 13, before we even get to clauses 14 and 15.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn relation to clause 10\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df3e6766443b46819410ad4fedf34077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f19738db8be0e6cc2735b50875addc6b\u0022\u003EStuart Smith\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a by-part debate; you don\u2019t have to go in order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200887ea534ec1209ef758f03689ec641\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014it is replacing section 15A(4) of the Public Finance Act. Sorry, what was that, Stuart Smith?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df3e6766443b46819410ad4fedf34077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cfed90c29be23da595a5a2f33bcee281\u0022\u003EStuart Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I said you can go in any order. It\u2019s by part; it\u2019s not by clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252f5535700fab0d405318332ff43cdd0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Excuse me! This is not a debate across the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022987fc4646437b38767108a5943753468\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, it was an interjection\u2014I was just trying to hear his interjection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3f876c55b351f29c5a4c4ba4f28d0f8\u0022\u003ETangi Utikere\u003C/span\u003E: She\u2019s allowed to respond to interjections.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002237e5ed5761739dd14c12deaf9e522827\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS\u003C/span\u003E: Absolutely. Any member can go anywhere, but I\u2019m just going through it one after the other.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn relation to this new amendment, it\u2019s replacing section 15A(4) with \u201CHowever, in the case of an appropriation for borrowing expenses, subsection (2)(c) does not apply.\u201D Now, when you look at the Public Finance Act, the current 15A(4) actually has two paragraphs. In 15(4)(a), \u201Cin the case of an appropriation for expenses and capital expenditure to be incurred by an intelligence and security department,\u201D which I think the Minister of Finance had said there is no more requirement for that to be reported, and then goes to (b), \u201Cin the case of an appropriation for borrowing expenses, subsection (2)(c) does not apply.\u201D I just want to confirm her earlier response to an earlier question from another clause that that is actually why we don\u2019t have that paragraph (a) and it\u2019s only (b) as per the amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022c6882bfe9c6dd2bcd36630c77787573d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c6882bfe9c6dd2bcd36630c77787573d\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:41)\u003C/span\u003E: This is now getting repetitive. I have already clarified that the bill requires these departments to provide end-of-year performance information on appropriations with the same content as the other departments. This has been done by convention. This brings it into statute.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002231457a201a79576e8f5edbc5499ed7b7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002231457a201a79576e8f5edbc5499ed7b7\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:42)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m just signalling to you, Madam Chair, also in terms of the conversation we had before, that a lot of the questions I asked of the Minister of Finance, on clause 15, are philosophical in nature, but I want to get down to the specific clauses and subclauses and ask if the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind providing an example. Again, I noticed, with clause 15, that one of the things that has changed between the first reading of this bill and the end of the second reading of this bill is this subclause (1), which is \u201CReplace section 26J(1)(a) with:\u201D paragraph (a)(i), (ii), (A), and (B). I want to check with you, Minister, whether you wouldn\u2019t mind providing an example of the variables detailed in subclause (2) when alternative variables must include a variation\u2014as detailed in new subsection (2)(1B). What would be an alternative variable that can be \u201Cused in addition to, or in substitution for,\u201D as stated in replacement section 26J(1)(a)(ii)(A)? Would you be able to give an example of what would be considered a substitution?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227ef423fda7b143b890e93f8018529ebe\u0022 data-id=\u00223624baab8583c4eb901c864d2f57efc3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227ef423fda7b143b890e93f8018529ebe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223624baab8583c4eb901c864d2f57efc3\u0022\u003EGREG FLEMING (National\u2014Maungakiekie) (20:43)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002288d4e35a4034349f181f724db8e78328\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m tempted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022ec23503e6fb5b06b363c56d270ecb2b7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ec23503e6fb5b06b363c56d270ecb2b7\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m just noting that I am moving through Part 1 but that a lack of engagement from the Minister of Finance is one of the reasons why I have to\u2014it would be good to, from the Minister, have a response to some of these questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI can move on to clause 16, which is where we\u2019re looking at the content of the fiscal strategy short-term intentions. I wanted to start by asking the Minister about clause 16(1), when we\u2019re looking at \u201CThe fiscal strategy report \u2026 for the financial year \u2026 which the report relates [to] and for at least the next 2 financial years \u2026 explicitly [using] ranges, ratios, or other means,\u201D. I do like the measurement of this, but I wondered if, by explicitly stating \u201Cnext 2 financial years\u201D\u2014which makes sense\u2014\u201Cexplicitly [using] ranges, ratios, or other means,\u201D, there is any situation where that potentially could limit or create inflexibilities in terms of how the short-term fiscal strategies could be reported on?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m going to start with that particular question, and if the Minister so wishes to address my previous question around what is considered a substitution, it is also found in a similar phrasing in clause 16(1), replacement section 26K(1)(b)(i).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00228d51053e0a861854eb177e53082c978f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228d51053e0a861854eb177e53082c978f\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:45)\u003C/span\u003E: The member asked for an example of where an alternate variable could be used. An example is core Crown net debt versus total debt. Obviously, both measures are still providing a descriptor of the Crown\u2019s debt position, but they are slightly variable. New section 26J(1B), inserted by clause 15, continues to require the Government to explain how those long-term objectives accord with the principles of responsible fiscal management, and where the Government chooses to use an alternative variable, either in substitution for, or in addition to, the statutory variable, the fiscal strategy report must state how the alternative variable used is similar in nature to one or more of the statutory variables. I note that successive Governments of different political stripes have, from time to time, used these alternate variables.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223df0aa096bfde4ce5eab0fdff606e819\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Just before I call the member, I\u2019ve been watching this debate for the last hour. I\u2019m aware it\u2019s quite a technical bill, and the well-informed nature of those engaged in it has also been noted. That shouldn\u2019t be an excuse to use the technical nature of it to bog us down, and nor should it be, on the other hand, a reason why we shouldn\u2019t actually be delving deep into it. Just that balance is what we\u2019re trying to seek to achieve here. I also note we\u2019ve had what, I\u2019d have to say, is quite an ambitious closure motion from the other side, but we are just moving forward at a nice pace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00225ed1960ea734a10e8c06753fcc3b08f7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225ed1960ea734a10e8c06753fcc3b08f7\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, I really do appreciate it. I agree that this is quite a technical bill, and I\u2019m also trying to get my head around it, which is why we are seeking clarifications from the Minister of Finance, but I note that this is the Public Finance Amendment Bill, and public finance\u2014in many ways, the way we do the Budget\u2014is going to affect every part of what we do here, including any portfolio and any ministerial work. I guess I\u2019m just trying to be thorough enough with this bill to give due respect to the magnitude of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThank you, Minister, for that response. That\u2019s really helpful. That\u2019s a really good example, which I will remember, in terms of substitution. I want to pick up on something that I mentioned that straddles clauses 15 and 16, and that is clause 14 and, subsequently, clauses 17 and 19 maybe, which are all around the circumstances of the removal of wellbeing and also the repeal of certain clauses. When we are looking in the regulatory impact statement\u2019s option two, which is removing the wellbeing-related requirements, it says that, in terms of consistency, \u201CThis option could lead to less consistency and comparability of information contained in the Budget Policy Statement over time.\u201D I just want to check with the Minister about, with the removal of the wellbeing, how the Minister would ensure that the consistency and comparability of information are maintained at the same level as it is currently.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00224ba556da09727a1bcf9aec9ae499c817\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224ba556da09727a1bcf9aec9ae499c817\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, clause 19 simply repeals that requirement that the Government would state in the Budget Policy Statement the wellbeing objectives, as a separate matter. This removal just reflects the actual practical reality of a Budget Policy Statement. If the member is to read my most recent Budget Policy Statement, I set out, very clearly, the Government\u2019s overarching goals for its terms of office, which I would intend to do in the future and, I suspect, any decent Minister of Finance would do. Then I simply state there are also the wellbeing objectives, because achieving them is what we\u2019ve judged to be the most important contribution the Government can make to the long-term social, economic, environmental, and cultural wellbeing of New Zealanders. It is simply a fiction to say that, by placing a requirement on wellbeing in the terms of the Public Finance Act, it is, in practice, changing anything about the way in which Budgets have been put together or formed. I would make a generous assessment that there has probably not ever been a Minister of Finance who has set out to try and deliver a Budget that would reduce wellbeing, and putting the clause in there, I think, is more window dressing than anything else.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022c4c4e6885c3ab3156065ae49286e2f47\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c4c4e6885c3ab3156065ae49286e2f47\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Just a very short follow-up question. I wasn\u2019t referring to, I guess, the wellbeing part. What I\u2019m specifically referring to is what is on page 26 of the regulatory impact statement around consistency and comparability of information contained in the Budget document as something where the removal could have a potentially negative impact. The only question I have is whether the same level of consistency would be expected. Although the regulatory impact statement says that they may be negatively impacted, is that something that the Minister is already working on to ensure that the same level of consistency exists? That\u2019s all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u002229dbcc16f460af9f1356f1b17065c5ea\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002229dbcc16f460af9f1356f1b17065c5ea\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (20:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. My questions are related to the questions that my colleague\u2019s just asked around clause\u00A017 on the repeal of the wellbeing objectives. In reading through the regulatory impact statement in terms of the options that the Minister of Finance was presented with in terms of solving the policy ill that she saw there, option 3, which obviously was not the option that the Minister went with, was clarifying wellbeing requirements to strengthen transparency and accountability. I\u2019d like to know the extent to which the Minister considered that. The Minister\u2019s consistently said that she can cover this off through the Budget Policy Statement more broadly, but, indeed, when the wellbeing requirement was introduced in 2020, it was about having that consistency and transparency, which is what the objective of this Act says it\u2019s trying to increase. So how are we going to compare one Budget to the next in terms of having that consistency?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMy second question to the Minister around that is: why are we making these changes now while, at the very same time, the Finance and Expenditure Committee has been tasked by the previous Government with doing the inquiry into public reporting? This has been brought up by a previous speaker. One of the things that that is looking at is how not only we, as a Parliament, can hold the executive more to account in terms of its fiscal decisions, but also non-fiscal indicators and what they may look like. In many ways, making this change is very much getting ahead of that piece of work that\u2019s going on. I\u2019d like to know the extent to which the Minister considered that when she was working through the policy options that were presented to her.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00225c92068cfb72a37452184faf0e5b794c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225c92068cfb72a37452184faf0e5b794c\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:53)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m delighted to say that I considered that, and I think the Budget documents are pretty comparable. All you need look at is the waffly words and photographs and pictures and endless sentences and superfluous phrases in Grant Robertson\u2019s Budgets and then compare them with mine and know there\u2019s a new show in town. I don\u2019t think that the wellbeing measures have provided consistency in that regard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe second thing that I would point out very clearly is that never, at any stage, were specific statutory metrics introduced in relation to the wellbeing objectives such that they would have been objectively comparable, whereas the Public Finance Act, on the other more longstanding measures, does have metrics around the level of debt, around the balance between operating expenses and operating revenues, the level of total net worth, and the total operating expenses. I think the member probably already knows it, but the reality is the wellbeing clauses were inserted into the Public Finance Act by the previous Minister of Finance as a window dressing exercise to pretend that, somehow, his Budgets were different from any others, but they were judged in the same way as any Budget is, which is: what\u2019s the inflation rate? What is that doing to the cost of living? What is the growth in the economy? What is unemployment? What\u2019s the debt? What are you spending? If she disagrees with that is how his Budgets were judged\u2014what is the impact on public services; what is the impact on taxpayers?\u2014then I invite her to have another discussion with Grant Robertson. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u00227505d93430920884cfa8eeec16b0997a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227505d93430920884cfa8eeec16b0997a\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (20:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I think these committee of the whole House stages are important for the committee to ask the Minister of Finance questions about the decision-making process around the various policy options that were presented to her. The question that I put to her around option 3, which wasn\u2019t retaining the status quo\u2014that was option 1. Option 3 was around clarifying those wellbeing requirements. The Minister said that she wasn\u2019t satisfied that there were statutory metrics that were there in the same way that the fiscal indicators had statutory metrics, so I\u2019d like to know: did the Minister consider, instead, amending the legislation and putting in place statutory metrics by which those wellbeings could be measured? That is entirely different than the answer that the Minister just gave, which was around option 1, which was retaining the status quo.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022d979f8109dae2f922dcc6696f5e4ca99\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d979f8109dae2f922dcc6696f5e4ca99\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:55)\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u002283b0bc4399bec0c956955653089e6d0a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002283b0bc4399bec0c956955653089e6d0a\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (20:55)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dafa9ee97f2dad8a9357103b74a3541c\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: Slow to the draw.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c3d54f710346c416f662568f167ae5ff\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: There\u2019s a long way to go, people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f4f545be2c20b1f4a2a02da73b792c0\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS\u003C/span\u003E: A very long way to go. That\u2019s right, Dr Megan Woods, because we are only at clause 17 of 30 of Part 1 of two parts, plus an interpretation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I want to ask the Minister of Finance is in relation to, particularly, the wellbeing provisions, where clause 17 repeals section 26KB of the Public Finance Act. Now, even though the Minister believes it was window dressing, an organisation that didn\u2019t believe it was window dressing was actually the United Nations. The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC)\u2014so it\u2019s a committee in the UN\u2014recognised that the introduction of these wellbeing objectives into the Public Finance Act was a crucial framework for safeguarding children\u2019s rights and that the launch of the subsequent Wellbeing Budgets from 2018 was a positive step towards realising one of our international obligations under UNCRC, article 1. The UN committee recognised these positive steps, and so it is not merely window dressing according to the UN.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the wellbeing objectives that we did have was around child poverty and the ability, basically, for Governments to be able to observe that the wellbeing objectives were more about longer-term thinking. There were many submissions that we received during the select committee process that reaffirmed that view. Their concern was that, by the repeal of section 26KB, the Minister was no longer taking a longer-term view into the wellbeing of children but was actually making more short-term decisions, which we have already recognised in some of the Amendment Papers on the Table, and that measures such as GDP assess, perhaps, how much you can produce or service, but doesn\u2019t actually calculate if you\u2019ve got people sleeping in cars\u2014how is that reflected in GDP?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy particular question to the Minister is: given the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child recognised the introduction of the wellbeing objectives into the Public Finance Act as crucial for safeguarding children\u2019s rights and also the subsequent Wellbeing Budgets as a positive step towards realising under UNCRC article 1, what are her steps, now, to deal with that, given she has now repealed that as part of clause 17 and repealed section 26KB?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022a6789cf678391076a9f3df0702fa5740\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a6789cf678391076a9f3df0702fa5740\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (20:59)\u003C/span\u003E: The question really highlighted something that I hope my colleagues agree with, which is that I\u2019m glad it is the people of New Zealand who democratically elect their Government and not a report writer at the United Nations, because if that member wishes to press the case that, by simply inserting wellbeing objectives into his Budget Policy Statements, Grant Robertson was about to deliver more wellbeing, I would suggest to her that 33 months of out-of-control inflation reaching an intergenerational high, the accumulation of tens and tens of billions of dollars of debt, a cost of living crisis, a crash in the economy, which led to his Government being voted out, would suggest that most New Zealanders judged that the insertion of wellbeing objectives did not, in fact, enhance wellbeing. I\u2019d also address the member\u2019s questions by saying that we have retained the child poverty Act, so in relation to her questions around that, those reporting measures remain. I\u2019d also point out that the inclusion of wellbeing measures did not prevent people sleeping in cars, which was a common occurrence under her Government in which the social housing wait-list was much, much longer than it is under ours.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022920b0090d32ec96bc70f3a5b6c6145b7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Just an observation, first, Minister. The reason the Minister doesn\u2019t make comments in the chair is because she has a microphone and they are broadcast, so please defer from that. Secondly, also to be aware: the more material the Minister introduces into her answers, of course, it does broaden the debate out. Thirdly, though, be aware we need to be still making progress and I\u2019ll be now asking for each member who is actually asking questions to refer to the part of the bill that they\u2019re referring to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022589a56312d9aab2ddb49bae542759bef\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022589a56312d9aab2ddb49bae542759bef\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (21:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, thank you, Mr Chair. Yeah, the Minister of Finance did open up a whole lot of different questions in relation to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224abd3c40f3d074c66d16938ce83325b5\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EThat\u2019s right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220f3b7667f5499a68483370a0b216193a\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS\u003C/span\u003E: I know, a lot of debatable points which we will go through.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220838e5f9bac748d2a59aea595e5226a0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002279b051b25ca8f2ede179e2ef9ee23620\u0022\u003ESimon Court\u003C/span\u003E: You haven\u2019t been able to answer any of them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c8adc421a597f1158004891558b5a1bb\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, what was that, Simon Court? Just so we can put it on Hansard, thank you very much\u2014take a call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESo, therefore, given the Minister\u2019s particular comments in relation to some of our obligations that we have committed to under the UN and some of the conventions\u2014particularly to the rights of children\u2014is she now saying to the New Zealand public that she does not believe that New Zealand should not be a party to the United Nations conventions on the rights of children, given her response that she just gave? I ask the Minister to respond very carefully to it, because it would be a very interesting Hansard to review, and to continue this line of questioning, given the different subjects that she opened up as part of her response.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00224729960aaf2194fc3524256fb7eea27c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224729960aaf2194fc3524256fb7eea27c\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (21:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Also, Mr Chair, you spoilt our fun because the Minister of Finance has already opened up and we would love to have the opportunity to talk about shock events and the fact that we often seem to have this amnestic effect that we have on the other side, when the very shock event that the Minister refers to that we need to be prepared for is exactly what happened globally in 2020, where we actually, overall, came out better in terms of our level of debt compared to many others in the world.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut the question I have for the Minister is referring to clause 20. Within the regulatory impact statement, there are a number of issues that this bill is hoping to address and there\u2019s still a few more that we haven\u2019t touched on yet, and I want to touch on the one that talks about quantifying and publishing new tax expenditure estimates. I want to check with the Minister; I guess the first question over here is in the regulatory impact statement\u2014and I\u2019ve been keeping a close eye to it\u2014when it comes to clause 20, inserting new section 26MA. I\u2019m looking at subclause (3), specifically \u201Cthe tax expenditure statement must include, for each tax expenditure\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things that we are seeing\u2014this is the options identification of this particular section in the regulatory impact statement where option 3 is chosen, and this is page\u00A019. The content in the regulatory impact statement says, \u201CThe content requirements to be specified in legislation would include:\u201D five different categories. In most cases, each of the categories match what we see in 26MA(3)(a) to (e). But I\u2019m curious as to why there\u2019s been a change in the legislation from what is in the regulatory impact statement for option 3, \u201Cd\u201D., which is an explanation of the outcome the expenditure is intended to achieve. Whereas 26MA(3)(d) is the type and objective\u2014objective, not outcome\u2014of the tax expenditure, noting that when we\u2019re looking at the definition of \u201Coutcome\u201D versus \u201Cobjective\u201D, outcome is straightforward, but the objective is a step-to-step process of leading to a particular goal or a particular outcome.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess my question to the Minister is: why are outcomes not required to be included in the tax expenditure statement in the legislation, compared to the regulatory impact statement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00226fd921910b713089cf9f5a1b9dca35b6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226fd921910b713089cf9f5a1b9dca35b6\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (21:05)\u003C/span\u003E: In answer to Barbara Edmonds\u2019 question: no. But as the member should well know, it has simply never been the case that New Zealanders agree with every sentence in every UN report.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn relation to clause 20, this is simply a transparency measure, and I note that it was actually welcomed by Opposition members on the Finance and Expenditure Committee, which is to put in a requirement where there is this tax expenditure, that there is some reporting on the outcomes of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220fe7508c7b8a47378c4c88fe1ce69fcb\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9442abb1c3bff96b95744acfce91256\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fe7508c7b8a47378c4c88fe1ce69fcb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9442abb1c3bff96b95744acfce91256\u0022\u003ECUSHLA TANGAERE-MANUEL (Labour\u2014Ikaroa-R\u0101whiti) (21:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003Et\u0113n\u0101 koe e te Minita\u003C/span\u003E. My question is relating to clause 17 and the repeal of 26KB. Acknowledging the Minister of Finance\u2019s focus on fiscal responsibility and of course the fact that M\u0101ori had strong support for this in their submissions\u2014for the wellbeing reporting\u2014in 2018. Given the strong performance of the M\u0101ori economy, which is based on generational wellbeing and evidence of prudent fiscal management, did the Minister have any conversations with any iwi or iwi entities, including hauora entities? Was there any consultation undertaken with those entities and the impacts that this will have on the long-term effect of not just the M\u0101ori economy but the overall economy, with a M\u0101ori lens? Did the Minister receive any advice on whether changes to the inclusion of the Wellbeing Report will affect any obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi, and was that even a consideration? Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u0022e8d4c84b3a4f3ca272259eef8de0f54c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e8d4c84b3a4f3ca272259eef8de0f54c\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (21:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and I still do have questions on those clauses 17, 18, 19, 20, which is the set of clauses that are removing the wellbeing reporting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn the regulatory impact statement (RIS), Treasury noted that the Wellbeing Report \u201Cprovides a standalone piece of analysis on broader economic and social outcomes, published at regular intervals. It is \u2026 using Treasury\u2019s professional judgement and is independent of Ministers. This supports public debate on the state of the nation. Ceasing the [Wellbeing Report] therefore risks less information being made available for public debate.\u201D Now, this is quite a fundamental change in terms of what the bill\u2019s purporting to do, which is around transparency; that actually there\u2019s advice from officials that it\u2019s going to risk less information and less transparency feeding into the public discourse in public debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other question I have for the Minister is, in the explanatory note, it gives streamlining the number of stewardship reports that Treasury must prepare as a reason for discontinuing the Wellbeing Report. It\u2019s seeing it in the context of those other stewardship reports that are produced, and this could be re-characterised as a de-prioritisation or a cut, if you like. So if administrative efficiency was the priority, as outlined by Treasury in the RIS, was the consideration by the Minister for merging the existing requirements of the three existing stewardship reports into the Wellbeing Report to look at consolidation of those reports, rather than simply cutting the Wellbeing Report in the name of streamlining? Thank you, Mr Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00222acd48cab7db4be41d9ed7d9a899ca49\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222acd48cab7db4be41d9ed7d9a899ca49\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (21:09)\u003C/span\u003E: In reference to the questions from the first member, I note that the bill went through a full select committee process to which any M\u0101ori individual entity or organisation was able to submit. I note the bill only received 80 written submissions. However, I can also confirm for the member that no inconsistencies with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi were identified during the development of the policy proposals in this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn answer to the questions from the Hon Megan Woods, I just simply disagree with the statement that she quoted. In terms of her question around consolidation: no. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220601c335662c7ca0d62d752ab65e3040\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: I also have to say that broadening out the debate doesn\u2019t mean spending too much time on those broader issues, either; it means they can be obviously addressed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022 data-id=\u0022e77fd5c35462bff00c90a3b288035df5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e77fd5c35462bff00c90a3b288035df5\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON (Labour) (21:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I don\u2019t believe the Minister of Finance answered the question from Cushla Tangaere-Manuel at all. I want to come back to clause 17, particularly when we look at this from a wellbeing perspective, and we look at the strategies that roll out in terms of M\u0101ori-targeted funding. Now, we were talking about the consultation process, and the Minister has not given us a satisfactory answer in regard to that, particularly given what the M\u0101ori economy is worth. We\u2019re talking in the hundreds of millions of dollars, and yet the Minister has not come back with any answers in terms of her consultation process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, we\u2019ve seen so much money\u2014in fact, I would say around a billion dollars, and I\u2019ve taken this up with Minister Bishop and Minister Potaka\u2014in terms of the M\u0101ori housing strategy; over $800 million in the last year or so transferred out of the M\u0101ori-targeted area for M\u0101ori housing, which is something that has been incredibly crucial in terms of development for M\u0101ori. I would like the Minister\u2019s response to that, given that we had a programme in place\u2014we had M\u0101ori housing groups in place\u2014and it seems to be something that this Government has ignored, despite that funding going into the mainstream p\u016Btea. Now we have M\u0101ori providers who have to compete and who are missing out, so it goes against the grain. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003EChairperson signals to member\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYes, yes, I\u2019m trying my best, Mr Chair\u2014it\u2019s a very difficult, tricky topic here. We\u2019re talking about Budgets\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0a41b17f72356f8ed169162e1f89f36\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Maybe best left to others, Mr Jackson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab7b46ca19069a9c090d7be1b2243014\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m trying my best here. If we\u2019re talking about wellbeing, where is the wellbeing in transferring that money out? Where is the strategy in terms of targeted funding for M\u0101ori? Where is the consultation? Where is the partnership with M\u0101ori? I think that the Minister has been very\u2014well, I did not hear the response. In fact, I thought it was an inappropriate response.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022 data-id=\u0022777f9db0e0d001475433837f614e8c1a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022777f9db0e0d001475433837f614e8c1a\u0022\u003EKATIE NIMON (National\u2014Napier) (21:12)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022485538c32bb9e803314d4fff8677bf5e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: We probably need to keep moving forward now, to those questioning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u0022cfc6fdacd3c9610076a4b780202ce90b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cfc6fdacd3c9610076a4b780202ce90b\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (21:12)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and I\u2019m happy to carry on from my colleague Mr Jackson, who just gave an excellent speech outlining the kinds of things that need to be reported under wellbeing reporting, and the kinds of things that that would pick up. I\u2019ve got a very simple, quick question for the Minister of Finance, it is still on clause 17. Why did she not consider the consolidation of all of the reports into one?