"\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00227421c5a8b1e1f25aa19bb41d7b44cb03\u0022\u003ETuesday, 15 September 2026\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000001\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002282241f8ebec7b49b9cd7ef95a7f801dd\u0022\u003EStart of Sitting Day\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ebee929c588ff8ab6e38559e26cbce3a\u0022\u003EKarakia/Prayers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022 data-id=\u00221c7cf9d67e78aead8b789a95b060d238\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221c7cf9d67e78aead8b789a95b060d238\u0022\u003ETEANAU TUIONO (Assistant Speaker) (14:00)\u003C/span\u003E: E 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/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000005\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00229ef20c8cbaf483a4b19815abce82be7d\u0022\u003EObituaries\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ce09b80cb6b5b71a61920fc9c856bf29\u0022\u003EJames Leonard Peters MNZM\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd3c88ae5e64c54111f90ec3e3654958\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Members, I regret to inform the House of the death, today, of James Leonard Peters MNZM, who was an MP from 2002 to 2005 for the New Zealand First Party. I desire on behalf of this House to express our sense of loss and sympathy with the relatives of the late former member, including his brother, our fellow member, the Rt Hon Winston Peters. I now ask that members stand to observe with me a period of silence to mark, in respect, his memory.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMembers stood as a mark of respect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002259deb9a1a444bda9c4cdbe4d9c949874\u0022\u003EPresentation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00223da72db754458c5ec9128eb2d3fb88d1\u0022\u003EPetitions\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022989bb257e6c43a199fe721c00f6ffbe3\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Eight petitions have been delivered to the Clerk for presentation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002213c64314faf9cbd9114bf8568e405de3\u0022\u003ECLERK (14:02): \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003EPetition of Alexander Ilin requesting that the House urge the Government to evaluate the replacement of proprietary software with free, open-source alternatives across all Government agencies\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Epetition of Callum Entwistle requesting that the House ban the use of AI facial recognition in public areas\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Epetition of Hair \u0026amp; Barber New Zealand requesting that the House urge the Government to provide a residence pathway for skilled hairdressers and barbers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Epetition of Jenny Bell-Johnson requesting that the House urge the Government to commission an independent, on-site audit of every public hospital emergency department\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Epetition of John Clarkson requesting that the House urge the Government to develop and implement a secure, simplified digital pathway for low-risk property ownership transfers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Epetition of Neil Scott requesting that the House urge the Government to sever all relations with the state of Israel until Israel has observed the rights of Palestinians to return and to vote\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Epetition of Ng\u0101ti Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated requesting that the House reject any proposals to remove, amend, or redefine references to Te Tiriti o Waitangi or its principles in legislation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Epetition of Simon Heath requesting that the House conduct an urgent inquiry into the operational practices of the Ombudsman and Auditor-General.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a770669203d24c4c2d13a4b4ad5d7bd\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Those petitions stand referred to the Petitions Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00227c966b4efbe942e456172270b9d86308\u0022\u003EPapers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022021dfe2935ac2acea95cceb2e3b7f3af\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Ministers have delivered seven papers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002244963e1d788e6f6f23d8cb87197e54e3\u0022\u003ECLERK (14:03): \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003EFinancial Markets Authority, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EKiwiSaver Annual Report 2026\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003EMinister of State-Owned Enterprise\u2019s response to the petition of Joanne Klaui\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003EReserve Bank of New Zealand, Monetary Policy Statement, September 2026\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003EParliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EManaging the environmental risks of mining: a high-level overview of regulatory practice\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Epublic inquiry into the disappearance of the Phillips children\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Ereport of the Attorney-General on the amendments to the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill proposed by the Justice Committee and Amendment Paper No 804\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Ereport of the Attorney-General on amendments to the Corrections (Management of Prisoners and Prisoners\u2019 Property) Amendment Bill proposed by the Justice Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217b0fb9c5be4de2ae80a7b0ca0e19c0d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Those papers are published under the authority of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00227c464b509c7c4ed9a00b724633dd9ea6\u0022\u003ESelect Committee Reports\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002285537a8045214d12cc304ed07c0929a0\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Twenty-one select committee reports have been delivered for presentation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a6b8d06ea9eff9da4bca1ba2726c14f2\u0022\u003ECLERK (14:04): \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003EReport of the Environment Committee, second scrutiny activities report for the 54\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E Parliament\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Ereports of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee on the:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003Esecond scrutiny activities report for the 54\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E Parliament\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003EIndia Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003Epetition of Rasy Sao \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Ereports of the Justice Committee on the:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003Ebriefing on Te Au Reka\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003Ereport of the Controller and Auditor-General, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EDepartment of Corrections: Planning for stable housing outcomes\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Ereport of the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee on the second scrutiny activities report for the 54\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E Parliament\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Ereports of the Petitions Committee on the petitions of:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003EDaniel Matthews\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003EDanny Tahau Jobe\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003EPegasus Residents Group Incorporated\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003ESouthland Recreational Whitebaiters Association\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003ETanya Waikato\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003ETristyn Kristna\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Ereports of the Primary Production Committee on the:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003EHazardous Substances and New Organisms Amendment Bill and the Petition of GE Free NZ in Food and Environment\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003Epetition of Jade Steel\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003Esecond scrutiny activities report for the 54\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E Parliament\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Ereports of the Regulations Review Committee on the:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003Ebriefing on retrospectivity in secondary legislation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003Ecomplaint about the Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2024\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003ESecondary Legislation Confirmation Bill (No 4)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Ereport of the Social Services and Community Committee on the second scrutiny activities report for the 54\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E Parliament\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003Ereport of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee on the second scrutiny activities report for the 54\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fff2cb2b1976b9f77e95243a62faa703\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The bills are set down for second reading. The activity report briefings and complaints and the report of the Controller and Auditor-General are set down for consideration.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022530b978a07567758212fd1e77e602aa1\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002212e80d26a999aa0873dececa997792ce\u0022\u003ETaxation (Annual Rates for 2026-27, FBT Simplification, Foreign Investment Funds, and Remedial Measures) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002212e80d26a999aa0873dececa997792ce\u0022\u003EReferences to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Standardisation) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002212e80d26a999aa0873dececa997792ce\u0022\u003EReferences to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Strength of Legislative Obligations) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002212e80d26a999aa0873dececa997792ce\u0022\u003EReferences to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Repeals) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00220a1355dfa420faab5bd64731d2c0eb23\u0022\u003EIntroduction\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a4682918eabd1596d06f9835ac9a68bd\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The Clerk has been informed of the introduction of four bills.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d043be4b8302df01c2a140b0c88f4c62\u0022\u003ECLERK (14:06): \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003ETaxation (Annual Rates for 2026-27, FBT Simplification, Foreign Investment Funds, and Remedial Measures) Bill, introduction\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003EReferences to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Standardisation) Amendment Bill, introduction\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003EReferences to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Strength of Legislative Obligations) Amendment Bill, introduction\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003EReferences to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Repeals) Amendment Bill, introduction.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ade1924a7f8c1b5f011ba681c6f455e\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Those bills are set down for first reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022673a57a99ab61927cd81850a2fd5b7d8\u0022\u003EOral Questions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222cd7eae6b4feddd832879d656a2b7315\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022670a8eeafb2ed9b58681cb99e8ff23b4\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 1\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022 data-id=\u00223a0c2b38fd7114c7e065507494fc2597\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223a0c2b38fd7114c7e065507494fc2597\u0022\u003EHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Deputy Leader\u2014Labour) (14:06)\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=\u0022545bfac0607d685be3f25ca6fca49756\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022545bfac0607d685be3f25ca6fca49756\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister) (14:06)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, particularly our desire never to introduce a capital gains tax that taxes inflation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b4c6bd9ddbab2bf65161c0f86bebccac\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by the fact that after two years of his Government there are only 54 additional nurses across the country and does he accept that his cuts mean fewer nurses and a health system under immense pressure?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222ac1fdfa1929bd26480c6c81de5a51ab\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: What I acknowledge, as I said last week, is that under this Government we have hired 2,100 extra nurses. We\u2019re actually also recruiting 2,300 full-time nurses at this point in time as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022129e6136a7c759f4e2fac42da420d4a4\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: Why won\u2019t he guarantee a job for every nurse who graduates in New Zealand so that New Zealanders can get the healthcare they need and qualified nurses don\u2019t need to move overseas for work?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b682a4c832d8446715b37a037a4039ab\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, look, I appreciate the member might want to tell her version of the facts, but here on this side, we understand that immunisation rates for under-two-year-olds are up, wait times in emergency departments are getting better, elective surgeries are getting better, and we\u2019ve set some clear targets. Unlike the last Government, we are putting money into this, we\u2019re putting workforce into this, and we are very clear on the outcomes and improved outcomes we want to see for patients.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217b798b5e97907470d910dd40709791e\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by his Government\u2019s decision to cancel or halt infrastructure and construction projects, which has cost at least 20,000 construction jobs across New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f405d35b6d14de187d44862096180a1\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I disagree and refute the characterisation of that question, because, I\u2019ll just say to the member, what caused a slow-down in our construction sector was the last administration, which cranked up Government spending 70\u00A0percent\u2014a lot of it wasteful\u2014which drove up inflation and drove up interest rates. No wonder developers don\u2019t have certainty. The good news is that we\u2019ve had a 35\u00A0percent growth in construction jobs on SEEK and we\u2019re getting this show on the road.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fda9f2a49ba7ca0d0147b58a8c9885bd\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Government considered, or would it consider, borrowing $50 million to design a bike bridge it doesn\u2019t ultimately build in order to stimulate activity in the engineering consulting industry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c2ed5cc72495de69b967d0a05ae0be8\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: No, we wouldn\u2019t, and we also wouldn\u2019t spend $300 million on an Auckland Light Rail project\u2014money spent on consultants over six years without a single metre of track being laid and a route even being agreed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a42d2fec970f51519aa36e1b0de22418\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: Why won\u2019t he restore and extend Apprenticeship Boost and invest in M\u0101ori Trade Training so that young New Zealanders have the skills and qualifications they will need when the industry gets moving again?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fffe4073b33e316e02d0479a146eb162\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that\u2019s exactly why I\u2019m very proud of our decision to double the amount of trades academy spaces from 10,000 to 20,000, and another 1,000 Youth Guarantee places for young students that actually have nil or very poor quality qualifications.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226979c29534bd8126c161807659a254bf\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: How many New Zealanders have been affected by his Government\u2019s failure to administer winter energy payments, benefits, and hardship grants, and will he admit that those issues were a direct result of his decision to cut public services?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba390137a481998b3ad59f02d274c1b3\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: No. We have a law change that required beneficiaries to confirm their circumstances annually. It\u2019s entirely appropriate, because we\u2019re interested in getting people off welfare and into work. We don\u2019t believe in having a 3.2 percent unemployment rate and putting 60,000 additional Kiwis on jobseeker support as that member did in Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225af0d9b370f665fe0c0720dd591946f6\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: Why won\u2019t he support a public good test before he cuts jobs across Government agencies, given that his cuts to the Public Service are exactly what left pensioners without the winter energy payments and sitting in the cold?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a0412e6db0917253ee23c3f1cc9e688\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Because this is a Government that actually does a lot and makes sure that for taxpayers\u2019 dollars, we\u2019re extracting maximum value from it. We believe we can build a classroom for $600,000, not $1.2 million, and, as a result, we can build twice the number of classrooms than that member and that Government did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022732e7a08a37ae1116bc64cb7f1a37f4d\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e6ac55f0946ba5701c2f05535d12dd84\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022 data-id=\u0022dba47e13277a57a6fcce55d258b2b3d7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dba47e13277a57a6fcce55d258b2b3d7\u0022\u003EHon MARAMA DAVIDSON (Co-Leader\u2014Green) (14:11)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000099\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=\u002279f1c29792e4c151698d7c36c7db3dfd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002279f1c29792e4c151698d7c36c7db3dfd\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister) (14:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and in particular our desire never, ever to introduce a wealth tax, an inheritance tax, a gift tax, a death tax, or to lift income tax rates or corporate tax rates either.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce77ac8869a95a6c3486dacd0efad406\u0022\u003EHon Marama Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Natural Environment Bill include any changes sought by agriculture lobbyists in a private meeting that was held while the bill was still being drafted?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce1163282dcb15ed9a31f40c89e70ca1\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m unsure\u2014you\u2019d need to direct that to the relevant Minister\u2014but what I\u2019d say is that we engage with industry groups, and we also engage with the environmental NGOs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c834a2dcca831f4756f95a42ebf79d0e\u0022\u003EHon Marama Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Can he confirm that the requirement for a development to be considered \u201Cwithin environmental limits\u201D has been removed from the Natural Environment Bill following a specific request from agriculture lobbyists in a private meeting?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002293d45c3922020490937b0f48abb489a5\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I make no bones about the fact we are powering up farmers in this country, because they are the backbone of this country. They are doing exceptionally well, and we are very proud of what we\u2019re doing to make it easier for farmers to get on and farm and growers to get on and grow and builders to get on and build.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d6bf859a16a47a83c663911f3b546d5\u0022\u003EHon Marama Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Did Federated Farmers ask for the Natural Environment Bill to prevent decision makers from considering the negative impacts of greenhouse gas emissions, and can he confirm that the bill was subsequently amended to require that persons \u201Cmust not \u2026 consider any adverse effect on climate change of any greenhouse gas emissions\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3d1ab4eac37c4b0b607730918250142\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I\u2019d just say to the member, on this side of the House, we take advice, and we consult with broad ranges of people from our officials right out to industry groups and also environmental NGOs, and that\u2019s exactly what happened in this case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223bc2540df536679f47b5b26deb1cd7e6\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Prime Minister confirm that in addition to so-called private, closed-door meetings with Federated Farmers, the Government also held private, closed-door briefings with the Environmental Defence Society, Greenpeace, Forest \u0026amp; Bird, and indeed Lan Pham and the Hon Julie Anne Genter?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228bc3483eda53b0865eafeb0c257b2e5d\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I can, and that\u2019s the point I was trying to make in my earlier answers\u2014that we are a Government that consults and takes advice from lots of different people, then we weigh it all up, and then we make our own decision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224a0b425f85de650a0c8a311cc009f3b3\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister stand by the Government consulting affected people \u201Cwhile the bill was still being drafted\u201D, and, if not, what better time is there?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253d4c4a557d7cba0ee4aed27e48caee4\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that\u2019s exactly the point. We want to get the perspectives from lots of New Zealanders who have views on lots of different things, then we weigh it all up, and we make a decision on this side of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227f248c3045536134c4a20f1907a8ec10\u0022\u003EHon Marama Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree that Te Tiriti provisions in legislation provide an essential safeguard against the exploitation of te taiao and public resources?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a32fa8e7af4f56733fcbeb98cae5d9ed\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, again, what we\u2019re doing is making sure that our Treaty clauses are crystal clear for everybody so that everyone understands the obligations they have to each other, and we get some consistency in it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f161908b031c5be4901fa63b30a7eee3\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: Does he think the Government would be accused and criticised for not talking to groups like Federated Farmers, the Environmental Defence Society, and other interested stakeholders in the resource management and planning system if the Government had indeed not talked to them during the development of the bill\u2019s progress?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002287b7b36c0871d5c47a9724dbfe2f887d\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I mean, I think this is the fundamental difference between this side of the House and that side of the House, right? I mean, we don\u2019t just take our officials\u2019 advice and just box-tick our way through it; we actually take our officials\u2019 advice, we talk to lots of other people, and then we make a decision to get good policy in place. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022366de0a61726a43e9dd1f861859d7246\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ll just wait for a moment. I\u2019ll call the Hon Marama Davidson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221af8450b7a1deb9890d908c0c263ae36\u0022\u003EHon Marama Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Why is he prioritising, in the final weeks of this Parliament, repealing Treaty clauses from legislation while New Zealanders are struggling to afford kai, heat their homes, and get a decent job?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d66f99a27e22c821dfaf34cdb6998e2\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I\u2019d just say to the member that the thing that actually doesn\u2019t help the cost of living crisis for many New Zealanders is, actually, implementing more taxes, and that\u2019s what the other side want to do. But I\u2019d just say, look, I\u2019ve said it very clearly; we\u2019ve got all sorts of Treaty clauses in our different legislation. They create uncertainty, they create legal risk, and we want everyone to be crystal clear on their obligations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022411075fc7313b82ae4b6eb09758f7c55\u0022\u003EHon Shane Jones\u003C/span\u003E: Do you consider it unusual in te Wiki o te Reo M\u0101ori, M\u0101ori Language Week, that the Greens have asked the same well-rehearsed primary question in M\u0101ori, but they don\u2019t put the same effort into asking their supplementaries, and would he like me to give a M\u0101ori translation of the word \u201Csock-puppet\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e06404e407495ec4c432210b8fde191\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. Thanks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00224374aee150f1b77665a6391715492228\u0022\u003EFinance\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022bcfe10334cb17cfff1cdb230dd365439\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022 data-id=\u0022f45c4f8c20284b33bd3a162f37957c38\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f45c4f8c20284b33bd3a162f37957c38\u0022\u003ERYAN HAMILTON (National\u2014Hamilton East) (14:15)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Finance\u003C/span\u003E: What recent reports has she seen on the economy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u002236fc4e7fb379d755677b8d7fb3a2795a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002236fc4e7fb379d755677b8d7fb3a2795a\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (14:16)\u003C/span\u003E: The BNZ-Business New Zealand Performance of Manufacturing Index for August came out on Friday, followed on Monday by the Performance of Services Index. These surveys show that both the manufacturing and service sectors are expanding in New Zealand. Manufacturing and services together make up about 78 percent of our economy, so these results are a positive signal about economic growth in the September quarter of this year, which is almost at an end.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f8a1635e619bf5e6a04e7772fd84b751\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: What could harm growth in the manufacturing sector?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223b6cfeb08d29e84f4a20470779048493\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, ongoing conflict in the Middle East and its impact on fuel and freight costs is obviously a concern. Another blow to the sector would be the scrapping of the Government\u2019s Investment Boost policy. If that were to happen, manufacturing businesses could no longer immediately deduct 20 percent of the cost of a new asset and would pay more tax when they invest in machinery, plant, tools, equipment, buildings, and other capital assets. Business tax in New Zealand would go up by $1.6\u00A0billion a year, and the country would miss out on much-needed investment in productive assets that would have raised wages for New Zealand workers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e360cf4b17c8af481b43684f62cf9879\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: What else could impede business growth in New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c1895307dd9e54a82a563e690a75dab\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, new taxes would hurt business and hurt the economy. Consider, for example, a capital gains tax on property that businesses own. Businesses, large and small, across New Zealand own and use factories, sheds, workshops, warehouses, garages, office buildings, laboratories, shops, and the land they sit on. These are an intrinsic part of productive businesses that employ people and pay wages. A capital gains tax would impose a new tax on them. Ultimately, that tax would fall on the owners of the business and the workers they employ.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9b2c6df743a154ae22268d34fccb3ed\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: What would be the impact of a major increase in Government revenue?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e12d30a4a64dfedfba78c71dddd165e\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, a major increase in Government revenue would have an impact on all Kiwis, not just on businesses. Core Crown revenue is currently expected to be 31.2 percent of GDP in four years\u2019 time. If, for example, that proportion was deliberately raised to 33 percent, it would require taxes to increase by $10.4 billion a year. Now, obviously, $10.4 billion is a big increase and would likely require some sort of combination of raising GST, increasing personal income tax rates, putting up the company tax rate, and introducing a comprehensive capital gains tax that included all assets. Those measures would be a huge blow, both to the economy and to everyday Kiwis.