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022e6e004a56812a9e3039a28a74c2b0394\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e6e004a56812a9e3039a28a74c2b0394\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (21:13)\u003C/span\u003E: Because I thought it was better to remove it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002232c4acef7bc913bf758b6086c4c08f30\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002232c4acef7bc913bf758b6086c4c08f30\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (21:13)\u003C/span\u003E: I would like to move on to, I guess, the next broad theme of this bill, which is around specific fiscal risks\u2014or SFRs\u2014which is what we\u2019re looking at in clauses 22 to 24, noting that clauses 22 and 23, essentially, replace some of the reporting aspects from two years to four years and three years to five years respectively.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to check with the Minister of Finance, on clause 24(2), also noting that this is still a brand-new clause that hasn\u2019t been touched on previously. We are looking at specific fiscal risks. Clause 24(2), which says, \u201CAfter section 26Q(3)(b)(ii), insert:\u201D\u2014the new subparagraph (iii)(A) talks about \u201Cthe fiscal impact during the forecast period for the economic and fiscal update if the risk were to materialise;\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to check a couple of scenarios with the Minister and whether they would then be considered the materialisation of a risk for the forecast period of the economic and fiscal update. One of them is, for example, what we are seeing now, when there has been international conflict that potentially disrupts supply chains, etc. Would that be considered something that is going to happen here? It\u2019s not something, I would assume, someone could forecast, but if it does materialise, would it be considered a specific fiscal risk? That\u2019s my first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy second question is: if you are looking at the increased frequency of climate-charged weather events\u2014and, again, when we did the infrastructure debate, there was a lot of conversation about what happens when certain communities are cut off. I think Grant McCallum talked from a Northland perspective, and I think Katie Nimon also mentioned Tukituki\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221801d48745027140b1607d63063f915\u0022\u003EKatie Nimon\u003C/span\u003E: Napier.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274cf1294762f86eec60235c0bc5f2b8b\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, no, you\u2019re Napier\u2014I\u2019m sorry. Tukituki and Napier, Katie Nimon\u2019s and Catherine Wedd\u2019s electorates. If that were to happen, and we are looking now at a very clear increase in climate-charged weather events\u2014we know that those risks will materialise, so would those kinds of risks also appear as a part of specific fiscal risk? Those are my two questions. Where does it go if it\u2019s not anticipated, and would climate-charged weather events be included, because it\u2019s now happening?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022a4881baaa63cf663dc26928fab7a378f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a4881baaa63cf663dc26928fab7a378f\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (21:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m just noting that we are up to clause 20\u2014I\u2019m just doing a progress update. Clause 20 of 30 in Part 1 of a two-part bill, including the interpretation section. Going specifically to clause 20, which is new section 26MA, which is the tax expenditure statement, during the select committee process we heard from a number of submitters who are actually very supportive of this new amendment, this new addition to the Public Finance Act by the Minister of Finance, so I do acknowledge the work that she and Treasury have done on that in relation to making this a mandatory reporting obligation. Some of the particular questions in relation to the tax expenditure statement were on parts that were perhaps missing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust quickly for the Minister: has she considered reporting on how much potential revenue is being lost to avoidance or evasion, by broad tax type? That does sound weird\u2014how can you report on how much tax may be avoided or evaded? However, Inland Revenue do have a compliance model where they do, via industry sector, try to calculate the level of avoidance or evasion\u2014whether it\u2019s avoidance or evasion, they\u2019re two separate things, and they won\u2019t necessarily say one or the other. They can actually measure that, and that\u2019s by industry sector. For example, if you\u2019re in the hospitality sector, and other cafes of similar sizes are showing that they\u2019re reporting X amount of revenue, but your particular business doesn\u2019t actually show that same level\u2014it\u2019s actually probably a drop\u2014that is actually a flag within the system that they would probably report as part of their compliance modelling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to ask the Minister that question: had she considered whether\u2014because it\u2019s not as part of the current tax expenditure statement\u2014how much potential revenue is being lost to avoidance or evasion, before I ask other, further questions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022a0bda0240dab5dc767c5fc762151add3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a0bda0240dab5dc767c5fc762151add3\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (21:18)\u003C/span\u003E: In relation to the questions about clause 24, I refer the member Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan to the latest Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update for examples of what risks look like, and I note that these include climate change - related risks. For the member\u2019s information\u2014although I would note that providing this information is certainly wide of the bill at hand\u2014if a risk materialises and has an impact on the Crown, it is no longer a risk; it would be included in the forecasts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn terms of clause 20, I\u2019d just simply note for the member the Hon Barbara Edmonds that nothing precludes any Minister from reporting information above and beyond what is required from the Public Finance Act. This Government certainly stands by its delivered promise to invest more in audit and compliance at the IRD. We have done that over successive Budgets, and we are proud to have done so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022 data-id=\u00225d5643d8f9afbcfb7a0c1018e26a1d2a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225d5643d8f9afbcfb7a0c1018e26a1d2a\u0022\u003ENANCY LU (National) (21:19)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a830ec867187d986c07535ca3e239ef3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Barbara Edmonds, moving forward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022767543b98ababdaf4ffc7a45628ab8e5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022767543b98ababdaf4ffc7a45628ab8e5\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (21:19)\u003C/span\u003E: I am moving forward, Mr Chair, to, actually, my proposed amendment that is on the Table, specifically an amendment to clause 20. That\u2019s to insert new paragraph (f) after new section 26MA(3)(e), and that\u2019s the estimated number of taxpayers that would be affected by the tax expenditure. I note the Minister of Finance says that the current amendment doesn\u2019t preclude Ministers from being able to report on anything; however, I believe that this is important enough that it should be actually in the primary legislation. The reason why I say that is that by ensuring the tax expenditure statements also include the number of taxpayers that would be affected by tax expenditure\u2014this would prevent a repeat of where a Minister makes claims about how many people would benefit from a tax cut or a transfer, only for it to be wildly overestimated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI do think it\u2019s important that that goes into primary legislation. Yes, Ministers could decide to report on that by other means; however, by putting it into one place, which is the tax expenditure statement\u2014again, I hope that amendment would be able to get the support of the committee\u2014it means that the Minister has to actually record the estimated number of taxpayers that would be affected by that tax expenditure\u2014not in a policy paper, not in a little \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EBudget at a Glance\u003C/span\u003E booklet, not in a press release, but, actually, in the tax expenditure statement. I seek, hopefully, an answer from the Minister as to whether she would support my amendment to clause 20, new section 26MA(3), to insert new paragraph (f).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022d26a567de46699624e15c38fd012dd31\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d26a567de46699624e15c38fd012dd31\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (21:21)\u003C/span\u003E: No. The clause codifies existing practice. The way in which the member the Hon Barbara Edmonds has put the amendment would significantly increase the resources required to be applied by taxpayers in order to deliver on that legislative amendment. But I guess some members of the House have different views on how we should use taxpayers\u2019 money. I always think we should be as prudent as possible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u00223c8a5a66636f52d7caf1acc7beb1cf96\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223c8a5a66636f52d7caf1acc7beb1cf96\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (21:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Given the Minister of Finance\u2019s response that it\u2019s already recorded in other things, how would it cause even more resources to, actually, then just record it into one place? That argument does not make sense. The Minister\u2019s saying, \u201CWell, they have to record it in this statement, in that statement.\u201D\u2014the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EBudget at a Glance\u003C/span\u003E, for example, or a press release\u2014but that it\u2019s going to cause a whole big bunch of resource to put it in the tax expenditure statement. If the Minister stands by her response, how much more resource would it be? What advice did she receive from Treasury or IRD in relation to that large amount of resource, extra resource it\u2019s going to take? How much would that extra resource cost? Why can\u2019t she include that as part of a further financial year? And if the Minister is standing by her claim that it has to be recorded in other documents, name those other documents, otherwise she has totally, basically\u2014what\u2019s the word?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229265c1f8e5a3b2d775bb27c36eac6426\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EMisled.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022343b51a9703b3961005f741cbd99b375\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014misled or mischaracterised. If it\u2019s going to be included as part of other documents, I don\u2019t\u2014I\u2019m trying to understand how it is more of an extra big resource to put it in a tax expenditure statement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022c6a4a66d08341f595742b2d13b3323b7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c6a4a66d08341f595742b2d13b3323b7\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (21:23)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I want to move on to, now, looking at a new clause. Again, I note that I\u2019m not our finance spokesperson, so a lot of the questions I ask are probably going to be asked in more depth by other finance spokespeople, like the Hon Barbara Edmonds, in far more detail than I could muster. Also noting, with what the Minister mentioned before, that there are some good bits in there that we do agree with, but it\u2019s still important just to check with the Minister of Finance on some of the intent and some of the operationalisation of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWith that being said, I want to move on to clause 26, which is around the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update (HYEFU). This is to do with one of the other policy intents of this bill, which is adjusting the requirement of a HYEFU in an election year. The only question I have for the Minister in this\u2014and I understand why we\u2019re moving from October to September, it\u2019s a logical move in terms of the gap between what is going to be in a Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update (PREFU) and what is going to be in HYEFU. But one of the things that I see in the regulatory impact statement, on page 38, is that there is the risk that if the exemption applies more often because we have moved the date of the HYEFU from October to September, there are no further requirements for producing any economic or\u2014sorry, the exemption from October to September; there\u2019s no requirement to produce a HYEFU, possibly, at the end of an election year before a Budget Economic and Fiscal Update (BEFU) the next year. So I want to check with the Minister\u2014and this is something that\u2019s recorded in the regular impact statement\u2014what is the Minister\u2019s intent; is that a significant enough risk in the Minister\u2019s perspective? I guess that\u2019s the first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMaybe I\u2019ll just ask my second question now as well, which is on clause 27, and that is to do with the shifting of the PREFU earlier, taking note that more people would be doing advance voting. I think the idea of shifting from, I think, at this stage, the window between 35 days and 25 days is a good one. But in terms of the interaction\u2014which we said before\u2014of the exemption for HYEFU and then the shift in terms of the PREFU, does the Minister also think there\u2019s going to be a longer and longer gap between the BEFU mid-year in the election year than, potentially, a PREFU now earlier in terms of the election? And there\u2019s going to be a much longer gap potentially. Then, if you get a HYEFU that\u2019s been exempted, there\u2019s going to be a longer gap between the PREFU and the BEFU of the subsequent year\u2014is the gap going to be too long for it to be considered a good process?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00221231ecaa5473b0d3b717d47950d62671\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221231ecaa5473b0d3b717d47950d62671\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (21:26)\u003C/span\u003E: In response to Barbara Edmonds\u2019 questions, the advice I received was that by formalising publication of the taxation expenditure statement as it currently stands, rather than a new, novel, and expanded form as she has described, that reflected what Treasury and Inland Revenue believed they could achieve within existing resources. I was advised that collecting comprehensive data on all tax expenditures in the way described would impose compliance and administrative costs that presently outweigh the value of the additional information and would divert resource from analysis of policy options.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the questions from Lawrence Xu-Nan, I note that this is simply about being pragmatic and practical. The period between a half-year update and a pre-election update\u2014if it is too short, it imposes significant burden on Treasury. As it is, the time difference between a Pre-election Fiscal Update (PREFU) and the next update, which would be at Budget if the exemption were to apply, is not dissimilar to the existing gap between a Budget Economic and Fiscal Update (BEFU) and a Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update in non-election years, which is roughly eight months compared to seven.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just also note that regardless of the requirements in the Act, a newly elected Government may wish to provide updated economic and fiscal information to the public and would be able to do so\u2014again, nothing in the Act precludes it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7c0549b5be03c4bcbd262a632c461b1\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Tom\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232ac64a724f125f6056aee0412e1dfae\u0022\u003EHon Member:   \u003C/span\u003ERutherford.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002275fe0a9289a2a0ae5f3356ece481275a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014Rutherford. You\u2019ve been away a while, Mr Rutherford.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022e65217e99f39f6485d3bade24d072cd6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000784\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e65217e99f39f6485d3bade24d072cd6\u0022\u003ETOM RUTHERFORD (National\u2014Bay of Plenty) (21:28)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223cc21d33384db3a6b3056aac675da806\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll also just remind that attempting to persuade at this stage and attempting to clarify will be two quite different points that will be taken by the Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u002223b4b12c8ad29a07e2f4ee9f0279248d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002223b4b12c8ad29a07e2f4ee9f0279248d\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (21:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, Mr Chair. I have a question in response to the advice that the Minister of Finance just gave. The advice that she received was that it would take additional resource, that, basically, the tax expenditure statement as set out currently in Amendment Paper 502. The additional resource for Treasury and IRD is based on how much resource it would take for this, for, basically, what\u2019s in clause 20, new section 26MA, which is \u201C(1) The Minister must present to the House of Representatives a tax expenditure statement\u201D, and they must present that statement immediately after they delivered the Budget for the financial year\u2014which is fine. \u201C(3) The tax expenditure statement must include, for each expenditure,\u2014(a) a description of the tax expenditure; and (b) the legislative provision that authorises the tax expenditure; and (c) the estimated value of the tax expenditure, where it is reasonably feasible to estimate; and (d) the type and objective of the tax expenditure; and (e) if available, a link to an internet site where [the] documents that record the following are published: (i) the decision to make the tax expenditure: (ii) the analysis that informed that decision.\u201D Then, (4), it \u201Cincludes an exemption, allowance, preferential tax rate, deferral, or offset.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI accept the officials\u2019 advice that that does take significant resource, because this is new. Every time something is new, in the same way as when the disclosure statements were introduced as a regulatory requirement, it does take effort. However, for example, when officials estimated that 21,000 families would benefit from FamilyBoost, the maximum is 250, and when we\u2019ve asked the Minister how many of those families have actually received it, the Minister is unable to answer it. So we have assumed it\u2019s zero.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat work is being done. That is part of a Budget policy. The work has already been done to forecast that it was 21,000 families. So I don\u2019t understand how that work, which has already been done, cannot be transferred into the Tax Expenditure Statement, and why that would cause huge\u2014sorry, I think the word was \u201Cbig\u201D\u2014resources by the Minister when the work\u2019s already done.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAgain, let\u2019s follow that from step one. The Minister has released a FamilyBoost policy as part of Budget 2024. If the Tax Expenditure Statement was required in 2024, there is a whole list of things that they would need to do as part of the Budget Policy Statement, because it must be released straight after. The work has already been done to forecast how many families would benefit from that particular tax policy. I do not understand what is the extra, because that\u2019s actually the real question: what is the extra resource to translate the forecast of 21,000 families into a Tax Expenditure Statement? The reason why I\u2019m asking what is the extra resource is because although I can accept from officials that, yes, for Treasury and the Inland Revenue Department there may be significant resources for the new Tax Expenditure Statement, they would have had to do the work as part of the principal tax policy decision, which the Minister has included as part of her Budget.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe introduction of the whole Tax Expenditure Statement is to make it mandatory as part of this Act. You are making it mandatory. I do not accept the excuse that it is big resources, so my question to the Minister, and it is a new question, is how much extra resource\u2014the extra bit, given officials, hypothetically, have already estimated X thousands of families are receiving this\u2014is needed to put that in a Tax Expenditure Statement, given the purpose of the Tax Expenditure Statement is to set out the effect of tax policy decisions, made as part of the Budget to make it mandatory, when the work is already done? I don\u2019t understand the Minister\u2019s response of \u201Cbig resources\u201D, because, actually, the resources have already been allocated, they\u2019ve already been forecast, so what is the extra resource that\u2019s required to put this in a Tax Expenditure Statement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u00226030a7903e72d37343499fb06295b5ad\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226030a7903e72d37343499fb06295b5ad\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (21:33)\u003C/span\u003E: I have a question for the Minister of Finance on clause 27, which is \u201Csection 26T amended\u201D, which is around the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update (PREFU). We supported increasing the number of days in which the PREFU needed to be published. This is an important part of the election cycle, when the books are opened up. Parties right across the House and the Opposition, as well as the New Zealand public, get insight into how much money there is and how the policies stack.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things I\u2019m interested in is that if you look at the primary legislation, section\u00A026T(1), it states that \u201CThe Minister must, not earlier than 30 working days, nor later than 20 working days, before the day appointed as polling day in relation to [the] general election\u201D. Clause 27(1) in the amendment legislation replaces \u201C30\u201D with \u201C35\u201D and \u201C20\u201D with \u201C25\u201D. I support that, but one of the things I\u2019m interested in is whether the Minister of Finance received any advice around whether that polling day was the right day that we should be using, given the growth in advance voting in New Zealand, or whether or not we should be setting the days that the PREFU needed to be published out from the beginning of advance voting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019re seeing hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders who are casting their votes before polling day. It is an important part of the election cycle in terms of Opposition parties being able to release policy, making sure it all stacks up. That window has fundamentally changed since this primary legislation was put in place that saw polling day as a fixed state, whereas we now know, in fact, that the regulatory impact statement and some other work actually shows the growth of advance voting, because it is such a thing and it is part of the rationale for why we extend it out. I just wondered whether the Minister either received or asked for advice on whether polling day or the beginning of advance voting was a better metric.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u002245879452d9d082137bb4d560c64216cb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002245879452d9d082137bb4d560c64216cb\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (21:35)\u003C/span\u003E: As the member the Hon Dr Megan Woods well knows, the clause has the effect of, effectively, meaning the Pre-election Fiscal and Economic Update is published five days earlier. This strikes an appropriate balance between, on the one hand, ensuring that voters have better information before they go to vote, and, on the other hand, ensuring that that data is up to date and not out of date by the time they go to vote.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022 data-id=\u002280e7dbe4cee25b37d637ddcea71808c2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002280e7dbe4cee25b37d637ddcea71808c2\u0022\u003ETIM COSTLEY (National\u2014\u014Ctaki) (21:36)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299def38d77cce2a215b8ad1599a2a0ab\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendment to Part 1 set out on Amendment Paper 502 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254d7dd97f821cbb23eda84c0fc3682f1\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Barbara Edmonds\u2019 tabled amendment to delete clause 4 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce608926dacebbeb977c03af11ac44f7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment deleting clauses 12 and 13 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000817\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229450fe99ddbe75d4e91129d182e89032\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Barbara Edmonds\u2019 tabled amendment deleting clause 14 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000826\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002218c996088bc01e4004dd1296c4eee9ec\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 15(2) to insert \u201Cthe level of long-term social deficit\u201D into new subsection (1A) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000834\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000835\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002283c19599b888f4ba56af63c518bb8c82\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 15(2) to insert \u201Cthe level of long-term infrastructure deficit\u201D into new subsection (1A) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000840\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000841\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000842\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000843\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000844\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a22908e2b47c8796a8a4a0ca5c8c668d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 15(2) to insert \u201Cthe level of climate risks to financial stability\u201D into new subsection (1A) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000845\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000846\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000847\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000848\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000849\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000850\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000851\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022029f8d8f535df95409ace4168f2d7063\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 15(2) to insert \u201Clong-term social deficit\u201D into new subsection\u00A0(1B) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000852\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000853\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000854\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000855\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000857\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000858\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e88964ce7f0e9ecf179359d9e3634a68\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 15(2) to insert \u201Clong-term infrastructure deficit\u201D into new subsection (1B) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000859\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000860\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000861\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000862\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000863\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000864\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000865\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0936e04f10fbc0338beb29304571706\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 15(2) to insert \u201Cclimate risks to financial stability\u201D into new subsection (1B) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000866\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000867\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000868\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000869\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000870\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000871\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000872\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235afe0625bf7e339e4f60d534d44c7ec\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 16(2) to insert \u201Cshort-term social deficit\u201D into new subsection\u00A0(1A) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000873\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000874\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000875\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000876\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000877\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000878\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000879\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c964e5d2bfa6d4f85c4457d0b0d03f4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 16(2) to insert \u201Cclimate risks to financial stability\u201D into new subsection (1A) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000880\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000881\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000882\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000883\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000884\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000885\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000886\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223afaf08c504f033145748fb0044216a1\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 16(2) to insert \u201Cshort-term infrastructure deficit\u201D to new subsection (1A) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000887\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000890\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000891\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000892\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd90d627d3e047a49f845a4957b90aa4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Barbara Edmonds\u2019 tabled amendment deleting clause 17 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000894\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000895\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000896\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000897\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000898\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000899\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000900\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022837221d705251abbcd0bc0a8030c4b1a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Barbara Edmonds\u2019 tabled amendment to clause 20 inserting new subsection 26MA(3)(f) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000901\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000902\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000903\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000904\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000905\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000906\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000907\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022354335561591d633e2f2984a527e46ab\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Barbara Edmonds\u2019 tabled amendment inserting new clause 32A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000908\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000909\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000911\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000912\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000913\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000914\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Part 1 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000916\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000917\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000918\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000919\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000920\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022010a03bbe45d1c24df4fbf666e2c6538\u0022\u003ECommittee of the Whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000921\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e4e11bf9da43fb28adfb35ff8bd34f89\u0022\u003EPart 2 Amendments to rest of principal Act\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000922\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a08b32aa0ccf49da434603ee9b8ebfa0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to Part 2. This is the debate on clauses 31 to 43, \u201CAmendments to rest of principal Act\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022656beba7eca09173bec0a70e029dc3f1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000923\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022656beba7eca09173bec0a70e029dc3f1\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (21:54)\u003C/span\u003E: The amendments to the rest of the principal Act include amendments to section 34 around \u201CResponsibilities of chief executives: financial management of departmental matters\u201D; clause 32, which amends section 38 around departments\u2019 provision of information on strategic intentions; clause\u00A033, which amends the requirements for information on strategic intentions; and a number of other clauses which are a combination of consequential amendments relating to amendments in other clauses, remedial measures, and cross-references to other parts of the Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000924\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have taken the opportunity, in amending the Public Finance Act, to tidy up some things along the way, such as clause 42, which clarifies the Minister of Finance\u2019s authority to issue securities, and other measures, such as applying reporting requirements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do note that clause 44 is being added by Amendment Paper 502, which I have spoken to already in the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000926\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022041e1132682240fb6d513ec817c527d7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the time has come for me to leave the Chair. The committee is suspended and resumes at 9 a.m. tomorrow.