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022038b0fe681f1cc755c6d63dab01acbf0\u0022\u003EFinance\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002226ec009515dd35b15c19235b17c96d5d\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 4\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022066e053a96369241257468a1c26da0d5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022066e053a96369241257468a1c26da0d5\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (14:19)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Finance\u003C/span\u003E:\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E E te rangatira o te Whare, mihi nui ki a koe.\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=\u0022911c2dc467c1d2fe090591bf9697dfdd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022911c2dc467c1d2fe090591bf9697dfdd\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (14:19)\u003C/span\u003E: In context, yes. I particularly stand by the statement of the National Party finance spokesperson that there should be no new taxes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002213a3d4bd65294c0ff50ac4743f152f41\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: Weird. Has the Government received Treasury\u2019s review of State assets, first announced in November, and have any papers been taken to Cabinet?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e37f47393b85809512b8c4a006c92a82\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: I can confirm that no papers have been taken to Cabinet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224935dae86fd4045656b24399c07980d6\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Government received Treasury\u2019s review of State assets, first announced in November?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002259d83dcc7de52144fe77793fa5c774ac\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Treasury has been conducting performance ownership - purpose analyses of each company that the Crown owns, and Ministers have received Treasury\u2019s draft advice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002277dceed36d39320d782ddb0ee6bce5b6\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: Will she rule out any asset sales as long as she is the Minister of Finance?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a9251507637be0d7e958c7d235e572f6\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022928c9ecf7e1d7edf17d9a02317a36cec\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: Does she stand by her previous statements regarding asset sales: \u201CI think we\u2019ve got to be really open with New Zealanders if we\u2019re planning to change anything.\u201D, and why won\u2019t she front up to Kiwis on her plans to sell the assets they\u2019ve built up over generations?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a69878ddfcd3870887521f24d20a21d2\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: I stand by my statements, and despite the member\u2019s wish for fireworks, the only fireworks are popping in her caucus, that is busily designing new taxes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002240c155c31e4b3d6eb402c992fced1e6f\u0022\u003ERevenue\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225b504bf3197f6042b92c27a389c6db25\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 5\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u0022c17fb75f4f27bcde8c9cda6fb141fb3c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c17fb75f4f27bcde8c9cda6fb141fb3c\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (14:20)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Revenue\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Government considering introducing a capital gains tax that would apply to gains caused by inflation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022ea1edbcfdc5b776b861b5d52713b26a9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ea1edbcfdc5b776b861b5d52713b26a9\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (14:20)\u003C/span\u003E: No. This Government will not introduce a capital gains tax. We do not think New Zealanders should be hit with a new tax. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022053c8e0f8588db1aab64d109e02c6a68\u0022\u003ECarl Bates\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d7f6a5dc3acc765f54a22bcd03fda5f7\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a moment: we\u2019ll just wait for everyone to calm themselves down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbf93d633d4542636a4ffd2e10342ea4\u0022\u003ECarl Bates\u003C/span\u003E: Why is it important to distinguish between an increase in the dollar value of an asset, and a real capital gain?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e81eb10b6022090548a84e6e13851b2d\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: Because a higher price on paper does not necessarily mean someone is actually better off. If inflation pushes up the value of a property, taxing that increase can mean taxing someone on money they have not actually received. That is not fair and it is not something this Government supports.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002248427947949f2b27788e7af393b59950\u0022\u003ECarl Bates\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002201a96dd357550f51c7d384f8454087be\u0022\u003EHon Dr Deborah Russell\u003C/span\u003E: 25 properties.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f423760359155b654b8d3077506383a7\u0022\u003ECarl Bates\u003C/span\u003E: What could it mean\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228cecf89f5c53a1c36b3d7c43fffa3671\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a minute. Who was speaking then, while the question was being asked?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221aa29d7f0c09e3988acec3e09d5f5141\u0022\u003EHon Dr Deborah Russell\u003C/span\u003E: That was me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c499e9d71ca2c899b5249837dfa826e0\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, then please apologise to the person asking the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b381e0feac104923e183d9a3404cf57e\u0022\u003EHon Dr Deborah Russell\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da5518d1424af80e49ef1dfbe90a005d\u0022\u003ECarl Bates\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary. What could it mean\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c88552951bd9ff125a676463e1737df9\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: 25 properties.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3b58490e2321b2d1ddc5a5e6e026cc2\u0022\u003ECarl Bates\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014for a small\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022426f310af41246e6bd8d5c0d4e8daab4\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, hang on. One more time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6d896160dd14ba8349125153b483a7f\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, I thought he was finished.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de111d697ae6d9b326d8f35b9311107a\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m sorry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e04301102367ea7dfb79063a4962cbaa\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e04992815fbc4e6e1417a05c35001fb5\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, stand up and do it. I\u2019m sick of this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f5491ebefb5ab28f92c54072159c31c\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: Withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002207bb21dc7244edd80e6beb31fed8bba0\u0022\u003ECarl Bates\u003C/span\u003E: What could it mean for a small-business owner if their property increases in value because of inflation but they are taxed on the full nominal gain? [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002220cd8735e9811704b0a3730a1bacc4c1\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The balance of this question will be heard in silence with no interjections whatsoever.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002276b32ad13d054da1edc8f5726c87707e\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. In some cases, they could actually be worse off in real terms after getting a whopping tax bill from the Government. That is not how we should be treating people who are hard-working and build something up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ecaa528b839fcd193a4072086febac7\u0022\u003ECarl Bates\u003C/span\u003E: What is the Government\u2019s approach to New Zealanders who work hard, save, and invest to get ahead? [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EQuestion 5 interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022057fad9fd0f836c43f2b00d62d36474a\u0022\u003EWithdrawal from Chamber\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00229ce17fe0df73bf05a90c1d32638f95d8\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e1b12cfee0ee45d4d148d7696bc69fd3\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: OK, I just gave a fairly clear instruction to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e7c5a78e4ddfe0ec71280cdefca0d33\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f914919c05c45a42aa5d1e9596863c2\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: There were\u2014well, the member in the front row there might like to leave the House now. That wasn\u2019t funny at all. I wasn\u2019t making a joke; I was taking it very seriously. Please leave the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen withdrew from the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002260717b907fc7be50e9054fb1ca535b64\u0022\u003EOral Questions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002229352af777bb337a973e972618a6043f\u0022\u003ERevenue\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022683b7d2a9028cd1020810de87a58070d\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 5\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000180\u0022\u003EQuestion 5 resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u002212be7b96c675c46415d880a2690f04e5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002212be7b96c675c46415d880a2690f04e5\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (14:23)\u003C/span\u003E: What is the Government\u2019s approach to New Zealanders who work hard, save, and invest to get ahead?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022f82b14b4c051114bb4c15e07181ad447\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f82b14b4c051114bb4c15e07181ad447\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (14:23)\u003C/span\u003E: On this side of the House, we back Kiwis and we back New Zealand. New Zealanders should be encouraged to save, invest, build businesses, and provide for their families. On this side of the House, we do not see hard-working New Zealanders as a convenient source of more revenue to fund more spending. Our approach is to reward aspiration, investment, and hard work, not punish it with more taxes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00229ba609d7bab2ceecd37f45f2598aea37\u0022\u003EHealth\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00220c86ee0fec856226400668151f6700f5\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022 data-id=\u002201672a8a0f5f43bcb0535fc9799f562d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002201672a8a0f5f43bcb0535fc9799f562d\u0022\u003EHon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) (14:23)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Health\u003C/span\u003E: Is it correct that Health New Zealand\u2019s latest Budget material recently released showed a significant structural funding gap for the 2026-27 year and that it could not cover the costs of its existing activity?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022 data-id=\u002297c3e1be2607418295ba7856f11a7f0d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002297c3e1be2607418295ba7856f11a7f0d\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN (Minister of Health) (14:24)\u003C/span\u003E: As the Hon Casey Costello said on my behalf in the House, the Government has agreed to increase Health New Zealand\u2019s projected deficit for 2026-27 to $475 million, as set out in media reports and Health New Zealand\u2019s publicly available statement of performance expectations. That is a deliberate decision to deliver more healthcare for New Zealanders. I reject the premise of the second part of the member\u2019s question that Health New Zealand cannot cover the costs of its existing activities; that is not how Government accounting works. The agreed deficit is precisely what allows Health New Zealand to keep delivering those activities and more. It is also important to note that in 2022-23, Health New Zealand overspent its budget by more than $1 billion and, by the member\u2019s own reasoning, precisely the same question could be asked of her.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228bc3ab542b2ae72f363e0d79ff8f4864\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: Why did he claim \u201Crecord investment in health\u201D in May this year, when only two months earlier he\u2019d been advised that even with that funding, the health system couldn\u2019t cover the cost of its existing services?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb72c4527a91e42f50ca0182c4a23042\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: I would encourage the member to read page 11 of the statement of performance expectations, which states, \u201CAs such Health NZ will be considering a longer path to break-even that is more sustainable and ensures we can continue to deliver more services to New Zealanders without placing unnecessary pressure on the organisation.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208c6dd5fef4b95e25fda904c83cc09b1\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: What steps did the Government take to increase pre-committed health funding when advised of that structural deficit in March?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a45ed1e3cf16edabe019d5bcd01ba1a1\u0022\u003EHon Shane Jones\u003C/span\u003E: More than you did!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d02b278a4fef0a1f585bb021aa75c05\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: We went through a process to ensure that Health New Zealand could continue to deliver more services. As stated in the Statement of Performance Expectations, they will be having a \u201Clonger path to break-even that is more sustainable and ensures we can continue to deliver more services [for] New Zealanders\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1a3e39fa64b2086647aba879d18caac\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: What other proof of health system underfunding would he expect, other than a Treasury note that references a structural funding gap eight times?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c82e937359ab152e9d1e54cb0a3a8bc1\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: If the member wants to\u2014as I said in my answer to the primary question\u2014pose that same logic on herself, when in 2022/23\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224d034bde6ac09ad608e93c4f88707554\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: No, you\u2019re the Minister!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224200046a8879f3f2526333df20f48f08\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014Health New Zealand over spent its Budget by more than $1 billion and ran a large deficit that was to ensure that services could be delivered. We\u2019re continuing to ensure we deliver more services for New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225dd04835a3ae236ff9d24182ea9197d6\u0022\u003EDr Vanessa Weenink\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister confirm that an extra $475 million in health spending is arithmetically an increase, rather than decrease?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002215c95d3866d6f2e413d38a3fb9ca699a\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: That is correct: a $475 million deficit means Health New Zealand will be allowed to spend $475 million more to allow more money to be spent on health. It is a deliberate decision to deliver more care for New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229be76a3bf1c296f8a102a1504e1182f7\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: Why did he choose to allow Health New Zealand to remain in deficit longer, and services at continued risk of cuts, rather than funding the health system more?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c3f96f058dc28af4889a9733060c6c3\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: Firstly, I would encourage the member to read the statement of performance expectations, which says, \u201CAs such Health NZ will be considering a longer path to break-even that is more sustainable and ensures we can continue to deliver more services to New Zealanders without placing unnecessary pressure on the organisation.\u201D This is on top of the additional funding. The Government is continuing to put record funding into healthcare, and most importantly, we are seeing year-on-year improvement against our health targets, which are making progress after years of decline.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fc25e3b45e7803c4b666e693a5fe25fb\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f4ee727e07037bbad3dfc51e8289c4b2\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 7\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022 data-id=\u0022a2b57716c39409e36315f5a9e3e34710\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a2b57716c39409e36315f5a9e3e34710\u0022\u003ERAWIRI WAITITI (Co-Leader\u2014Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori) (14:28)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000203\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=\u002226474f35de9528475c0dae1c7a40bdde\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002226474f35de9528475c0dae1c7a40bdde\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister) (14:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and particularly our position of no new taxes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299a809b72a6490df4064a5b8bec0d55d\u0022\u003ERawiri Waititi\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree with the M\u0101ori Language Commissioner that his Governments policies have put te reo M\u0101ori at risk?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a37d8cb4416932c34d71a18e8586e93\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: No, not at all. I think we are very proud to be celebrating te Wiki o Te Reo M\u0101ori for 50 years, it\u2019s been really important, and we\u2019ve put a huge investment into it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fda04c194853ee65c3d44c4bd54b72a6\u0022\u003ERawiri Waititi\u003C/span\u003E: How can he deny that his Government has put te reo M\u0101ori at risk when they have cut $30 million from te reo M\u0101ori teacher training; removed M\u0101ori words from children\u2019s books; replaced M\u0101ori Government department names with English ones; directed the Public Service to stop communicating in te reo M\u0101ori; removed bilingual road signs; and wasted millions of dollars to make English an official language of this country, when English was under absolutely no threat?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f5c89fb136d115b4ef102ff5aeef73ce\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Because we\u2019ve actually invested more than $100\u00A0million for M\u0101ori education. We\u2019ve put $14 million in to support 51,000 teachers, we\u2019ve put $10 million into a virtual learning network connecting students to M\u0101ori-medium science, technology, engineering, and mathematics teaching, we\u2019ve put $48 million into M\u0101ori broadcasting, we\u2019ve put $49 million into Te Matatini, and $10 million into Te M\u0101ori T\u016B to showcase M\u0101ori culture to the world.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220451ce5b791796380f3969aac3663996\u0022\u003ERawiri Waititi\u003C/span\u003E: Why has this Government decided to erase or weaken Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations across 19 pieces of legislation under urgency during te Wiki o Te Reo M\u0101ori, and does he accept that he is undermining M\u0101ori rights while the country is celebrating M\u0101ori culture?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228be884480aeeb108a16cfd70163ca984\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: No, not at all. Actually, we\u2019ve had all sorts of generic Treaty clauses; from \u201Chonour\u201D to \u201Chave regard to\u201D, to \u201Cgive effect to\u201D, to \u201Ctake into account\u201D\u2014all we\u2019re doing is making sure we don\u2019t have open-ended clauses that could create uncertainty and legal risk. Most importantly, we\u2019re making sure that everyone\u2019s clear about their obligations, because we\u2019re getting maximum clarity and consistency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e26281e212cbb5ebd2130f5c468742c\u0022\u003EHon Paul Goldsmith\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Prime Minister confirm that the single biggest area of new expenditure in the arts and culture space has been the extra resources put into Te Matatini because of the great support there is for M\u0101ori performing arts?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4bd7242fe89433f4970bf626b5c340b\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and I want to commend this Minister and also Minister Tama Potaka for advocating very strongly for it in the Budget.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296ebd5a2c5ca35b8f103f8c1d11696eb\u0022\u003EHon Shane Jones\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister agree with the esteemed leaders M\u0101ui P\u014Dmare, Sir Apirana Ngata, Te Rangi H\u012Broa, and Timi Kara that the Treaty has three articles, not fabrications and contrivances of the 1980s otherwise dressed up as principles, and that this Treaty between two peoples ultimately brought us together: one people, one country\u2014\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003Ehe iwi tahi t\u0101tou\u003C/span\u003E?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a301e44fa414118e484a0e23ef62640\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: I also believe very strongly that the best way to meet our obligations under the Treaty is to focus on delivering better outcomes for M\u0101ori, and that\u2019s what this Government has been doing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022253f89b583aa24a9a559de4347d41b44\u0022\u003EHon Shane Jones\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Prime Minister confirm that the bills referred to in terms of regularising references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi are actually rationing something that had become akin to cultural spaghetti spread throughout our legislation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b42c165122f10fddc50aa1fbd308520f\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the point that I\u2019ve been making is that we\u2019ve had a complete variation of actual Treaty clauses. It\u2019s important that they are consistent and they give maximum clarity so that everyone understands their obligations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217026895c72e714f34a8b8bd50cd3732\u0022\u003ERawiri Waititi\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree that the three references to Te Tiriti o Waitangi bills that his Government intends to pass will result in less accountability to Te Tiriti, and the only way to stop them is to vote this Government out?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214d69260ed5bffab78074ea5d0a03343\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: No. I think, actually, that when you look at the results that we\u2019ve had, we\u2019re improving regular attendance for M\u0101ori students from 51.3 percent to 54.6 percent; when you think about the lower level of M\u0101ori youth offending, down 28 percent; there are 4,000 fewer M\u0101ori victims of violent crime; when you think about the amount of work that we\u2019ve done around housing\u2014and what about the Ng\u0101i Tahu aquaculture projects, which are going to create lots of jobs for young M\u0101ori? So in this House, we actually get on and we deliver for M\u0101ori. We don\u2019t just come here and do performative stuff.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0de37c3e6ee2950bf98b7a538823bf3\u0022\u003EHon Shane Jones\u003C/span\u003E: Does he accept that the ultimate accountability to te iwi M\u0101ori is via the voting system, and some M\u0101oris in this House are looking healthier than others?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a2f80b1a2ce1bd973e2b308e9936ed60\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that\u2019s a point, not a question. Question No. 8\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022598bf8a94450d6462acf18bba6663c9d\u0022\u003ERawiri Waititi\u003C/span\u003E: Says a list MP.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022556b4498c14a0639aa85ce05748ed033\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014Laura McClure, and no one else, Mr Waititi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022eb117ab1e946aee24b211fd32be84eeb\u0022\u003ERegulation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022aa5fb528619cfa15a407492e58aa4f9e\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 8\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b064dd56673f4c1cb11c1242823abb92\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd146780b7d4fbd28d2daa15d60ce4b9\u0022\u003ELAURA McCLURE\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. To the Minister for Regulation, what recent announcements has he made about\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a487d9d0982c3f21e7ed8a7dda6b155f\u0022\u003ERawiri Waititi\u003C/span\u003E: Put your name on the ballot.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022962306795d2a8196f81511600af3afdf\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Hey, hey, listen\u2014sorry. No one speaks when a question is being asked. One member has left the House today for breaching that after two warnings, and there will be others to go if we continue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b064dd56673f4c1cb11c1242823abb92\u0022 data-id=\u0022a2ee9637e7ec62899d47ea39405cff0a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b064dd56673f4c1cb11c1242823abb92\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a2ee9637e7ec62899d47ea39405cff0a\u0022\u003ELAURA McCLURE (ACT) (14:32)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister for Regulation\u003C/span\u003E: What recent announcements has he made about regulatory relief for the hospitality sector? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022 data-id=\u0022c153faca5bb0eef5e1cbd01eebb423f5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c153faca5bb0eef5e1cbd01eebb423f5\u0022\u003EHon DAVID SEYMOUR (Minister for Regulation) (14:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Last week, alongside our Minister for Tourism and Hospitality, the Hon Louise Upston, I released the latest sector review from the Ministry for Regulation. It shows the usefulness of the ministry because it was able to listen to 13 different sector groups, 27 district licensing committees, 12 territorial authorities, and a further 21 hospitality businesses, alongside receiving 247 written submissions. These people have told the ministry that they have been bedevilled by excessive regulation, often having to provide the same information multiple times even to the same regulator; decisions take too long and they have little certainty; alcohol licensing and renewal processes are inefficient and disproportionate to risk and are ineffective; fees for licensing and registration are too high and not always transparent; food safety requirements are not always effective, efficient, or proportionate to risk; and the building consent and planning requirements create unnecessary costs and delays specific to the hospitality industry. We know this, and we now have 24 recommendations that the Government has already accepted and will implement in the next year\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261362834641df3e4b6a7c8d6cee30b69\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a very long answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002276981f25be4290d8e02b83b80058388b\u0022\u003EHon DAVID SEYMOUR\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014because the ministry was able to get this information from the sector.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf2d43603957688f900da54a0108681d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: It was indeed a long answer, and so concise answers should\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b064dd56673f4c1cb11c1242823abb92\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f60347b132cd5b805344d6b22bf444a1\u0022\u003ELaura McClure\u003C/span\u003E: What are the review\u2019s recommendations?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022795e86b9921ee7930b1c208841c46487\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Hang on. Answers should\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dce114abe1dab3b9659d01423554f421\u0022\u003EHon DAVID SEYMOUR\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274d7d0ba057469bf98ee4bed6a0f40db\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, hang on, we haven\u2019t had the question yet. However, if we could short-cut it without the question and just go straight to the answers, that might be\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b064dd56673f4c1cb11c1242823abb92\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e314fc8290575b134040ff237877c205\u0022\u003ELaura McClure\u003C/span\u003E: Oh look, I took your advice well on board. What are the review\u2019s recommendations?