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000927\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 9.56 p.m. to 9 a.m. (Thursday)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000928\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00222a0b5f28415e1669942a573663e64dbb\u0022\u003EExtended Sitting\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000929\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002251dd327eeeec00cc9649395179a5917e\u0022\u003EThursday, 5 March 2026\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000930\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00223605204712f56370cd0bdb116345dc9f\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000931\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cfc10a2d7c94d709c9085fd036b4ff86\u0022\u003EPublic Finance Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000932\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00224a0b96d272cfb672280c77c0b95191b3\u0022\u003ECommittee of the Whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000933\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000934\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u002258b3bd63212a1c5443032eae8eb2aa8e\u0022\u003EPart 2 Amendments to rest of principal Act (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228123f88f37de69ebdbe549c94596ba3c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the committee is resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u0022529ab215d7b1acc13f1b7d912cbac22e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000936\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022529ab215d7b1acc13f1b7d912cbac22e\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (09:00)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the committee report progress presently and move on to consideration of the Social Security (Accident Compensation and Calculation of Weekly Income) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000937\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the motion be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000938\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000939\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000940\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000941\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000942\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EProgress to be reported.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000944\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c44e1e06619a33404ef75630a056e23c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: We now move to consideration of the Social Security (Accident Compensation and Calculation of Weekly Income) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000945\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e5d55544336e8227e5b2b210c0a1426a\u0022\u003ESocial Security (Accident Compensation and Calculation of Weekly Income) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000946\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00222201a1720275aaa77ddf9c8b0ef1fe35\u0022\u003ECommittee of the Whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000947\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022172dfdecfc8549673c51e1cc527335e7\u0022\u003EPart 1 Amendments relating to accident compensation and calculation of weekly income\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000948\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1584783c29b2bc5f9674617b8d6f828\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we now turn to the Social Security (Accident Compensation and Calculation of Weekly Income) Amendment Bill. We begin with the debate on Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u002249857479d8351737462c0b833568aea4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000949\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002249857479d8351737462c0b833568aea4\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (09:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, I seek leave for all provisions to be taken as one question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000950\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c72f0142329a0f045ca2250af5c54024\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000951\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EPart 1: this is the debate on clauses 4 to 7, \u201CAmendments relating to accident compensation and calculation of weekly income\u201D. The question is that Part 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u0022ed8a51645bfddefad9f7827f0a8b2495\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000952\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ed8a51645bfddefad9f7827f0a8b2495\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (09:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you so much, Mr Chair. This is a bit of a quasi-urgency bill because we had a one-week select committee process, there\u2019s no regulatory impact statement, and there was no ability to adequately engage with cross-Government agencies on the bill. I have some questions that would have been answered if we had had a proper process to begin with, and I\u2019ll move to the clauses shortly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000953\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe first one is: did the Minister, at any point, engage with ACC officials or the Minister for ACC in relation to the provision of this bill, and was she advised, at any point, around the inclusion of sexual violence survivors as part of those 37,000 people affected by the bill? If she did not consult at all, or her officials did not consult, with ACC on the inclusion of sexual violence survivors, I would like to know why, because submitters in the select committee stage were very, very clear about how this would affect not just sexual violence survivors but abuse in care survivors as well. That is my first question around the extent of engagement she has had with ACC, or the Minister for ACC for that matter, and whether she received any feedback.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000954\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn Part 1, I\u2019m particularly interested in the provisions in clause 4(1) and then new subsection (1AAA), because this is where we talk about people\u2019s partners. I want to start with something that the Minister has yet to acknowledge publicly, which is the impact on partners of ACC claimants and the relationship rules at Work and Income New Zealand and how this may affect people who may be deemed to be in a relationship in the nature of marriage with a person who\u2019s receiving a benefit and may be an ACC claimant. As the Minister may know, the Work and Income New Zealand rules in relation to a relationship in the nature of marriage can include just going on a handful of dates. It could even include flatmates who may have just been deemed to be too close but not actually for all intents and purposes having a romantic relationship. I know this myself because I have sat at benefits review committee hearings where people have been accused of this, and the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) has previously even been accused by the Privacy Commissioner for their practices in determining this and the type of information they gather.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000955\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan the Minister illustrate how many partners of ACC claimants have also had historic debts as a result of the provisions in this bill? I am so far referring to the provisions in clause 4 because of the way that we are defining \u201CP\u201D or their spouse. I think this would be one of the more appropriate parts to outline it. How many partners are affected by this? These partners are not necessarily the ACC claimants themselves. Often, if you\u2019re a beneficiary and your partner is also a beneficiary\u2014say, for example, a supported living payment recipient\u2014part of the challenge is that, say, somebody on a supported living payment, a person who\u2019s got really serious health conditions and who\u2019s a partner of an ACC claimant may just lose all their benefit and all their entitlements once an ACC claim comes through. Does she have a breakdown of who these partners are, how many thousands of them there may be, and, for example, the types of benefits that they may have been on, if they were on any benefit? How many of them would have been on the supported living payment with really serious health conditions and have been unlawfully put into debt due to the practice that MSD has carried out for decades? I want to begin with that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000956\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf the Minister does not have the information in relation to partners, as defined in clause\u00A04 by \u201CP\u201D, I want to know why she didn\u2019t do due diligence to understand the scope of who is being affected by this bill. Equally, if the Minister did not engage with the Minister for ACC or if her officials did not engage with ACC officials to determine how many sensitive claims there were\u2014or whether there were even sensitive claims, because I\u2019m yet to hear the Minister, at any point, acknowledge sexual violence survivors in her contribution as people affected by this bill\u2014I want to know why she has yet to acknowledge them. Those are my introductory remarks, and I hope that we can have a fulsome debate. This is the bill that affects 40,000 people, so I think it\u2019s a worthwhile thing to be debating.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u00225d913f81150473ccd5bef8fd3b5ee8ee\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000957\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225d913f81150473ccd5bef8fd3b5ee8ee\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (09:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I want to start my contribution by talking about my concern about whether people in this Chamber, and indeed the Minister truly understands the nature of the change that is proposed and its impact on people. I have got to admit that I did not when I began this inquiry. I am in the select committee that heard from submitters, and it was an enlightening experience. It sent a shudder through me that it had been proposed that this was actually something that would be done under urgency without a select committee. That would have been a travesty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000958\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat emerged during that select committee process was an injustice that was very evident and was not evident in the advice that we had been given. I understood that there had been a longstanding practice in the relationship between the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) and ACC and that that longstanding practice needed to continue because, otherwise, there was a risk that people would double-dip\u2014they would get ACC and they would get MSD support\u2014and that that was a risk that we were facing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would like the Minister to talk specifically about that double-dipping risk. I\u2019d like to understand whether the Minister still thinks that, without this piece of legislation, there is double-dipping. I want to explain why I don\u2019t think there is. What we were told in the submissions, over and over again\u2014and we had 850 submissions. It was a very, very short time frame. Last week, we were in a recess from Parliament. We sat and we listened to only some of those submissions, not all of them, because of the process. Those submissions revealed a pattern that goes something like this: if you have a person who has a broken arm, their claim is immediately accepted because it is obvious that they have a broken arm. But if you have a person who has been sexually abused repeatedly and they suffer from post-traumatic stress as a consequence, many years later this becomes an impediment to their capacity to work. That is a common scenario. The Minister\u2014not the Minister in the chair, the Hon Penny Simmonds, but the Minister responsible for this, the Hon Louise Upston\u2014was at a sexual assault centre with me last week on recess. We saw on the whiteboards in that centre the impacts of something like post-traumatic stress disorder and how much those symptoms impact on people\u2019s capacity to work and function. They\u2019re very, very real. I think we\u2019ve all accepted that as a country, I hope, but I think we still remain a little ignorant about it. The Minister wouldn\u2019t be, because she saw the same whiteboards that I did. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000960\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn that situation where a person suffers from a sexual assault, it is a complex case. We heard from the advisers in ACC that they only had time to break down the last 50 of these potential cases in the last year. They looked at them and a significant number of them are sexual assault scenarios. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000961\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf that is happening, then the person\u2014and I just want to foreshadow that I\u2019m going to have to tell the story beyond the next time, and I\u2019ll be seeking the next call. In that scenario, you have one situation which is a broken leg. Their claim is accepted and they get a whole lot of support in addition to 80 percent of their earnings. If they\u2019re an airline pilot, they do rather well. If they\u2019re on minimum wage, there is a capacity to pay a certain amount and they get that. That\u2019s how they do it. But, because they\u2019ve got a broken arm, they may get some household help. I had that, in fact, myself when I broke my arm when I was breastfeeding a baby. They gave me household help. It made a huge difference. They\u2019d get rehabilitation services. There are all sorts of additional things they get. They may get winter-warming costs. They might get taxis. They are getting a bundle of benefits that are financially significant in addition to the 80 percent earnings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000962\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen you have the person with the delayed claim. Let\u2019s take the sexual assault survivor. For that person, their claim takes five years to resolve. In that time that it is resolving, they may not be able to work because they\u2019ve broken down as a consequence of what\u2019s happening. I hope we all understand that that is real. In that situation, they will only have the Ministry of Social Development\u2019s main benefit, and it will be, as my friend from the Greens has talked about, impacted in terms of whether they\u2019ve got a partner, etc., so it will be whatever that minimum is. They may get some other benefits, like winter energy\u2014they might be eligible for it\u2014but they won\u2019t get the much richer bundle of support that they would get under ACC.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000963\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, after five years, they get their claim accepted and ACC are accepting that they\u2019ve been in default for that entire five-year period. At the moment, the arrangement has been for many years that the main benefit\u2014there\u2019s a discussion between ACC and MSD, and the amount of money that they\u2019ve had as a main benefit is taken out of the back-pay of the 80 percent of earnings before the claimant ever sees it, so they lose that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000964\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat this Government, as I understand it, is seeking to do now is to say that it is right that what MSD has been doing\u2014because this is considered income, and I\u2019d like a discussion from the Minister: I\u2019d really like to know what she thinks about the income basis and the inequity here. Because MSD only look through the lens of income under their own Act, they have been asking and insisting that the claimant pay back any other costs that they have met. If they have met accommodation costs, they will ask for it back. If they have met any counselling needs, any energy payments, anything like that, they are asking the claimant to pay.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000965\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EACC have not paid any of these amounts during that time at all. They haven\u2019t paid any of the superior bundle of rights that person will have, but they don\u2019t seek to pay it back. I\u2019d like the Minister to answer whether I\u2019m right. Am I right that ACC has financially benefited enormously in most of those situations because, during the default, they do not actually pay any of this money and, in fact, then the claimant is paying back its own support? If the claimant has taken any support at that time, they must pay it back out of their income. Am I right with regard to that? If I\u2019m right\u2014and that\u2019s what the claimant said\u2014they are infinitely worse off.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000966\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat the Government seeks to do today is entrench that inequity, where somebody who had a perfectly justified claim for five years and has missed all those benefits is also being told they are responsible for all payments above it. Am I right that there is a problem here? For the main benefit, I understand that would be a double-dip. If you got the main benefit and you got the 80 percent earnings, that would be a double-dip, but that\u2019s not what\u2019s going on. We have never allowed that to happen in this country. What the Minister seeks to entrench here is the right of MSD to take back all those extra payments that MSD has made and not compensate that person with anything that ACC should have paid in the interim.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000967\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, that seems deeply unjust to me, and I\u2019d like the Minister\u2019s explanation as to why equity is established in this way. We have an amendment on the Table, which we hope, as the Labour Party\u2014it\u2019s informed by submitters, and I\u2019d like to speak to that amendment separately. We have an amendment where we think that we can fix some of the injustice here. I\u2019d like another call, but first of all, I\u2019d love to hear the Minister explain why this is considered double-dipping and why I\u2019m wrong about this. Thank you, Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u0022bfcbb8f1cb94d2552e0a74ebba276a32\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000968\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bfcbb8f1cb94d2552e0a74ebba276a32\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (09:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Look, there\u2019s been a number of questions and a number of statements, and I want to clarify the situation. First of all, I want to make it very clear that this bill is about treating all types of income, whether ACC or other income, in the same way. It\u2019s to ensure that the system is treating any income people can rely on in the same way, to ensure fairness and equity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000969\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the questions from the Green Party member Ricardo Men\u00E9ndez March, the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) consulted with ACC as part of this process. I understand that ACC provided information to the committee about the nature of ACC claims that were available, including sensitive claims. With regard to the member\u2019s questions about partners, relationship rules are out of scope of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000970\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to make it clear that this is ensuring that longstanding policy intent underpinning MSD\u2019s approach to backdated ACC payments, and charging income against past entitlements is aligned with the general principles of the welfare system, and those are the principles of a targeted welfare system. It\u2019s clarifying longstanding practice and there will be no impact on clients compared to the current state. There will be no change. There is no difference. It is clarifying what has been longstanding intent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000971\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also just want to note that it is providing certainty in the law to remove that risk of the policy intent not occurring, so past assistance should always be reviewed when backdated ACC payments are received.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000972\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also have another comment here: MSD does not hold the ACC claim information beyond the financial information, so income will continue to be charged as per the longstanding policy and practice. Clients will not get less than they currently are entitled to based on their situation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u00225339b691325d20935187e4cbeaa7418f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000973\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225339b691325d20935187e4cbeaa7418f\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (09:20)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s astounding that the Minister in the chair would actually say that partners are out of scope of this bill when, in the Social Services and Community Committee, we literally got given information confirming that if your partner is someone on a benefit and you get an ACC claim, that partner could lose their benefit as well, because the income calculations for benefit eligibility are treated as one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000974\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWhere is a Minister that is actually aware of this bill in the Chamber to speak to this? We\u2019re not going to have a substantive debate if the Minister incorrectly says that something is out of scope. I want to ask again\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000975\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea87d800adf6a678d74108780cdda120\u0022\u003EHon Karen Chhour\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I do believe mentioning someone\u2019s absence from the Chamber is not supposed to be happening.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000976\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022023841cc13d4ed5491448882d4c6c895\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, just a note for the Chair as well that there\u2019s been a longstanding history that if the absence of a particular member in the House is vital to the debate of the House, we are able to call specific people as being absent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000977\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022749c1a0345986dbd3cf2d1bfe6090cef\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Sit down; I\u2019m going to make a ruling. I am going to make a ruling, so you can sit down. I mean, I do take the member\u2019s point around absences in the House. If I could ask members to steer away from that. I think the point has been made. I would encourage members to not make it again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000978\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253759f890581efc78fb83bedf2b13477\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I will ask the Minister to engage correctly on my question. How many partners of people on a benefit who have made ACC claims who are also on a benefit are affected by this bill? What\u2019s the breakdown of the types of benefit that they\u2019re on? We have had very surface-level engagement\u2014a little bit in the select committee around this\u2014confirming that partners are affected. I expect the Minister to be on top of it, so can she please give us a number?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000979\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ll continue with some of my other questions in relation to the provisions in clause 5. I would also like to seek her engagement to my prior question as to whether she, the Minister, sought any advice on the impact of this bill on sexual violence survivors, abuse in care survivors, or people with traumatic head injuries; the three groups that we\u2019ve received feedback from in the committee stage? I hear that officials engaged with ACC. I want to know if she, the Minister, sought any advice on the impact of this and, as a follow-up question, as to whether she sought advice that sensitive claimants would be one of the groups that would likely have some of the greatest debts imposed by the Ministry of Social Development due to the time that it takes for these claims to come back to them. Therefore, they would have accumulated quite a bit of debt due to the amount of time they would have been receiving some of the assistance outlined in clause 5.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000980\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhich takes me to my next question in relation to the provisions in clause 5: how many people that are affected in this bill, out of the 37,500-ish people, have received the disability allowance? I want to know whether the Minister thinks that the disability allowance is genuinely comparable to any support that ACC can provide for rehabilitation, because the disability allowance is normally not in line with any support that ACC can provide. The reason why I ask this is because we have heard a lot of discourse around how people access support during the time they\u2019re waiting for their ACC claim. Then the ACC claim gets put as a debt, because it covers the support that people have received, but those two supports are not comparable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000981\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo recap, did she engage in any way and seek advice on how many, and whether sexual violence survivors, abuse in care survivors, or, for example, traumatic head injury survivors were affected by this bill? How many people affected by this bill received the disability allowance? Is she able to clarify how many partners of ACC claimants have lost their benefit or have seen a reduction on their benefit as a result of the provisions of this bill, and whether she has a breakdown of the types of benefits? Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u0022ba246e12070945733d6b9d5d1baf50da\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000982\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ba246e12070945733d6b9d5d1baf50da\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (09:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. In terms of partners\u2014and I\u2019ll read some of the points out for the member\u2014if a client or their partner receive a backdated ACC payment for the same period the client received Ministry of Social Development (MSD) assistance, any MSD assistance the client and their partner received may be impacted. This is the same as it is currently. Backdated ACC payments are applied against the full main benefit rate before it has been split between a client and their partner. Like main benefits, supplementary assistance is split between a client and their partner.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000983\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen MSD charges income to assess entitlement to assistance, both the income of the client and their partner is included. This means that, if the backdated ACC payment reduces the main benefit to zero for a past period and the supplementary assistance is reviewed, a debt may be created for both the client and their partner\u2019s portion of any overpaid supplementary assistance. This is current practice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, with regard to survivors of abuse in State care\u2014and I want us to be very careful in addressing this, because it is important that these people, who have already been traumatised, are not used as a political football\u2014redress payments are made to survivors of abuse in State care, and they are not in scope of these amendments. They are not in scope. Redress payments made to survivors of abuse in State care are not considered as income or cash assets when testing entitlement to MSD. This will not change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000985\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255f3fb4079da8b8c75a220052619f205\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Just before we move on, and for the enlightenment of the committee around the points of order that were just taken before, can I refer member\u2019s to Speakers\u2019 ruling 29/1: \u201C(1) It is a convention that we do not make reference to the fact that a member is away or is not in the member\u2019s seat; but (2) if it is felt that the absence of a member is of sufficient importance, then the real or suggested importance of the absence overrides the convention.\u201D That\u2019s quite a high bar. We do have Ministers who often sub in for other Ministers as well. That point has been made, but I would like members to remember that moving on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u00225d7ff566b99dcea1bc4144833a2dc9d9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000986\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225d7ff566b99dcea1bc4144833a2dc9d9\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Musterer\u2014Green) (09:27)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can I just seek clarification whether this bar has been met, because if we had a Minister in the Chair that says something is out of scope incorrectly\u2014and I\u2019ve raised concerns about whether we have an issue with the Minister who actually introduced the bill, the Hon Louise Upston, not being in the Chamber, whether you think that actually has met the bar? We have seen literally in exchanges now where the Minister in the chair, the Hon Penny Simmonds, has incorrectly said that something was out of scope, only to then go back and claim that it wasn\u2019t.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000987\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022994cfa0483c7703ccfc2a613f521812f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: OK. Just to respond to the point of order. What we do want from the committee is, of course, conduct and engagement: conduct from members asking questions, and engagement from the Minister. I want to acknowledge that the Minister is engaging. The Minister is addressing questions. There are officials at the back who are supporting the Minister as well. At this point, I do not believe that that bar has been met.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u0022e171758efd8f7828577f2de547bfb67f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000988\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e171758efd8f7828577f2de547bfb67f\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (09:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Thank you. Just a follow-on question with regard to that use of people\u2019s\u2014or saying that they\u2019re not here. Yesterday, there was exchange in question time with the actual Minister. I was concerned that the actual Minister did not understand the nature of the change today. Is it appropriate, under that ruling, that I would bring that up in this forum? Wouldn\u2019t that override\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000989\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2d58825c46555a3c15ad674cc8cf1bc\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: What\u2019s the point of order?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000990\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002259148c075b8833606a31e9bce6878ddd\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m asking for clarity on whether that sort of situation overrides the suggestion that we don\u2019t talk about people not being present. I can\u2019t put those question to the actual person.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000991\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002262a2a2113a93e48cf7b0afdb289e6ba6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: I don\u2019t actually think that comes into it. Ministers often try to address questions and members opposite don\u2019t like what they hear. There always is a sense of frustration often in question time as well. I don\u2019t think that\u2019s related to the absence of Minsters or members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022cd7d9f4653bbcdcdf99df975547192bc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000992\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cd7d9f4653bbcdcdf99df975547192bc\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (09:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. It\u2019s good to be able to take my first call in this debate. This is a very impactful bill, and I think there have been some comments raised in this debate by the Minister for Social Development and Employment that this is not going to change the status quo. That is not correct, in the sense that we did have a situation where the High Court found that the intention of this House and Parliament had been incorrectly applied by the Ministry of Social Development (MSD). Of course, we know that MSD\u2019s intention and the policy that they were working to was consistent with their policy, but that doesn\u2019t mean that this law does not change the status quo for many hundreds, if not thousands, of people who may be impacted by these claims. So I think it\u2019s important to know that we are talking about an impactful bill and an impactful change that will affect people\u2019s lives, and that\u2019s why we have taken this proposal really seriously.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000993\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe, as members have alluded to, have had an original proposal to have this passed very quickly and then have it engaged substantively with a select committee process, and, unfortunately, what this select committee process did outline was that many of the concerns that we had and that we were not able to get sufficient information about at first reading were borne out by the submissions of people who had submitted to the Social Services and Community Committee. Further to that, even yesterday\u2014and members have referred to this, but I think it\u2019s important to note it\u2014the Minister referred to ACC providing information to the committee. Now, my understanding\u2014and members of the committee can correct me if I\u2019m wrong\u2014is that this occurred yesterday and that that information has been available to members only from that time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve looked at that information that the Minister referred to. That information is concerning because it shows that from the information that we\u2019ve been able to be provided by ACC, the majority of people that we\u2019re talking about who will be impacted by this bill are women, and they are women who have sensitive claims and so are most likely to have suffered sexual abuse. That does change the proposition, I think, for the House in relation to this bill and the way that we talk about those affected. Of course it\u2019s not entirely that group, but the statistics provided by ACC, when they looked at a group of 50 as a sample, found that around 65 percent of the people would have had sensitive claims and 70 percent would be women, and so these are the people that we are talking about today. I appreciate that there are aspects of that statistical analysis which will not be perfect, but I think that that\u2019s important for our context. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000995\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I think it\u2019s important to set out for us\u2014and I want to thank the officials who have provided advice to the Ministers and who are providing advice today in the Chamber\u2014is that there is a way that some of these concerns can be alleviated in terms of the impact on highly vulnerable people, in terms of the impact on sensitive claimants, and in terms of some of that impact that my colleague Helen White was discussing in relation to the payments that ACC has made which may have been related to recovery, and we have tabled an amendment in the name of Willie Jackson. This is a very significant amendment for the Labour Party. If the Government is not able to support this amendment, which would allow a discretion for situations of unfairness and would remove abuse in care survivors and sensitive claimants\u2014those very vulnerable people, who have already gone through what we would all acknowledge is a terrible experience, and those people on a disability allowance, where it is highly likely that that money was used for recovery and rehabilitation that would have otherwise been provided by ACC. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000996\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have put this amendment up in good faith. We would like the Minister\u2019s support for this amendment. We\u2019ve given it on notice to the Government so that they can assess this particular amendment, and it\u2019s really important for us. This is in the part that we are currently discussing. I do have some questions on clause 4, but this is in relation to clause\u00A05, and so they\u2019re the two very first clauses we\u2019re debating. If the Government is willing to support this amendment, that will be very integral for us in this debate, moving forward. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u00226c662e1056b3a421f8669a1ba78c9180\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000997\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226c662e1056b3a421f8669a1ba78c9180\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (09:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m just giving some answers to the question on numbers that the Green Party member asked for. While the Ministry of Social Development doesn\u2019t have the exact numbers of how many disabled people would be impacted, around 11,000 people had an ACC-related debt established for disability allowance between January 1998 and November 2025\u2014again, no change to how that was dealt with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000998\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of partners, the partner status data: for clients that have a partner without ACC debt, 1,146; for those that have a partner with ACC debt or supplementary assistance, 11,467; and for those with no partner, 24,925. I\u2019m just giving those numbers, again confirming that there is no change to what occurs currently. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0000999\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI note Camilla Belich\u2019s comments about it being an impactful bill rather than it being a bill that\u2019s not going to change current practice. It does not change current practice. The High Court and the Social Security Appeal Authority judgment have identified a misalignment between the Social Security Act and longstanding policy intent and practice, and so the Government has a duty to fix that and ensure that policy and law match up and are aligned. We need to ensure that the law is aligned with the general principles of a targeted welfare system, where the more income you earn, the less assistance you receive from the State. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u0022bc156aa99efc247ffa7d8aa36ab887bb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bc156aa99efc247ffa7d8aa36ab887bb\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (09:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you so much, Minister Simmonds, for engaging on the fact that this bill will impact 11,500 partners on a benefit. It is a substantive figure, and before I go on to more questions about clause 5 and one of my amendments, I have a question about the intent of the bill. I\u2019ve heard the Minister say that this is just legalising existing practice, basically, but does that make the practice morally right or just? I mean, we could apply that to many things that were wrong that were done for decades. If, say, homosexuality was actually illegal for many decades, if you were just clarifying to continue doing that, I would be standing here again and saying that that is not correct, and so can I ask the Minister: does she genuinely believe that the existing practice is correct, even when it puts sexual violence survivors into substantive amounts of debt?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy second question\u2014which she hasn\u2019t engaged with\u2014is whether she has received any information, or whether she is aware that sensitive claimants may be more likely to have greater debts with Work and Income because of the time that it often takes them to receive their ACC payments? I know that this is an extremely sensitive issue, and that\u2019s why I do think it deserves adequate engagement and recognition of who it is impacting and a recognition of the fact that, as far as I\u2019m aware\u2014but I want to know if the Minister is aware, and if she has any information to allude to the fact that sensitive claimants do take longer to get their claims and are, therefore, more likely to have greater debt. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I want to move to my first amendment, on Amendment Paper 522, which changes clause 5. This is an amendment that was brought forward after concerns from expert lawyers who echoed some of the stuff that we\u2019ve been saying since the first reading, and the reason why I wanted to bring this amendment for discussion is that it does make significant changes\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d9f706853479012a9e67c69ff81f38a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Do you have the number of the amendment?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022635c08f013107d80b8b54b940a61813f\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH\u003C/span\u003E: Amendment Paper 522.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce8d28a1b088c1cd15165b9c1d9c92a4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Amendment Paper 522\u2014cool.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227af68711544fc3f488c7e3941bc44d8e\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, thank you, Mr Chair. For this amendment\u2014and if you\u2019d just indulge me, Mr Chair, in making sure that I explain it thoroughly\u2014I am seeking as much cross-party support as I can because this is actually not necessarily just a partisan amendment from the Green Party. This is coming from actual experts who understand this issue at a deep level, and they are people who work on these issues on a regular basis. I know that they have reached out to all political parties in the hope that we can all get behind this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis amendment would actually create some limits\u2014just limits\u2014on the recovery of supplementary assistance following ACC back payments. What it does is it creates a framework where the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) isn\u2019t able to recover all or part of the supplementary assistance if the person received the payments in good faith, did not intentionally contribute to any material error\u2014and MSD is needing to have regard to all circumstances and consider whether the recovery would be inequitable. It also would allow MSD to have to consider whether these debts would alter the material position that people are in\u2014for example, whether there was any delay in getting this entitlement; the financial circumstances of the person, including whether the recovery would cause serious hardship. These back payments and the weekly back payments can often genuinely undermine someone\u2019s ability to make ends meet. If you\u2019re on the breadline\u2014if you were, say, someone who was living in a K\u0101inga Ora home, if you\u2019re somebody who was literally struggling to survive\u2014I think having consideration for the level of hardship these debts can impose is necessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAdditionally\u2014and this is why I was asking around the disability allowance\u2014the amendment would prevent MSD from recovering the disability allowance paid during the relevant period, and any supplementary assistance paid to meet costs that would generally be made by ACC. Again, I want to seek the Minister\u2019s engagement on my Amendment Paper 522, because this is a call for cross-party support to heed the calls of experts who work with survivors and people in hardship, who are telling us, time and time again, that just because this practice happened for decades, it does not make it right; and just because we\u2019re legalising the practice, it does not make it right. I\u2019d like to seek some engagement from the Minister on my Amendment Paper 522 and whether she would be inclined to support it\u2014and, if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u0022259c3b4afee7bfd4993587e069d64f7f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022259c3b4afee7bfd4993587e069d64f7f\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (09:42)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have seen the member Ricardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u2019s Amendment Paper 522. I just want to be very clear that the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) has a statutory duty to take all reasonably practical steps to recover debt. Having said that, MSD does have the discretion to look at the person\u2019s circumstances and to ensure that any repayment is done that recognises their situation, that recognises any hardship, that recognises what would be an appropriate level of repayment. MSD has that discretion; they exercise that discretion to ensure that any repayment is done in such a way as to minimise the impact on the client.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u00227e793fc27b53fe9ce4c9c55758e66497\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227e793fc27b53fe9ce4c9c55758e66497\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (09:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just seek clarity over those comments, because my understanding is that the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) has no option but to impose these debts. They could choose to work with the beneficiary to, say, either have it as being taken as a lump sum out of their ACC back payment or negotiate with the beneficiary\u2014an ACC claimant\u2014over a weekly repayment rate. Now, there is actually no discretion as to whether these debts on the supplementary assistance are applied altogether. This is why our Amendment Paper does seek to give MSD the tools to consider that hardship or, for example, the disability allowance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan I just check with the Minister in the chair that her understanding of the bill is that MSD has no option to say, \u201CWe\u2019re not going to put debt\u2014or we\u2019re not going to create this debt\u2014altogether, and maybe we\u2019ll charge ACC for it instead.\u201D, for example, if this would create hardship; or whether she\u2019s referring more to the options around whether this is, like, a debt that\u2019s imposed as a lump amount from the back payment or as a weekly repayment rate, and then there\u2019s a negotiation of those?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I have a question in relationship to the latter, around the weekly repayment rates, that maybe is what she was alluding to in her comments. It would be useful if she would clarify for us. Does she have any information around the breakdown of, historically, who has chosen to have that debt be taken out of the back payment as a lump sum, or whether it\u2019s been imposed as a weekly repayment? On the latter, I would like an understanding as to whether she has any information on the median amount of repayment rates that people have had. We know, for things like advances and other debt to MSD, there is a huge disparity among gender and ethnic lines on the weekly amount people have to pay back to MSD, where there is discretion applied on the level of repayments. We know\u2014we have this information\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278088fef189036119b9dec4ad8bdc590\u0022\u003EHon Karen Chhour\u003C/span\u003E: That is done on earnings, so it\u2019s not race or gender.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212830e384c615fc696364bc9d35fd180\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and I think the Minister on the other side of the Chamber should engage on this bill if she cares so much, rather than just throwing jabs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would say that this is important, because, if she says that the status quo is that MSD does have the ability to not impose debts if there is hardship, I want to know what she\u2019s specifically referring to, because this is not how the bill works. This would raise further concerns that I raised earlier about the understanding of the bill by the Minister and how this is actually undermining the debate that we are having. Again, I want to make a call for the Minister to engage with Amendment Paper 522. I don\u2019t believe she has engaged with the substance of the amendment, because the bill itself does not give MSD that level of discretion. This amendment would allow MSD to have that level of discretion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs a follow-up question, what I would like to seek the Minister\u2019s engagement on, as well, to add to the list\u2014I know that she said earlier that she didn\u2019t have the number of disabled people out of the 37,500-ish people affected\u2014but does she have information that shows how many people would have been on benefits that you can only qualify for if you are disabled or have a health condition? I know that some of these benefits may be historical, like the sickness benefit that we don\u2019t have any more\u2014but whether she received advice on how many people, historically, would have had debts while being on a benefit that means that they\u2019re qualified as having a disability or a serious health condition? That is very different from how many disabled people are out there, because we know there are disabled people who are on the jobseeker benefit and are unable to access those other benefits. Does she have that information, and, if so, what is the breakdown?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis would actually be in relationship to the provisions in clause 5, in my view, because, ultimately, if you are someone, say, on the supported living payment, you\u2019re far more likely to be needing that supplementary assistance. That is why this is relevant to the provisions in clause 5; ultimately, this is about understanding who is affected by clause 5 and who are the people affected by the provisions in clause 5.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo engagement on my amendment; the breakdown of benefit type; whether MSD can actually just waive those debts or whether it\u2019s just simply how those debts are established\u2014it would be really, really useful to hear from the Minister to have a constructive engagement on this debate, and in the hope that we can heed the calls of experts who work with survivors, who have asked all political parties to mitigate some of the harm that this bill is entrenching; and an ability to give MSD a bit more flexibility to consider people\u2019s hardship.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u0022f0a95961a117d7d5336b0b5471ec3db9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f0a95961a117d7d5336b0b5471ec3db9\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (09:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I made very clear at the start, when I was talking about repayments, that the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) does have a statutory duty to take all reasonably practical steps to recover debt. It is not discretion around debt; it is discretion around the repayments and taking into consideration the situation of the client. MSD already has that discretion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI think the member Ricardo Men\u00E9ndez March already answered their own issues around discretion when he said about MSD and their application of that discretion around repayments, and saying how inconsistent it was and how it wasn\u2019t evenly applied against gender and ethnicity. Therein lies the problem: when you provide more discretion to MSD, there is a possibility of inconsistencies, and, therefore, the clearer the legislation is, the better. They have the discretion already; the member has complained about how they use that discretion, and yet he is asking for more discretion. We see exactly the issue that he clarified, that he made clear: that is, the inconsistencies that can occur across how discretion is applied. So, no, we won\u2019t be accepting it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022a7f3651c2aeac4f2a92013c179ccb43c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a7f3651c2aeac4f2a92013c179ccb43c\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (09:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I am interested to hear the Government-side contributions, because I think we\u2019re certainly a long way away from a closure motion. We\u2019ve barely discussed any of the substantive detail in Part 1 at all, and Part 1 is the majority part of this bill. I am sure that they have some very valid contributions to make to this debate, and that\u2019s why they\u2019re seeking the call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question of discretion is really important. The Minister in the chair hasn\u2019t answered yet, in relation to the two amendments put forward to her that would allow discretion, whether she would support those or not. It is important to know at this stage; this is the time that we are debating these amendments. Will the Minister support this or not? Will she support discretion?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve had a slight exchange here. It did appear that she was saying there was discretion already. I wonder if she was talking about the social security regulations and if she was referring to that at all, because I have had a relatively close look at some of the regulations, specifically No. 208, but my understanding is that only occurs when there\u2019s been an error by the Ministry of Social Development (MSD), which would not be the situation in most of these particular situations. She said that the discretion is in relation to the type of repayment. If she could just clarify that that is the only existing discretion and that there is no discretion, either, in the bill currently proposed, and, additionally, if why she was referring to discretion was perhaps because she may be looking to support some of these amendments. Now I\u2019ve just lodged another amendment, which gives a generalised\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022395c23f9bc3dc5ad181db278201ba254\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003ENo.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002266f2d865320e9fce27538157c1923e3b\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014discretion to this bill. Those on the other side say, \u201CNo\u201D, but I would remind them that the discretion is in relation to people who are survivors, mainly, of sexual assault, who will be given debts due to no fault of their own, due to the passage of this legislation.The discretion, as described, I think, in all the amendments tabled, is in relation to situations of unfairness and undue hardship and inequity.When those types of situations occur, that is when MSD can apply the discretion under the amendments proposed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the Minister notes that, sometimes, discretion can be applied in a way which is unjust and that that\u2019s a risk. I don\u2019t think that is a reason\u2014or a justified reason\u2014to turn our backs on not allowing payments for very vulnerable people who\u2019ve already had terrible experiences, through no fault of their own, to suddenly be indebted, when that would be unjust, when that would be unfair, and when that would create undue hardship for those people. If the Minister is concerned about making sure that criteria apply, the amendments tabled have very, very specific criteria, which would allay some of those concerns. When applied in a uniform manner, they are unlikely to result in situations of discretion being applied unfairly, because of how prescriptive they are. They do require good faith, and they do require a situation where there is no fault on behalf of the claimant.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a serious matter. I go back again: the Minister did say that she did not agree that this was a change in procedure. Well, we do have a law, and as the law currently stands the recovery of these benefits is not permissible, and that is why the Government is bringing in this law. It is a change to the current status quo. I think it is really important to know that question of discretion. I know there are a lot of people who work in this field who are watching this debate and are keen to know: will the Minister agree? Will the Government agree to compassion in allowing discretion when there is truly a situation, assessed by MSD, of hardship? She has a few options in front of her, provided in good faith.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think we need clarification that she does not consider that the current regulatory system allows for discretion. If that\u2019s not correct, we need to have that cleared up right now, because this is going to be integrally important for how this particular piece of legislation is received and impacts the community. Discretion, and the ability of MSD to utilise discretion, is absolutely fundamentally important to how this bill will proceed, so having clarity on that is very important. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u0022d6d89100ac09795fa8762902e438a2f0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d6d89100ac09795fa8762902e438a2f0\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (09:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just before we move on from discretion, I wanted to ask the Minister in the chair whether she was aware that the amendment that the Labour Party has put up on this matter\u2014which is quite comprehensive\u2014is based on ACC discretion. While the Minister made a case that there should be no discretion because that could lead to inequity, in fact it\u2019s based on a similar provision, as I understand it, that works well in the ACC setting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIs she aware that a letter was written to the Minister by the very same experts in the area, seeking what the Labour Party has tabled as an amendment here, based on what they think will practically work in this area and make things fairer than they would otherwise be? I still haven\u2019t had an answer to my question about what the differences are between someone who has a long claim and their claim is accepted in five years versus somebody who has an accident which is apparent straight away and can be ruled on straight away.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDoes she accept they\u2019re being treated differently, and does she think that\u2019s fairer or not? If you look at the actual purposes and the intent that is at the beginning of the Act\u2014so it relates to this clause 2\u2014the reason for this clause is supposed to be that it looks at inequity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to raise an issue about accredited employers and moral hazard because this did come up during the submissions. There are lots of accredited employers out there and some of them are our meatworks, etc., so I\u2019ll use that as an example\u2014if a meatworks has somebody who has a gradual process injury, so they are impacted because they\u2019re cutting the meat and it is putting pressure and there\u2019s enough pressure that it becomes a gradual process injury under the Act, it\u2019s quite a hard one to establish because there are other things that you need to look at like was the person\u2019s shoulder going to deteriorate anyway, etc, so it takes time through a process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf it\u2019s an accredited employer and the accredited employer is paying for the cost of rehabilitation, and if we had a bad-faith situation or even just somebody who thought of it in terms of the numbers, aren\u2019t they better off just delaying the claim, in that in any situation that they can see prima facie any reason to delay, aren\u2019t they better off\u2014that accredited employer who pays their own ACC\u2014delaying the claim? Under the law as we will make it now\u2014and I take Camilla Belich\u2019s point: the law as it is now doesn\u2019t do this because the High Court has said it won\u2019t; it would only take the main benefit, but, actually, in this current situation that we are putting in place today, isn\u2019t an accredited employer put in a position where there is a moral hazard because we are making delays pay for an employer in that situation, because they don\u2019t have to pay any of the additional costs?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAt the end of the five years, they don\u2019t pay all the things they would have paid. We had an example given to us by Hazel Armstrong from Hazel Armstrong Law. She was talking about her role, also; she\u2019s on the board of the Port of Auckland and she was talking about how much benefit there is if you accept a claim early for the individual and for the rehabilitation of that person. In the Port of Auckland, they\u2019ve got gold-plated rehabilitation. People return to work much quicker but it costs the company the outlay at that time because they put in that work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf there is an employer who doesn\u2019t do that and decides delay is their best friend, aren\u2019t we making a moral hazard in this law, here? So I\u2019d love an answer to that question. I want to know, also, because we had an ACC briefing yesterday in our select committee\u2014it was after the select committee process was through and we had to report back, but we really had lots of unanswered questions. So I want to know some of the answers that I still haven\u2019t got back because it was only a 20-minute briefing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question I asked ACC is: why are you not paying for these people\u2019s extras? Why are you only passing on the 80 percent earnings? Is there a legal reason? What\u2019s going on there? I haven\u2019t received an answer to that. So I\u2019d like to ask the Minister: has she asked\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022373648cb55521e7694bb5dbb5c904eb3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The member\u2019s time has expired.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022 data-id=\u002255da0decb8a97f48f24cbbdcf4ea52b9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002255da0decb8a97f48f24cbbdcf4ea52b9\u0022\u003EORIINI KAIPARA (Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori\u2014T\u0101maki Makaurau) (09:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, t\u0113n\u0101 koe. T\u0113n\u0101 r\u0101 t\u0101tou. It is an absolute privilege to stand here to rise on behalf of Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori but on behalf of many M\u0101ori\u2014as we know, overrepresented when it comes to social welfare and many other detrimental effects that really cause pain and suffering for generations. We\u2019re not just referring to the last week since this bill came into this House, but we\u2019re drawing retrospectively\u2014pun intended\u2014on the impacts that this bill and the proposed changes, amendments by the Minister, will have going forward prospectively.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I have been a part of the select committee process and was fortunate enough to read as many of the 850-plus submissions that were put through, many of which were from M\u0101ori, submitted from wh\u0101nau M\u0101ori, individuals, partners, separated parents, widows, survivors\u2014several survivors. The harrowing stories that they shared openly with the Social Services and Community Committee, in writing and in person, cannot be ignored by this Minister or this Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne other area that cannot be ignored, that must be considered seriously with serious consideration by the Minister and by this Government, is the inclusion of a section that guarantees every New Zealander will be protected, and that is through Te Tiriti\u2014one of the many amendments put forward by Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori. This is not ideological. Te Tiriti ensures that every New Zealander is safe, is treated with great respect, and is treated equally, yes\u2014and I want to draw our attention again to that word, because that word is at the centre of the purpose, the intent, of this bill. Equity is what I understand the Minister is trying to achieve, but the stated objective of this bill is to maintain the integrity of a targeted welfare system and to ensure that people do not receive duplicate income replacements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EEquitable, to achieve equity\u2014this isn\u2019t it. This bill does not achieve that. It has been proven and shown in court and during the select committee process. It is written by legal experts who have been supporting survivors of abuse. They say that this bill does not provide equity. In fact, it provides, in perpetuity, inequity, and it also goes further to create further harm, to deepen hardship, to deepen the pain and suffering that these 37,500 people already suffer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt has been proven in the High Court that the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) was acting unlawfully. Rather than addressing that issue, we are now debating how we can scratch that and move forward but apply a retrospective lens that claws back what rightfully was paid to claimants. It wasn\u2019t a main benefit. It was a supplementary to ensure that those people accessed and had access to the right supports\u2014for instance, rehabilitation. For wh\u0101nau that scrape together the last 10 bucks to put butter on the table, actually finding services, finding the right services, for wh\u0101nau M\u0101ori\u2014we\u2019re talking about rongo\u0101. Not everybody in te ao M\u0101ori actually goes to hospitals, seeks out those sorts of supports, but the ability to access compensation as well as supplementary supports to help families in desperate need is the query. Te Tiriti\u2014one of our many amendments\u2014ensures that everybody in New Zealand and everybody impacted by this bill is treated fairly. Fairness is what we call for in the amendments that we\u2019ve put forward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister did say, and I acknowledge, that the intent of this bill is to ensure a targeted welfare system, but in her statement, simply fixing a situation where there has been an overpayment with MSD with benefit and supplementary allowance payments that are made while someone who is paid weekly ACC and someone who gets a backdated payment\u2014excuse me, I\u2019m a little bit nervous; this is my first time. The question to the Minister is: does she agree that the bill as enacted means that there is a difference between the person who gets ACC paid on time and gets backdated\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220cdea0d39d658337ba51aa969ce97d23\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The member\u2019s time has expired.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bfa5cde02f80d5c1ee5a8e7746a84b60\u0022\u003EHon Members: \u003C/span\u003EMadam Chair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229597642e1ab88bba899a415b078c06dc\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Excuse me. I was just going to suggest to the member, when your time is expiring, you can seek another call, and, if so, because the member had already started her question, I would give her the opportunity to finish the question. But I do encourage members to get to the questions earlier on, OK? Oriini Kaipara.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a9640c3c6e5f6f4a5f12b8852260cf56\u0022\u003EORIINI KAIPARA\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I\u2019ll finish the question. Does the Minister agree that the bill as enacted means that there is a difference between the person who gets ACC paid on time and gets a backdated payment; if so, is the Minister aware that in many supplementary assistance cases, it is used by people to pay for treatment and rehab for their injuries, and, when this money is paid on top of that person\u2019s weekly compensation, by forcing them to pay this money back to MSD out of their weekly compensation payments, they are paying for their own treatment and their own rehabilitation costs, and so they are worse off?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u0022c061f09de9be2c1f9425bb64896e1d66\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c061f09de9be2c1f9425bb64896e1d66\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (10:05)\u003C/span\u003E: I want to acknowledge the amendments from both the Green Party and the Labour Party with regard to additional forms of discretion. The reference to ACC discretion was made. Of course, ACC discretion is out of scope of this bill, and this bill is addressing how income is treated for benefit purposes. I just want to note that, while the two parties have put forward amendments on discretion, the Government considers that creating additional forms of discretion goes against the actual intent of this bill, which is to provide clarity and consistency in how ACC payments are treated in the welfare system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI hope that I picked up Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori\u2019s question right, about whether this bill is going to ensure fairness between the different types of ACC\u2014whether it\u2019s delayed payment, backdated payment, or ongoing payment. That is precisely the reason to ensure fairness between those two types of ACC payment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u0022a274b1fbf60ea110dea4167aec46531a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a274b1fbf60ea110dea4167aec46531a\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (10:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you so much, Madam Chair. Yeah, astonishing the members on the other side are so keen to engage in the debate\u2014but anyway. Look, I just have one clarification on my Amendment Paper 522 and the Minister\u2019s amendment which was introduced in the committee of the whole House\u2014and we haven\u2019t had a chance to debate it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust on 522, I want to ask the Minister to clarify\u2014I know that she just briefly touched on it\u2014whether it is her view that some of these debts could cause hardship. Can she acknowledge whether this is currently what she\u2019s intending to do?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMoving on to the Minister\u2019s amendment that she has introduced, I wanted to ask\u2014this kind of touches on all parts of the bill but particularly I think references some of the stuff in relationship to the Social Security Appeal Authority and the benefit review committees, etc. I may just take the opportunity to talk about her amendment right now, because it actually addresses the whole of the bill, but can I just get clarification from the Minister\u2014because this will help us know whether we need to draft a further amendment to it, and I would love to be able to do so before we get to Part 2\u2014whether the change that she is making through her amendment would also include people who have filed reviews of decisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe amendment language seems to only talk about benefit review committees, but there\u2019s often a period in which you file a review of a decision and the Ministry of Social Development hasn\u2019t had the chance to evaluate the review of the decision. For those who don\u2019t know, often there\u2019s sort of like a three-tier stage that people can go through, right? Sometimes, in my experience when I was at the front lines, once you launch a review of a decision, you may be able to get an outcome within a day. You may be able to get an outcome within a week. But sometimes it can take quite some time to get an acknowledgment. Can I just get clarity over her amendment, which does touch on all parts of the bill? I\u2019m seeing some engagement. I can leave that for the other parts, but anyway, just wanting to raise that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ll move on from the questions on her amendment and I\u2019ll go to some of the provisions in clause 5. This is specifically on subclause (1), inserting new section 198A(5)(d). I wanted to get a sense of whether she also had any information on the temporary additional support data and how many people access it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to know, again, whether she considers that the support that people can access via the temporary additional support is comparable in any way to the support people can get through ACC for things like rehabilitation, etc. The reason why I\u2019m focusing on the temporary additional support component as one of the types of supplementary assistance that is explicitly named in the bill\u2014in clause 5, and this is a new point\u2014is because, often, temporary additional support is to meet the costs that, effectively, no other type of supplement or main benefit can get you. So it can actually be used for things like, for example, transport costs, etc., to get to the doctors. My question is more whether the amount that people can get for temporary additional support and the scope of what it can be used for is comparable to the range of support they can access when they finally get their ACC claims.