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a72e0ac6ba12aafdd3dfe47d7b5dec0\u0022\u003EHon DAVID SEYMOUR\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, I\u2019m sure the tape will show that she had asked that question, and I would respectfully submit that I am\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222e5bd3d04c2591a5efb6f3b707d35f6\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, just a minute.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a3b4f9d3b67f674728aec4842c7fa199\u0022\u003EHon DAVID SEYMOUR\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014being concise: we\u2019ve just done a lot of good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022119583c3252389e9fcd731d6a1f2be89\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, sit down. I hadn\u2019t heard it and so we\u2019ll just call the question to an end, and, in that case, we\u2019ll go to question No. 9, the Hon Willow-Jean Prime.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a04e4a692b02dc62608b61cb23015bf\u0022\u003EHon DAVID SEYMOUR\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, point of order. There is a right of a member to ask a question, and she does not deserve to lose that right because you don\u2019t believe that I\u2019m answering it correctly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002201401eb40d2d554881c5755cfe749e34\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, you need to read your Standing Orders, because all supplementaries are at the discretion of the Speaker. And you argued with me, which wasn\u2019t the smart thing to do. It\u2019s not progressing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002211f5bd2933360935b5c84171a8fe2041\u0022\u003EHon DAVID SEYMOUR\u003C/span\u003E: The question is: are you using that discretion responsibly for the House?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a05f037a472478fb185a5f6564d4e92a\u0022\u003EWithdrawal from Chamber\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c6c44308fc7d6062621b1b2ac5125810\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002244ed129b8df5be53dff5b0eb4e16da56\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member will leave the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour withdrew from the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f4ea1bc2f0176ffc1c710f90d1ac3b45\u0022\u003EOral Questions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00220eb4a85faf3dbfc20489842e1a42f834\u0022\u003ESocial Development and Employment\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b05a10d01be1961112331b36d57541ec\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u00220b2af8efa9c5c3bb9ef095a9bee0f2f4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220b2af8efa9c5c3bb9ef095a9bee0f2f4\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (14:35)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister for Social Development and Employment\u003C/span\u003E: Does she stand by her statement that \u201CI accept responsibility\u201D for a series of mistakes related to payments from the Ministry of Social Development; if so, why did it take her more than three weeks to publicly accept responsibility?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u0022a2a92591ef251c9a870bee9cb3ec70cb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a2a92591ef251c9a870bee9cb3ec70cb\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) (14:36)\u003C/span\u003E: To the first part of the question: yes. To the second part of the question: I reject the member\u2019s assertion. As Minister for Social Development and Employment, I accept full responsibility for my portfolio, including when people are let down. As I\u2019ve said previously, what happened was unacceptable, and I would again like to apologise to everyone who was impacted. My focus as Minister is on ensuring this does not happen again. The review that was released last week identified where things went wrong and what needs to change, and my expectation is that Ministry of Social Development (MSD) will implement the recommendations as soon as possible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022083b70fbf06b1c75aa6972f910a065b4\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: How many disabled people who missed out on payments they were entitled to fell behind on rent as a result?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db1162c86b463fa0df0e68913d9c1b32\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: The report that was released last week by MSD states the number of people who were affected. Some of those were on the Supported Living Payment; that number is 2,349.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd4058df412ae2cb4cfa849cb50582c1\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: How many pensioners who missed out on payments they were entitled to couldn\u2019t afford food as a result?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a79d0ce4303efdd70806995b85c59b7\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: I don\u2019t have an answer to that. As I said, I recognise that the mistakes meant that payments were suspended that shouldn\u2019t have been. The focus was on ensuring that payments were made at pace\u2014MSD did do that\u2014but I acknowledge that there will be people who suffered hardship as a result.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a64767504620b3f459f3a14e5f45368d\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: Were there other benefits, such as Jobseeker, affected by processing delays at MSD?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223df9ce65dd03252a3a88c1da04eb2d88\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: The Confirming Your Circumstances review related to predominantly those on the Supported Living Payment. There were a very small number on emergency benefits that were affected.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022debb81928b0cdeb277448d811c92a2cf\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: When will she admit that people had to go without food, medical appointments, or fell behind on rent, because of her changes under urgency and her cuts to staff at the ministry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298995100f4bd40b86cda831ac4eaa0d4\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: I reject the assertion of that question. I have said in this House, previously, that people had payments suspended that shouldn\u2019t have. As soon as that was identified the payments for the winter energy payment were made within 48 hours. There has been a review\u2014which the Ministry of Social Development delivered last Thursday\u2014with recommendations, and I expect them to deliver those at pace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00224ab5a52f1886126dfc0bca43585b5c2b\u0022\u003ESocial Development and Employment\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e2da17d143d9dcb266e6307627f288b8\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 10\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u0022714c9ccb9edb5ce882b419e72ff35f8c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022714c9ccb9edb5ce882b419e72ff35f8c\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: How many suspensions and cancellations of main benefits occurred as a result of processing delays triggered by Confirming your Circumstances reviews, and how many of them were Supported Living Payment recipients?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u0022995a5d3e7aec3b2ec21c6fe166080837\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022995a5d3e7aec3b2ec21c6fe166080837\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) (14:39)\u003C/span\u003E: The Ministry for Social Development (MSD) have advised me that 2,460 clients on a main benefit were affected by the processing delays; 2,349 clients were receiving the Supported Living Payment. MSD did not break this affected group down by cancellations or suspensions. MSD has acted quickly to clear the backlog and make sure that these clients have had their payments reinstated and any arrears paid.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220982b27b19fc0b9b98bb74ffab7c3835\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: Has she bothered to ask the Ministry for Social Development whether any of the sick, injured, or disabled New Zealanders who lost their main source of income went hungry, into debt, or became homeless?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0ed7a7e959a0af920109ccd25cfa299\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: It is clear from the review that was undertaken that people went without payments that shouldn\u2019t have, and I have acknowledged\u2014as has the chief executive of MSD\u2014that that has created harm and hardship, for which we have both apologised.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b9f7bfe7701e652ee7232a6d8de84127\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: Has she asked her ministry whether any of the sick, injured, or disabled New Zealanders who lost their main source of income went hungry, into debt, or became homeless?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022684761f3a35570de1c2d950dd47e92ad\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve answered that question and acknowledged that those who had payments suspended that shouldn\u2019t have, have experienced harm and hardship. That will be in a range of ways, with a range of different circumstances.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281e1094be3f202c98b60b4b6a2b53c1a\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: Has she sought any briefings or advice on the impact on sick, injured, or disabled New Zealanders who lost their main source of income, and whether this led to people going hungry, into debt, or into homelessness?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002234f85a3c2b588fcc31325e759f64d7cf\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, because that is why a review was undertaken, on which MSD reported last week. As I said, it is clear that people had payments suspended that they shouldn\u2019t have, and that had an impact on them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225204005bc77ed358ece3485733e7ed9c\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: If her answer to my previous question over whether she sought advice or briefings about whether people went hungry, into debt, or into homelessness was \u201CYes\u201D, what did MSD have to say about the number of people who went hungry, into debt, or experienced homelessness?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226034a2116f0b13897e108380b22cdeb7\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve answered the question in terms of the number of people who had a main benefit suspended when they shouldn\u2019t have, and the review that was provided by MSD last week clearly goes into what happened and why, and how many were affected. As I\u2019ve said in this House on multiple occasions, as soon as I was aware of the issue, my focus, and my request of MSD, was to ensure that payments were put in people\u2019s bank accounts at haste, and they have been. There are recommendations now in terms of what has happened and why, and I expect MSD to action them with pace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226762256ef914da85aabf5f41bdd18930\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: On what date did she first receive correspondence from welfare recipients or members of Parliament alerting her that people were experiencing cancellations and suspensions to their main benefits or supplementary assistance due to MSD processing delays, and this excludes the briefing she received on 13 August by her own ministry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002259ae9445be651e3dd6fb67691493eab8\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: In terms of the question, the first identification that went to an MSD staff member about a suspension was at the end of April. As I said last week, it took far too long for MSD to draw the threads together when issues had been raised by multiple people. That was unacceptable, and that is where I expect the recommendations of this review to be delivered at pace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a91c4f02181b20b381ba1ab3294d1e62\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was specifically on correspondence that she received from welfare recipients or other members of Parliament. At no point did she address either of those groups; she talked about correspondence from MSD but did not address whether she received correspondence from welfare recipients.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f620ad64dc30709767d28a8951d0ebd5\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m not sure that that\u2019s right. I think the question was certainly addressed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227cef4e658121d088486e8f95f44330c8\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m happy to answer it. I don\u2019t have that detail in front of me. If the member wants to put a question down in written form, I will answer that for you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00229d16b1abe4eeba28e85e49c7c159f4f6\u0022\u003ETourism and Hospitality\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002237a387a054070cede2e1d2ee6137a435\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 11\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022 data-id=\u0022e34c12cb2b9ef52ef66b33e87d95e45e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e34c12cb2b9ef52ef66b33e87d95e45e\u0022\u003ENANCY LU (National) (14:43)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister for Tourism and Hospitality\u003C/span\u003E: What recent reports has she seen on tourism in New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u00229fabc0ac55dd0145f54b802d01967552\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229fabc0ac55dd0145f54b802d01967552\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Tourism and Hospitality) (14:44)\u003C/span\u003E: Data released by Stats NZ yesterday shows New Zealand\u2019s international visitor numbers continue to rise, with arrivals for July exceeding 2019 levels. Our first target for visitor numbers was to return to 2019 levels, so this result is great news: 256,600 international visitors arrived in New Zealand in July 2026\u2014an increase of 8.5 percent on July 2025. We\u2019ve also welcomed 3.69 million arrivals in the year to July\u2014an increase of 9 percent on the year prior, which puts us at 95 percent of the 2019 levels for the year. Growing tourism is a key part of our Government\u2019s plan to fix the basics and build the future, and this progress shows that our plan is working.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214c787da9ba72d5b6a9525d9c05104aa\u0022\u003ENancy Lu\u003C/span\u003E: What markets have seen the strongest growth?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022210c0048490a9341193b74891225f56b\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: We are seeing continued growth from our largest visitor market, Australia, with a record number of our Aussie mates crossing the ditch in July. Visitor arrivals from Australia increased by 6\u00A0percent on July last year, reaching 194,900 visitors. There was also strong growth from other key tourism markets, including a 12\u00A0percent increase in visitors from the United States and a 25\u00A0percent increase in visitors from China. These results are another positive step towards our goal of doubling the value of tourism exports by 2034. With one in nine New Zealanders working in tourism and hospitality, growing visitor numbers means growing job opportunities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022342f022ede2f190069b14e31db6ba96e\u0022\u003ENancy Lu\u003C/span\u003E: What commentary has she seen on these reports?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002265b9b785a374d640538e185150af7846\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: ASB senior economists said global demand for New Zealand tourism has held up more than anticipated given recent global shocks. Rotorua mayor Tania Tapsell said, \u201CThe efforts that have gone in, both locally and from the Government, to these key markets is really starting to pay off. July is usually a quiet time, so the big win is the 70\u00A0percent jump in business and conference events that keep Rotorua afloat.\u201D Dave Beeche, the CE of Queenstown-based tour operator RealNZ, has said that the visa pilot for Chinese visitors has been enormously successful and has made it a lot cheaper and easier for them to visit. Tourism is critical to our economy, and our investments will help deliver lasting benefits for communities and businesses across New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002265a23c1cc90f3b3b0dce49592230cc9b\u0022\u003ENancy Lu\u003C/span\u003E: What steps is the Government taking to support an increase in tourism growth?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b8fec853a7d15b4b3578461e7c482842\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: We know domestic visitors generate nearly twice as many guest nights as international visitors and account for around two-thirds of all guest nights across New Zealand. We do not believe that New Zealanders booking a weekend away or travelling for a family funeral or sports event should face an additional tax on top of the costs they already pay when travelling domestically. We are working hard to attract more visitors to New Zealand because the more visitors we have to our cities and towns, the more money is being spent in local shops and cafes. It\u2019s a key part of our plan to grow the economy so we can keep investing in front-line public services that Kiwis rely on, without having to reach for new taxes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022966d341558a9053f96214991679d6366\u0022\u003ECommerce and Consumer Affairs\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225610e363920040f8265600fe376613f4\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 12\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u00222bf29aa8ea5804f150c538e3f3fbcecd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222bf29aa8ea5804f150c538e3f3fbcecd\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (14:47)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs\u003C/span\u003E: T\u0113n\u0101 koe e te M\u0101ngai o te Whare. Ng\u0101 mihi o Te Wiki o Te Reo M\u0101ori. Does he stand by his statement that the Government\u2019s policy is for \u201Csustainable food price increases\u201D; and, if so, how much does he think prices will rise for things Kiwis cannot go without?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022 data-id=\u00228246834c4e463ebfb30c9ac511475735\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228246834c4e463ebfb30c9ac511475735\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs) (14:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, which is why annual food inflation is at 1.9\u00A0percent. In terms of prices and inflation more generally, I would note that Budget 2026 forecasts inflation for 2027 and 2028 within the Government\u2019s target band of 1 to 3\u00A0percent. That is a significant improvement on the 7.3\u00A0percent inflation rate recorded in 2022.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb289c8fe5d3ef12af81d77641ab29d0\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by his statement \u201CWe acknowledge that, overall, Kiwis pay too much for their groceries.\u201D; if so, what actions has he taken to reduce food prices for Kiwis?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7bbc77fd5a405996d4621a00e513da8\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, we do acknowledge that Kiwis pay too much for their groceries. That is why the Commerce Commission is continuing its compliance work against major supermarket operators, that is why we are supporting reforms to improve competition and lower barriers to entry in the grocery market, and that is why we are increasing penalties for fair-trading breaches.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a22bcc8e77212f876e6a9c047b3d13c\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Was it a good use of time and resources to spend three years trying to attract a third supermarket entrant from overseas when, during that time, the duopoly has maintained an 80\u00A0percent market share and grocery prices continue to rise?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a21b97bf94803a5af5d7473e81689efe\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, no one speaks while a question\u2019s being asked. The member will ask the question again, with no one else adding any commentary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022211a21d33adc3e606be99a77eaa1e17a\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Was it a good use of time and resources to spend three years attracting a third supermarket entrant from overseas when, during that time, the duopoly has maintained an 80\u00A0percent market share and grocery prices have continued to rise?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002258a718918bc54655f426e4ef209ceb89\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, it was a good use of resource and the fact that food price inflation is down to 1.9\u00A0percent is an indicator. When one does nothing, and one fuels the economy and pours petrol on the fire, that is when you get food price inflation of 12.5\u00A0percent under the last Labour Government in an annual context. We are a lot different from that lot.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c038f3e34da3a3863de00562ed922bd3\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Are New Zealanders paying higher prices for groceries, petrol, airfares, and banking, and have they been told, repeatedly, by this Government, that more competition is coming and that will help those prices?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225cc59aed1adf8b851e4d2424feefa1e2\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: This Government continues its focus on reducing inflationary pressures, while supporting reforms to lower competition and lower barriers. A 1.9\u00A0percent annualised food inflation is a lot better than the 12.5\u00A0percent in the year to June 2023. In the year to June 2023, under a Labour Government, fruit and vegetables went up 22\u00A0percent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214ee1b88675d935ee2159ed5c8c6d116\u0022\u003EHon Nicola Willis\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022332de827b99e4ff767e74d1e78a10282\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just wait for your own crew to calm themselves down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cbea3cf12545c22f02b06d019f212034\u0022\u003EHon Nicola Willis\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister confirm that in the 12 months to July the price of eggs, in terms of food price inflation, went down 15.5\u00A0percent, which compares to a 77.9\u00A0percent increase in a 12-month period under Labour; and can he also confirm that the price of tomatoes dropped 29.3\u00A0percent compared to a 148\u00A0percent increase during a during a 12-month period under Labour?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223c840208835a10d4108dee06eb9cc9bc\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: I can confirm both things and I can confirm in the three years to 2026, food inflation\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7877de6734f5fca5699aa00988b393f\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a minute, sorry. The member\u2019s asked a question and clearly wants answers, so it would be a good idea, I think, to listen and to hear those answers. Start the answer again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5fc8c9c2e482dcff128336b5a3938df\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I can confirm both those numbers. I can also confirm that in the three years to 2026, under this administration, food inflation has been 6.8\u00A0percent. But I can also confirm that in the three years to 2023, under the last Labour Government, food inflation was 21.9\u00A0percent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022df758d785b2769336c43dab46fdd27a4\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by his Government\u2019s approach to competition and believe it has been sufficient to protect New Zealand consumers from the market power of big companies?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222a8e755222376a4bffc2204c3a701f6\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, we do, and we also stand by our decision to remove the Grocery Commissioner and put more powers into the ComCom, and it was a decision that was made by Dame Paula Rebstock, who made the recommendation to remove the individual Grocery Commissioner role, and if you looked at the select committee report, the Labour Party unanimously agreed to the Rebstock report.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af39e613a9fb31cf9c8bf404a187a3ba\u0022\u003EHon Nicola Willis\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister confirm that in the last 12 months, tinned spaghetti has dropped 6\u00A0percent in price compared to a 35\u00A0percent increase in a 12-month period under Labour; that the price of chicken has fallen 4\u00A0percent compared to a 23\u00A0percent increase in a 12-month period under Labour\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022569244a4cd21f43634b8559665a5a329\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: What\u2019s the price of mince?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022690f81d299d0ca71d58c1bf8bbc80789\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, we\u2019re just going to back it up a bit. The rule is, and everyone knows it Ms Prime, Willow-Jean, the Hon, that we don\u2019t\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] Yeah, I said we\u2019re backing it up. We don\u2019t speak at all when the question\u2019s being asked. The Hon Nicola Willis, ask the question again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022227942cb5279f1a833c5d88875988741\u0022\u003EHon Nicola Willis\u003C/span\u003E: Can the member confirm, in terms of food prices, that in the past 12 months, tinned spaghetti has fallen 6\u00A0percent in price, which compares with a 35\u00A0percent increase in price in one 12-month period under Labour; and that in the same 12 months the price of chicken fell 4\u00A0percent compared with a 23\u00A0percent increase in a 12-month period under Labour?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223555f613f45a62ab139cdfc4e185b681\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: I am delighted to confirm those decreases, particularly around tinned spaghetti. I received a delighted email, a very pleased email, from the Hon Bill English, who makes spaghetti and pineapple pizzas\u2014he too is delighted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c6b45a16f936c382108f9fe7997706fd\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Is that what he says to the people who are paying 88 percent more for butter, 96 percent more for tomatoes, and 72 percent more for bread under his watch?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225b393f89ffe57141d55064fa9a3e4812\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: What I would say to those people is that fruit and vegetable prices are lower than a year ago, down 1 percent, and that is a stark contrast to food prices being up 12.5 percent in the year to June 2023, including fruit and vegetables up 22 percent in the year to June 2023 under the last Labour Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022036725139654540b0a9c8a44417ca529\u0022\u003EHon Nicola Willis\u003C/span\u003E: In light of that member\u2019s question, would the member be surprised to learn that, in fact, in the 12 months to July this year, butter price inflation fell 1.9 percent, which, again, compares with a 13.5 percent increase during one 12-month period under Labour?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229965780d4d5ff772e0384adb6ef8e803\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I can confirm that, and also reiterate that, while fruit and veges went up 22 percent in the last year of the previous administration, fruit and vegetables in the last year of this administration have gone down 1 percent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220ed9d538aaaf982cf04ad37b8ec446b2\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: Can he confirm that he flippantly said to the general manager of Fair Food, the food rescue organisation, when she was sharing with him about the cost of living crisis and struggle with people purchasing food, \u201CDon\u2019t you think a little bit of hunger is just inevitable?\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bc44e56690ccc8fe09962fc481f4b761\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: Anyone who knows me knows that I would never have said such a thing, so I dispute that. Just because that claim was made doesn\u2019t make it true.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbef04ae0e9ad692bc70fb8f0a7fcaea\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That concludes oral questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002296571a4bdd228695c9911d30de8b68b2\u0022\u003EDebates\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00228b21d217f3c5301589f41998f834b216\u0022\u003EWinter Energy Payments\u2014Findings of Government Report\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00222eb7e627cf0a33f3618b5e6131353628\u0022\u003EUrgent Debate Declined\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eab013cd7b39e5733cd86660738f70ce\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Members, I have received letters from Ricardo Men\u00E9ndez March and the Hon Willow-Jean Prime to seek a debate under Standing Order 399 on the findings of the Government report \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EWinter Energy Payments and Confirming your Circumstances: A Review\u003C/span\u003E. This is a particular case of recent occurrence for which there is ministerial responsibility. The House has already debated the circumstances that gave rise to the report. I do not think that the matter warrants further attention to the House today. The application is declined.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWe come to take a 30 second break before I call on the next Government order. Members, there\u2019s too much talk. If you are leaving for other business, do so quickly and quietly. I don\u2019t want to single out members, but those at the bottom of the Parliament need to be quiet or leave. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002226ed563086dadf03c545e869ffe277a2\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e0f37fb3f119ab5874559426b5c81488\u0022\u003ETaxation (Annual Rates for 2026-27, FBT Simplification, Foreign Investment Funds, and Remedial Measures) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002238ee369a498a260bfbdc83928afd1db8\u0022\u003ELegislative Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00224237430faf33b391aea5a8300b459502\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224237430faf33b391aea5a8300b459502\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (14:58)\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to present a legislative statement on the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2026-27, FBT Simplification, Foreign Investment Funds, and Remedial Measures) Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e8cb683dd02ad0f5b0638f03eb3febe\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave has been sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is none.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThat legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002261eb1d15f70ebcd46851865f6166a1e2\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00226e7d3db76facefe9b9e0f25c765bc3c1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226e7d3db76facefe9b9e0f25c765bc3c1\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (14:59)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2026-27, FBT Simplification, Foreign Investment Funds, and Remedial Measures) Bill be now read a first time\u003C/span\u003E. I nominate the Finance and Expenditure Committee to consider this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis omnibus bill contains a broad range of measures all aimed at growing the economy and encouraging investment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA consistent theme throughout is reducing compliance costs, simplifying rules, and increasing certainty for businesses and taxpayers. The prime example is the proposals related to fringe benefit tax\u2014or FBT. FBT was originally intended to ensure non-cash employment benefits, such as work vehicles, are taxed consistently with salary and wages. Over time, the rules have become increasingly complex, resulting in misunderstanding and poor compliance. The bill proposes a much simpler approach.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ERather than requiring detailed record-keeping and log books to determine private use of work vehicles, employers would select a category reflecting the level of private use and apply a corresponding valuation rate. These changes are expected to significantly reduce compliance costs for Kiwi taxpayers. Valuation settings will also be updated, with different rates applying to standard, hybrid, and electric vehicles, to reflect the lower running costs of electric vehicles. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe next major component of the bill relates to our Foreign Investment Fund\u2014or FIF\u2014rules. We started reforming this regime last year, focusing it first on settings that were deterring skilled migrants from staying in New Zealand. This year, we are focusing on removing the pain points for New Zealanders. The FIF de minimis threshold would increase from $50,000 to $100,000. This means that more people with smaller investments will not have to apply these rules, and instead will pay tax on the dividends received.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill would extend availability of the revenue account method for unlisted foreign shares to all New Zealand residents. This removes a requirement to pay tax on unrealised earnings from liquid assets. Related changes to the financial arrangements rules will reduce compliance costs and cash-flow uncertainty for taxpayers who hold foreign currency denominated financial arrangements. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd lastly, we have made a change to the transitional residence regime that will benefit both migrants and New Zealanders returning after 10 years or more from overseas. Previously, it was possible for the transitional residence period to be triggered while a migrant was still tax resident in another country. The bill provides that the transitional residence period would only start once a person is tax resident in New Zealand under a double tax agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill also improves the research and development tax incentive, one of the Government\u2019s largest business support programmes. Eligible businesses will be able to receive in-year payments based on expected entitlements. Inland Revenue will also be able to accept late applications, or correct minor administrative errors so that businesses can retain access to the incentives where appropriate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe are also proposing to reduce the cap on eligible internal software development expenditure from $25 million to $3 million per business, per year. These changes are all intended to make the tax incentive more accessible and cost-effective, maximising its productivity benefits. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo remain fit for purpose, the tax system needs to adapt to new technologies. The bill also includes measures related to the taxation of crypto assets. A new rule modelling on existing share-lending arrangements will mean that gains or losses are recognised only when the asset is ultimately disposed of. More New Zealanders are now exporting excess electricity back into our grid. The bill will also zero-rate GST on excess electricity supplied from residential premises. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill also implements several Budget 2026 initiatives for charities and not-for-profits. The bill confirms that membership subscriptions and levies received by not-for-profits would remain non-taxable. The bill will also increase the statutory deduction for smaller taxable not-for-profits from $1,000 to $10,000 and make it clear that tax returns are not required so long as the net income is and remains below this limit. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo encourage more charitable giving, eligible donors would be able to receive donation tax credit refunds during the year, rather than waiting until the end of the year, and they will be able to transfer those donation tax credits directly to the charities they wish to transfer them to. The tax treatment of volunteer honoraria would also be simplified by allowing such payments to be treated as salary and wages.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, the bill grants overseas donee status to six New Zealand charities with overseas charitable purposes. Our Government\u2019s focus is clear: growing the economy, improving productivity, and creating the conditions for businesses to invest, grow, and employ\u2014simply, to fix the basics and build the future. Tax is not the only lever in that agenda, but it is a very important one. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022aa84cb469b69be8e9771d8b068f47c86\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aa84cb469b69be8e9771d8b068f47c86\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (15:06)\u003C/span\u003E: This is quite a large tax bill for a tax bill. There\u2019s a lot in it, and they\u2019re largely sensible measures that the Labour Party agrees with. They\u2019re pretty standard tax measures: tidying up aspects of our tax law that need to be tidied up, and changing some stuff because the world has changed, so the laws need to change. The Labour Party supports this bill through to first reading, though there are several issues we will want to dig into in the select committee stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe changes around the calculation of fringe benefit tax (FBT) on vehicles are very sensible. It is a complicated area in terms of record-keeping. These new changes mean that an employer can specify whether a car is mainly for private use or mainly for business use, and then the fringe benefit tax is calculated accordingly. That\u2019s a sensible change. But there are some wrinkles in it. One is that if a vehicle is going to be claimed to be mostly for business use, then it has to be a branded vehicle\u2014it has to have the company\u2019s branding on it. There\u2019s an exception for farm and agricultural vehicles there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIntriguingly, in the commentary on the bill, there is a description of what might happen. It says, \u201CThe purpose of the branding requirement for vehicles is to discourage employees from using company vehicles outside their permitted private use. This is because employees are generally less likely to use a branded vehicle for private use because doing so could bring the employer into disrepute or make non-compliance with FBT requirements more visible\u201D, and then it says, \u201C(for example, a company ute seen towing a jet ski at a boat ramp).\u201D That\u2019s a very specific example, and it makes me suspect that perhaps officials at Inland Revenue had seen exactly that going on. In fact, we know that there has been a fair amount of non-compliance around some of the FBT rules\u2014perhaps because they\u2019re unclear\u2014and a fair amount of private use that wasn\u2019t being accounted for in the FBT rules. So these are all pretty sensible changes sitting in there around fringe benefit tax.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, I do think we\u2019ll need to ask at select committee how Inland Revenue intends to monitor the way that businesses are classifying vehicles in terms of their private use or business use, and we\u2019ll see what plans they have around that. There is something that we do need to know a little bit more about there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the rules around financial arrangements\u2014again, there are some very sensible changes. People say, \u201CWell, what\u2019s a financial arrangement?\u201D It\u2019s basically any long-term financial agreement\u2014a mortgage, a swap, an investment bond\u2014and, ordinarily, once it\u2019s over a certain value, the income and expenditure and that has to be calculated spread over the life of the debt instrument or of the financial instrument. It\u2019s complicated maths, and you really need to know how to do those finance calculations in order to do it. There are some sensible changes here around the financial arrangements rules to make sure that it\u2019s just a little bit easier for ordinary taxpayers. Now, businesses likely still have to do the calculations, but they\u2019ve got the resources to do it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESomething that people often didn\u2019t realise is that debt denominated in a foreign currency falls into the financial arrangement rules. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, that\u2019s a problem for a New Zealander who perhaps owns a house overseas and there\u2019s a mortgage on that house overseas denominated in a foreign currency. That technically is supposed to be accounted for under the financial arrangement rules. Lots of people don\u2019t even know that. Back when these rules were first put in place, the world was much less connected, people travelled less, but these days not only do we have many more migrants coming to live in New Zealand, but actually it\u2019s entirely possible to get financing from a foreign bank quite easily, and so be subject to these rules.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s a pretty sensible exception that this bill is going to introduce to the financial arrangements: mortgages on private houses don\u2019t need to be accounted for as a financial arrangement. Now, by and large, that looks like a good measure, but it does leave a wee bit of a potential loophole in the Income Tax Act. Where there\u2019s a loophole, someone will walk through it if they possibly can. So, again, I want to check with officials during the select committee process as to exactly how they intend to monitor that and how they intend to ensure that people really are complying with the law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, as I said in my opening remarks, by and large, pretty much this bill looks like a very sensible tax bill\u2014a standard tax bill that obviously advances the Government\u2019s agenda, but also addresses several issues within the Income Tax Act. We will support this bill to select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022 data-id=\u002255a21c4f02dabef0c02192e9be6c0898\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002255a21c4f02dabef0c02192e9be6c0898\u0022\u003EHon JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green\u2014Rongotai) (15:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Let me start by talking about one of the tiny, good things in the bill, and then I\u2019ll speak to the Green Party\u2019s concerns about the rest of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFringe benefit tax. I had a member\u2019s bill which was sadly voted down by members of Government parties earlier this term that would have fixed up some of the loopholes around a perception that company provided vehicles weren\u2019t subject to fringe benefit tax if it was a double-cab ute, even if it wasn\u2019t being used for work purposes and it was being used for personal purposes. This bill in front of us starts to incorporate some of that, which I\u2019m relieved to see. I think, overall, the simplification looks like a reasonable thing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is a tiny incentive for hybrids and electric vehicles (EVs) to combat the fact that they actually were slightly penalised by the fringe benefit tax policy approach previously. Even going back to when I was Associate Minister of Transport, trying to talk to the then Minister of Revenue, Stuart Nash, I was trying to get the Inland Revenue Department to deal with this, and they were pretty obstinate. I think now we\u2019re providing a tiny little incentive for companies to provide electric vehicles or hybrid vehicles as opposed to more high consuming fossil fuel vehicles as company cars.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s important because, actually, the majority of brand new cars that come into the country are purchased by businesses or fleet vehicles. So fringe benefit tax policy towards motor vehicles is a huge lever the Government can pull to ensure that we\u2019re getting better outcomes from our vehicle fleet. That means better fuel consumption in a time of a fuel crisis\u2014seems pretty basic. Getting those brand new EVs into the country also reduces the cost for ordinary New Zealanders who usually acquire their vehicles through the second-hand vehicle market. So that\u2019s one tiny thing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI mean, they could have gone much further. Australia exempted EVs from fringe benefit tax for five years or something like that and it worked quite well. That\u2019s what my bill proposed, which the Government voted down. But here at least we\u2019re seeing them do something sensible on the treatment of motor vehicles so we aren\u2019t unintentionally subsidising fuel inefficiency and higher cost of fuel use through our fringe benefit tax approach to motor vehicles.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Green Party won\u2019t be supporting the bill. By and large, overall, our income tax policy penalises low-income earners and means that high-income earners like members of Parliament don\u2019t pay enough tax. The Green Party have proposed quite a different approach in our tax policy that would see 96 percent of New Zealanders paying less tax, while still raising more revenue to invest in services and infrastructure that are for public good, which we all benefit from. We usually don\u2019t support these bills because the current coalition Government, despite all their rhetoric around being about productivity, actually, what they\u2019re mainly doing is upholding a status quo that allows those on the highest incomes and those with the most wealth to continue enriching themselves, whilst starving the Government and the public the revenue they need to invest in public good infrastructure and services. That is a political choice that does not help the country become more prosperous\u2014quite the opposite. If you think that we\u2019ve had a productivity problem in New Zealand for a few decades, maybe continuing the same approach, with the tax system, isn\u2019t the right way to address it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey also have significant concerns about some of the other aspects of this: introducing wider automated decision-making powers for Inland Revenue that can be used for decisions that impact taxpayers. This is an issue that we have had concerns about in relation to the Ministry of Social Development and benefits. We also have the same concerns when it comes to IRD. And it makes it easier for overseas-based student loan borrowers to be arrested. I just don\u2019t think that\u2019s the right approach at all. I mean, this Government has chased hundreds of New Zealanders overseas a day\u2014hundreds a day; a huge number since they came into office\u2014by cutting investment in public services and infrastructure, meaning there are no jobs, just making everything much worse for younger people who are already burdened with huge debt in order to access tertiary education or any type of vocational education. We really disagree with this punitive approach and the Green Party will not be supporting this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022122b521e63baaab9581711870212ff01\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022122b521e63baaab9581711870212ff01\u0022\u003ETODD STEPHENSON (ACT) (15:16)\u003C/span\u003E: ACT will be supporting the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2026-27, FBT Simplification, Foreign Investment Funds, and Remedial Measures) Bill. As the Minister of Revenue has already set out, this is a bill which does some very important things, including setting the annual rates for 2026-27 for taxation. As many people know, ACT is the OG \u201Cno new taxes\u201D party, but we are also into tax simplification. The fringe benefit simplifications contained in this bill, we\u2019re very interested to discuss and see it go through.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWe often get a lot of questions about foreign investment fund rules\u2014FIF rules\u2014and again, there are some really sensible changes in here, which I think will help those having to navigate that very complicated system. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022 data-id=\u0022775375ca326354a45c8c81270355c4c3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022775375ca326354a45c8c81270355c4c3\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON (NZ First) (15:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. New Zealand First rises in favour of this Taxation (Annual Rates for 2026-27, FBT Simplification, Foreign Investment Funds, and Remedial Measures) Bill. Beyond setting annual rates, the bill aims to continuously maintain and modernise the tax system by updating settings across foreign investment funds, fringe benefit tax, research and development tax, incentives, goods and services tax, not-for-profit organisations, and tax administration. It seeks to reduce tax barriers to capital and skills, eliminate unnecessary administrative compliance costs for small businesses, and provide legislative and certainty for modern digital administrative tools while protecting the tax base.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe certainly support the new rules for the foreign investment fund, raising the tax deductions from $50,000 to $100,000, and removing income tax return filing requirements for small non-profits\u2014a very sensible arrangement for those small non-profits who are doing good charitable work in our communities. It delivers in-year advanced payments for R \u0026amp; D tax credits, putting vital cash flow into innovative Kiwi companies when they need it most. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is pragmatic centre-ground legislation that cuts red tape and supports our productive sectors. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022 data-id=\u0022c1f8b45bd903c550bee62215e0feff5f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c1f8b45bd903c550bee62215e0feff5f\u0022\u003ERYAN HAMILTON (National\u2014Hamilton East) (15:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Look, this is a pragmatic bill. One of the great highlights I enjoy out of it is the phrase \u201Cclose enough is good enough\u201D from the Minister of Revenue, as we\u2019re simplifying the fringe benefit tax piece of legislation into six simple categories: mainly private use, mainly business, mainly business use on farmland, private use limited to home to work commuting, business vehicles for home to work travel only, and pool cars. So it really does help to simplify it. Mr Speaker, I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022e1f88941e3eefb23c0d2e92b10a898ce\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e1f88941e3eefb23c0d2e92b10a898ce\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (15:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, thank you, Mr Speaker. A special treat to talk on a tax bill today. I was disappointed that the ACT member didn\u2019t explain how tax on foreign investment funds works, because it is actually a pretty tricky area\u2014I thought he was up to the job, but apparently not. In fact, this is something that constituents have approached me about: the difficulty where they\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223b29cd6ae46c030aafcbc939b51cf806\u0022\u003EHon Matt Doocey\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c74e38752f70c6d7ceb976b220d703e\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: Well, you might laugh, Mr Doocey, but I actually have constituents with wealth and they\u2019re not all my uncle.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe fact of the matter is that if people come to New Zealand\u2014particularly people who\u2019ve been here for a while\u2014they often have investments and pension funds in their home country. The foreign investment fund rules, as they currently sit, require a payment of 5 percent of the value per year\u2014or that\u2019s the deemed return on them, and so you\u2019re taxed on that 5 percent whether the fund went up 5 percent or not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, the other problem with that is that you\u2019ve got to actually find the cash, and if it\u2019s a pension fund that\u2019s over there, then you might not. In fact, the constituent I\u2019m thinking of was on a modest salary in New Zealand\u2014about $80,000\u2014but did have a healthy retirement fund in the United States, and he had to find a sizeable chunk of cash to pay every year. He pointed out that there had been a carve-out for wealthy individuals coming to New Zealand whereby you could return the actual increase in the fund along with dividends and be taxed on that, which is essentially opting for an actual returns rule, as I understand it, rather than a kind of deemed return. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe whole idea of the 5 percent was to get around, essentially, the arduousness of valuing shares and dividends all the time. Here we have a situation where the indulgence that was extended to new immigrants essentially has been extended to everyone, and it makes really good sense that that\u2019s the case. It is actually just enabling tax on real revenue, rather than on assumed revenue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI must say, I giggled a little bit in terms of the fringe benefit tax and utes. I did mention to Deborah Russell, as she was speaking, that she needs to go to the Coronet ski field car park and see the number of branded utes up there. I do know that the IRD has been known to go to car parks at places like ski fields to see how many work vehicles are being used there. But this simplification of fringe benefit tax\u2014I think there is always a balance between tax being accurate, being fair, and being workable. I think this fringe benefit reform kind of moves it towards the workability end; it\u2019s not trying to get the tax perfect down to the last dollar. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe idea of lifting the categories of weight class is a good one because, obviously, you don\u2019t want to be excluded from fringe benefit tax because you\u2019ve got a double-cab ute that is over 3,000 kilograms. Moving that weight class up to 6,000 kilograms, so that we know that those vehicles clearly are light trucks and not everyday vehicles, is a really good thing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EObviously, as we go through every year, we\u2019ve got to update and confirm our tax rates. It\u2019s a pretty fundamental part of the public finance framework. It\u2019s a good bill, and obviously our members of the Finance and Expenditure Committee will be having a good old look at this bill at select committee, which is what should happen. In my experience, there are actually some useful tweaks around workability that happen in that forum. It\u2019s one of those bills that because it\u2019s a technical bill\u2014and people do actually want the tax system to work effectively\u2014there is some constructive feedback, and of course you get that independent advisor in who will also do much the same. So off to select committee it goes\u2014not this Parliament, obviously, but the next one\u2014and that\u2019s all good stuff. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022 data-id=\u0022c7d3bd2787dea56a5d2d437a7f46dee6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c7d3bd2787dea56a5d2d437a7f46dee6\u0022\u003EDAN BIDOIS (National\u2014Northcote) (15:24)\u003C/span\u003E: This is a good bill. It\u2019s particularly good for small businesses in its fringe benefit tax changes. I support it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u0022863b117b36c4553693447ebeedbaf847\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022863b117b36c4553693447ebeedbaf847\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (15:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is my pleasure to take a call on the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2026-27, FBT Simplification, Foreign Investment Funds, and Remedial Measures) Bill. This is a bill that Labour supports. It is a pretty standard tax bill\u2014the kind of bill that comes to this House annually; it sets those annual rates, makes the changes that were included in the Budget, and various other tidy-up bits.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, there were some changes that were made at the Budget at the time that Labour said we were supportive of. For that reason, we are supporting this. One of those changes, actually, that I think is really important is the change to the foreign investment fund or FIF rules that were announced at the Budget. This is incredibly important in terms of how it is that we attract international investment to New Zealand. The way in which it did work was very much on an unrealised basis. Before we make these changes, the tax was charged on an unrealised amount. The investor was deemed to earn income equivalent to 5 percent of the opening value of their foreign shares each year, regardless of the actual income that they received. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I think, across this House, we can see the benefit of attracting foreign investment to New Zealand\u2014but not only foreign investment but attracting those individuals that want to come here and sometimes come home. I have met a number of New Zealanders who have gone overseas and done some remarkable things and want to come home, but they have got caught out by FIF rules. This is an important change. As New Zealand, increasingly we are punching above our weight in a number of industries. We have New Zealanders who do remarkably well, and they earn share options, often, in overseas companies, and when they come home, it can be incredibly complex. One of the changes that is made here, and one of the obvious changes that this bill is making, is that it moves that threshold from $50,000 to a new threshold of $100,000 for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is also a new method for calculating FIF incomes on unlisted shares, which was introduced in the last tax bill, but it was only available to recent migrants. The new method, or the revenue account method, says that 70 percent of gains realised on the sale of shares during the year, plus any actual dividends received, are subject to the tax and the taxpayer\u2019s marginal tax rate. This really shifts away from that idea of unrealised gain that happens in there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other change, and my colleague the Hon Dr Deborah Russell, who likes nothing more than the technicalities of a tax bill to go through in detail, and will be looking forward\u2014well, this probably won\u2019t be something that the current Finance and Expenditure Committee examines. But I know from other tax bills that she likes nothing more than going through in a very technical way, as both she and the Hon Barbara Edmonds are both technical tax specialists and like to pick the eyes out of such bills. My colleagues have talked about what\u2019s happening in terms of the fringe benefit tax on motor vehicles, and that is a change that, I think, many see will need to be kind of kicked around a bit at select committee to have a look at whether it\u2019s really doing what is intended and what we think is in the best interests around that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other change that is in this bill\u2014and I\u2019m interested to see what comes out of the select committee process about it\u2014is the change around the research and development tax credit that is in here. The bill makes a good change to the Research and Development Tax Incentive. It enables businesses to claim credit quarterly, which improves their cash flow. This is especially useful for start-ups. It also expands the range of R \u0026amp; D expenditure that mining business can claim, and this is something I really want the select committee to have a very close look at in terms of what really is the research and development that\u2019s happening within that industry, and what is it that is being given a tax break? We know that we have R \u0026amp; D tax incentives in New Zealand because we want to stimulate innovation\u2014it\u2019s the kind of economy we want to create\u2014and we really need to have a look at whether that is fit for purpose.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELabour does support this bill. It is a bill we will happily pick up as a Government, because we know that this country cannot afford another three years of this National Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022 data-id=\u0022e14af6d504889ce8912fc473236d4958\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e14af6d504889ce8912fc473236d4958\u0022\u003ENANCY LU (National) (15:29)\u003C/span\u003E: What this country can afford is a National Government that is focused on making sure that our tax settings are fair and just, and also a National Government that has already delivered tax relief to Kiwis for the first time in 14 years\u2014and also another three years of a National Government that will continue to strengthen and ensure that our tax system is fair. Therefore, I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022 data-id=\u0022063cf3d2fa2d6609a5e4558d620135ed\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022063cf3d2fa2d6609a5e4558d620135ed\u0022\u003EKATIE NIMON (National\u2014Napier) (15:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, thank you very much. Look, anything that reforms tax for small business is a wonderful thing, so with that, I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2026-27, FBT Simplification, Foreign Investment Funds, and Remedial Measures) Bill be now read a first time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 101\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 21\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a first time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022df741fa33962a356ab9f8254283b5539\u0022\u003EReferral to Select Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022 data-id=\u00221665c5f4e5c26efcefc53bc683ba1179\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221665c5f4e5c26efcefc53bc683ba1179\u0022\u003ESPEAKER (15:31)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2026-27, FBT Simplification, Foreign Investment Funds, and Remedial Measures) Bill be considered by the Finance and Expenditure Committee\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d6b72bbe2dba8d384178925c18caa48d\u0022\u003ESittings of the House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00228115a18ffe75ff8735ec8c30d80bb088\u0022\u003EUrgency\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u0022ffb297dcddb8b1aef003cef6b65aa090\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ffb297dcddb8b1aef003cef6b65aa090\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Leader of the House) (15:31)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat urgency be accorded\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u200D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe remaining stages of:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill,\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill,\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill, and\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill;\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe first reading and referral to select committee of:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Repeals) Amendment Bill,\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Standardisation) Amendment Bill, and\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Strength of Legislative Obligations) Amendment Bill;\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe second reading and committee stage of the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill;\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe remaining stages of the Public Works Amendment Bill;\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe committee stage of the Pae Ora (Healthy Futures) (3 Day Postnatal Stay) Amendment Bill; and\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe remaining stages of:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill,\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe Policing Amendment Bill, the Corrections (Management of Prisoners, and Prisoners\u2019 Property) Amendment Bill,\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe Immigration (Enhanced Risk Management) Amendment Bill, the Land Transport (Revenue) Amendment Bill,\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe Financial Markets Conduct Amendment Bill, and\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItemSL2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe Commerce (Promoting Competition and Other Matters) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EToday, we accord urgency, in the second to last week of the 54\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E Parliament. No bills are going through all stages this week or bypassing scrutiny. This is, once again, overtime. Our Government has had a significant legislative agenda, and it isn\u2019t quite finished yet. Some of the bills are being sent to select committee today so that committees can open submissions before the Parliament dissolves. The rest, we aim to enact before the end of the term\u2014all worthy bills which will have positive impacts on New Zealand and New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat urgency be accorded\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00228cf559ba89c2516813b8762e88c085ef\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022573793c7cb1b4fa2bc473c0e2769172b\u0022\u003EIndia Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a7640f6afbdc5bd275bf186ffba56623\u0022\u003ELegislative Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00223fdf1d903953dea705da1084c1a52ce0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223fdf1d903953dea705da1084c1a52ce0\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (15:34)\u003C/span\u003E: I present a legislative statement on the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e57d67ab62a77934ab8c4c052d621f75\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002238a9b0dbd956173b905b9e6149f3506f\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00221b8bda9a7ba2272ad1b67811f398536f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221b8bda9a7ba2272ad1b67811f398536f\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (15:35)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill be now read a second time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee has carefully considered the bill, and I want to thank the members of the committee and officials for their work. The committee also took the time to carefully consider all submissions, and I commend them for that approach. I recognise that they worked incredibly hard to scrutinise the legislation in tight time frame, including when Parliament was in session, to make the necessary recommendations and to have the bill ready for the House today. The committee has also recommended technical amendments to the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe committee has recommended amendments to Part 1 and Part 4 of the bill, and I welcome those amendments. Part 1 of the bill establishes a new quota for the export of milk albumin to India. It amends the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act (DIRA) 2001 to incorporate the albumin quota that we secured under the free-trade agreement (FTA) into New Zealand\u2019s existing diary quota export licensing regime. Part 1 adds India as a designated market for albumin exports and provides for a regulation-making power to enable up to 10 percent of export licences to be reserved for smaller and new exporters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe addition of clause 7A, inserting new section 26C, will provide flexibility if the FTA enters into force on a date other than 1 January. In that circumstance, quota must be allocated on a pro rata basis, to reflect the proportion of the quota year remaining. This allows New Zealand albumin exporters to benefit from improved access to the Indian market and provides certainty for exporters during a partial quota year. This is consistent with arrangements for other FTAs that have been given effect to under DIRA.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 4 of the bill establishes the framework for quota management systems for apples, kiwifruit, and m\u0101nuka honey. It enables regulations to set up systems to allocate quota return or transfer quota, issue export certificates, and provide information to Indian authorities. The amendments recommended by the select committee are largely technical and operational in nature, reflecting issues identified by officials during the development of the regulations and matters raised by submitters and the committee. Collectively, these amendments improve the clarity, transparency, and workability of the quota management system established under the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe amendments strengthen the administration of quota arrangements. They improve quota manager requirements, transparency of quota allocations, audit arrangements, compliance and quota allocation, and management mechanisms. These amendments and the other minor technical changes are about striking the right balance, protecting the integrity of New Zealand\u2019s quota management systems while ensuring enforcement powers are clear, proportionate, and consistent with those available under comparable regulatory regimes. No amendments were recommended for Part 2 or Part 3 of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe India FTA is one of the most significant trade agreements that New Zealand has secured in decades. Before I go on, I just want to recognise that, in the committee stage, the bill will be split in half, which is normal practice, so that the quota management is a separate piece of legislation. I do want to recognise, from discussions with the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor, that whilst the committee might have been informed later in the stage\u2014if there is any understanding around that that is different, I want to offer an apology for it\u2014it is exactly the same as what happened with the UK FTA. It\u2019s standard practice in the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe FTA opens the door to the world\u2019s fastest-growing major economy, a country of 1.4\u00A0billion people and a middle class expected to reach 700\u00A0million consumers by 2030, and a GDP expected to reach $12\u00A0trillion in that same year. At a time of rising global uncertainty, New Zealand needs more customers, more markets, and more opportunities. As a small exporting nation, with one in four New Zealand jobs linked to exports, we depend on rules, relationships, and agreements to ensure our economic security and prosperity. FTAs, particularly with growing economies, allow our world-class exporters access to markets otherwise blocked. Growing exports means growing incomes, investment, and opportunities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOnce implemented, this agreement will create new opportunities and a level playing-field for most New Zealand exporters, relative to their competitors currently trading under their own agreements. Australia, the United Kingdom, and the European Union have all concluded FTAs with India, and we cannot afford to be left behind. In the first two years of the Australian FTA, with India, entering into force, its forestry exports to India surged 119 percent whilst ours fell 19 percent during the same period. Our share of sheep meat also dropped dramatically once Australia\u2019s FTA with India entered into force. We used to provide 85 percent of India\u2019s sheep meat imports, and this fell to 9 percent since Australia signed their FTA, with Australia now representing 91 percent of India\u2019s sheep meat imports.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe agreement restores New Zealand\u2019s competitiveness and puts our exporters back on a level playing field. The numbers speak for themselves. From day one of entering into force, 57 percent of our current exports will enter India duty free. This rises to 82 percent over 10 years when fully implemented. Another 13 percent will benefit from sharp tariff cuts. This means that tariffs on 95 percent of our current exports will be eliminated or sharply reduced. Tariff elimination on day one for a range of key products\u2014including forestry, sheep meat, and wool\u2014will ensure immediate benefits for exporters in those sectors. For goods like seafood, most industrial products\u2014including iron and steel, bulk infant formula, cherries, and avocados\u2014will see tariff elimination over periods of seven to 10 years. Other key exports like apples and kiwifruit have secured sizable duty-free quotas that offer commercially meaningful access into the market and additionally 50 percent out-of-quota tariff reduction for kiwifruit. M\u0101nuka honey will benefit from a sharp reduction in tariffs over five years. On dairy, tariffs on bulk infant formula, other dairy-based preparations, and peptones will be phased out over seven years, while tariffs on albumins will be halved within a quota covering recent trade.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBeyond new market access, the deal offers more certainty for our services exporters, for investors, and for Kiwi businesses looking to increase their footprint in India. India has made commitments on almost 100 additional sectors above its World Trade Organization (WTO) commitments, including, crucially, a most favoured nation commitment for services. This means that any better access India offers future FTA partners in key services sectors will automatically flow through to New Zealand and that our agreement gets better over time. This is the case with the FTA concluded with the European Union and India. New Zealand will benefit more by passing this legislation and putting the agreement in force before the EU\u2019s FTA.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis agreement strengthens more than our economy, and the New Zealand - India FTA will also assist the development of stronger trade, economic, cultural, and people to people links between our two countries. The legislation before the House is straight forward. New Zealand has secured this deal with India in record time\u2014vital for our exporters and the Government\u2019s goal of doubling the value of exports over 10 years. It will create opportunities for farmers, growers, manufacturers, innovators, service exporters, and small businesses across New Zealand. The India FTA stands to serve our economy, our exporters, and our future, and I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219d78d3718d65d8573d91b8c613feb9a\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u002247560b7574bae4595f008db4a65d17ae\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002247560b7574bae4595f008db4a65d17ae\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (15:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Labour rises to support this bill and this trade agreement. The Minister has said this is one of our most significant trade agreements. We do have to make a mountain from a molehill to achieve that agreement, I think. It is indeed a big step forward, but it is at a relatively low volume across many of the sectors\u2014sheep meat, for example. Not to belittle the potential for this agreement, but I think it\u2019s the start of a very long journey with a very big country for a very small country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to acknowledge the Minister and the officials for the work they did. There has been, through previous Governments\u2014including Labour\u2014a lot of work put in. I want to take this opportunity in the House to acknowledge Jane Cunliffe, who had worked in my office, who had worked with the Minister previously, who has just left, and who had been a trade commissioner in India and been part of a team of people who lived in that country over many decades, building a positive relationship that allowed this trade agreement to move forward so quickly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe were told of this agreement at the end of last year. We knew that there had been work going on and that the Government and the Ministers had put in a lot of effort, but it was at the very late stages of 2025 that the Labour Opposition was aware that this agreement had been signed. But, actually, before the end of the year, of course, we also found out that it wasn\u2019t a done deal, because the coalition partner New Zealand First indicated it wasn\u2019t going to support the deal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere had been, at that point\u2014of course, over the Christmas period\u2014a lot of questions focused our way\u2014is Labour going to support this? Unfortunately, the Government had chosen not to include the Opposition at any stage through the negotiation of this agreement, so we had to then set about investigating what was in the detail of the agreement, and the devil is often in the detail. And we had a coalition partner, led by the Rt Hon Winston Peters, saying that this was a terrible agreement and that he wasn\u2019t going to commit to it and that was it. Then we had the ACT Party and the National Party\u2014and I know the Minister and a lot of his colleagues have done a lot of work, including the Prime Minister, visiting India\u2014saying this was the greatest thing since sliced bread. We only got a copy of the agreement at the end of January, and we committed to the Government, in confidence, to go through that agreement as best we could. We asked for background information. It was a little like getting blood from a stone to get some of that information, which made us a little wary of whether the deal was a good one or not. The headline issues were, raised by the Rt Hon Winston Peters, that we were going to be flooded by migrants and that we were going to have to commit $33 billion in investment from New Zealand, and the Government had guaranteed it. Well, those were the claims. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELook, we went through that agreement very, very carefully, as I say, in good faith with the Government, checking that in what had been a political commitment to this from Christopher Luxon to get this deal over the line\u2014very ambitious, I\u2019ll say that\u2014we hadn\u2019t cut corners or in fact, given too much away in what is always a very, very challenging situation. Negotiating trade agreements is not easy. We\u2019re talking about the sovereign rights of one country, the sovereign rights of another, and reaching compromise, ultimately, to get a good deal for both, not the best or a perfect deal for either side but a compromise that satisfies the interests or the vast majority of interests in both countries, to move forward and ultimately to be in a better position after one or two or five or ultimately 20 years. We came back to the Government in April, and we said, \u201COn balance, in spite of not having all the information, we believe that it is a good step forward.\u201D, and we agreed to support that. Indeed, a few days later, of course, that agreement was signed, and I was in India with the Minister, and he invited me over, and I appreciate and acknowledge that because it does have to be bipartisan arrangement. It has to be New Zealand, not just political parties, committing to agreements like this, because they do affect both our opportunities and some of our obligations into the future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe select committee then went through, and I\u2019d like to acknowledge the members of the committee for looking at the treaty, for the treaty assessment process that we did, for looking at the deal, and for listening to people coming in and making submissions. I think that was a very thorough process. Now, we have in the House, of course, a piece of legislation that the committee has looked through. It\u2019s come back to the House, and as the Minister said, we just had a last-minute amendment that actually splits the bill. Now, we can understand the technical side of it and the justification for it. However, the committee didn\u2019t have an opportunity to just check whether splitting the bill would make any difference to the outcomes or the opportunities from this. None the less, we\u2019ll take the Minister\u2019s word there, and I\u2019m sure there will be some scrutiny in the committee stages in the House here to ensure that splitting the bill does not move from what we heard in select committee and what the select committee understands will be the final outcome of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIndeed, the outcomes are opportunities. They are not huge steps forward in benefits for New Zealand. The tariffs are lowered, and the quotas are put in place and, over time, may be reduced, but it is ultimately up to the exporters to take up the opportunities offered by this agreement. They are reasonable, and they are significant, but it will take some time to run through that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf I can just point to a couple of things, as I say, Labour has always supported moving forward with trade agreements for our country. We are a trading nation. We are totally dependent upon that, and the things that we have to trade off are few and far between. We\u2019ve always been open. We have very few tariffs. In the areas of investment, which is one of the areas where we\u2019ve always got to put on the table, we have normally moved up to $100 million of investment into our country with very little scrutiny. The threshold has been moved to $200 million where people can almost, as of right, with some exceptions, be able to invest in our economy. It\u2019s normally positive, but not always, so we\u2019ve got to keep an eye on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis agreement allows investment from India into our economy of up to $200 million, and with not much scrutiny. What is concerning, of course, and the Government has yet to answer this, is the commitment to promote investment from New Zealand into India of $33 billion within 15 years. That is an ambitious target. That is an ambitious target and the Minister for wool over there would probably rather turn his back on, actually, the most significant market for wool in India, and insult the Indians by saying, \u201CWell, we shouldn\u2019t try.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe scrutiny that we passed over this piece of the bill and its detail was that it is to promote the investment into India, not the final figure itself. Now, Prime Minister Modi came here and he said it was certainly high on his agenda. He certainly wants to see investment in India, and we have to be mindful of that expectation. Governments over the next 15 years will have to keep an eye on the level of investment. I\u2019ve spoken to some of the sectors; not a great deal of enthusiasm at the moment, but this is a market of 1.4 billion people and, indeed, we will have to have a commitment from exporters to invest in that market if they want to maintain the benefits negotiated in this agreement. It is nonetheless a risk, and we in Opposition have tabled that risk, which is why I go back to one of the most significant trade agreements. I\u2019m not quite sure that I agree with the Minister for Trade and Investment on that, but it is certainly, potentially, significant. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn the issues of immigration\u2014another thing raised by New Zealand First\u2014the Labour Party has scrutinised this very, very carefully. It does offer opportunities for Indians to come into our country, but they are limited in number and limited in the associated benefits with that Temporary Employment Entry particular assigned\u2014I don\u2019t know what you call it. Anyway, it is a particular pathway for migrants that is unique to this agreement, and, indeed, the terms have been written into this agreement. We feel assured that, actually, that does protect us from rampant migration, and no doubt we\u2019ll hear some counter views from New Zealand First.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe third area is innovation, and it will be through partnerships and innovation that we build our strongest partnerships with India. That was indeed the topic of many conversations that I had as trade Minister, and that my colleagues in Government had as Ministers when they visited India. This does offer huge opportunities into the future. The Labour Party supports this legislation through, but there are some risks that we have to acknowledge, and those risks go with the opportunities. Ultimately, it\u2019s up to the exporters as to whether they take those up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022e357747ebd2a9ff368ea5c5ca34748ef\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e357747ebd2a9ff368ea5c5ca34748ef\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (15:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand to speak on the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill. Now, the Green Party has opposed the agreement in the past, so it makes sense the Green Party will not be supporting the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, there are a couple of things, and I think both the Minister for Trade and Investment and also the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor have mentioned the agreement that kind of underpins this particular bill, so it\u2019s important for us to sort of address some of these areas as well. I think one of the fundamental challenges, and particularly for the Greens, when we\u2019re looking at any sort of trade agreement is, firstly, we do have a level of scepticism when it comes to bilateral trade agreements in general. We have seen that bilateral trade agreements have been used more and more often now because of the challenges that the World Trade Organization is facing, despite the fact that, yes, it can still be said that most of the trade agreements internationally are still multilateral, or even plurilateral in some instances. Using the New Zealand - India free-trade agreement as an example, we do see India, that is traditionally hesitant when it comes to bilateral trade agreements, increasingly signing bilateral trade agreements, or at the same time, trying to uphold this international rules-based trade system as well, making deals with Aotearoa New Zealand, making deals with Australia, with the EU, and the like. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019re seeing that even countries that are shying away, traditionally, from bilateral trade agreements are making some of these agreements. But fundamentally, one of the things that is still a continuous concern for the Greens is that the over-use of bilateral trade agreements, although works to a certain extent, does undermine the way that we look at that international rules-based trade system in general, because bear in mind that there are countries, India being a good example, that may not have the ability to negotiate strongly; or other countries that we see who are blatantly violating some of that international rules-based system, whether it is the increase in tariffs in the US or protectionism in other countries when it comes to resources.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen we\u2019re looking at Part 1 to 4 of this bill, there are also other areas that are of concern as to how they have manifested through the agreement itself. Now, we have heard that we still haven\u2019t received clarity around what that US$20 billion of intention to promote really means for our people and for our businesses here in Aotearoa New Zealand. That\u2019s $33 billion over 15 years. Yes, we can say that it\u2019s the intention to invest and all of those, but the problem is that the country that does make that kind of decision falls with India as opposed to their being part of a joint discussion. I think that continuously is a concern, like the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor has said, that this is going to take future Governments, regardless of who is in power, nuance and a level of balance and also diplomacy to be able to get some of that right and to be able to work through what that potentially means. Also, fundamentally, it seems wild that we\u2019re also expecting that the Government in some ways is having this level of commitment and requiring our businesses to be able to do that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, of course, there are other levels of commitment in here, whether it is the impact this will have on our tariffs being a key thing. Because bear in mind, even though you look at Part 1, which talks about dairy tariffs and also, particularly, around things like albumin, which is a big part of this particular agreement\u2014and my colleague Steve Abel will be speaking more around agriculture and dairy in general\u2014but that is also a concern because, again, a lot of the tariffs of imports coming from India will be removed from day one, but a lot of the tariffs that we see for our export sector going into India will only decrease over time. If India, in this case, does find that we are violating some of the terms and conditions, particularly around the intention to invest, they\u2019re able to remove some of the tariff reductions that we are supposed to be enjoying even as a part of this bill. That is something that is also a concern for us to think about. Of course, even when it comes to bilateral agreements, from a Green perspective, environmental protection and climate action and labour rights absolutely underpin what we consider to be a good bilateral agreement, which is why, out of a lot of the bilateral agreements we\u2019re currently seeing, the New Zealand - EU free-trade agreement is the only one that we have supported thus far. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut there have been a lot of conversations. I\u2019m noting that the bill that we do have, and we have lots of questions for the Minister during the committee stage as well, is a manifestation of that particular agreement, so the ability for us to even look at some of these things that we could change is quite limited, even though some of the changes we have seen during the select committee stage deviate from what we have seen in other comparable free-trade agreement bills or Acts in the past, or even comparable acts that are related to this, and I\u2019ll mention a couple of examples. But through the committee of the whole House stage, I think one of the first things\u2014you know, whether we\u2019re looking at tariffs or we\u2019re looking at other forms, the quota and how we look at quota managers, and the management of those quota continues to be a big focus in this piece of legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things I think is really interesting that we\u2019ll kind of explore more fully during the consideration of this bill, as opposed to the consideration of the agreement, is what\u2019s the genus, when we\u2019re looking at\u2014because, you know, as part of the agreement we\u2019ve had the Apple Action Plan, the Kiwifruit Action Plan, the m\u0101nuka action plan. I would be keen to know, particularly when we\u2019re looking at Part 4 of this bill\u2014and we did have a little discussion during the select committee stage around what is captured by \u201Ckiwifruit\u201D in the Kiwifruit Action Plan; noting some of the ongoing concerns we have with the loss of some of the cheaper varieties in China, as a result of some of those particular stocks being leaked is probably the best word that comes to mind immediately, but I\u2019m sure there are other more appropriate words for that. For us, it\u2019s really important to be able to prevent\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b004aa4f423532983866895758961754\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EStolen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022194a2ad021eba3052b4b1c3edde01c55\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CStolen\u201D is possibly a strong word. I guess it depends whether it was passed on, whether it was stolen by someone else. I think, you know, if we were looking at it from the context of criminal law\u2014maybe we need to have a bigger discussion in the committee stage around mens rea and actus reus. I\u2019m happy to have that conversation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut it is interesting to see, in this agreement in particular, that m\u0101nuka honey\u2014specifically m\u0101nuka\u2014is locked in. I\u2019ll be keen to know what that, potentially, means for other bilateral trade agreements, particularly when it comes to the Australia - India free-trade agreements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust finally, a couple of other things that we had considered during the select committee stage\u2014it\u2019s around search and surveillance, but particularly around investigation. I think this is something that we still do need to tease out. I know that this is something that my colleague Vanushi Walters and I did have a fair bit of conversation and discussion about as a part of the consideration of this bill\u2014and also in terms of some of the aspects when it comes to secondary legislation about fee setting. I think it\u2019s also important for us to consider this further during the committee of the whole House stage with the Minister for Trade and Investment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things I would like to point out, finally, and this is more of a broader concern that we do have\u2014one of the things that the Green Party is is disappointed. This is, from a process perspective\u2014like the Minister said, like the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor said\u2014an important treaty examination. But at the same time, the Government could not even adhere to its own \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ECabinet Manual\u003C/span\u003E, of refraining from taking any binding treaty action, in respect of a treaty that has been presented to the House, for 15 sitting days, but expected a select committee to move up the schedule for deliberation within that 15 sitting days. I believe we only had about nine sitting days to consider the agreement itself before the first reading of this bill was introduced. That simply is not good enough because when we saw the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee and the Government actually extended the time for consideration because it was important. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut again, it just highlights that this bill\u2014we\u2019re yet to see if this will genuinely be beneficial for the people of Aotearoa New Zealand, or if it is something that\u2019s simply for political gain. So the Greens will not support it at this stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b064dd56673f4c1cb11c1242823abb92\u0022 data-id=\u002292e254ca81c42458cccf99af90bcd9cc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b064dd56673f4c1cb11c1242823abb92\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002292e254ca81c42458cccf99af90bcd9cc\u0022\u003ELAURA McCLURE (ACT) (16:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise on the second reading in support of the Indian Free Trade Agreement (FTA). Firstly, I just want to thank my other committee members for the work that we have done in scrutinising this legislation. This is the enabling legislation, but, as many members before me have started to speak quite a bit about the agreement itself, I will note that ACT did have some concerns, but we felt that they were well-traversed throughout the committee of the whole House stage, and we\u2019ve landed in a relatively good position here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill that is coming in to help with the legislation and getting it in place is really about setting out the framework, the quota management system, how it will work, and also around amending the Overseas Investment Act, for example. So that is really small technical stuff.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere has been heaps of commentary on the Indian FTA and I will agree that I think it is a really small step in the right direction. There was certainly not enough credit given to the likes of dairy, for example. Some of the quota amounts are quite small in some areas, and I think that we could have been far more ambitious. But you have to start somewhere. I think the Minister outlined, very succinctly, that India has the fastest growing middle class globally. New Zealand is not in a benign position; we are a tiny island nation at the bottom of the planet. We need to make sure that we are diversifying our trade options. For that reason, I\u2019m going to commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022 data-id=\u0022d0cbe336e573751514317b8b63018c68\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d0cbe336e573751514317b8b63018c68\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON (NZ First) (16:05)\u003C/span\u003E: I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to oppose this bill, the Indian free-trade agreement (FTA) bill, especially in the form that it is in.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aa1d6ecbab36c7a29d54b95693726296\u0022\u003EHon Damien O\u0027Connor\u003C/span\u003E: What about the wool!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002297ded2de64c66c97106040607b4e43af\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: The wool is a product we\u2019re selling. If you listen long enough, you\u2019ll learn the difference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First has, in its manifesto\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d8e374a6ef152249c1db17721451aa32\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve lived long enough, thank you, Mr Wilson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224157da6c835ffb334f1679f7c56df011\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014the aspiration to sign a FTA agreement with India, just not this version.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAn FTA should deliver mutual benefits; this one advantages India over New Zealand. We need to get it right. Foreign affairs Minister, the Rt Hon Winston Peters, has visited India on many occasions to further New Zealand\u2019s interests and facilitate a mutually beneficial agreement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First supports expanding New Zealand\u2019s access to major global markets. As an export-driven nation, our prosperity depends on selling goods and services to the world and India, home to around 1.4 million people, represents a significant market. However, FTAs take time and should not be done in record time, as we heard earlier. With due care when negotiating an agreement and drafting legislation, we enter a legal arrangement that commits both parties under the World Trade Organization General Agreement on Trade in Services and General Agreement on Tariffs and Trades, and, on the other hand, our own domestic legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe current Indian FTA bill has been too rushed and falls short in several areas and therefore should not proceed in its current form. The national interest test highlighted some concerning loose ends which, combined with various hooks in the agreement itself, does not put New Zealand on the same level as India in this agreement. New Zealand First would like to see some of these issues resolved. The trade imbalance: New Zealand is opening its market more fully and immediately than India, particularly in dairy and horticulture, while India retains significant protections, concessions, and exclusions. New Zealand has fully liberalised all tariffs on Indian imports from day one under this agreement, from a very low 2.2\u00A0percent tariff base, whereas India has 30\u00A0percent of its tariff lines remaining at high rates up to 33\u00A0percent with very gradual reductions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Indian economy sits around $4.1 trillion with a rising middle class compared to approximately US$240 billion for New Zealand. Our export impact on India\u2019s economy is tiny, limited, and exclusionary. India\u2019s potential impact on New Zealand\u2019s economy, on the other hand, is vast and open. Why on earth\u2014why on earth, then, are we investing New Zealand dollars\u2014$32 billion\u2014in their economy with no reciprocal agreement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EImmigration: this agreement goes beyond trade by embedding migration commitments that could limit future New Zealand Governments\u2014aka us\u2014control over immigration settings. It\u2019s going to be in the agreement. There are uncapped and open-ended migration pathways that will impact New Zealand and New Zealanders. For example, uncapped student visas with 25 hours per week paid work allowable with a two-year post-study extension work visa, and after that, even, you can have a further extension if you wish.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe words that you were looking for, the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor, were the uncapped intra-corporate transfer work programme\u2014nice words\u2014for work specialists, like yoga teachers\u2014we need more yoga teachers, apparently! This allows for up to three years\u2019 employment and access for partners and children who can also seek student or work visas whilst here, three-year work visas\u2014take one of those\u2014with an accredited employer. Oh, and a further work visa for another five years\u2014post-study and post-work visas that can lead to residency applications with familial skilled migrant business and investment specialist work access. It goes on, and it goes on. New Zealand First has concerns about these things and argues that it will increase pressure on housing, infrastructure, services, job security, and social cohesion at a time when our youth and unemployed need jobs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EInvestment: New Zealand First objects to the proposed commitment to facilitate US $20 billion of outward investment into India over 15 years, especially because India may be able to rebalance some of these concessions, the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor, on tariffs, intellectual property, and quotas if it considered that New Zealand had not met its cooperation agreements. The commitments under these cooperation agreements are not benign.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAgricultural cooperation and quotas: New Zealand First is concerned that cooperation mechanisms and agreed action plans could compel New Zealand to share valuable agricultural expertise, cultivars, tacit knowledge, and intellectual property while exposing New Zealand to penalties if these commitments are not met.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIntellectual property (IP): a major risk in this agreement is that New Zealand plant varieties, seeds, technology, trade secrets, and industry know-how could be transferred or weakened under India\u2019s IP framework, especially given India\u2019s non-membership of the International Union for the protection of New Varieties of Plants. Come on, guys. We\u2019re giving our stuff away; we\u2019re selling our knowledge. Have we not learnt? Intellectual property within industry sectors is more than a legal definition of one innovation, strain, strand, or cultivar. IP, trade secrets, technology transfer, and sharing of expertise are evident in this FTA under those agreed action plans. Figure it out. New Zealand needs to be sure that there is no such repeat of, for example, SunGold Gold3 kiwifruit, m\u0101nuka honey in Australia, Envy apples in China, and the list goes on. We have not protected our stuff, and here we are doing it again. This is kind of crazy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDomestic Indian legislation\u2014have we really looked at this?\u2014provides scant evidence for the protection of New Zealand\u2019s IP and shared expertise\u2014scant evidence. Why are we selling our trade secrets when we could be taking advantage of years and years of science, producer practices, and tacit knowledge and when we could be protecting our strongest competitive export advantages instead of giving them away?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ERules of origin and manufacturing: we haven\u2019t come across that yet. Let me say what New Zealand First warns about\u2014the specialist high-value dairy ingredients. We will be vulnerable to the rules of origin abuses by providing the opportunity for intermediary countries to exploit preferential trade agreements. The few concessions in the India free-trade agreement include tariff concessions on specialist dairy ingredients, such as albumins and peptones to be re-exported from India\u2014in other words, New Zealand\u2019s only dairy access\u2014to support India\u2019s manufacturing and value-added products. Why are we giving that expertise away? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022527af87ecc838e559aeefeef50fdd79b\u0022\u003EHon Mark Patterson\u003C/span\u003E: This is a terrible deal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a930622c5e129fc7ca8808788dc207d\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re getting there. How about the financial systems you\u2019ve signed up to? Did you know about those? Come on. Those on the Finance and Expenditure Committee might know a little bit about this. There is concern in this agreement about the cooperation on digital payments, unified payments interface integration, fintechs, central bank digital currencies\u2014CBDCs, right?\u2014data governance, scams, privacy, and financial sovereignty. New Zealand First does not see how these clauses are fundamental to this agreement, given New Zealand itself is still concerned about, and still considering, all of these things. We\u2019re not there yet with CBDCs. Come on. We\u2019re signing a free-trade agreement, thinking that that\u2019s going to solve it for us. Are you crazy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Paris Agreement: these commitments should not be included in the trade agreement, because they could turn domestic policy choices into FTA obligations. We\u2019re signing up to it with them; we have to live up to it. New Zealand First believes this free-trade agreement is not a good deal for New Zealand and New Zealanders. It is not too late to turn this into a free-trade agreement that benefits New Zealand and is in agreement on trade. Thank you, Mr Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd9e5f174e7dfbe3804348bbc3d3491b\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Steve Abel\u2014five minutes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u00221574dd60c83442fa494423fc68cfe079\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221574dd60c83442fa494423fc68cfe079\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (16:15)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. We believe that trade, globally, should be focused on fairness, not simply on the removal of barriers to corporate exploitation of people. This bill has some real problems with it\u2014this free-trade deal\u2014and I want to outline some of the ones that the Green Party is concerned about. One common thing that we try and get better trade on, with other nations, is our dairy products. I think it was inappropriate for us to seek to flood or impact the local Indian dairy industry and market with New Zealand dairy products, because why would we as a nation that is, as is commonly expounded in this House, so dedicated to the dairy industry want to undermine the most ancient subsistence dairy culture in the world?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ECows have been farmed in India for 8,000 years. Do you know how many dairy farmers there are in India? About 80 million dairy farmers. Most of those dairy farmers own between two and three cows. Some only own one cow. Many of them are landless. They are subsistence farmers. They provide nutrition to their households and some small income from the dairy that they produce. I don\u2019t believe it was ethical or appropriate for us to ever seek to undermine dairy farmers in India with our dairy product, here, from New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fa370c0016e740998a2816116c8e4365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022121a31707cbbbf1d96a3c368b01112eb\u0022\u003EHon Andrew Hoggard\u003C/span\u003E: So if we all have one cow, then you\u2019ll stop attacking the dairy industry in New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f81bab776b3b82383f558e0e5244cf08\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: What did he say? I missed it. You\u2019ll have to tell me that later, Mr Hoggard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s another very glaring problem with this bill that has been outlined by our colleagues from New Zealand First. No, we\u2019re not going to make a xenophobic attack on it, because we don\u2019t believe in a race-baiting nationalism, which is the last refuge of the scoundrel; we believe in criticising it on economic grounds. It is the obligation that we shall promote foreign direct investment from New Zealand with the aim to increase foreign direct investment inflows to the value of United States $20\u00A0billion. That has been said before by my colleague Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2014that\u2019s $33 to $34\u00A0billion New Zealand dollars at current exchange rates. That has to be achieved within 15 years. Now, for context, there is nigh on zero possibility that we can achieve that, because New Zealand\u2019s total foreign direct investment (FDI) outflow\u2014abroad to all countries in the entire world\u2014in 2025 was $1.46\u00A0billion. Just think about that figure. Less than $1.5\u00A0billion dollars is how much FDI New Zealand invested in every other country in the world, and we are signing up to an agreement whereby, in the next 15 years, we\u2019re going to achieve a $34\u00A0billion investment in just one country. Where in the Lord\u2019s name is that going to come from?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EForeign direct investment requires us to find the monies to invest in another country\u2014i.e., not invest in our own country\u2014and exporting such massive volumes of capital would be flying in the face of our current balance of payment position. We run a chronic current account deficit, and it\u2019s largely driven by the outflow of profits to foreign investment in New Zealand\u2014i.e., to Australian banks and to Australian companies that now own our meat industry in part. Additional financial outflows of direct investment to India would require either additional exports, fewer imports, or higher overseas debt to compensate. The New Zealand dollar would fall in value, making imports more expensive and overseas debt more expensive to service. This, in the name of doing good for our economy, is actually a total nightmare for our economy over the next 15 years, and that particular part of this agreement will come back to bite future Governments very hard. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022 data-id=\u0022ec057f66e058facfb7b07438fa8951c6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ec057f66e058facfb7b07438fa8951c6\u0022\u003ETIM VAN DE MOLEN (National\u2014Waikato) (16:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Look, we\u2019ve traversed well the fine benefits of this free-trade agreement (FTA), and so I\u2019ll focus my comments on the changes made through the select committee process. I do want to start by thanking submitters for their contributions through that process, and also fellow members of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee and the advisers. We did consider this in a very efficient time frame, and the aim of that was to make sure that we could get ahead of the EU FTA with India in order to enjoy that most favoured nation status with regard to wine, in particular.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOur focus was really around the nuts and bolts. We ensured that the Ministry for Primary Industries were considered accountable at the same level as other non-Crown quota managers. We put in a deadline to have a reasonable time frame for appeal processes around quota allocation. We got rid of the need to gazette those so that there\u2019s less red tape, and we had some broader consultation on fee-setting, as well. Then, with regard to the search powers piece, we didn\u2019t think it was appropriate to give warrantless search powers in this instance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose were a quick summary of the key changes we\u2019ve made. This is a good piece of legislation, and I look forward to it progressing. Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022 data-id=\u0022402dfda2989ff74a9fea213ccd8dd15d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022402dfda2989ff74a9fea213ccd8dd15d\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour) (16:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Like my colleague the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor, I rise to speak in favour of the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill at this second reading and to commend the Minister for Trade and Investment for seeing the agreement through, but, as my colleague has said, really, the foundations of building the relationship happened before this term. I will speak in more detail to that at the third reading of the bill, but I did want to mention that in 2020, there was a five-year plan that the Labour Government put into place in terms of developing that relationship. Both the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor and the Hon Nanaia Mahuta were very much responsible for driving forward that platform, on which this agreement proceeded.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor has said, this isn\u2019t necessarily the agreement that we would have negotiated, but it is a start and it does present an opportunity for New Zealand, both for our larger exporters and also for our small and medium sized enterprises, as well. We heard from a number of submitters, including Business New Zealand, ExportNZ, Zespri, Seafood New Zealand, Beef \u002B Lamb New Zealand, and others, about just how much they expect it to benefit their business in the coming decade-plus. As has been mentioned, export is directly connected to one out of four jobs in New Zealand, and so it certainly is a benefit, despite what others in the House have said. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, of course, this is an interesting piece of legislation because we first had the treaty examination process and received submissions on that. Can I commend the chair of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee, Tim van de Molen, for his work both on that part of the hearing as well as on this part, which was much more specific about a much thinner range of issues, but the submitters who made submissions in relation to this bill, regardless, submitted on the agreement itself in quite a broad way, and so I did want to speak to some of the issues that others have traversed, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe first one is the investment commitment. As has been said, this isn\u2019t a commitment in regard to the amount itself\u2014so the $33 billion\u2014but it is a commitment to promote. It is an effort clause in terms of how I like to see it, and it is one that we are obliged to work towards over the course of 15 years. But others in the House have used the word \u201Cclawback\u201D, almost suggesting that once we get to 15 years, if India is not satisfied that that effort clause has been met, they can somehow retrospectively claw back some of the benefits to our exporters that they have already accrued, and that\u2019s simply not the case. So, just to be clear on that, that is a clause that kicks in in 15 years\u2019 time and, in the meantime, all those benefits are available to our exporters, and certainly I would expect the relationship to develop as such. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second issue is the treatment of workers, which is always very central to our thinking as a Labour caucus. During the course of discussions and of reviewing the documents, that was a very significant part of what we took forward as a condition of our support. This conditionality is in two parts: one is to ensure that the labour inspectorate has sufficient capacity to be able to manage issues as they might come up, and the second was in relation to ensuring that the people impacted have access to legal advice at the very earliest of stages, and our proposal was that that could be done through Community Law. So we will absolutely be continuing to look at this to ensure that the Government is putting in place those measures. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, my Green Party colleague Steve Abel spoke about fairness and the issue of flooding the Indian market. In my view, that isn\u2019t an issue in this scenario. He spoke about dairy, and that\u2019s of course not going to be an issue in relation to the agreement as it is, but in terms of the other exported goods at play, there are clauses in the agreement which allow either party, due to a flooding-of-the-market issue, to suspend a quota amount because it\u2019s having a direct impact on their local market, and so that isn\u2019t an issue at all. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen we had colleagues from New Zealand First speak about the immigration issues here. The immigration commitments are narrow. They\u2019re not novel; they\u2019re not something very new that we\u2019re placing in our agreement with our Indian colleagues. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe commitments are largely consistent with or below the existing standards that we offer more generally. With the student visa work rights, for example, Indian student visa holders would get at least 20 hours of work rights per week, but the current settings are 25 hours, and so, in practice, the new commitment doesn\u2019t expand on the status quo at all. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the uncapped flood of student visas that we\u2019ve heard about from some members in this House, the no-cap commitment simply locks in a New Zealand approach more generally. It doesn\u2019t create a new approach at all. The post-study work extension is narrowly targeted to PhD graduates. It\u2019s not the general student population, and so it really does limit that cohort of entry, and, of course, the Government still retains policy levers to be able to control and manage the flow of immigration. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just did want to say that I think it\u2019s extremely irresponsible, some of the rhetoric that we\u2019ve heard around immigration not only today but earlier in the House. I do think that members who continue down that path ought to take into account that it\u2019s having broader ramifications in the public\u2014what\u2019s just being said in the House here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe chair of the select committee has spoken to some of the changes that we made as a select committee in the House, and I just did want to acknowledge that some submitters\u2014including, I believe, it was ExportNZ\u2014urged us not to make any changes to the legislation so that it could proceed at pace. While I completely do understand that perspective, my view is that the changes that have been made are very technical but also extremely practical in terms of where we\u2019ve landed. For example, the quota system that was created, essentially, at the initial drafting of the bill envisaged that the legislation would be passed at the start of a quota year, which isn\u2019t necessarily the case. There are tweaks that we made to that which would help it make sense and would allow those quotas to be seen as a proportion, rather than applying from the get-go. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other change that we made\u2014which is a fascinating one\u2014was in relation to search and seizure powers. As members have referenced, we removed one of two of the search power options. One was a warranted search, and the second was an unwarranted search to, essentially, allow inspection where there weren\u2019t any grounds to secure a warrant in the first place. The committee\u2019s decision was to completely exclude warrantless searches. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, interestingly, this is a point at which the committee disagreed with the legal advice that was provided by Crown Law. Crown Law\u2019s view, on examining the initial search powers, was that both the warranted search powers and the non-warranted search powers were compliant with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and were lawful in that respect, and they counted as a reasonable search or seizure, but it was certainly the committee\u2019s view that those unwarranted powers, with no suspicion whatsoever, were not. I do think that that\u2019s a fair place for the committee to land. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy one concern in terms of where the committee has landed in regards to this free-trade agreement (FTA) is a question of whether the powers of search are consistent in relation to other powers that apply in the other FTAs\u2014specifically in regards to the powers of inspection relating to dairy. The powers that relate to dairy reference Part 4 of the Search and Surveillance Act, which, in my view, were framed up as a power that is responsive to criminal offending. I do hope that in the long term, this House can look at whether we need a new search powers regime that is more fit for purpose for civil regimes and to allow the current search powers to only apply to criminal regimes. Having said that, I do think the committee did a fantastic job of scrutiny, and I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022 data-id=\u00229459541e9f8e2b1981eabc02322bd851\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229459541e9f8e2b1981eabc02322bd851\u0022\u003ETIM COSTLEY (National\u2014\u014Ctaki) (16:31)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s nice to see Lawrence Xu-Nan and Winston Peters agreeing on something, but I fear they\u2019re on the wrong side of this one. In New Zealand, if we want more options for Kiwis, if we want more teachers or nurses or doctors\u2014whatever we want, it takes money. New Zealand has always made its money by selling stuff to the world. India opens up 1.4 billion customers to New Zealanders. It is a great thing. I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022367839471f68498a2eb7761ec87a2db5\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: This is a five-minute split call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229f071e5323b640f383726a46f39e8187\u0022 data-id=\u0022ac727a4eef85e800d8bf75394d4f0c71\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229f071e5323b640f383726a46f39e8187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ac727a4eef85e800d8bf75394d4f0c71\u0022\u003EHon PHIL TWYFORD (Labour\u2014Te Atat\u016B) (16:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. It\u2019s a pleasure to be able to contribute to this second reading of one of two bills that are implementing the India free-trade agreement (FTA).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhy does Labour support this FTA? For a number of reasons, and I\u2019ll run through them. As the previous speaker, Tim Costley, was saying, this trade agreement really is a bridge to one of the fastest growing and largest economies in the world. There\u2019s no doubt that in the years to come, India\u2019s economic growth will make it one of probably three of the major great powers in the world, and over time it will probably surpass China in terms of the size of its economy. For New Zealand, I think the case is that\u2014and for me this is what it all comes down to\u2014in this increasingly uncertain world, it\u2019s very important that New Zealand has the opportunity to deepen and build its bilateral relationship with India, given India\u2019s geopolitical and economic significance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe agreement itself is far from perfect, and I\u2019m sure Damien O\u2019Connor would have negotiated a much better one. No\u2014didn\u2019t get a rise of the Minister for Trade and Investment on that one. It\u2019s not the agreement that Labour would have negotiated, but we have, after long and careful deliberation, taken the view that this agreement is in New Zealand\u2019s national interest. There are very significant tariff reduction benefits to some of our most important primary sectors\u2014kiwifruit, wine, honey, sheep meat, and forestry, among others. The opportunity to open up significant export relationships in services, tourism, and labour mobility is clearly, in our view, in our national interest.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to say something about the immigration aspects of the agreement. This agreement does not open the floodgates. In fact, it\u2019s quite moderate. Labour mobility is extremely important to the Indian Government. Labour mobility provisions already exist in a number of the big trade agreements that have been negotiated internationally in recent years, including in several of ours. It\u2019s not something to be afraid of, and the provisions in this agreement\u2014specifically the 1,600 a year temporary work visas over three years; 5,000 at any one time; no pathway to residence; no right to bring family here\u2014are commitments that will fit quite snugly within New Zealand\u2019s existing immigration policy settings. Labour mobility was extremely important to the Indian Government, and I doubt we would have had this agreement if we hadn\u2019t been willing to negotiate on those aspects.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to say something to colleagues in the Green Party about their approach to this in relation to ours. As I said, we acknowledge the bill\u2019s not perfect, but Labour has always understood that New Zealand\u2019s destiny and prosperity are very tightly tied to the ability of our firms to export and sell their goods and services on international markets. Without that, we wouldn\u2019t survive. Agreements like this, and the China trade agreement before it, I think, are a pretty powerful illustration. Nevertheless, we also recognise that trade relations produce winners and losers, and it\u2019s very important that at the national level, the distribution of benefits and costs are taken into account by Governments\u2014our Governments\u2014and we use the levers available to ensure that we recognise and address those.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019re also committed to the Trade for All agenda, developed when David Parker was Minister for Trade and Export Growth, and a determined effort to take the community along with us. These processes should be transparent; we should engage the community and different interest groups and stakeholders\u2014and particularly the very often sensitive labour and environmental standards that really go to the heart of the winners and losers in these agreements need to be considered and, wherever possible, negotiated in substance into these agreements. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226c562dc86e974914b8878595e580f138\u0022 data-id=\u0022b30becbf4c53b888d119e2c28301a406\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c562dc86e974914b8878595e580f138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b30becbf4c53b888d119e2c28301a406\u0022\u003ECATHERINE WEDD (National\u2014Tukituki) (16:37)\u003C/span\u003E: I am really excited to support the India free-trade agreement. Coming from Hawke\u2019s Bay, the fruit bowl of New Zealand, this opens up huge potential for our apples, cherries, kiwifruit, red meat, wool, wine, forestry\u2014the list goes on. It\u2019s going to be huge for our economy, huge for jobs and opportunities, so I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022154727523a59431ab210aea1cf707272\u0022 data-id=\u00229c7fb2ffe4e17e635009f1faad6fe022\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022154727523a59431ab210aea1cf707272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229c7fb2ffe4e17e635009f1faad6fe022\u0022\u003EHon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour) (16:37)\u003C/span\u003E: It is a pleasure for me as a New Zealand member of Parliament of Indian origin to stand and take a call supporting the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill. I think for the entirety of my almost nine years in this House, this is something that Kiwi-Indian communities have been talking about and have been wanting to see Governments progress.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI, too, want to acknowledge the work of the previous Labour Government\u2014particularly Nanaia Mahuta, David Parker, and Damien O\u2019Connor\u2014who had, as my colleague Vanushi Walters pointed out, a five-year plan to ensure that we stepped up the relationship between the two countries. There was a fair bit of effort that was put into that and a number of visits both ways that were symbolic, I guess, but also bore testament to the fact that that relationship was being strengthened and deepened. I do want to point to that and the fact that this is many, many years in the making.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt was a really good opportunity for me to be the only Opposition member as part of the PM\u2019s delegation to India when the announcement was made around the negotiations restarting on this free-trade agreement (FTA). It allowed me to see the difference in narratives between how the FTA negotiations were being portrayed in India through the media and various industry organisations in India versus the narrative that was being shared by the current Government rampantly within Kiwi-Indian communities here. They were very different. What we heard here was that the Prime Minister had made a commitment on the campaign trail that if National was elected, there would be an NZ-India FTA negotiated and concluded in the first term, and all of that.  And then the story that was sold was the power of this Government\u2019s negotiation powers, I guess, or the strength of this Government\u2019s negotiation powers, and how, in one year, they had done what no Government before them had managed to do, and they had deepened that relationship and got to a point of negotiating, or reopening negotiations, on this free-trade agreement. And yet, everything that we heard over in India\u2014the way the story was being told back in India\u2014was that things had changed. Geopolitical shifts were happening and India needed to secure supply chains; India needed to diversify their trade. It was very clear that India\u2019s exports had been negatively impacted by the 25\u00A0percent tariff that the US had slapped on them, and so they needed to open up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd so, in the last two years, India has been actively negotiating 10 free-trade agreements. Things have changed quite dramatically on the Indian Government side. And there\u2019s no doubt that that was to our benefit, but it wasn\u2019t due to the strength of this Government\u2019s negotiation powers alone. I want to put that on the record, because that is the story that is being sold. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, as colleagues on this side of the House have made very clear, this is not the gold star of free-trade agreements (FTAs) either. It\u2019s not perfect, but we support it on this side because it goes some way towards improving things for us and for New Zealand exporters. We know that it gives New Zealand exporters more options in an uncertain international environment; that it positions New Zealand to benefit from India\u2019s long-term economic transformation. We know that about 95\u00A0percent of New Zealand\u2019s current exports will gain when it comes to tariff eliminations or substantial tariff reductions, particularly in sheep meat, in forestry, in kiwifruit, in apples, and wine. We also know, from significant commentary, that the gains may not be immediately realised, but the greatest value is likely to emerge over time. It gives New Zealand businesses a platform to develop new products, strengthens commercial relationships with India, and helps to build a sustained presence in a market of 1.4 billion people. All of that goes a significant way to benefiting New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI understand that the Government has commissioned modelling that estimates that the FTA could lift New Zealand\u2019s annual GDP by about $380 million, and exports to India by about $836 million by 2036. And so, for all these reasons, Labour supports this agreement and the legislation that will go towards enabling that. However, as we have pointed out, there are risks and there are two that I want to touch upon. One that is a significant risk, that Labour has pointed out, has highlighted, is the investment clause that others have spoken to, as well. It is a large sum of money that is meant to be invested in India. And as Vanushi Walters has pointed out\u2014it\u2019s US$20 billion, about NZ$33 billion in investment\u2014it\u2019s an investment promotion commitment. We need to show that we have done the work, put in the effort, over a 15-year period, for that investment to happen. But compare that with the 15-year period after the China - New Zealand FTA was signed, where outward investment to China was to the tune of about $1.5 to $1.8 billion over 15 years. So this US$20 billion commitment is significant, and the Government does need to reconcile Minister McClay\u2019s aspirational, sort of, characterisation of this investment clause with what we\u2019ve heard from the Indian Minister\u2019s description of potential clawback measures, as well. The Government needs to be quite careful about that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other risk that the Government needs to provide some certainty around, or to correct the public record on, is whether future Governments can still manage international student numbers. We saw what happened under the John Key National-led Government, where there was a monetary target put on export education, which then led to a proliferation of private training establishments (PTEs). Of course, some PTEs have a legitimate role to play in our education sector, but the proliferation of PTEs that were providing substandard education\u2014where many from India had sold land and houses to get the money to send their children to New Zealand, to get the substandard qualification, that then didn\u2019t get them a job in New Zealand, and led to an increase in migrant worker exploitation. We saw that happen under the last National Government, and we want to make sure that there are protections\u2014that we don\u2019t stray into that territory. It\u2019s bad for us and New Zealand\u2019s reputation, but it\u2019s also bad for the migrants and the students who come to New Zealand to study and to work here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn the note of migrant worker exploitation, I do want to point out some of the wins that Labour has secured. We said we would\u2014the process that the Government undertook to embark upon these negotiations was flawed. You don\u2019t chuck out your foreign Minister\u2014well, the foreign Minister exited the chat\u2014negotiating it. Where the Government themselves didn\u2019t have the numbers to pass ratification legislation in this House\u2014knew that, embarked upon, and waded into it anyway\u2014then came to Labour in the eleventh hour to get our support. We have provided conditional support as long as the Government expands the labour inspectorate to fund at least 14 additional staff focused on migrant worker exploitation, faster visa changes, and progressing the modern slavery legislation that we did a huge amount of work on in the last Government. All of those are things that the Government has agreed to as part of our conditional support for this legislation, but it will need to deliver on it and not just provide lip service and agree in principle to all of that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to end with the narrative around immigration. We know this is not open-slather immigration. My colleagues on this side of the House have been very clear as to why, but I want to point to how dangerous it is when parties like New Zealand First use this to talk about and, I guess, scaremonger and spread misinformation around the nature of immigration as a result of this bill. It is false. It is dangerous. It has harmed Kiwi-Indian communities and made all of us feel much less safe. That is not the society that we want to be in. And so when David Wilson stands up and talks about social cohesion in this House, it is laughable, because it is their party that has led to a huge amount of hate towards our communities as a result of their irresponsible narrative on this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022673069789fe74d02ac517109c173ccbd\u0022 data-id=\u002257ed153b5c09554eb10e5d1c9f258845\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022673069789fe74d02ac517109c173ccbd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002257ed153b5c09554eb10e5d1c9f258845\u0022\u003EHon Dr SHANE RETI (National\u2014Whang\u0101rei) (16:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I stand to support this bill. There are many important components, and I especially note the sectors on apples, kiwifruit, and honey. Ng\u0101puhi rangatira Sam Napia has affirmed to me that these are very important to the M\u0101ori economy. With that, I\u2019m very pleased to commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill be now read a second time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 29\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a7fbe652ea1d8f696fb14e095bc24fb\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill is set down for committee stage immediately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI declare the House in committee for consideration of the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002271e453ba517dfcf74a55518c153e0a74\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u002269cb53b318fa4491a18edd91704b2403\u0022\u003EPart 1 Amendments to Dairy Industry Restructuring Act 2001, and Schedules 1AA and 1\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002225faf21adf1b9bed9fb2ee0d7700aad0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the House is in committee on the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill. We start with Part 1. This is the debate on clauses 3 to 13, \u201CAmendments to Dairy Industry Restructuring Act 2001\u201D, and Schedules 1AA and 1. The question is that Part 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00220b28bbb25334e8e1aaa08366ec47a745\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220b28bbb25334e8e1aaa08366ec47a745\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (16:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Minister, for being available for the consideration of this bill. When we\u2019re looking at Part 1, \u201CAmendments to Dairy Industry Restructuring Act 2001\u201D, I first have a series of questions specifically around the quota for albumin. I want to start with clause 4, \u201CSection 5 amended (Interpretation)\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess my first question, which might be an obvious question for the Minister for Trade and Investment, is about the reduction in tariffs. First of all, when it comes to \u201Cquota\u201D, I\u2019m assuming that part of the quota is to do with the reduction in tariffs, when we\u2019re looking at albumin. We know there is an immediate 50 percent reduction, starting at 1,000 tonnes per annum and growing to 3,000 tonnes by year five. Can I check with the Minister: is that growth progressive, year on year? I\u2019m seeing a nod. Good; that\u2019s my first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWould that, then, potentially require any updates or changes in legislation, in terms of the way that that particular quota would be looked at? No? It does not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, when it comes to this particular one, would the Minister be able to, I guess, elucidate for the committee on how the quota would be allocated with existing dairy farmers, in the context of this particular bill? I\u2019m looking at things like \u201Calbumin designated market\u201D\u2014or anything that\u2019s related to clause 4(5) of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022b22f24f3b2de6f2177c1b338d2afe3e5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b22f24f3b2de6f2177c1b338d2afe3e5\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (16:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Indeed, going to Part 1, \u201CAmendments to Dairy Industry Restructuring Act 2001\u201D, this is arguably the most important and most contentious part, I guess, of the trade agreement. The Minister for Trade and Investment might have quite a bit of information to provide to us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe export many, many products\u2014and produce many, many products\u2014from milk in this country, from a dairy industry that is arguably one of the most innovative in the world. The question to the Minister: why did we get only albumin? Why did we get only one product as of right into a market that is incredibly knowledgeable and appreciative of dairy products?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMaybe the Minister can answer or explain to us the process that left us with just one product, and then maybe he can explain the process of elimination that saw all of those other potential products knocked out of the agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022ddf98ae37781ddd27db491eb8df068a3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ddf98ae37781ddd27db491eb8df068a3\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (16:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Just if I might\u2014because I want this to be as interactive as possible\u2014to the Green member Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan, it is not farmers who will benefit from this part of the agreement and the issuing of quota; it is, of course, processors and exporters that do. Farmers supply them, and they go from there. Actually, the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act (DIRA) legislation that is already in force dictates how quotas are shared out. There is no change to that; the legislation merely adds India and this quota to the DIRA legislation. As with the EU agreement or the UK agreement, and many others, and so on, where we have quotas for dairy products, there is no change other than it being added.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ETo the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor, the legislation that we have before us is very, very specific as to this quota only. I think probably the questions that he is raising are out of scope. I\u2019m happy to talk to him afterwards. Of course, this is the legislation to meet obligations\u2014in this case, to make sure tariff rates come down, and then, secondly, that New Zealanders can benefit from the quotas we have received. When we did the full treaty examination, previously, before this legislation was put in place, I think many of the issues he has just raised now, and that many others may wish to cover, were discussed in great detail by the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b5169081a441ae8a149b712d49edf906\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I take another call, I\u2019ll just remind members that we are not debating the free-trade agreement per se, just the legislation that sits alongside it. It is quite tight. I did give the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor some latitude, hoping he would get to it, but it is out of scope.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022 data-id=\u0022a673640dd8070d353eda8fdd0c8041ad\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a673640dd8070d353eda8fdd0c8041ad\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour) (16:55)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Like my colleague the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor, I am on Part 1, clause 4(5). This is the definitions\u2014two questions from me. The first one: obviously, we have the agreement, and then we have legislation that brings into force those parts of the agreement that require legislation to bring them into force. No doubt the same is true of India. Do the definitions sync, in terms of India\u2019s legislation, and is that a conversation the Minister for Trade and Investment had with his counterparts to ensure that definitions like \u201Calbumin designated market\u201D are consistent across both jurisdictions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe second question: within that definition\u2014\u201Calbumin designated market\u201D\u2014it says, at the end of that particular paragraph, \u201Cincluding any amendment or any successor to that annex\u201D. That\u2019s a reference to an annex of the free-trade agreement itself. I have a question about whether it is ordinary practice to allow for that flexibility, for part of a trade agreement to be renegotiated and then a piece of legislation to automatically apply to that new standard, or whether this is new. I would expect that, ordinarily, if there were changes, new annexes, changes to existing provisions, those changes would need to come back to the House in terms of changes made to legislation. I\u2019m just wondering whether it\u2019s ordinary practice, and also, whether the Minister is anticipating that there will be changes to what constitutes an albumin designated market?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00229f4848ac4b3cdaf283934af9d1d1328e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229f4848ac4b3cdaf283934af9d1d1328e\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (16:57)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I know that we\u2019re focusing, currently, primarily on clause 4(5), around some of the definitions. I think, while we\u2019re discussing albumin in particular\u2014albumin is in Part\u00A01 of the bill because it is part of what we see in the New Zealand - India free-trade agreement as part of the tariff reduction. That is why we\u2019re seeing it here. My question to the Minister is: if albumin being a big aspect of the tariff reduction is why we\u2019re seeing it in Part 1 of this bill, I\u2019m curious to know why there are, then, no clauses in Part 1, particularly under clause\u00A04, around the fact that we also received a tariff reduction for bulk infant formula, and also dairy peptones.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EOne would at least assume that, in this clause, alongside \u201Calbumin\u201D, dairy peptones would also have specific paragraphs. I mean, I\u2019m looking at the fact that we\u2019re getting an elimination of the 20 percent tariffs on peptones over seven years. Is it because it is not currently in effect? When it is in effect, are we expecting an amendment to this Act that will add additional definitions for dairy peptones\u2014if the Minister for Trade and Investment wouldn\u2019t mind clarifying that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022bf6d5fa17ecc0881d2cc0a2ef0f6e41b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bf6d5fa17ecc0881d2cc0a2ef0f6e41b\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (16:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and taking your guidance, of course, of sticking to the more technical side of it, I will indeed attempt to do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe allocation of quota, and the definitions here under clause 4(5), \u201Calbumin designated market means the tariff quota for albumins of New Zealand origin\u201D\u2014 one of the questions I have for the Minister\u2014because we do have a number of core components, including albumin, coming into New Zealand from Europe for infant formula manufacture. I\u2019m just asking the Minister about the \u201Ccountry of origin\u201D definition\u2014I know it\u2019s included here\u2014just to ensure that that doesn\u2019t allow any crossover from some of the imported product.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, in terms of the allocation process for export quota, on the basis of the existing quota or the existing total volume, that\u2019s reasonably small to my knowledge, so maybe the Minister can explain whether they considered the growth in this market and whether there had to be a new system of quota allocation from what we\u2019ve traditionally done into markets like the UK, EU, or the US. So there are a couple of questions in there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other one is about the \u201Celigible reserve albumin participant\u201D, of course. If someone can apply for some of that reserve\u2014which is 10 percent of the total volume, as I understand\u2014why is it limited to 50 tonnes or less? It would be good if the Minister can answer those questions at the moment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022 data-id=\u0022d02e750b7affa63cd558b47896fbcb5c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d02e750b7affa63cd558b47896fbcb5c\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON (NZ First) (17:01)\u003C/span\u003E: This is just a question for the Minister around the economic cooperation and technical assistance chapters or sector. Quota management remains quite tightly connected to these action plans under this agreement. We would really like to know how our action plans\u2014which include cooperation for cultivar transfer, seeds, albumin, peptones, and so on\u2014are going to be affected if there is any kind of situation where New Zealand has actually not performed its agreements or commitments under the cooperation that we have agreed to through the action plans.