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is particularly important because we have heard that this is about addressing inequity between\u2014well, I disagree with the language, but this is what we\u2019ve been told\u2014people who have had access to a main benefit while waiting for an ACC claim and received support from MSD compared to people who perhaps got their claim really promptly. But my understanding is, and the High Court agrees, that a lot of this supplementary assistance is not necessarily comparable and it is just because people needed it while they waited for their claims to come through. So if she has any data on the temporary additional support specifically\u2014so how many people needed it, maybe the range of things that she\u2019s aware it can cover, and whether it\u2019s comparable, that would be particularly useful. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI know that she may choose to address her amendment in another part of the bill, but I would none the less like some engagement on it at any point in this debate. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u00229a9cdbf42ae5e6bf42e3c95463ab2ebe\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229a9cdbf42ae5e6bf42e3c95463ab2ebe\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (10:12)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for the question from the Green Party member about the savings provision, and, of course, the amendment came about because of the very issues that the member talked about, that was heard from submitters at the Social Services and Community Committee. The inclusion now has been made to those who have made application for a review by the benefits review committee, and they include those who have filed. So just absolutely clarifying that for the member. I will wait for some additional information from the officials regarding the temporary additional support data.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022 data-id=\u002243a93e0fa7d27df7a8ffe81b16307107\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002243a93e0fa7d27df7a8ffe81b16307107\u0022\u003ESUZE REDMAYNE (Junior Whip\u2014National) (10:12)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220919a9645c77e30062292fa656229fa0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I think we are getting towards the end of this part, members. There are likely some questions on the two schedules, clauses 6 and 7; if we can move on to those while we wait for the Minister to get her advice from the officials.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u00224896286cf8f9c02b06c9185149d51595\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224896286cf8f9c02b06c9185149d51595\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (10:13)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I will move to clause 6, but I\u2019ve actually got a question which is on new section 198(5)(b) and (c), inserted by clause 5. and that\u2019s with regard to the issue of the winter energy payment. That came up in the submission process because people who have been disabled are often in a situation where they need warmth, and that is often paid for by ACC. So it\u2019s a very\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255da53c3754313189e7162f2a7670d96\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: So what\u2019s the question?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264620bda1da85d21f93165f474f03d71\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: I want to know from the Minister in the chair whether she considered that an issue like the winter energy payment is something that might have been excluded or could be excluded at this stage, because there\u2019s such a correlation with recovery from an injury. So it\u2019s something that is a really direct example of someone paying for their own rehabilitation. I\u2019d be very keen to know what was discussed with regard to the winter energy payment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen if we move to replacement Schedule 3, inserted by clause 7, if we look at (1A), we have \u201CMSD must, in calculating a person\u2019s weekly income under subclause (1), determine the period or periods to which any income (other than annual \u2026 pay income) relates based only on\u2014\u201D, and then there\u2019s a very long example of how they must do it. First of all, I would like to know from the Minister, why \u201Cmust\u201D\u2014why have we been so directive in that situation? Because then we go on to (2) to say, \u201CIf MSD cannot determine the period \u2026 to which the income relates\u201D. It sounds, to me, like what the drafters are trying to deal with there is that it\u2019s a guessing game and that became very apparent in the process we were going through\u2014that to calculate after all this time is actually really difficult. So there has been an additional part here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI wanted to contrast that and ask: can the Minister explain why they would not be able to determine periods and periods of income that relate? What is the logic for that exclusion? Am I right that it is because it\u2019s really, really difficult to do? And so MSD\u2014we were told that the reason we were doing this was it was just going to be a nightmare, administratively, to actually change things for people away from longstanding practice. There\u2019ve been a whole lot of people who had money clawed back and there would be a lot of work involved in doing it, because it\u2019s so uncertain what was going on. Isn\u2019t this an example of it being a nightmare the other way where there\u2019s got to be calculations and then there\u2019s uncertainty? Could I please understand that situation? I\u2019d be really grateful for an answer on those before I moved on. I do appreciate that the Chair often looks for a to and fro. Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022877261c2973dbc1176494de1663a382f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022877261c2973dbc1176494de1663a382f\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (10:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to note that we have had a few generalised questions around specific amendments that are in relation to this part, but there are a number of clauses that we haven\u2019t touched on at all, so my intention is to ask specific questions on those clauses.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EJust also to clarify for the Minister in the chair, the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper\u2014is that to be debated in Part 1? Because if we moved on to Part 2, we wouldn\u2019t be able to significantly discuss that. If we could get just some clarity in relation to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e4bff0723e11ea5cf146ceaa009ff50\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: It does straddle both, and there has already been commentary on the Amendment Paper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a6ee35f21a3e09412497571e3addc150\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I\u2019m aware of that, but I just wanted to know if it\u2014so that\u2019s actually really helpful to know that it is in Part 2 as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do have some specific questions that I wanted the Minister to answer in relation to these earlier questions on Part 1, and I think that these haven\u2019t been touched on. If we look at clause 4, which is the first section, we\u2019ve received some information from the Minister around partners and the amounts a week that that they would receive. I think we can probably move on from that section. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf we look at clause 4(4), we see that we look at what is a specified benefit under this particular Act. The question that I have is in relation to the kind of temporary benefits and the discretionary benefits that do not form part of the main types of benefit that would normally be considered, which are more usually described as a specified benefit. Obviously, we have the disability benefit and then we have the winter energy payment, and we have the accommodation supplement. But those discretionary benefits which are also going to be covered by this order\u2014has the Minister received any information as to the types of situations that those particular such benefits would apply? I think that is important in terms of the argument that we will have probably throughout this bill\u2014that it is really important to know and identify whether the ACC payment that has resulted in the debt was actually as a result of people using what would otherwise be utilised as a payment. So if someone was on ACC, they would have received money for recovery, and it might be that there\u2019s some further information around those less common types of payments that might make it clearer as to how that was utilised, and that is really important to the effectiveness of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, one thing we haven\u2019t discussed at all is the issue of holiday pay. I don\u2019t believe we\u2019ve discussed that issue at all. This does apply to holiday pay, and there\u2019s a relatively complex discussion of how that holiday pay will be calculated in relation to whether it will be covered under this particular bill. The way that I had understood it is that people must have received their actual salary for their holidays and that is the only way that a holiday would be included within this, but it might be that that is incorrect. There is reference, in addition to that, to public holidays, and, obviously, some people are paid for public holidays and some people aren\u2019t. Some guidance from the Minister on how that works, in relation to this, would also be helpful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAdditionally, we had the partners out of scope, and then they were in scope. Is this something that\u2019s also taken into account? What about other types of payments, when people are on parental leave or other types of Government assistance? Is there an interaction with that in the bill? I think there are some outstanding matters in relation to the nuts and bolts of the calculation, which, while we have been looking at the high-level issues, have not yet been touched on at all within this debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u002242ec499d8608e964b1e219394ce2aa90\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002242ec499d8608e964b1e219394ce2aa90\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (10:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, thank you. With regard to temporary additional support that the questioner from the Green Party was asking about, there are 10,963 people who were receiving temporary additional support and who also received backdated ACC payments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWith regard to Helen White\u2019s comments, I\u2019m just confirming, again, that this is confirming what is a longstanding policy intent when calculating a person\u2019s weekly income. The Ministry of Social Development (MSD) has to charge that income for the period that it represents and account for scenarios where MSD is not able to determine the period of a person\u2019s income that it represents. They must determine the appropriate period to charge that income, having regard to the extent to which it was earned in that period or those periods, the extent to which other entitlements to it arose in respect of that period or periods, and the period or periods for which it was otherwise received, acquired, paid, provided, or supplied. The member asked: when a period can\u2019t be determined, what sort of example would that be? For example, something like a gift for a relative doesn\u2019t relate to any specific period.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002206cc0d0725e265a5b40ac12c1c6aed73\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I take the next call, can I please encourage members to move forward. We are now starting to go backwards. That is becoming repetitive. This is a warning that the debate is becoming repetitive.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u00228212dc2a8076b7eb70e10589da16ecd7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228212dc2a8076b7eb70e10589da16ecd7\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (10:23)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. We have not talked about the retroactive nature of some of these provisions at all, from what I can recall. The issue is connected with the amendment that has been made because the amendment from the Minister herself is to widen the scope of the people who are able\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226520e8c8ad2f5477c1e6338cf9217d7d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: What clause are you speaking to?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224423e1fcd94e52f33a7b39a3545c3e81\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, I\u2019m speaking to the amendment and the retroactivity of cutting off the claims.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022abef352a046b869c1641f59af4e178c9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Is that Part 2?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbaacc63b61deeca3b6333fcd2d9e90f\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: You just indicated that we were discussing the amendment in this part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a36f1e0473ff13eae72b81f52ead873\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister\u2019s amendment\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002295f00d6a21f7a6e24f078e14787ef38b\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 528. I can deal with the retrospective aspect in the next part and just deal with the amendment if that\u2019s helpful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad1f01ddd926cdce0c4e21db0a68037f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, because retrospective\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0026bfede981fdc311ab0126f22dc41\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002245119dfa92c0dd1760003ccfbba74106\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014is in Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e12d00f32c28eab1ba8e926e92f428f8\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: Lovely. I\u2019m very happy to do that. We thank the Minister for making that amendment, but what it does is it captures a group of people who have got claims in the works, basically. It is a situation that seems to me to suggest that the Minister accepts it was not just to cut people off who were in that position and that there\u2019s an acceptance that it is unjust. Presumably, they would be double-dipping too\u2014if there was really any double-dipping going on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d like the Minister in the chair to answer that question. Why has that amendment been made? Is that a concession that these people are unjustly affected in that situation? Are they\u2014those people that are now captured, which is a slightly wider circle\u2014also the people who are going to now double-dip? I would really like a straight answer because I\u2019ve had no answers on double-dipping. It\u2019s not an answer to say that this is the practice that\u2019s been\u2014that was a justification for it. I want to know: what\u2019s the story? Are they actually in a situation where it will be accepted that these people will be double-dipping but that\u2019s OK because they\u2019ve got their process in the works and it\u2019s down to a High Court ruling that was itself illogical; or is it, in fact, a group of people that we need to expand? In which case, I would like to know whether the Minister has considered other expansions of this group. The ones who were really vulnerable couldn\u2019t have known that they had to make a claim, because, in fact, this happened so quickly, but there\u2019ll be a whole group of people who are just as impacted and who don\u2019t know. Did she consider a pathway through for those people who are in that situation now and who were impacted by that decision when she was considering this particular amendment?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI don\u2019t want to detract from the fact that I\u2019m happy to see an amendment on the Table that gives a few more people their rights under the law, but what was the logic for this particular carve-out? I am very keen to hear why it wasn\u2019t applied to others and whether others were considered in the greater scheme of things. Is it an amount of people? How many people are affected? What we heard from ACC is that they were only looking at the last year and they were only looking at 50 people. Is it that it\u2019s considered that that will help sexual assault survivors? Is there some sort of logic there, because that is the greatest number in that period and that they\u2019re more likely to know? I\u2019d really like to know.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, just with regard to the sexual assault issue, I\u2019d really like to know: was there a discussion with the Minister who is involved in the prevention of sexual and family violence about this impacting on people who are the victims of that violence? I\u2019d really like to know. Was there any discussion with that Minister about the nature of this and the impact on those survivors, because she\u2019s deeply committed to that area and is working in it? It would seem logical given the numbers, or was that sort of impact just not known to the Minister? We only found out about it after our report was done. Thank you, Minister. I really want to hear the answers to those questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022 data-id=\u0022ab6e2306646cf84f8a4a69e446e50faf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ab6e2306646cf84f8a4a69e446e50faf\u0022\u003EDAN BIDOIS (National\u2014Northcote) (10:28)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256787016005b4da79aef1a5e1b531537\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m not going to take that closure motion just yet, but it is very close.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022546c80bb9f4d6d51577c871c554f07e7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022546c80bb9f4d6d51577c871c554f07e7\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (10:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have a very specific question around clause 7, \u201CSchedule 3 amended\u201D. When we\u2019re looking at \u201CPeriods to which income (other than annual holiday pay income) relates\u201D, I want to focus specifically on the overall section. First of all, what I would like to know, in terms of clarification, is: when we are talking about the income and particularly the extent\u2014for example, replacement subclause (1A)(a) says, \u201Cthe extent to which it was earned in that period or those periods;\u201D. When we are looking at that, particularly in the context of ACC, is that granted income or is that payable income? Because those two things would be considered different in that context.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, moving on\u2014just very quickly\u2014to touch on replacement subsection (2), it does say that \u201CIf MSD cannot determine\u201D, it may use other alternative measures, but I want to check that with the Minister because there\u2019s no example given. A table of the sort that we see under (1A)(b) would have been helpful in terms of how the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) uses alternative periods or has regard to different periods in order to determine the period or periods in which an income relates if they cannot determine it. Those are my two questions, at this stage, around clause 7, \u201CSchedule 3 amended\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022 data-id=\u00222fcec84f40633956288485d0c5d92f73\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222fcec84f40633956288485d0c5d92f73\u0022\u003EORIINI KAIPARA (Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori\u2014T\u0101maki Makaurau) (10:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, thank you. I also wish to propose an amendment to Part 1, Part 7\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea5e6fb0da44aa23299b8e493cb36bf3\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: Clause 7.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba573da245eff1e9e1f55de4fee9ba1a\u0022\u003EORIINI KAIPARA\u003C/span\u003E: Clause 7\u2014thank you. It\u2019s in regard to what my colleague here to my right touched on, in clause 7(2), replacement clause (1A)(2): \u201CIf MSD cannot determine the period\u201D. Now, is there scope there to consider, knowing that the majority of the people\u2014there are a large amount of M\u0101ori being impacted by this bill, and many others; there are a lot of M\u0101ori who are going to suffer by these amendments. The proposal is, in clause 7, which amends clause 13(2) of Schedule 3\u2014on page 5, after line 29\u2014to please input: \u201C2(a) MSD develops an operational guidance for determining the period to which income relates in partnership with M\u0101ori, including iwi, hap\u016B and M\u0101ori service providers.\u201D This also ensures that partnership at that high level is implemented practically and pragmatically in law, in legislation. It allows M\u0101ori, especially iwi post-settlement, to ensure that they can act with courage, but also to take responsibility and help their wh\u0101nau, which they want to do. This is really referring to ensuring that there is equity across this entire bill, and particularly in this Part 1, proposed new clause 7(2A) of Schedule 3 of the Act, in Amendment Paper 513.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u00228acc3863c2e0b6f9916819021bed23e9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228acc3863c2e0b6f9916819021bed23e9\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (10:32)\u003C/span\u003E: I want to note that in the notification from ACC, the Ministry of Social Development always knows what period the payment relates to. ACC determines that period. In terms of the example, I had given an example earlier of where it can be difficult to determine a period\u2014things like a series of gifts from family might be where it\u2019s difficult to determine the period.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn terms of the paid parental leave question and the holiday pay question from Camilla Belich, paid parental leave is treated as income in the benefit system, and the bill is intended to treat holiday pay as other income, but there needs to be the bespoke provisions in here because of the nature of holiday pay, which can be earned in a different period to when it is paid.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u00228c809216889620bb30a3458106e921dd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228c809216889620bb30a3458106e921dd\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (10:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you so much, Madam Chair. I have some questions on clause 7, and I will also be touching on some things that are yet to be addressed, including a couple of amendments I haven\u2019t had a chance to speak to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe first one is\u2014if the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind clarifying, on clause 7(2), replacement clause (1A)(b) of Schedule 3 of the Act\u2014whether, in determining \u201Cthe extent to which any other entitlements to it arose in, or in respect of, that period or those periods\u201D, the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) also has the opportunity to assess whether someone hadn\u2019t received their full and legal entitlements as part of that process? I raise this because often when a case manager or case worker may be looking at someone\u2019s entitlement, they may actually realise that someone may have been entitled to something that they haven\u2019t received. I\u2019m just checking whether the provisions in clause 7 are only to be used for the purposes of establishing a debt, or whether MSD could actually determine, \u201CHey, it turns out we should have been giving you a bunch of support that we didn\u2019t.\u201D, and that also gets to be addressed as part of that process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second one is in relation to\u2014the Minister\u2019s amendment touches a little bit on it, but she hasn\u2019t addressed that, and I think clause 7 is the best place for us to potentially address it\u2014the interactions between the mandatory reviews that are coming into place in March and how this works. Could the Minister in the chair elaborate on the mandatory review policy and the interaction with these, basically, assessments of periods to which income relates in the provisions of clause 7\u2014whether there\u2019s a relationship to those and whether she would like to speak to the implementation of mandatory reviews and how they interact with this bill, as proposed in her amendment. This is particularly important because, obviously, those mandatory reviews will have significant impacts on MSD staff and people on the benefit, and they are mentioned in her amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are a couple of amendments in Part 1 that I really need to speak to before we move on, because they matter to us and they matter to the people we serve. The first one is Amendment Paper 524, which I haven\u2019t spoken to yet. Amendment Paper 524 is very specifically asking that, in clause 5, the entitlement does not relate to a sensitive claim, to survival of abuse in care, or the beneficiary having been a victim of crime. I wanted to know whether the Minister\u2014524 is the amendment. Thank you\u2014I appreciate the Minister checking. The reason for that is that I hear comments around how this is simply entrenching existing practice, but I guess it goes back to a question that she hasn\u2019t engaged with from earlier\u2014before the current Chair was in the Chamber, I believe\u2014about whether she believed the existing practice was right. That\u2019s why 524 is an amendment that I am proposing and that I would like to seek some engagement with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne last thing that I haven\u2019t had engagement from the Minister on and that I do want to reiterate to just see if the Minister would like to engage on this issue\u2014it deeply matters to me and, I know, to other members\u2014is the amount of debts that are established as a result of the provisions in clause 7. Would she be able to outline what some of these quite large amounts of debts are\u2014what are we talking about? Do we have people that have debts in the amount of $30,000-plus? You know who these people are. It goes back to an earlier question I asked that has not been addressed, which is whether sensitive claimants are likely to have a greater amount of debt, and whether the Minister has that understanding or otherwise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason this relates to clause 7 is because, ultimately, we\u2019re talking about the calculation of the period of the person receiving that income and supplementary assistance in clause 7, so as part of calculating that period, we\u2019re looking at the reality that the longer that period is, the larger the debt is also likely to be. Therefore, I want the Minister to outline which groups of people are likely to have a greater period being assessed as part of the provisions in clause 7 that may lead to them having large debts. Are those people more likely to be sensitive claimants? Again, if she would like to comment or address the range of debts that we have, particularly in the higher brackets, and what kind of level of debts we\u2019re talking about, that would be really useful to get the Minister\u2019s engagement on. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u00220bd381ae256e9f8b17f1c2a82b2103d7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220bd381ae256e9f8b17f1c2a82b2103d7\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (10:38)\u003C/span\u003E: I just want to clarify again that we are ensuring alignment\u2014this bill is assuring alignment\u2014with current policy and practice. We are not here debating whether a targeted welfare system is appropriate or not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022024ed1d4cb685ee66d4470e5ef7989f9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022024ed1d4cb685ee66d4470e5ef7989f9\u0022\u003ETODD STEPHENSON (Whip\u2014ACT) (10:38)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202e63d81558f3c237d8f31b4a9e751b0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Part 1 set out on Amendment Paper 528 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a960f186864da1f731ca0effb1257ddd\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Oriini Kaipara\u2019s amendment inserting new clause 4AAA set out on Amendment Paper 509 is out of order as being outside the scope of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Ricardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u2019s amendment to clause 5 set out on Amendment Paper 524 be agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c137b3b8dc8644ead6d36a6422f7d762\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Ricardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u2019s amendment to clause 5 set out on Amendment Paper 525 is out of order as being contrary to the principles and objects of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting subsection\u00A0(1A) into new section 198A be agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220dc88a719f4accf188f1d9bd0c9581e5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting subsection (1B) into new section 198A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002284c785f3d8e5f84f6a558e344f127a9f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting subsection (2B) into new section 198A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af05bfa710bc9f7f49855eea8fc2ebef\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting subsection (2C) into new section 198A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d94c888c4b00f30fe2428d1832733eb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting subsection (3A) into new section 198A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d6238a3dcc260bcf48cc98979aa81c4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting subsection (3B) into new section 198A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ccfae58f0ab3db081bf3460e1c7f304\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting subsection (3C) into new section 198A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228288895ad2a137cda9a8d4f468911069\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting subsection (3D) into new section 198A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e131e070890949c02526870d8f0e5fdb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting subsection (3E) into new section 198A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229e0074969d51b4d4624197507e316d78\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willie Jackson\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting paragraphs (c) to (f) into new section 198A(2) and inserting subsection (4A) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a1b65fef95879ed570b4ad3441aac54\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s amendments to clause 5 set out on Amendment Paper 518 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261a41880935b5327236c8233be55f579\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s amendment to clause 5 set out on Amendment Paper 511 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220dc4fbda5e663ad8bc48abe47d5fd1d8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s amendment to clause 5 set out on Amendment Paper 515 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002209eb739c1a13897edb036fa3bb5d21b3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s amendment to clause 5 set out on Amendment Paper 516 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022584dccbbd6d4c4a9fc34ee9679e6ce10\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Ricardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u2019s amendment to clause 5 set out on Amendment Paper 526 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c323926caf008e4b84182a9be54990d1\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s amendment to clause 5 set out on Amendment Paper 517 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226dde6226758df491e2fbfba33c4cc058\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s amendment to clause 5 set out on Amendment Paper 519 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af2b5a18998240c01abd62f2e3825065\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Camilla Belich\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting subsection (6) into new section 198A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1088c80a914cd1dbfc6b7953bbac422\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Ricardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u2019s amendment to clause 5 set out on Amendment Paper 522 is out of order as being contrary to the principles and objects of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Camilla Belich\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 6(2), deleting \u201Cor an accredited employer\u201D from new paragraph (b), be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da3a86cfcd7f1147c110711c3e724265\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Oriini Kaipara\u2019s amendment to clause 7 set out on Amendment Paper 514 is out of order as being contrary to the principles and objects of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s amendment to clause 7 set out on Amendment Paper 513 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Part 1 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c93fe9bfe32c5eabae27d16165270612\u0022\u003ECommittee of the Whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a241fbec9f1a9070feb129d3ad591021\u0022\u003EPart 2 Amendments relating to transitional, savings, and related provisions, and the Schedule\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228564d73c7ca8494c96e46fe36c240046\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to Part 2, the debate on clause 8\u2014\u201CAmendments relating to transitional, savings, and related provisions\u201D\u2014and the Schedule. The question is that Part 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u0022c5f4cba75931c74f3ae24a5aa788a3f3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c5f4cba75931c74f3ae24a5aa788a3f3\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (11:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you so much, Mr Chair. I want to go back to the Minister\u2019s amendment because, at the end of the day, it touches a lot on Part 2. First of all, can I ask the Minister in the chair, in the saving provision changes that she is proposing, how much money will likely or potentially be considered as part of that, right? So we\u2019ve got the amounts that are potentially being considered by the Social Security Appeal Authority, and now we\u2019ve got the ones in this provision that are part of the benefits review committee. I would like to understand whether she did any work to understand how much money would be in question here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EEarlier, I actually asked a question, and I just want to triple-confirm with the Minister, because I\u2019m particularly concerned that the answer I got given may have been incorrect. Now, if I look at page 10 of her Amendment Paper 528, the Schedule, \u201CNew Part 11 inserted into Schedule 1\u201D, clause 108, \u201CEffect on proceedings\u201D, it says, \u201CClauses 105 to 107 apply to proceedings before a benefits review committee (BRC), the appeal authority, or a court only if those proceedings are begun on or after the changeover.\u201D, and then it kind of talks about, in subclause (2), the same thing. Earlier, I asked about whether people who have lodged a review of decision would be captured in this, but my understanding is that the proceedings of the benefit review committees do not start, necessarily, when someone lodges a review of decision; the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) determines, after a review of decision, whether this will go to a benefit review committee. This is particularly important because during the select committee process, we did get a breakdown of how many reviews of decisions have been lodged, how many of them were waiting for a hearing, and how many were in front of the Social Security Appeal Authority. We also found out that people who were lodging these things for the purposes of challenging the dates established by this practice were waiting, on average, considerably longer than others. In her amendment, I do not see a specific reference to a review of decision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I am concerned about is that you have got people that would have literally filled out the form, haven\u2019t heard back, and may be excluded by this new amendment, which, in the Minister\u2019s own words in the second reading debate, was brought forward because of the concerns that were raised by submitters and members during the one-week select committee process. Confirmation of this is critical to understanding our support and satisfaction with this amendment and whether it generally honours the contributions by submitters. If she has excluded people who have lodged a review of decision, I would be keen to know whether the Minister\u2019s intent would be to support any amendments presented by us to include review-of-decision documents that have been presented to MSD. Clarity over that would be useful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI go back to my earlier question around the dollar figure that we\u2019re talking about through the inclusion of the benefit review committees, which is the new language in the Minister\u2019s amendments when it comes to the saving provisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I wanted to understand is whether the Minister would confirm whether MSD had proactively let people know, after the High Court decision and this bill being introduced, that the existing practice was unlawful and that they could challenge it. This also has affected the number of BRCs and Social Security Appeal Authority numbers that we\u2019re talking about in the savings provisions outlined in Part 2. Is the Minister aware whether MSD took any steps to let beneficiaries know of the High Court decision and that their practice had been unlawful and that they would be able to challenge this through any process; if not, why did MSD not let people know that the practice was unlawful and that they could be eligible to actually receive quite substantive amounts of money back? If that is the case, I wonder whether the current amendments still leave out people who would have been legally able to challenge these debts but just may not have been aware, because I would say that the layperson is not necessarily following proceedings in the High Court.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo those are my three sets of questions that I hope the Minister can engage with to a full extent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u0022c558197bb4ef7f177333add5ff996354\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c558197bb4ef7f177333add5ff996354\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (11:06)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019ll just confirm what I said to the member\u2019s question regarding the provisions, the amendment, and the expanded provisions. For avoidance of all doubt: they are reviews that are filed with the benefits review committee, including those at the internal review stage, so there is no doubt they are those that are filed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe Ministry of Social Development have undertaken some very high-level costings based on the reassessment for the first 39 people, and anticipate that these expanded savings will cost an additional $2.1 million to expand the savings provision to another 91 people. So that\u2019s, at a very high level, the cost of the expansion of the Amendment Paper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c83a326e20548516afb4fd7f16c487b1\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: What\u2019s the figure?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b9001ff1a0bc39d27ba4e932d171765f\u0022\u003ECamilla Belich\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c55de90a515b1ed0090155ee78baf27a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Camilla Belich.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224fee289758473d4000bcc15ba84c6f06\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, I don\u2019t think the member heard: $2.1 million.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u002283e9342fe4cfdfdb71aa2c83d7d92e8e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002283e9342fe4cfdfdb71aa2c83d7d92e8e\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (11:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. It\u2019s good to be able to take a call in Part 2, which, obviously, does cover some significant parts of this Act. I think it is important to note that although there has been a policy rationale articulated by the Minister in relation to this particular bill, and the rationale for the retrospective nature of this bill, the fact is that the High Court has determined that with the legislation as it applies in New Zealand at the moment, and since the passage of the primary legislation in 2018, it would have been possible to change the law in order to be consistent with the objectives of the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) and the policy that that wanted to implement, without having a retrospective element to this bill. It could have been a decision that the Government made in relation to these transitional provisions and commencement, which are in the Schedule, \u201CNew Part 11 inserted into Schedule 1\u201D, clause 104 to actually have this bill apply to future events and to change the law to align with policy of the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is an important point, because, essentially, what we\u2019re having here at the moment is the Government saying that there are a certain set of rules that applied at the time that these particular payments were made and that we\u2019re going to go back in time and we are today going to change those rules so that different rules apply. So things that were done in good faith over that time can be covered. I think this is a fundamental point of Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlthough we\u2019ve heard from the Minister, repeatedly, that this is no change to the current practice of MSD, there is a way that the Government could have put forward a bill which did not have this element of retrospectivity whilst making the position consistent. I think the committee deserves to know the rationale for that. I would imagine that it is partly due to the cost of that, and we\u2019ve got some exclusions to that, and the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper is relevant to this because this does expand the group of people who would not have these rules apply to them. But we need to hear the policy rationale for that. As we know, retrospective legislation is not the norm in this House. I\u2019ve read the Attorney-General\u2019s New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet, which I don\u2019t feel sufficiently addressed\u2014it certainly didn\u2019t find that there was a breach. But also, at the time\u2014and I think this is important\u2014she didn\u2019t have the information available to her on the types of people impacted by this bill, and, as we\u2019ve said, those are mainly women and mainly people who are victims of assault and of sensitive claims. This is a serious matter, and the retrospectivity of this means we could be going back some time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to know from the Minister the rationale in relation to this section, and also if she\u2019s had any advice as to the period of time that this would actually apply for this policy: will there be people who received these payments in 2018\u2014who will actually be going back that far\u2014who will be impacted by this? I do have an amendment on the Table, but I may wait to see what the Minister says in relation to the policy justification before going over it. I do think that it is a serious decision to bring retrospective legislation to the House. It is something that is out of the norm, and it does require good policy rationale in order to justify it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u00229cf36cd5245e5c96c9070156bbc592dc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229cf36cd5245e5c96c9070156bbc592dc\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (11:11)\u003C/span\u003E: I want to look further at the issue of retrospectivity, because it is so unusual that we do that in this House\u2014for good reason. I\u2019m looking at clause 106 in particular, \u201CValidation of certain pre-commencement decisions\u201D. We\u2019re validating the law, as I understand it. We\u2019re validating the practice over what the law has found is unlawful behaviour in that situation. I would love to know what the rationale is, but I\u2019d also like to talk about the practicalities of that. I suspect the rationale is that there\u2019s a lot of administration involved in going back.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor the benefit of the public, this is a situation where the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) has been clawing back, for many years, moneys from beneficiaries that have been paid out, and they\u2019ve been doing it unlawfully. They shouldn\u2019t have been taking the money that is those extra payments; they were only entitled, as I understand it, to take the main benefit. They\u2019ve been taking real money off real people, and today what we\u2019re doing is saying that was OK regardless of their circumstances and impact. I would really like to know whether the Minister, faced with the fact that it was going to be hard to go back and repay people what should never have been taken off them under the law, has thought about some practical ways around that that might narrow the number of claimants.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor example, we could have looked at people who had a lot of money taken off them. We could have gone to the ones that had had a significant amount\u2014so, say, over $5,000 or $10,000. We could have just looked at them and ring-fenced them so that we were narrowing the amount of work to be done, but we would recognise that that\u2019s a significant amount of money that had been unlawfully taken off people. I\u2019d love to know whether any work was done in terms of looking at it in terms of the wood for the trees\u2014so not looking at every claim, but could we have looked at those big amounts where there\u2019s been a clawback? We must know what the clawback was already. That doesn\u2019t seem to be that hard a thing to find out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen I wondered, also, whether we could have done that with regard to our most vulnerable\u2014if we looked at people who have been, for example, on a benefit for a long time, or for the duration of the period. Those are the people who haven\u2019t necessarily been rehabilitated in the time. Could we have excluded them and paid them? What we seem to have done is chosen a group of people who are probably our most well-informed, who have got on to it and have lodged a review in the process. That seems to me to be inherently unequal, because they are not necessarily the people who have suffered the most damage. I genuinely want to know whether that is something that the Minister would be prepared to do, and how that stacks up against the usual caution about retroactivity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would also like to know whether there was any liaison with ACC over these issues, because it really concerned me, in the discussion that I had with MSD advisers during the select committee process, that when we asked about that, it seemed as if the operation of MSD and ACC were acting in silo. Over something like this, how much discussion was there with ACC about the practicalities of that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe also have got rid of what used to be there in the law, which was a catch-all, which was the Judicature Act\u2019s savings clause. It basically said, under that Act, that if you\u2019d spent money in good faith, there wasn\u2019t a capacity to claim it back, and that has been part of our law since, I think, 1908. It was in statutory form. It is an equitable principle. I don\u2019t want to keep going beyond these points except to say, can I just check in: given that that check and balance was gone, the Judicature Act, and there\u2019s not really an equivalent any more, was it something that was considered?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, finally, I want to go to the point of a window for the claims. We\u2019ve heard that we\u2019ve decided what claims were in as of the date, and this definitely goes to the retroactive nature of it. What was wrong with having a window for claims that said, \u201CWe\u2019re on notice now that this is going to change. But if you have a claim, and you could have done that in combination with the significant nature of the amount\u2014if you have a claim that you think is over $10,000 or $5,000\u2014then you have six months to get your review in.\u201D? That would have been an opportunity to get the most important cases through. I want to know: was that considered, having a window rather than slamming the door shut with no notice, and particularly in combination with retroactivity? Thank you. I\u2019d be very keen to hear the answers to this question, Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u00221fb8bbd28eef540bf4778a3cb7abbf2d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221fb8bbd28eef540bf4778a3cb7abbf2d\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (11:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019ve got a relatively technical question, and I am just mindful that the Minister in the chair is engaging with her officials. OK, cool, awesome.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust on Part 11 of Schedule 1, does the entitlement in clause 105(3)\u2014this is page 8, if we\u2019re looking, for example, at the Minister\u2019s amendment, which means the whole bill. I\u2019m looking at wanting to know whether the provisions in there include an entitlement to \u201Ctreatment or rehabilitation\u201D or simply \u201Cweekly compensation\u201D. Then I want to know how this relates to the provisions in Part 1, particularly new section 198A, which doesn\u2019t just include income replacement but also includes disability allowance and other treatment and rehabilitation-related needs. Basically, the question here is: is the intent of the bill simply about requiring repaying injury-related needs from people from weekly compensation or not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThese are two quite different things, right? There\u2019s the loss of weekly earnings that are compensated through the payment, but also there\u2019s a cost of rehabilitation, which I think is really specific support that is unlocked by ACC. I\u2019m particularly concerned as to whether the intent is to\u2014I know we gave an example in the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt says literally, for example, an entitlement to weekly loss of earning compensation, but there\u2019s no mention of rehabilitation, and I want to understand whether that was the intent or otherwise, and if it isn\u2019t the case to include the cost of rehabilitation, whether she would then allow people to be able to have access to those and for those to not be affected by the clawbacks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things that I am also particularly interested in, and I haven\u2019t had engagement with the Minister on, is on the range of debts imposed by Part 2. There hasn\u2019t been engagement on the upper end of debts that are imposed and who is particularly affected. I\u2019ve continuously sought engagement from the Minister on this and haven\u2019t been able to get an engagement or answer from her on it. The reason for the question, I\u2019ll reiterate, is that I am particularly concerned that the higher end of these debts are likely to be carried by women who are sexual violence survivors. I do think this is such a delicate and important point that we need to have engagement to traverse, and it relates to the savings provisions in Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI know that in the select committee period, we had a bit of\u2014we know that there are debts that are over $30,000, which is substantive for someone on a low wage or a low income. Debt of $30,000 is significant\u2014life-changing, even, I would say. But what the Minister hasn\u2019t given us clarity on is whether she believes that these debts are more likely to be carried by sexual violence survivors or otherwise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo, once again, clarity over, basically, new section 105(3), inserted by clause 8, in relationship to the cost of rehabilitation\u2014clarity around that as well as the sort of higher-end debts and whether these are likely to be carried by sexual violence survivors would be useful to have clarity on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs I said, this is a sensitive issue that I do think requires addressing from the Minister, and I just think I\u2019m not satisfied by just saying that, well, this is just confirming existing practice. This is in some ways the ability for us to ascertain whether the existing practice is harming people who have been trying to seek recourse from traumatic and incredibly traumatic things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne thing that I also didn\u2019t get engagement on and I want to go back to the Minister on is whether she\u2019s aware whether the Ministry of Social Development considered sending or even did send communications following the High Court decision letting people know that they would be able to challenge this decision through the review-of-decision process. The reason why I asked this is she gave us a number, the number of people in the benefit review committees (BRCs), but that\u2019s a very low number compared to the 37,500 people affected by this bill. I believe this number of reviews of decisions and BRCs would have been higher if communications had been sent, and this is why I want to know whether, at any point, communications had been sent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAgain, we could have traversed this in the select committee process, but we had one week. It was rushed. We didn\u2019t even have the Minister, so this is the one opportunity we have to seek clarity from her on these issues. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u002299c1df17d13c6d01aec18900ab4d4ecb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002299c1df17d13c6d01aec18900ab4d4ecb\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (11:23)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. There\u2019s been a number of questions around the retrospective nature of the bill. The key reason behind this is the fact that the bill is reflecting the operation of the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) with regard to policy intent. This has been their operating intent, and it has been aligned with the policy intent, and therefore it\u2019s appropriate that this be upheld both retrospectively and prospectively.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf it wasn\u2019t, we\u2019d be looking at substantial inequities arising between ACC clients who have received welfare entitlements. The bill does save those small cohort of cases who have been under review, and that\u2019s appropriate. It ensures that legislation doesn\u2019t interfere with those particular cases, but they are a very small number of cases. The reason for the retrospectivity of it is that it\u2019s important to ensure that the fairness occurs outside of that very small cohort that are currently before review.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the interaction between MSD and ACC, MSD worked with ACC throughout the select committee process and they engaged on all the relevant questions that have been asked. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust noting with regard to the question from the Green Party member about rehabilitation requirements, that responsibility sits with ACC. This bill is about clarifying how income from ACC is treated in the welfare system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u00220d983be0b5c02a02b3b8247938c0717e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220d983be0b5c02a02b3b8247938c0717e\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (11:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I do thank the Minister in the chair for engaging in some of that discussion around retrospectivity, because it is very, very important and significant in this bill. A slightly different matter that hasn\u2019t been specifically addressed by the Minister is in relation to the changeover date, which is in Part 11. Actually, it was quite difficult when I was doing amendments on this section because it\u2019s a schedule\u2014new Part 11\u2014inserting new clause 104, and then the definition of \u201Cchangeover\u201D. The reason that that\u2019s particularly interesting and I think deserves comment is this changeover date puts in place a date which I think reflects the time that this bill was introduced to the House. It does make it retrospective, but it is a more unusual form of retrospectivity because it\u2019s actually picking a time that doesn\u2019t coincide with commencement or Royal assent, but simply when this bill became publicly available.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would like to hear the Minister specifically on that changeover date and why in fact it was necessary to, effectively, prevent those people who may have had claims once this decision was made giving any period of time at all that was prior to the introduction of this bill. That is particularly unusual to have that changeover date there and something that the Minister could change. I think an even fairer change would be along with the introduction of this bill\u2014so whether the Minister would consider an amendment in relation to that; I think that is particularly important to try and make sure that we do have this addressed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAdditionally, the bill, in this part, as it applies to the transitions, puts into place the Minister\u2019s amendment. For the purpose of this, I\u2019m actually looking at the Amendment Paper, which has been lodged in the House as a fully amended bill. I\u2019m imagining that because we agreed to the Amendment Paper in the last section, even though this is in Part\u00A02, these are already in place. I\u2019m discussing the relevant parts of the Minister\u2019s amendment with reference to the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 528. The Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper looks at\u2014and we agree with this, and I think all parties of the House have supported it\u2014the inclusion of the benefits review claimants and the people who are excluded from the effect of this bill. The question I wanted to ask the Minister in respect of the benefits review committee is: is she aware or has she sought advice from officials on whether there are people who may have had a claim declined by the benefits review committee or otherwise dealt with in a way that didn\u2019t fully recognise their entitlement? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason that this is an important question is because this is a retrospective bill, and because people who are now\u2014and, we agree, should be\u2014excluded from it are covered by the people who have been in the benefits review committee. Are there people whose cases have been discharged who are excluded from this, and who, in fairness, should be included within the exclusion? The only reason that they would not be is because they were faster and more efficient at asking and inquiring to the benefits review committee around the status of their case. That would also apply to people who had cases in the courts, but we know that that will be a much smaller number of people and that will be most likely because we\u2019ve had the High Court decision. There\u2019s usually a greater degree of consistency required within those types of arguments. That\u2019s quite a specific question, but one that I think should be addressed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u00222b1124af4c11678f39cb9bf80c02c20e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222b1124af4c11678f39cb9bf80c02c20e\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (11:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just noting, again, some points on the retrospective nature of the bill. The bill, of course, is ensuring\u2014as we\u2019ve said many times\u2014that policy intent and practice is upheld, both going back and going forward, and it\u2019s to ensure that policy and practice is upheld for as many people as possible, apart from that savings provision of that small cohort of people that are in active dispute.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI think we\u2019ve made it very clear: yes, the changeover is 2 p.m. on the date of the bill being introduced. That isn\u2019t the standard approach but there is a very clear reason why there is the need for retrospectivity on this bill, because we need to ensure that current policy and current practice is upheld for as many people as possible. In terms of the claims declined around that very small number, I\u2019ll ask the officials to give me some additional information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0f0a7c5daea5c306df86964363ec6d3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019d just make the point at the moment that we are sort of covering one aspect of this, which is fine\u2014seeking points\u2014but when each of the presentations is taking the full five minutes, it does sort of influence the Chair on whether the next person will get the call or not. The whole idea of committee stage, of course, is to explore.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022db0c768dc0e17f2438d51c9115a30581\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022db0c768dc0e17f2438d51c9115a30581\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (11:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Mr Chair. I would like to speak to my amendment, and this is specifically for clause 105(1) of the schedule. I\u2019m coming at this from a completely different angle, which is from a taxation angle. The reason I bring forward this amendment, which is to say that subclause (1)(a) and (b) are not applicable to any specified benefit or specified supplementary assistance granted payable prior to 1 April 2024\u2014there\u2019s a reason for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPreviously, ACC arrears covering multiple years were taxed at a higher rate, which is up to 37 percent. That would have applied if ACC compensation had been paid on a weekly basis, starting from the original date of the injury. But the problem with that is that, at a higher rate, a claimant could possibly lose all of the entitlement, for example, to Working for Families tax credits for the year in which they received ACC arrears, and a significant portion of the arrears was lost to tax and related liabilities that way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo this particular aspect of the tax treatment of ACC arrears was changed in sections 57, 59, and 62 of the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2023-24, Multinational Tax, and Remedial Matters) Bill, which introduces new provisions to the Income Tax Act 2007. But this took effect on 1 April 2024. So, for claimants who will receive the ACC arrears prior to the day and did not have the benefit of the amendment, the bill presents additional unfairness where they are taxed at a higher rate for their ACC arrears, as well as having the clawback we\u2019re seeing in this particular bill, which then means that when we\u2019re looking at this bill, my amendment is simply just to say to ease some of those unfairnesses, we\u2019re looking at those ones simply granted after 1 April 2024.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess the question comes down to three parts. The first part: it is likely for those people who are also up before the 2024 date where there is a higher taxation being placed on that, they may very well receive very little in terms of ACC arrears, which means that it\u2019s better for them not to receive the ACC arrears because they\u2019re going to be further in debt. So the first question to the Minister is: how many people would have had more debt accrued than what the ACC arrears present post-tax?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy second question is around whether the Minister would consider this amendment which corrects that potential level of unfairness. Those are my only two questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u0022b4e016de1844cc0a14c3ad02d6de69a3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b4e016de1844cc0a14c3ad02d6de69a3\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (11:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. The Minister in the chair has now repeatedly talked about how this is longstanding practice, and I want to examine that statement in terms of the evidence she has for that because I have seen no evidence of that practice being something that is reflected in the law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo here we have a legal decision which says this is what the legislature said that the bill would do, and we have an assertion that the practice is the way it is because it\u2019s consistent with the law, as I understand it, and yet the two are at odds here. So what I want to know is: did the Minister get advice as to whether the Ministry of Social Development genuinely thought they were abiding by the law in this practice? Is there any connection there? To say it\u2019s a practice, if it\u2019s a practice of chopping people\u2019s heads off when the law says you can\u2019t, doesn\u2019t really cut it. We need to know what the basis is for this being a bona fide practice rather than getting wrong the intent of the legislature.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would say that\u2019s a fundamental question. So repeating it\u2019s a longstanding practice isn\u2019t going to cut it; what\u2019s the evidence of that practice being bona fide in that way, and what kind of advice has the Minister had on the justice of that, in light of the intention of the legislature? Did they look at the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E, for example, from the time when the bill came in and say, \u201COK, this is what the legislature did mean to happen; we just wrote it down wrong.\u201D? That would be the kind of thing that I\u2019d expect rather than just saying it is as it is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen I have a couple of other questions. One is: in terms of claims for delay, you will recall I talked about how I was worried about the risk that an accredited employer might take advantage of the situation and delay things. Well, it\u2019s also true that delay is something that has always been a worry with regard to accredited employers, and that there has been an advantage taken. So would a claimant who had had their claim delayed in a calculated way because this was the practice and the accredited employer didn\u2019t have to pay as much if they delayed the claim\u2014if there is evidence of that kind of practice occurring, which has been a worry for my colleagues in the law for some time, is this law going to stop any case that says that someone has deliberately or in negligence delayed a case, and it has caused loss? Because I would say that in a normal legal setting, you would be able to take that case on the basis of there being a negligent act or a deliberate act to stop. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAre we doing that here? Are we saying no claims whatsoever; you can\u2019t have any remedy? Is that what the Minister intends to do, and is that what is happening here? The next bit is the claims against ACC itself. I have not yet had any clarification about why ACC doesn\u2019t pass over to the recipient\u2014to the claimant who\u2019s successful\u2014the kinds of payments they would have had in the default. They\u2019ve missed a lot of those opportunities. Why does that not happen? In which case, is there still here a claim possible against ACC? Does the Minister intend to stop that happening by this retroactive Act, or is that still possible? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose are three concrete questions. I actually have had very few answers to my questions so far, and I\u2019d be really appreciative of some of those sorts of answers. Thank you, Mr Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u00226567ee9de4662b740671029dfab88914\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226567ee9de4662b740671029dfab88914\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (11:39)\u003C/span\u003E: With regard to the very specific question around those people who have had a claim declined and will they be captured or not, the amendment is very clear that the savings provision applies to all live cases, either with the review and with the benefits review committee, the Social Security Appeal Authority, or the courts, at the changeover date. It is clear that they must be live cases.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn terms of Helen White\u2019s assertions, this has been practice that has been operational practice by the Ministry of Social Development. It is the policy intent of the legislation, and it aligns with that overall principle of a targeted welfare system, where the more income you earn, the less assistance you receive from the State. I don\u2019t believe that we are here to debate that matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u0022e5e5f2a55d23f977694e048274f0cc97\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e5e5f2a55d23f977694e048274f0cc97\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (11:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you so much, Mr Chair. I just want to raise some issues that I haven\u2019t had engagement with, and then I\u2019ll move on to some new material.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m interested in still knowing about the communications side from the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) and whether that was considered after the High Court decision, because that would have affected or may give us information as to why we have the number of benefit review committees and Social Security Appeal Authority appeals that we have.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I wanted to ask, and this is specifically something the Minister in the chair mentioned in her previous answer\u2014she mentioned that there was engagement with ACC as part of the select committee process. She said that explicitly. I would like to know whether there was engagement in the development of the bill. We would know this from a regulatory impact statement, but we don\u2019t know. What kind of engagement did she have in relationship to, for example, the savings provisions with ACC in the development of the bill specifically?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also wanted to speak to\u2014and this is new material, Mr Chair, but it does relate to the Working for Families entitlements that are affected due to the interaction between the tax system and these debts and back payments, etc. Does the Minister know how many people may have lost their entitlement to Working for Families historically over the period that this unlawful practice was happening? If anyone lost their entitlements for Working for Families, does she have concerns that this actually may go contrary to the intent of the Working for Families policy of incentivising and supporting people into employment? Therefore, does she think that the interaction between the bill, which is legalising practice, whether it\u2019s right or wrong; obviously, there\u2019s different views between party lines\u2014but whether she thinks that the existing practice may have actually undermined the intent of the Working for Families policy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to know, again, whether she had any information on\u2014and this is something that I have tried to seek engagement with. She talked about the lump-sum debts but didn\u2019t really engage on the sort of weekly repayments that would, obviously, be affected by the savings provisions. What is the higher-end percentile, the top 10 percentile, of weekly repayments that people would be experiencing? For example, would this be larger than, say, the weekly amount one could get with the winter energy payment? This also helps us ascertain whether these debts are putting people into hardship or otherwise. We do not know, have not had engagement with the Minister, on the weekly repayment rates that come as a result of this. I\u2019m particularly interested in the top 10 percentile, because the top 10 percentile often tells us where discretion has been used in a way that often does negatively impact people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I want to know is whether she has any information about the employment status of the 37,500 people following these debts being established and whether they went on to continue being on a benefit after receiving the ACC support or whether they were adequately rehabilitated to the point of being able to return to the workforce. The reason why I ask this\u2014this is new material, and this is MSD\u2019s responsibility to have those statistics\u2014is because if the ACC back payment is to support people to rehabilitate themselves to re-enter the workforce, but then there\u2019s a debt established which negatively affects the person, negatively affects their financial position, that may negatively impact their ability to re-enter the workforce. Does she have any information to ascertain this? At the end of the day, the outcomes for the people affected by this bill deeply, deeply matter in relationship to whether we or other parties support it or otherwise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EInformation around the interactions of how many people have lost their Working for Families entitlements, how many people have re-entered the workforce after these debts or have ended up staying on a benefit, whether communications have been sent by MSD to people following the High Court decisions and prior to this bill being introduced, and the top 10 percentile are things that I\u2019m yet to get engagement from the Minister. That is new material. Thank you very much.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u0022d19c3045351bb54f58c68d6978bc34da\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d19c3045351bb54f58c68d6978bc34da\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) (11:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just a couple of questions that were really specific that I want to give some feedback on. One, with regard to ACC and Ministry of Social Development (MSD) consultation outside the select committee process, I can confirm that there was consultation throughout the process of developing the bill, so not just the select committee process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWith regard to communications from MSD to clients regarding the High Court decision following the ministry\u2019s acceptance of the High Court ruling in November 2025, MSD\u2019s immediate priority was to engage with the clients who had active cases before the High Court or Social Security Appeal Authority. At that time, there were three that had pending High Court decisions and 36 with the Social Security Appeal Authority.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u002281b2823adf3c51e63923963c0ab09277\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002281b2823adf3c51e63923963c0ab09277\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (11:46)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and thanks to the Minister in the chair for her engagement on this issue. I wanted to just clarify the answer that she had given me on the fact that the savings provisions only applied to live cases with either the committee or with the courts. I just wanted to get some assurances that the people who actually took the case to the High Court\u2014that would be considered a not live case under this bill, so I just wanted to get some reassurance that those people would not in fact have these debts retrospectively put back on them, considering they were the ones who first took this case and would successfully be able to have a ruling in the High Court. I would imagine that these would be the very people who the savings provisions would want to save and protect\u2014and, if not, whether those people will be disadvantaged by this legislation. I think that\u2019s an important point in terms of how the savings provisions apply.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen just to raise a few issues which haven\u2019t yet been covered in relation to clause\u00A0107, inserted into Schedule 1 by Amendment Paper 528. This also relates to contrary decisions, but I think it\u2019s a new point and not a clause that we\u2019ve referenced specifically in this debate so far. This is quite an unusual clause, because it specifically states that contrary decisions are overridden, and that appears to me to be a statement in relation to existing articulation of law either in the appeal authority, the Social Security Appeal Authority, or in the court.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, relatively unusually in the way that this is drafted, there are three cases mentioned. I wanted to check those examples, that that\u2019s not an exclusive list\u2014because it says \u201Cexamples\u201D, so I\u2019m assuming that that\u2019s not an exclusive list. But does this clause have any effect following the passage of this Act? What I mean is: is this purely to retrospectively state that the law as it is now is what\u2019s currently in the new bill, and then will this clause 107, effectively, be redundant as it has overridden the existing case law?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI assume that the reason for these examples is that there will be more cases that could have been listed, but for\u2014I don\u2019t know\u2014practical reasons or not wanting to miss one out, that was listed. Is this purely an issue to do with the law prior to its commencement, and moving forward will this not override any further decisions? Of course, there could be appeals in the Social Security Appeal Authority around this legislation on different points of law. I think that\u2019s quite an important point. Hopefully, I articulated that in a way that the Minister or advisers can provide an answer to. I\u2019m really wanting a response on the people that took the case to the High Court, and are they being sufficiently considered with the savings provision because of what the previous Minister in the chair had said, and the future impact of clause 107?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u00226ba7ccc66e152a2197c80b1896ec7afe\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226ba7ccc66e152a2197c80b1896ec7afe\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) (11:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I can confirm that the person who took the case is in scope of the savings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn terms of your other question around the structure of this legislation, we\u2019ve taken great care to try and not introduce new risk. Those sorts of things have been carefully considered. One of the things that is important in this legislation is to make it clear that where there has been an overpayment, that is what is being addressed, irrespective of what form of income came in to mean that there is an overpayment. We\u2019ve been very careful not to create additional risk in drafting this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u0022f014a482179fd31f24d1230d05a1541a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f014a482179fd31f24d1230d05a1541a\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (11:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I want to take the Minister in the chair up on that opportunity to talk about what that overpayment looks like. We have a whole lot of people who are being cut off retrospectively. I\u2019m mindful that we\u2019re in this part of the Act, but I\u2019m also mindful that the Minister did answer questions in the House yesterday where she talked about equity. That\u2019s actually one of the things that is supposed to be the intention of this part, as much as I understand it as the entire bill. It\u2019s supposed to prevent inequities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I\u2019d like to know from the Minister is: is she confident that what she is doing prevents inequities? If I give an example of somebody who is cut off from making a claim when we pass this legislation, who has been subject to a sensitive claim, it\u2019s taken five years for them to go through that process. They have received the main benefit in that time. That is not in dispute. That is a definite double-dip, because you\u2019re getting a benefit and you\u2019re getting the 80 percent. So they had that taken out of the money that they\u2019ve got by the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) and ACC in consultation before they receive anything. Then they receive what\u2019s left over and out of that comes a claim from MSD\u2014there has been a claim for everything that they have got in their 80 percent, because it is to offset costs in the situation that have been addressed by MSD; so things like energy payments, counselling, etc.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf those amounts have been taken away from them and somebody else who had a broken arm has not had any of that money taken away\u2014they\u2019ve received all of the ACC system through it\u2014how is it equitable to cut them off from what the court has said was an unlawful recovery of the money that MSD has clawed back? They would be significantly better off if there was no retroactivity, because they could make a claim for the money that\u2019s been clawed back, and they get the balance of the 80 percent after the main benefit. That would be their position.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey would be in the same position, then\u2014actually, not as good a position as somebody whose claim was accepted straight away because they would have had more; we know from the evidence before the select committee, they would have received a lot more assistance, because ACC is a better system in many ways; it\u2019s not as bare bones. How can the Minister justify that? I would like an answer. Does she actually think that that person I\u2019ve just described has double-dipped in some way that it justifies the recovery of those payments; or is it just a fanatical adherence to the idea of income and a siloing of income from the ACC system?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMSD has an idea of what income is and it will not look beyond it. It will not look to equity. That\u2019s what we\u2019re really doing today. We\u2019re not looking at equity. How does she actually reconcile the purpose with this retroactive claw-back confirmation\u2014it\u2019s OK, MSD took all this money off you, and you got nothing: how is that OK? How does that reconcile with the purpose?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am really interested in her answer on this, because I was concerned in the House yesterday, when she was answering questions about inequity, that the Minister did not understand that this is not a double-dip\u2014that these people are having money taken off them. The only people who are double-dipping are ACC, who are not paying all that money across. They are the benefiters, and now accredited employers, who when they delay matters, have benefited significantly financially. I would like those issues addressed from the Minister. I\u2019m grateful that she\u2019s here in the chair on this bill. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u00225f669abc3c2c97a8b9d5072ff5640443\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225f669abc3c2c97a8b9d5072ff5640443\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) (11:56)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m reluctant to say much on this, because I know much of it\u2019s been covered already in the debate. Let me just say this: the welfare system of income support considers a person\u2019s circumstances and their need for an income for a period of time. That is how it works. That is quite separate from the ACC system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIf a person received income\u2014for example, an investment income\u2014it would be charged over that period. If it then meant over that period of time someone had received an overpayment of support based on their income for that period of time, the same rules would apply. This is when we talk about equity. That is exactly what this bill is doing. Irrespective of what the source of income is, it needs to be treated fairly. New Zealanders need to know that the welfare system is based on income support for people when it is needed based on their income; all sources of income, not just some.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u0022fa76962d9c79b147cc98e18f32d85a3e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fa76962d9c79b147cc98e18f32d85a3e\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (11:57)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. That\u2019s actually quite a useful contribution from the Minister in the chair to engage with, because this goes contrary to what the High Court actually found, which was that these payments were not so much deemed as overpayments, but they were there because people needed it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan I get confirmation from the Minister as to whether the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) provides comparable assistance for things like rehabilitation that ACC can provide? Secondly, she talks a lot about fairness and inequity in referring to this bill, but isn\u2019t it the case that an existing inequity in the system is how long, for example, sensitive claims take to process? Comparing the people who have to wait, often, years to get their claims with people who may be able to get their claims more promptly, for, say, things like a rugby injury, is just simply not comparable. I would like to get the engagement of the Minister: when she talks about fairness and inequities, who is genuinely losing out if we didn\u2019t have these debts\u2014who would be negatively materially impacted if we didn\u2019t have these debts imposed directly to people because of the assistance that they receive?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, one thing that I didn\u2019t get engagement whatsoever from the Minister on is how many people have lost their Working for Families eligibility from this. Again, we haven\u2019t had engagement from the Minister on this, on the number of people\u2014the number of people\u2014who have lost their Working for Families eligibility because of the interaction between the tax system and the auditor\u2019s reports. Now, the Working for Families package is within the remit of this Minister, and I would like to know whether that was something she had explored in relation to this, because this goes back to an amendment that my colleague Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan made. I will pose those two questions to the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe third one is: why did the Minister\u2014the previous Minister in the chair talked about how communications were only sent to people who had cases in the Social Security Appeal Authority, I believe in the High Court, when the decision in the High Court was made. But why did she not send communications to the 37,500 people who had debts so that they could actually challenge these after these debts were found to be unlawful? Why did she remain quiet to tens of thousands of people whose debts were unlawful, and not choose to actually send any communications to let them know of the decision so that they could challenge it? Otherwise, the handful of cases that did make it to the Social Security Appeal Authority would have only been because they were able to often engage with expert advocates for lawyers. If she would be able to justify why only a narrow set of people got communications from MSD after their practice of putting these debts was found to be unlawful, it would be really beneficial for the debate and to get clarity as we head to the next reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221646607c54eac08183e561513c70d930\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Just for members\u2019 awareness, the issue around retrospectivity and policy intent has been well canvassed\u2014I\u2019ve just been talking with the Clerks. Just to let people know that that has been well covered. There was an issue raised around Working for Families which I believe is yet to be addressed, but we\u2019ll now go to Rachel Brooking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u00228749559f09195bbd9150dc3ef1d7f80f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228749559f09195bbd9150dc3ef1d7f80f\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Musterer\u2014Green) (12:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Thank you. What is your approach, Mr Chair, in relationship to the Minister for Social Development and Employment bringing new material herself to the debate, and us engaging with that new material that she is bringing? The Minister is making some new points in her contributions, and it makes it hard for us, then feeling like we cannot engage with those.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f790a94615e4a789b6a1b9ef3ab5ef40\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it has to be within the context of the bill. If I can encourage members to keep their questions within that framework, that would be useful\u2014the Hon Rachel Brooking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022d82c2e7dd75500e7630cd0501189ace8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d82c2e7dd75500e7630cd0501189ace8\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (12:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. My questions are not policy questions; they are just questions about the mechanics of the drafting. They relate to the Schedule, new clauses 107 and 108 and the definitions in 104. I\u2019m interested in this term \u201Cproceedings\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBefore I get to that, I just want to note that my colleague Camilla Belich was speaking on clause 107(2), which is \u201CExamples of contrary decisions\u201D, including\u2014and there\u2019s some listed there. I think it would be helpful to have in the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E why it is that these specific cases have been chosen to be included in the bill, because that just is unusual drafting. Again, that\u2019s not a policy point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, in Amendment Paper 528, I want to look at \u201CEffect on proceedings\u201D, new clause\u00A0108, inserted by the Schedule. Subclauses (1) and (2) separate\u2014\u201Cdepending if proceedings have begun on or after the changeover.\u201D That\u2019s that 2 p.m. time; if it\u2019s at 2 p.m. or after, that\u2019s the changeover. Then subclause (2) is for the ones begun after: \u201CProceedings before a benefits review committee, the appeal authority, or a court that are begun, whether or not they are finally determined\u201D. I\u2019m just checking this wording of \u201Cwhether or not they are finally determined (including any rehearing, retrial, or appeal), before the changeover\u2014\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ll tell you why I\u2019m asking this question: those words are also found in clause 107(1), which is about the proceedings: \u201Cwhether or not they are finally determined\u201D. My question is just to clarify that link. If a proceeding is started in one tribunal and then it is appealed and goes through different courts, then\u2014this is what I\u2019m wanting confirmation of\u2014the proceeding; that is how this legislation works. It\u2019s because those words about the continuation don\u2019t appear to be in the definition of \u201Cproceedings\u201D, but then they do appear in clauses 108 and 107. Would it be simpler if they were, in fact, in the definition: that the proceeding is where it starts and where it continues on to higher jurisdictions? Why it\u2019s not in the definition but it is in clauses 107 and 108\u2014that\u2019s my question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u0022143ef2dac5f753586dc0713d7653adbd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022143ef2dac5f753586dc0713d7653adbd\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) (12:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Firstly, the question on Working for Families: the Ministry of Social Development is not responsible for assessing entitlement; that\u2019s Inland Revenue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the question around the examples, that is just giving a couple of examples of the decisions, not all of them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the question around the proceedings, that is just to provide clarity that, for those that have begun proceedings, they will be progressed until their completion, and Amendment Paper 528 includes those that are at benefit review decision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u002271e71e55604bc4668f460753a17aa134\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002271e71e55604bc4668f460753a17aa134\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (12:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you to the Minister for Social Development and Employment. I don\u2019t intend to take a full call; I just was going to ask a similar question to my colleague the Hon Rachel Brooking, but then wanted to wait to hear the Minister in the chair\u2019s answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust for the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E and just to clarify that we\u2019ve got this exactly clear: if there is a case in the Social Security Appeal Authority which is saved by the savings provision and if that case then goes on and is successful, then that person would not have their debt recovered if it\u2019s on this point\u2014presumably, that it covers all the other points\u2014and that would not interact, then, with the point in new clause 107 of Schedule 1, inserted by the Schedule, where they\u2019d be overridden. So they\u2019d be able to, essentially, carry on with their case as if this bill had not been passed, and if they\u2019re successful, then they would receive a decision, which would be up to the Social Security Appeal Authority, leaving the courts aside. Maybe in this one instance they were unsuccessful, though; then they would presumably have been unsuccessful under the previous interpretation anyway and so would also just be at the mercy of the Social Security Appeal Authority.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI know it\u2019s quite a technical question, and I\u2019m sure that the Minister and officials know the answer to this, but just so we\u2019re exactly clear on those, especially as the amendment has not been able to be scrutinised in the select committee process, just working out exactly where those individuals will end up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u00224601857b7f2b9ab76358e6685ce274d3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224601857b7f2b9ab76358e6685ce274d3\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) (12:06)\u003C/span\u003E: I want to thank the member Camilla Belich, who raised the question, for her engagement on this bill. One of the things that we are wanting to preserve for anyone who is at any stage of the appeal process, that has raised a concern that is in a review of decision with a benefits review committee or the Social Security Appeal Authority or further up, their cases will proceed. That was to, basically, recognise that from the date of introduction, anything that was already in a process prior to that point can run its course.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u00228e97346fb6ec3fa3cbd98820d6e14429\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228e97346fb6ec3fa3cbd98820d6e14429\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (12:07)\u003C/span\u003E: In relationship to her Amendment Paper 528\u2014this is new material, but it relates to her amendment to broaden the scope to people going through the benefits review committee (BRC) process and review of decision, and on top of the Social Security Appeal Authority. Will the Minister for Social Development and Employment explore additional resources for people undergoing those processes so that they\u2019re supported to not be retraumatised by it, in acknowledgment that many of them would have been survivors of horrific experiences? I\u2019m just interested to know if, as part of the amendment that she brought forward, she\u2019s intending to have any additional resources for people undergoing those processes who may be survivors of abuse in care or sexual violence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI ask this because the BRC process is often quite stacked against beneficiaries: it\u2019s two Ministry of Social Development (MSD) people and one community person\u2014they, in my view, often side with MSD. It can be a really daunting process for people to undergo without, say, lawyers or advocates. Is the Minister\u2014now that, in her amendment, she\u2019s broadening the scope of who will be covered in the savings provisions\u2014also intending to allocate any resources so that no one is retraumatised by the experience of being able to prevent those debts being imposed, and, if not, does she think this is something worth exploring to make sure that the people who she\u2019s now including in the settings provisions can actually undergo these processes in a way that does not create further harm or trauma?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAll right. I\u2019m still waiting for engagement on the number of people who may have lost their eligibility to Working for Families. I would lodge for the debate to close\u2014I would hope that maybe the Minister is looking at some documents in relationship to it to ascertain that figure. I don\u2019t know what the Minister feels like in relationship to my colleague Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s amendment\u2014if we\u2019re not able to ascertain those interactions within the taxes and the eligibility for Working for Families that these back payments can create.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to get engagement on the top 10 percentile of the weekly repayment rates, that I haven\u2019t had engagement on. I just want to reiterate those. I know the Minister has engaged with us, but I just wanted to note and put it in the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E that that engagement has just been a repetition of the intent of the policy, which makes it hard for us to engage in some of the substance of those kind of more granular bits of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELastly, out of the people who she has now expanded the scope on around the BRCs and review of decisions in relation to the savings provisions, does she have any information in relation to whether they\u2019re in employment or receiving income support at the moment, and, if so, does she know whether any of them have any disabilities that may require them to receive additional support\u2014not just to not be re-traumatised as part of the process, but to just make sure that the process is accessible to them? Like I said, the BRC process that she\u2019s now including in her amendment often includes people having to prepare a humongous amount of documentations before those hearings. If she is aware that any of them have disabilities that would require additional support to make sure that they can go through the process in a way that it is fair\u2014whether she has identified that in the preparation on the amendment that seeks to include a few dozen additional people into the saving provisions following the select committee process. So some engagement on that would be deeply appreciated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d also like to know how organisations like Community Law Centres Aotearoa will have to engage on this process, and perhaps if the Minister is not tapping into resources to make this process accessible, whether that will have to be footed by front-line organisations supporting those very same survivors.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022 data-id=\u00221b108a751ef9d6758ae68f0314415d00\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221b108a751ef9d6758ae68f0314415d00\u0022\u003ETODD STEPHENSON (Whip\u2014ACT) (12:11)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228438b398f0fad513a2a029ca173db989\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ll go to Helen White, but just to reiterate, we don\u2019t want more discussions on policy intent, retrospectivity, and those sort of things. So very specific clauses with new material would be appreciated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u002271c1adefc05447ae2c67f124dd3d6f29\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002271c1adefc05447ae2c67f124dd3d6f29\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (12:11)\u003C/span\u003E: This follows on from something that Ricardo Men\u00E9ndez March has raised about those who are included within the capture of the savings of this and how we best expedite those cases. Did the Minister for Social Development and Employment consider streamlining those cases basically through a mediation process? That would be a faster way of dealing with those matters. I\u2019ve never really had an answer from the Minister on why those people who are part of that category are more equitable than the group beyond it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just wanted to also mention that those questions that I asked about the scope of this cut off in terms of what other avenues people might have\u2014so I talked about the delay\u2014they\u2019ve never been answered, and they\u2019re actually really important for the lawyers looking at the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard,\u003C/span\u003E so that they can see what the intention of the Minister was, whether it was intended that this cut off, and the words seem to cut off the right to take any claim for any reason. So would it be possible for those people to take a claim if they had a legitimate other course of action in that way? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose are real questions and if you don\u2019t answer them, Minister, then it leaves us in a position where lawyers will be litigating on whether they can do that. So it\u2019s really important we know what the extent of the intention is in this situation. I would be very keen on knowing plainly where people stand in that situation, and I would thank the Minister for answers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u0022af2e058de7cd5fada00674c0fbe07d67\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022af2e058de7cd5fada00674c0fbe07d67\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) (12:13)\u003C/span\u003E: A specialist team at the Ministry for Social Development and Employment has been set up to work through the reassessments for this group.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022 data-id=\u00220f6381f32534024f95472727eb0257ad\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220f6381f32534024f95472727eb0257ad\u0022\u003EORIINI KAIPARA (Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori\u2014T\u0101maki Makaurau) (12:13)\u003C/span\u003E: Given the nature and the gravity of the impacts that we are debating here in the Chamber to do with this bill, part of the discussion points that Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori has put forward to the Minister\u2019s select committee and gone through this process in 109\u2014which does not exist. But that is my question to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: is there scope to make an allowance for us to revisit this, knowing this is detrimental? There are severe impacts that could worsen the crisis amongst our wh\u0101nau. We\u2019re not just referring to welfare but the need for supplementary supports for wh\u0101nau M\u0101ori is real. So the question to the Minister is: is there scope to allow for a review of this part of this bill in one year\u2019s time\u2014an allowance for this House to repeal this part of the bill should it not give effect to the original intent of the Minister and this Government, which is a targeted welfare system that fully realises equitable outcomes for all?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, the question also goes on to ensure that if the Minister is confident that this bill will be applied fairly, then what is, then, the objection to ensuring there are mechanisms within here to review, as a House, but also for further public consultation, which was cut very short. In fact, it was only by chance that public consultation was considered on this very significant bill. \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EKoir\u0101 taku p\u0101tai\u003C/span\u003E. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat is my question\u003C/span\u003E.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022 data-id=\u0022febdc0ac2ce6de2202e4f26665b64348\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022febdc0ac2ce6de2202e4f26665b64348\u0022\u003EDr VANESSA WEENINK (National\u2014Banks Peninsula) (12:15)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226943312a4a5fc352731b33fc4da005b7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m looking for new material.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002279177955ff3f688beff4e6aff4ca7bf2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002279177955ff3f688beff4e6aff4ca7bf2\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (12:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I think, while we\u2019re looking at another part of this particular bill\u2014and I\u2019m specifically looking at Amendment Paper 528\u2014it\u2019s important to note that there\u2019s still a number of specific data that we\u2019re looking for and seeking engagement from the Minister for Social Development and Employment on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI do want to pick up on something that we haven\u2019t discussed, later on, which is around the pre-commencement decisions. Also, when we\u2019re looking at the effect on the proceedings, I want to check with the Minister that one of the things we are looking at is in terms of noting that in this Amendment Paper, we have seen the addition of the benefit review committee being applied. Noting that there are multiple tiers of a review and appeal processes being able be conducted as a part of this, has the Minister considered what the ability is for some of those changes being made and how that could be challenged further under the primary legislation? I think this is something that we will tease out more in the next part of the debate, but I think it\u2019s just a signal to the Minister that there are still questions that we haven\u2019t managed to receive from the Minister regarding some of the data and the costings behind a lot of this, as opposed to sort of the standard line that we\u2019ve been getting, but also in terms of the magnitude of some of those potential repeal, appeal, or review processes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022297bc572c27f45308dffb067ca3e7915\u0022 data-id=\u0022a9bea3851902558d795900dd6edbdc51\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022297bc572c27f45308dffb067ca3e7915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a9bea3851902558d795900dd6edbdc51\u0022\u003EDr HAMISH CAMPBELL (National\u2014Ilam) (12:17)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221d50b1bed029ff8876faff9736798e16\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Ricardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u2019s amendment deleting Part 2 set out on Amendment Paper 523 is out of order as being a direct negation of the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Part 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223c78395938c5e943d9f61e58bee65f86\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to Amendment Paper 528 inserting subclause (1)(a) into new clause 105 is out of order as being contrary to the objects and principles of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to the Schedule set out on Amendment Paper 528 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 102\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 20\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022114cfbde10216397b7e45bdb6cc6f04b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Oriini Kaipara\u2019s amendments to the Schedule set out on Amendment Papers 510 and 512 are out of order as being contrary to the objects and principles of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u2019s amendments to the Schedule set out on Amendment Paper 527 are out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECamilla Belich\u2019s amendment to clause 108 of Schedule 1 is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s amendment to the Schedule set out on Amendment Paper 521 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Schedule as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00220dd0d5c5b64e29ecb149c09e051ea915\u0022\u003ECommittee of the Whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022eb6a470f94e9cbfd71db51019ef0c562\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022351357bf07c08599b1cf7b8ebaa3e855\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we now come to our final debate, clauses 1 to 3. This is a debate on clauses 1 to 3\u2014\u201CTitle\u201D, \u201CCommencement\u201D, and \u201CPrincipal Act\u201D. The question is that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d5e5f393d13db30d27cc6a946c6cf99\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002268b554f3a095bb45c3356a3a5f7d9a94\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022e73636b9acc4d86c6ed3e2539735c4f9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e73636b9acc4d86c6ed3e2539735c4f9\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (12:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, sorry\u2014too enthusiastic. I want to start by actually addressing clause 3, \u201CPrincipal Act\u201D, and the reason I wanted to pick up on this one first\u2014and I\u2019m sure many other people have many additional questions around clauses 1 and 2, in terms of title and commencement\u2014is because clause 3 amends the principal Act, which is the Social Security Act 2018.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhile my amendment for Part 2 was not accepted because it\u2019s outside of the narrow scope of this bill, my amendment to Part 2 is not outside of the scope of the principal Act. The reason I want to address this is, as part of the High Court ruling\u2014and I want to quote this from the High Court\u2019s response, which is in paragraph 35: \u201CThe recipient of the supplementary assistance needed and was eligible for the assistance at the time. Furthermore, the Ministry\u2019s interpretation could result in the state retrospectively imposing potentially significant debts on [a person] of limited means, through no fault of their own. This would be contrary to both the purposes of the ACC Act and the Social Security Act, which provides, among other things, for the provision of the financial support of the people to help alleviate hardship.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf we\u2019re looking at section 3 of the Social Security Act, \u201CPurpose of this Act\u201D, section\u00A03(a)(i) specifies \u201Cto help people to support themselves and their dependants while not in paid employment\u201D. My question to the Minister is: in the context of statutory interpretation, the purpose of the clause reigns supreme over other parts of the clauses, what is the likelihood, in the Minister\u2019s opinion, of further legal challenges on the basis of this? What has been introduced in this bill goes against the purpose of the intention of the principal bill. And, if it is so, you could actually present those kinds of additional legal challenges, which then, potentially, will create ongoing inconsistencies, as we see, going forward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the reason I\u2019m also picking up on that comes down to one of the questions I had for the Ministers before, which is if we are looking at a situation where someone whose post-tax ACC arrears is less than the debt that is accrued through the Ministry of Social Development\u2014including everything else, such as Working for Families credits, etc.\u2014that goes contrary to the intention of the Social Security Act in terms of helping those to alleviate hardship. I guess that\u2019s my primary question in terms of the principal Act, which is: what are the potential further legal challenges on the basis of the broader principal Act, which falls under clause 3?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u0022d8757ed1d8105ab48ede04d0bb39c1a6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d8757ed1d8105ab48ede04d0bb39c1a6\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (12:27)\u003C/span\u003E: Another question relating to the principal Act\u2014and this relates to something in Part 2 we never got engagement on, so I\u2019m giving the Minister for Social Development and Employment an opportunity for engagement on this\u2014is that one of them is to help people find or retain paid employment. Now, we know that the interactions between the tax system and some of these debts and back payments could affect Working for Families eligibility, which, again, I was trying to get the number from the Minister and didn\u2019t get engagement on. It seems to me like if these debts push people deeper into poverty, maybe even the way some of this gets taxed affects Working for Families eligibility, would this not actually be contrary to helping people access\u2014well, to retain or find paid employment?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I wanted to ask is, in relationship to the principal Act, whether she believes that these debts can also cause a greater demand for other parts of the Act, like the need for special needs grants. If these debts prevent people from making ends meet, is she concerned that there\u2019s a greater demand of things like special needs grants as a result of this bill? This interacts with the principal Act, as well. Clarification on those two things would be useful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d just reiterate\u2014I think Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan makes an excellent point around alleviating hardship; this seems to be contrary to that. Is she concerned that people could challenge this in the courts, and how these debts actually go against the principles of the Act; or is she aware that this was already traversed in the High Court\u2014you know, this process that led us to this bill? Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u00227df3bc16cbe727c6a764bd0ce26f26df\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227df3bc16cbe727c6a764bd0ce26f26df\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) (12:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Obviously, this is not a debate that allows you to traverse the entire Social Security Act. This particular bill is about ensuring that all income is charged in the period in which it was received, irrespective of where that income came from. That is a principle of the Social Security Act. Ensuring that if somebody doesn\u2019t have income and they receive some; that is taken into consideration in terms of their application for income support, and if there is an overpayment, that is then addressed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u00225b8315cb035627a4fef5b8aa85feee6c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225b8315cb035627a4fef5b8aa85feee6c\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (12:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. This is just a comment on that issue. We had a situation for many years with regard to tax. Redundancy payments were taxed much higher because they were all treated as one lump sum, and so people missed out because the payments were treated as income when, in fact, they were compensation for a long period of time. My understanding is that in the tax department, that was a longstanding practice for years that was unfair, and since that time, there has been a decision to take that payment and spread it over a number of years to get a more equitable outcome. My point is that it is quite possible to find smart ways to create an equitable solution, even when a practice has been going on for a long time. Often that happens in the space of time where departments can talk to each other, and so I want to come to my concern about the commencement date of this and the time that the Minister has allocated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have a time which, as has been pointed out, is unusual. It\u2019s a very unusual form of retroactivity, and there is plenty of opportunity here to consider in the commencement date a different one. We have an interesting thing here because we have it saying that the law will come into force on the day of Royal assent, but, actually, the law will come into force on that date in order to create a different set of rules and a different lawful situation a long time before that date of assent. What I want to know from the Minister is whether we could look at pushing out that date of assent for some time so that for some of those situations that we\u2019ve talked about, it would be, effectively, a way of creating a window for people to get in a number of claims, and that would mean that for people who have got their claims lodged, they would be covered by some of the amendments that the Minister has made to allow that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat would allow a greater window by simply playing with the date that this comes in, and it would also allow that thought about when that would be appropriate. I\u2019ve talked about the possibility of it being six months that we\u2019d look at having a date of assent for when this comes into force, and then we could have a wider group, but it would be the people next in the queue who would be able to get in. The Minister looks like she\u2019s got an answer to my question, and so I\u2019d be grateful for that answer. Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u00223cbdc606323307ab08fe106f327cd3b6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223cbdc606323307ab08fe106f327cd3b6\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (12:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I have an amendment to this part of the bill. It\u2019s on quite a serious issue, and I think it\u2019s one that could be quite easily agreed to, based on the information that we have before us, and that is a little bit contrary to the bill. I\u2019ve read the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet that the Attorney-General did on the bill, dated 5 February. It concluded that there isn\u2019t an inconsistency, or that if there is, it\u2019s justified with this bill, but I suppose the issue is that quite a bit of information has come to light since the Attorney-General provided that New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYesterday, the Accident Compensation Corporation presented information to the Social Services and Community Committee, and that information appeared to show that the main group of people that were affected by this claim were overwhelmingly female. The group of people that they looked at was a sample size of 50, and, of course, there may be some issues with that, but it may be that ACC can get a greater degree of certainty on that information. But, certainly, it being 70 percent female is very, very high, even with the Government\u2019s changes to pay equity, which, I think, everyone agrees were a high threshold, but 70 percent would get you there. It\u2019s a significantly high threshold for the number of women impacted by this, and there is also the nature of the claims that the woman have. They are sensitive claims; claims of sexual violence. There is a gendered element in the statistics around sexual violence, and although, of course, that can affect anyone, having such a high percentage of women indicates that that is sexual violence perpetrated against women. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question I have, really, in relation to the commencement is: would it be possible to get the Attorney-General to do another New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet with the benefit of the information provided by ACC? It\u2019s not a time-wasting suggestion; it\u2019s actually because that information wasn\u2019t available, and my understanding and my belief of the people that have been working on this is that everyone has been working on it in good faith, based on the advice of officials, and under shortened periods of time. This is not a criticism of what the Attorney-General had and it\u2019s not a criticism, necessarily, of this process; it\u2019s a fact of this process that because it has had a truncated time in public and also at the select committee, by its nature, information has come to light, and so I think it would be good to have another assessment based on that information. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason I say that is that there is a type of discrimination called indirect discrimination. It\u2019s provided for in section 65 of the Human Rights Act. That type of discrimination is where there\u2019s a policy which appears to be neutral and appears to apply to everyone, but, actually, it affects mainly a particular group of people, and one of those groups can be gender. This is a very good example of something which, on the evidence we have had from ACC, is indirectly discriminatory. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt might be that the Attorney-General could take that information and can say that it\u2019s still justified, and that\u2019s something that her advisers and experts in her office could do. But I suppose my concern is that we haven\u2019t seen that information traversed, as far as I can ascertain, in the initial New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet, and so my amendment would be that that Royal assent is granted only after a second New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet has been able to be undertaken. I imagine that that could be done relatively quickly. These are not long documents that we have. I\u2019ve got it in front of me. It\u2019s a few pages, and they\u2019re actually not numbered, but I think it\u2019s around about five pages long. So it could be done quickly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it would be a good part of the process. It\u2019s a genuine attempt to make sure that there aren\u2019t discriminatory aspects to this bill which we should be made aware of, and so I would appreciate the Minister\u2019s views. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u002251add9cabfc1e08c6feb19696a7f0900\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002251add9cabfc1e08c6feb19696a7f0900\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) (12:37)\u003C/span\u003E: In terms of the changeover date in which claims are possible and accepted up until, that was traversed in the earlier part of the debate, and so I\u2019m not going to cover that again. In terms of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet, that is done prior to the introduction, and I don\u2019t anticipate doing another one, just as with every other piece of legislation in the House where there is a New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet at the start and it is not repeated throughout the process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022a5a8e173550966925128e2c805d09e83\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a5a8e173550966925128e2c805d09e83\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (12:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I want to move on now to clause 2, \u201CCommencement date\u201D, which I have a couple of amendments to, as well. But the reason that I wanted to preface my amendments to clause 2 is around the fact that even when we were looking at my question to the Minister for Social Development and Employment on clause 3, \u201CPrincipal Act\u201D, while the Minister has said that \u201CThis is what we\u2019re doing.\u201D, that doesn\u2019t actually address my question initially, which was whether there is anticipated legal challenge because it may not fulfil the purpose of the principal Act under section 3 of the Social Security Act. I think that that is something for the judiciary, for example, to tease out, but the fact that the Minister didn\u2019t say no implies that that, potentially, is a possibility in terms of weighing up the balance between what is presented in this bill and what is in the principal Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat brings me to my amendment to the commencement date. I do believe that, through the select committee stage and through the conversation we\u2019ve had today, while we are able to get certain data out of the officials and through the process around the number of people who are affected under the expanded scope in terms of the number of people, which includes partners and spouses that could be affected by this bill, the level of nuance and specificity that is required for something of this magnitude hasn\u2019t quite been teased out. My amendment to the commencement date would just simply suggest that rather than having this bill come into force after the commencement date, it comes into force on 1\u00A0July 2027. That is just to give us some clearer guidance and ability to look at this bill more carefully, and for the agency to be able to kind of do the background work more carefully, as well, before the bill fully comes into effect. That goes down to what my colleague Ricardo Men\u00E9ndez March also said in terms of the fact that we haven\u2019t had the confirmation that the Ministry of Social Development is able to contact the kind of people who would be affected by the introduction of this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAt the same time, I do understand, potentially, that the Minister wants the policy change to be clarified as quickly as possible. So if the Minister isn\u2019t open to my amendment, which means that the entirety of the bill takes effect on 1 July 2027, my other amendment is to specify to say that we understand the policy part in Part 1 may be taken into effect immediately the day after Royal assent, but Part 2 of this bill, in terms of the transitional measures, etc., and the retrospectivity, takes place later on 1 July 2027. Now, the reason I suggest that also is that regardless of how we\u2019re debating it and how the Minister views our amendments, the retrospectivity is going to take place regardless of the commencement date. I think if we\u2019re going to be doing that, then it actually does, again, allow us a little bit more time to tease out those specificities in terms of the number and the nuance in terms of those who are affected by this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo those are my two amendments. One of them is to amend the commencement date of the entirety of the bill, and my second amendment is only amending the commencement date of Part 2, noting that the Minister\u2019s intention and the bill\u2019s intention is to ensure the policy is clarified in Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u002235250e99bdad1720d5e0932fccb07fa0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002235250e99bdad1720d5e0932fccb07fa0\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (12:41)\u003C/span\u003E: I want to just make another point about what happened in the last week. I was on the Social Services and Community Committee, and what we ended up doing, once the report was in, because we had to bring it back to the House within a very short time frame\u2014we were able to get ACC to come in, but we only saw them for 20 minutes. One of the questions that is at the heart of this issue is: why was ACC not paying for the additional benefits that that claimant would have got in the period of default? That\u2019s a clear issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I put a question in writing to ACC at the end of the 20-minute hearing on that point, but I haven\u2019t received an answer. I have not got any clarity as to why that was happening. I asked whether there was a legal impediment, whether it was a legal constraint they had that meant they didn\u2019t pass that on, or some sort of permission they had not to pay on those amounts, because it\u2019s so pivotal to why Labour was supporting this bill and is not any more: we just simply did not understand that there were additional benefits on top of that main benefit that were being paid and that ACC wasn\u2019t passing them on. I don\u2019t have the answers yet. I would like those answers to be present before the Minister signs this into law, because it seems critical to me. I simply do not know the answer to a fundamental question that changes who should be paying here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe result of this law is that beneficiaries who have had injuries, but through no fault of their own have not been able to have that claim decided for some time\u2014either because it\u2019s complex or because it\u2019s been declined\u2014are paying for a lot of things that I think most New Zealanders would have thought were being paid for by the ACC system in that time, and I simply don\u2019t know why; I wish I did. It would be an interesting thing to know, and it would be critical to whether this is a fair law or not: knowing whether, in fact, ACC should be paying.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen we asked about whether we could explore those kinds of solutions, we were told we were moving too fast for that, there wasn\u2019t time to consider those things, or they were outside the scope because they were ACC. Nothing\u2019s outside of the scope of a good solution in this Parliament. That\u2019s the nature of parliamentary supremacy: that we should be able to make fair laws. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would like the kind of amendment that, actually, my friend Lawrence Xu-Nan has put up, which says that there is a delay here that is sufficient for the Minister to assure herself that she knows the answer to that question, because I haven\u2019t heard it today. I\u2019ve asked and I have not heard an answer to that question as to why that\u2019s occurring and why that\u2019s just. So I would like that amendment for that time, and I would like to suggest also that the amendment that says there\u2019s a different treatment of the retroactive part of this is a good alternative because to do that\u2014to split it up\u2014makes sense in terms of how we know now that the law has not been adhered to for many years and that people have suffered. We don\u2019t know the extent of that suffering.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn the ACC briefing, we had a situation where we know of about 50 cases in the last year; we know about nothing before that. We do not know how much financial impact we are causing today and who we\u2019re causing it to. It\u2019s an absolute shame that we don\u2019t know those things. We could have known them if there\u2019d been time. Let\u2019s put the date out for a few months while the Minister finds these things out, so that ordinary New Zealanders don\u2019t get hurt and treated unjustly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b96f1214ac30dfe5d05b62b011556c62\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Just before I take the next call, we are getting near the end of it, but this is the debate on clauses 1 to 3, \u201CTitle\u201D, \u201CCommencement\u201D, and \u201CPrincipal Act\u201D, so if we could keep the contributions within that. It is an opportunity to summarise but not to repeat other arguments or questions that might not have been addressed, from your perspective, in earlier parts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022 data-id=\u0022801202b8dd34f397b6e26d5f94ca6590\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022801202b8dd34f397b6e26d5f94ca6590\u0022\u003EORIINI KAIPARA (Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori\u2014T\u0101maki Makaurau) (12:46)\u003C/span\u003E: T\u0113n\u0101 koe. Just one observation from Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori in terms of clause 2. Really, it\u2019s in consideration of the scope and the scale and, again, the detrimental impacts this will have on M\u0101ori\u2014on wh\u0101nau M\u0101ori specifically. The question is: is there scope and will the Minister for Social Development and Employment, and the Government, reconsider there being, again, greater investment and greater focus on data and ensuring that we know exactly who is going to be impacted beyond the numbers that have been given to us? We need to know the faces, the places, and the spaces that they occupy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne area that is very, very, very under-spoken of, if that\u2019s a word in te reo P\u0101keh\u0101\u2014\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003Ek\u0101ore i te tino k\u014Drerotia\u003C/span\u003E [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Eit is not often spoken of\u003C/span\u003E]\u2014there is really no discussion about how we protect M\u0101ori who are severely impacted by these changes in the past, in the current, and going forward when this bill becomes law. The question back to the Minister, in terms of clause 2, is if there is consideration\u2014in fact, ensuring\u2014that there is scope for a M\u0101ori impact assessment report. That is the request from Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori: to replace the clause instead with ensuring that there is a subsection in this bill that ensures there is proper reporting investment into this bill that specifies the impact on wh\u0101nau M\u0101ori everywhere. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDue to the timing of this amendment and because it confirms current practice, there has been limited opportunity to undertake fulsome Treaty analysis. Te Tiriti is missing from this bill. Te Tiriti protects all New Zealanders, but it ensures that wh\u0101nau M\u0101ori receive the proper care that was guaranteed to them under Te Tiriti o Waitangi. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAgain, I implore the Minister to go back to have that hui with the executive on the data for M\u0101ori specifically, whether they are survivors of abuse, sexual assault, or they are the injured workers\u2014predominantly M\u0101ori work in those spaces. They are the ones that are working in forestry and fishing without proper supports. So when I refer to Te Tiriti, I mean seriously, not ideologically. This is a practical solution to ensure equitable outcomes for all, especially M\u0101ori. Minister, M\u0101ori impact assessment reports ensure that not just the Crown but also iwi can look after their people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u0022ca31215c685ba8ad8417f894ed77a97b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ca31215c685ba8ad8417f894ed77a97b\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) (12:49)\u003C/span\u003E: I just want to address the amendment that\u2019s proposed around commencement, but the Greens member answered his own question: the time frame is because we want certainty and clarity for those who are currently receiving income support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022960965a326a6cc66737f46d599d18c6f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Just a reminder about what I said earlier around keeping it confined to title, commencement, etc. That would be greatly appreciated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u0022765a54b7e94f7c7db66ce8bf141d1f92\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022765a54b7e94f7c7db66ce8bf141d1f92\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (12:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, I just wanted to speak to the title\u2014I haven\u2019t brought material myself on the title itself. One of the things that I\u2019m always interested in seeking engagement from Ministers on the title itself is whether the title actually facilitates people to understand what the bill really is about. Often titles of bills that actually do seek to entrench or create harm make it harder for the layperson to go on the Parliament website and actually ascertain what the Government\u2019s bills are actually doing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI wonder whether the Minister for Social Development and Employment considered alternatives to the existing title in front of us. So far, we have the Social Security (Accident Compensation and Calculation of Weekly Income) Amendment Bill, but I genuinely do think\u2014and I don\u2019t offer these titles in bad faith or with the intent of making a mockery of the bill, but titles which reflect some of the consequences of the bill\u2014so, for example: \u201CSocial Security (Entrenchment of Unlawful Practices)\u201D or \u201CSocial Security (Continuing Practices of Debt Collection by Government Agencies)\u201D; including other titles that may help people understand this bill, such as \u201CSocial Security (Creation of Debt After Receiving ACC Support)\u201D. More plain-language titles, in my view, support people actually understanding the intent of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister will well know that one of the themes that has arisen throughout the select committee process\u2014if she has read the material from the select committee process\u2014is that many of our law experts will note that many ACC claimants were completely unaware that they would have received a debt after finally getting their ACC claim. I do not think the title of this bill leaves people any wiser on what actually happens to ACC claimants who are on a benefit after making a claim. I wanted to get a sense as to whether the Minister considered more plain language or clearer options as to the impact of this title on people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn relationship to the commencement, I wondered whether the Minister is intending to allocate any resources, immediately after the commencement, to send communications to people\u2014for example, people who were making a review of decision or a benefits review committee application\u2014following the commencement, so that they know that these applications still stand, and whether she\u2019s allocating any resources following the commencement date for this, because, obviously, the commencement date is, at the moment\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002247a88a22498e4a208a43347635748943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224cf8b8c585af9c081d95bdf082a7918\u0022\u003ET\u0101kuta Ferris\u003C/span\u003E: 8 November.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a03c4a4bb3e8b3a6d657bd62bf80bdfe\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH\u003C/span\u003E: 8 November. Thank you; appreciate it. It\u2019s actually relatively soon after Royal assent. So I think there\u2019s something about making sure that people are very, very, very clear that, after this, they\u2019re actually going to be subjected to some debts, and that people are super-aware that if they choose to be on a benefit while waiting for an ACC claim, even if the ACC claim is in relationship to extremely traumatic stuff, like sexual violence, they may want to be careful of choosing to go on income support or taking up any supplements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m also wondering whether, after the commencement date, she will consider giving Ministry of Social Development front-line workers any guidance and making sure that this is made clear to people at the front line so that no one is inadvertently, accidentally entering into debt after applying for a benefit while waiting for an ACC claim.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing I had in relationship to the commencement date is whether any communications that will be sent following the commencement date\u2014and I genuinely wish to seek the engagement from the Minister on this\u2014will be made accessible to disabled people and will be communicated in accessible means. This is quite important because we know that, obviously, traumatic head injuries are one of the things that feature quite a bit within ACC claimants, that often takes a while for them to come through, and I\u2019m worried that without clear and accessible communications, people who may be dealing with brain injuries will be left none the wiser on the nature of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df3e6766443b46819410ad4fedf34077\u0022 data-id=\u00221342b526869827a58db40750f5fbcf56\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df3e6766443b46819410ad4fedf34077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221342b526869827a58db40750f5fbcf56\u0022\u003ESTUART SMITH (Senior Whip\u2014National) (12:55)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002288dcb381fc52312ab33138dc2119f154\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: There\u2019s been substantial engagement on this clause, so I am moving to a closure motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat clause 1 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227171c24648d5120b0c3e7738c16ee59b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to Amendment Paper 528, amending clause 2 to replace \u201Cthe day after Royal assent\u201D with \u201C1 July 2027\u201D, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment to the amendments be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment to the amendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022629c216804ce8243555d9c8ebce5eb6d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to Amendment Paper 528, inserting subclause (2) into clause 2, is out of order as being contrary to the principles and objects of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to clause 2 set out on Amendment Paper 528 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a9771e7805fba110f9598066c6c429a0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Oriini Kaipara\u2019s amendment replacing the commencement set out on Amendment Paper 520 is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECamilla Belich\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 2 is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat clause 2 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat clause 3 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill to be reported with amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f9cfd4acb626fb5c8f979350634387de\u0022\u003EPublic Finance Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f9cfd4acb626fb5c8f979350634387de\u0022\u003ESocial Security (Accident Compensation and Calculation of Weekly Income) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022662c33e55de3e98bd5d9b49fa20af00e\u0022\u003EReport of Committee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022 data-id=\u0022e5b53353b6dd582df7bcbe298a5a692d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e5b53353b6dd582df7bcbe298a5a692d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono) (13:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, the committee has considered the Public Finance Amendment Bill and reports that it has made progress on the bill. The committee has also considered the Social Security (Accident Compensation and Calculation of Weekly Income) Amendment Bill and reports it with amendment. I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the report be adopted\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002213da5ce4112b148f11e1a4ea9af3d2f4\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The Social Security (Accident Compensation and Calculation of Weekly Income) Amendment Bill is set down for third reading next sitting day. The Public Finance Amendment Bill, the Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Bill, and the Legislation Amendment Bill are set down for further consideration in committee next sitting day. The House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260304c32411258bdd40ffb0001525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EThe House adjourned at 1.02 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n  \u003C/body\u003E\n\u003C/html\u003E"