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022c02f1ffec9b440f21fe88c049caeba9b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c02f1ffec9b440f21fe88c049caeba9b\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (17:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. While I see that the Minister is seeking advice, I do acknowledge that because this is quite a technical bill, there might be chances where the Minister needs some very specific advice and guidance from the officials. Just following on from what my previous question is, now, the reason I asked the previous question is that, currently, the tariff reduction we get for albumin is 1,000 tonnes in the first year, which becomes 3,000 tonnes, as the Minister said, in five years\u2019 time. According to the national interest analysis, the 3,000 tonnes is just slightly above the average of what we\u2019re exporting right now, which means that although 1,000 tonnes in the first year will get that enjoyment of a tariff reduction, presumably the other 2,000 tonnes won\u2019t. I want to check with the Minister\u2014and maybe there\u2019s a simple explanation for this\u2014when we look at the definition of \u201Calbumin reserve portion\u201D, how would a reserve work, and then what then would an eligible reserve albumin participant, in this case, need to do to be able to be a part of that reserve?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThere are a few questions I want to ask the Minister regarding the definitions of \u201Calbumin reserve portion\u201D and \u201Celigible reserve albumin participant\u201D, but I want to start with: it seems like only one-third of our current export amount will enjoy the tariff reduction, so which one-third will we, again, expect the reduction to be\u2014unless I got it completely wrong?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00222aaf9aa2d675097026264606d9379210\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222aaf9aa2d675097026264606d9379210\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (17:03)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m very happy to answer some of those questions. The first one was around albumins and the definition in the legislation. Anything that countries trade across borders has a name, but it also has a tariff clarification, and it is a tariff code. That code starts small. It can go out, depending upon the greater amount of detail. In effect, \u201Calbumins\u201D is the name that we use, but in as far as the agreement is concerned, if one goes to the back\u2014and I recommend members do that; there are 500 pages of all these lines and so on, so I won\u2019t tell you where in the 500 pages albumin is, but we\u2019ll have a test later on to see if you got to it. I can tell you it\u2019s either just before or just after page 250, possibly. But the point that I\u2019m making here is that that is very clearly defined and, therefore, there is no misunderstanding. On the questions around whether India is lining up their understanding the same as ours, it comes to that tariff clarification. So that is the case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESecondly, it is for each country to inform the other that they\u2019re able to meet their obligations. When India says they\u2019re able to do that, as we do, it is accepted on either side; it\u2019s not for the lawyers to go and cross the i\u2019s and dot the t\u2019s or, in this case, dot the i\u2019s and cross the t\u2019s.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo Damien O\u2019Connor\u2014can product be imported for re-export as part of this quota, and will the rules of origin in the agreement cover that? They are very, very clear. Generally, the answer would be, no, it\u2019s not the case. This is purely from New Zealand, but the rules of origin dictate what we\u2019re able to export if there has been any transposition of value added. But, in this case, to answer your question, it would be no. The reason that it only talked about albumins and not infant formula and other things is that there is no quota required for infant formula exports; there is no quantitative restriction; there is only a reduction in tariff rate. The reduction in tariff rate for infant formula goes to zero, but it\u2019s over a period of time of\u2014seven years or 10 years?\u2014seven or 10 years. We\u2019ve got at least seven years to get an answer. But the point of that is: it doesn\u2019t need to be in here, because there is no quota over it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is a reserve of 10\u00A0percent of the quota\u2014whatever the quota may be in the first year. It\u2019s 1,000 tonnes, it goes up to 3,000 tonnes over that period of time. There is a reserve of 10\u00A0percent of that so that any manufacturer or exporter who is not exporting at the moment and may want to in the future or who is not manufacturing now but may want to the future wants access to that market is able to do so. But it is the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act (DIRA) legislation that controls how that takes place, not this this piece of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, finally to the question of the quota with tariff reduction and how that applies, well, ultimately, DIRA decides that. Companies will make an application enabled through DIRA, set out through regulation, and they then will have the opportunity to receive some of that quota and export as part of that. This is no different to what happens in any other quota that we have going in many other parts of the world.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDamien O\u2019Connor asked why, of the 10\u00A0percent, there was a 50-tonne maximum. That lines up with what we do with beef exports to other countries around the world. Ten percent is reserved. In the case of the first year, 1,000 tonnes would be 100 tonnes. Those who are bidding into the 10\u00A0percent reserve can get a maximum of 50 tonnes so that many others could have access to it. In the case that one company bid and got the 100 tonnes, as an example, then no one else would be able to get in there. In this case, for the 100\u00A0tonnes, at least there would be two. My expectation, though, is that those who want to bid in would be at the lower level to start with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229f071e5323b640f383726a46f39e8187\u0022 data-id=\u00221f6a31d7fd347445136129636157e417\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229f071e5323b640f383726a46f39e8187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221f6a31d7fd347445136129636157e417\u0022\u003EHon PHIL TWYFORD (Labour\u2014Te Atat\u016B) (17:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Further on the question of reserve albumin export licences, I wonder if the Minister can share with the committee what annual export value he expects that the access provided, or allowed for, under these provisions will generate. It would be interesting to have even a\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022308f56a64947dfaaee1543c906a46fef\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: It depends upon the value of the protein by tonne that\u2019s exported.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229f071e5323b640f383726a46f39e8187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f44b000a85642be0ab4efe410045f58b\u0022\u003EHon PHIL TWYFORD\u003C/span\u003E: Would the Minister put a ballpark dollar figure per year that we\u2019re talking about?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022447a9ccbcc19573bcb92e02427540c4d\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: I have to stand up and answer, so I\u2019ll wait till you\u2019re finished.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229f071e5323b640f383726a46f39e8187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c2c9e2b1d0354f2f698105fadcdeca6\u0022\u003EHon PHIL TWYFORD\u003C/span\u003E: OK, that would be interesting to know. Under new section\u00A026AB, which allows for reserving 10\u00A0percent of the licences for small and emerging exporters, that option is discretionary, and I wonder if the Minister expects to activate that reserve in the first quota year. If not, what would smaller or emerging exporters have to demonstrate before he would activate it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy colleague Damian O\u2019Connor asked about the 10\u00A0percent reserve. I wonder whether or not the Minister or his officials have got an estimate of the number of New Zealand businesses currently expected to qualify as Eligible Reserve Albumen Participants.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew section\u00A026AB also requires evidence that reserve participants will be able to use the licences. How will the Minister assess that without setting such a high evidential standard that genuine new entrants might be excluded? It also requires him to consult existing albumin licence holders about creating the reserve. I wonder how he expects that his department will ensure that the views of incumbents don\u2019t outweigh the interests of potential entrants.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022f75af56ddaaa4a2981871fa6562904fa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f75af56ddaaa4a2981871fa6562904fa\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (17:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. The question does go\u2014given that we are talking about quota for albumins, and it\u2019s a component of infant formula, and elsewhere in the agreement, the Minister and the officials have negotiated access for dairy products for re-export from India, I\u2019m thinking that albumins would be part of that process. So the question is: why, indeed, do we have a quota and weren\u2019t we given unlimited access for albumin, given that it could go into infant formula, huge volumes of which could be exported from India? So the question is: was it negotiated in that way so the quotas that we are talking about here and the reserves, of course, which will be 10 percent of that total quota, is that volume\u2014why was it limited when, in fact, our understanding of the agreement is that anything for re-export was unlimited?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00227e5e62bbf5ab12723dac750b32d26cce\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227e5e62bbf5ab12723dac750b32d26cce\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (17:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Just going through this. As far as the reserve, it is my expectation that the reserve will be used in the first full year. Consultation on reserve has already taken place, and we\u2019ve received feedback, and that was part of the reason to establish it. The way it will be governed is the same as with the EU and other agreements, and it\u2019s governed by the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act, not by this bill. As far as value is concerned, it depends upon the value of the protein by tonne, but an early estimate as of today\u2014plus or minus when fully enforced\u2014is maybe up to a $6 million tariff saving on what is the full amount.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ETo Damien O\u2019Connor, again, different issues, but ultimately there is albumin exports to India already. They are paying tariffs at the moment\u2014this will be a reduction. I would assume that those who are exporting this product or in India importing it\u2014wanting to buy it\u2014would only pay the 11 percent tariff if they were going to keep it in India, as opposed to re-exporting it, because the member is correct that any dairy product imported to India for re-export is a zero tariff rate. So it wouldn\u2019t make sense to use this for re-export when you can have a zero tariff rate available to you straight away without any quantitative restriction. As I understand it, this will be used for product that will remain in India, as opposed to being re-exported. This is a very high-value concentrate protein. It is sought after because of the high quality of what we have in New Zealand. So it is my expectation that the quota will be filled each year, as well as a significant amount of other product going to India for additional value being added for then re-export.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022c580e110a3bdd2709178fcf8131856b1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c580e110a3bdd2709178fcf8131856b1\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (17:13)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. In regard to that process, can I ask the Minister who will be responsible for ensuring that albumin, if it goes in for re-export at zero tariff, won\u2019t end up in the domestic market, and therefore put us at risk? So is that our obligation here? Or is it, indeed, that of the Indian Government to ensure that there\u2019s no crossover? Indeed, it won\u2019t be the Government\u2019s intention, I know, but like everything in law or regulation, there does have to be some kind of policing arrangement to know that we don\u2019t get caught out through such a deal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002261786051aa581c322768cae238dd7b7f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002261786051aa581c322768cae238dd7b7f\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (17:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Minister McClay, for your response before. I actually did just have a look at the agreement. Can I just check, because one of the questions I had before was around a progression from the 50 percent reduction in tariffs and the progression of the quota, which we\u2019re covering for under this particular bid. I asked if the progression from 1,000 tonnes to 3,000 tonnes is progressive or 1,000 for year 1 and 5,000 in year 5. But it does look like there is a progression of a 500-tonne increase per year, based on the free-trade agreement. Which means that if we\u2019re looking at a 10 percent reserve, potentially, each year, for the first year there will be a 100-tonne reserve up to a 300-tonne reserve in year 5 progressively. Would that be a correct interpretation of that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227acaaeff89e9740a1da9222917698290\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: 10 percent of whatever the quota is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a590c9de0bd5a92b62a8b270b59708c3\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Yep. Then, in that case, when we were looking at the eligible reserve albumin participant, this clause 4, amended section 5(1)(b)(ii), when we are looking at someone with equal to a volume of less than 50 tonnes of albumin for the quota year, if that\u2019s in year 1 that the reserve is 10 percent, could we potentially then be looking at two or maybe even three eligible reserve albumin participants? Would that be, in that case, a possibility? In that case, what is the process to determine what those two or three eligible reserve albumin participants are going to be?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the next thing is I did ask the Minister is regarding the definition of albumin. Going through the agreement, as well, we\u2019re looking at people having to hold an albumin export licence. Can I just confirm with the Minister that an albumin export licence and the definition of albumin in this case according to the agreement, then, would also include albuminoidal substances, albuminates, and albumin derivatives, because those three are three different terms that have been used within the agreement. I just want to make sure that this bill captures all three potential interpretations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I did ask the Minister questions around the reserves. I do want to move on to clause 7, new section 26AB, in terms of the reserve albumin export licence. I do want to check, because the 10 percent reserve is secondary legislation. It will be done on the basis that subsection (3) of new section 26AB is going to be met. I guess my first question for this section, and I\u2019ll leave it at that for this contribution, would be: how likely, then, would that secondary legislation be made? Because while we can talk about the albumin reserve, etc., my assumption is that that wouldn\u2019t be a thing if that isn\u2019t being given affect by secondary legislation. Can I just check with the Minister for new section 26AB(2), how likely is it, and has the Minister considered any time line of when, that secondary legislation will be commencing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022 data-id=\u0022853241209390bee36eefd45fb3e7b841\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022853241209390bee36eefd45fb3e7b841\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON (NZ First) (17:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. To the Minister, Hon Todd McClay, I noticed you were otherwise engaged from my last question, so it would be very nice if that was addressed. But related to that, the Joint Agriculture Productivity Council to oversee industry cooperation under the Agriculture Productivity Partnership I think is directly related to quotas and tariffs. In so far as these action plans around kiwifruit, apples, and honey outlined, the delivery of New Zealand\u2019s performance obligation in relation to these action plans is directly linked to these things. India has made it clear its expectation that cooperation activities under these plans start prior to entry in force of the free trade agreement. Second question: have they started? First question: what affect may the Joint Agriculture Productivity Council or the Committee on Economic Cooperation and Technical Assistance have due to underperformance on our part and the penalising actions that may be taken by India in that regard if that were to happen, which are outlined?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022c3019fb430bf5f463b57822b2bcbcff6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c3019fb430bf5f463b57822b2bcbcff6\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (17:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Quick questions around the process for different products being imported to India. Some will be in quota, some won\u2019t have a quota, some will have a reduced tariff rate, others won\u2019t. The case for export for a zero tariff rate, it is in the interest of both Governments to have a better understanding of this. This legislation deals with, in the case of albumins, the quota, and setting up the process linking it to other legislation so it can be issued, and therefore those exports under the quota, the certificates issued, will benefit from a tariff reduction.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt doesn\u2019t deal with things that will go in where there isn\u2019t a need for a quota. However\u2014and I\u2019m happy to help the member\u2014in the case of import for re-export and whether there is a zero tariff rate, India has agreed to set up a single desk, or a special desk, and only New Zealand has this. It\u2019s in the agreement through the free-trade agreement to manage the product that comes in so that we can ensure that it can reach those who want to import it for re-export. We also, of course, have received a commitment from India that goods that are perishable are to clear their customs within 24 hours. That is a significant benefit to our exporters. However, the bits I was speaking of don\u2019t feature as part of this legislation. This legislation that we\u2019re speaking about now is merely to set up the quota system for wherever there is a quota and the reduction of the tariff rate amongst that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs far as the 10 percent quota is concerned, ultimately, what we\u2019ve said is a maximum of 50 tonnes per exporter that wants access to the reserve quota. As to how many there will be, that will depend upon those that want to export. If 100 exporters in the first year, as the quota will be 100 tonnes, want to export one tonne each, I guess it could be 100 exporters; but there could not be only one with the full amount in that case because of the reserve. How that is governed is the same as other quotas we have when there\u2019s a reserve. The European Union and UK legislation, remember, in beef, we\u2019ve set that up as well so that anybody that is not currently exporting to that market but would like to has the ability to get some quota to get an establishment in that market at a lower cost. This isn\u2019t new. It\u2019s happened a lot of times before. It\u2019s very fair and transparent, and the sector is aware of this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs far as performance, this legislation doesn\u2019t deal with the issues that the member raised. This is merely about how we govern the quota and share it fairly for export, but in the case of the question around, has the cooperation started already\u2014the industries themselves are responsible for that and many of them have been up there\u2014the answer is yes, it has.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e58bb3a3be2c9cbcf3d2f6cc7f6f10c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I take the next call, can I just please ask members to refer to the clause that\u2019s being spoken to please?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u00225a64a8b7c6dfef00fa3343e506aef713\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225a64a8b7c6dfef00fa3343e506aef713\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (17:22)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m referring to those clauses about albumin in Part 1, and we\u2019ve been canvassing them quite extensively. I just want to get a direct answer, if the Minister for Trade and Investment is able to give it, on my colleague Phil Twyford\u2019s question on the value of this albumin tariff reduction, because it\u2019s clear from the national interest analysis that we\u2019re currently exporting around 3,000 tonnes already to the country, and it\u2019s envisaged that, by year five, all 3,000 of those tonnes will be without the tariff.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aab778d238194e7c93fa222d05366dad\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: No, that\u2019s\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cf4f35ca87fba2585ead8adbdcb00ca3\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah? If you can correct me on that, that\u2019s great. But I wonder if you can give us clarity on what the value of that will be. The importance of this is in us understanding what the overall purported value of the free-trade agreement will be to us as against what the potential costs and risks will be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220c9104e816bff3f1be698d09d3f944ea\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I explained before, this debate is not about the free-trade agreement; this is about the legislation that enables it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220ad3c6116135c473b984dc71725627cd\u0022\u003ESteve Abel\u003C/span\u003E: Sure. Madam Chair, can I just ask for clarification on that? So we can\u2019t ask about\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d0f39c2e996c48c14f7c3e2dff44bb6\u0022\u003ETim van de Molen\u003C/span\u003E: Is this a point of order or not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u0022aa794cdc8ad6ae8ca94f5957c0de59ac\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aa794cdc8ad6ae8ca94f5957c0de59ac\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (17:23)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah. Point of order. Can we not ask about the value that this bill brings into being through it making the free-trade agreement come into effect?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212d408f5d4f504607a785b52b91f95f0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002299f83c8742db6171d67fe93e43944b27\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002299f83c8742db6171d67fe93e43944b27\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (17:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Thank you, Madam Chair. Can I just get a piece of clarification because, usually, when we do discuss other bills as well, there will be things like an accompanying regulatory impact statement that we can actually ask about when it comes to policy-related questions as well. Now, when it comes to international treaty examinations, or even free-trade agreements, we actually don\u2019t have regulatory impact statements, but, in the same way, what we do have instead are things like national interest analyses, etc., so it probably is important, when we\u2019re looking at how the overall package of this bill in relation to the agreement\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0c761a08fb609e1ccb1fca71c3938ca\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: So your point of order is?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d6d8f17730628a28c5823e67a3d4024\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: My point of order is that the agreement itself is actually integral to the analysis we\u2019re able to do in some of the questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b934987193fab3d04f0201a35f7526d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I think I understand what you\u2019re saying. The value was debated in the first reading, and so now we are debating the parts in the legislation that relate to the implementation. I don\u2019t want this debate to drift into the value of the free-trade agreement because we are not debating that. We are debating this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221c71bb36191fbc61454c4e3ff38d05ab\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to that point of order. I completely understand where you are coming from. We\u2019re not debating the value of the free-trade agreement; it\u2019s the value of the tariff reduction that was the question because we didn\u2019t get a chance in the first reading to actually ask Ministers questions around the values or specific aspects of what this bill would entail. But we will make sure to keep it quite concise and related to a particular clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00220502a422cc49c7a6c7520b7824420b4e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220502a422cc49c7a6c7520b7824420b4e\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (17:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, in as far as the 10 percent quota is concerned, or the reserve or the full amount, it is not possible to answer the question directly. The reason for that is that it would depend upon the value of the commodity at the time. All I can say\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f7cace1f0fe5ca489015a77a700a75c3\u0022\u003ESteve Abel\u003C/span\u003E: You must know that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a47eb82ebd195eb02f4a004037a30ce\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that\u2019s because if it\u2019s $10 compared to $1,000, the 11 percent would be different. But the point that I guess I\u2019m making is that I did answer that fulsomely earlier. I mean, I don\u2019t want to take any time of the Committee, but if the Greens are indicating that their support for the legislation depends upon this answer and they may finally support a free-trade agreement, then I\u2019d be happy to go and have a coffee and talk about it later.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002280af3c52120e02bb14c3fcc299711832\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002280af3c52120e02bb14c3fcc299711832\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (17:26)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cbef68cc64a52f83fda8367572fd2fa5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s very well read, Minister. I think there is probably a little bit of room if we are prepared to move on, but we have thrashed clause 4. I\u2019m happy to take some new material but this is quite a restricted\u2014OK, you got it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u00228d18c0a490095eda92d390edb79742c9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228d18c0a490095eda92d390edb79742c9\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (17:27)\u003C/span\u003E: Absolutely, Madam Chair, as always. As always. New section 26AB, inserted by clause 7, and it is on the allocation of reserve albumin export licences, and new subsection (2) says, \u201CThe Governor-General may, by Order in Council made on the recommendation of the Minister, make regulations that reserve 10% of albumin export licences\u2026\u201D\u2014quite a critical area\u2014and then we go down to new subsection (3)(a) where it says, \u201CBefore making a recommendation\u2026the Minister must be satisfied that\u2014(a) there is demand for reserve albumin export licences from eligible reserve albumin participants;\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ELook, there are some cynical people around this place that say we have the \u201CMinistry for Fonterra and Trade\u201D. It\u2019s not. It\u2019s the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Can I get an assurance from the Minister for Trade and Investment that he won\u2019t be subject to what will be\u2014it may be a legitimate argument from Fonterra that we have to consolidate, not disaggregate the albumin allocations. And so, the Minister has to reassure us, and he can in the chair, that, in making a recommendation to the Governor-General that there is demand for it, he\u2019s not subject to some legitimate pressure from some of the big players that eliminate some of the smaller and innovative exporters who may have found or may want to develop a market opportunity for this. The question comes down to: what is the ability for us to check on that and ensure that the allocation of, not the quota but the reserve quota, which is 10 percent of the total quota, that that is going to be allocated on a fair and innovative system?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022 data-id=\u00229d5ec075509a59971357cc45a15a1964\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229d5ec075509a59971357cc45a15a1964\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour) (17:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m on the same clause as my colleague. This is clause 7, inserting new section 26AB, and it\u2019s a question about the Minister for Trade and Investment\u2019s decision not to allow the transferring of export licences. New subsection (4) says that an eligible reserve albumin participant who is allocated reserve albumin export licences effectively cannot transfer them. Now, section 28A of the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act allows the Governor-General to essentially approve secondary legislation that allows the transfer of other licences, essentially for the purpose of ensuring or expediting exports.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe question is why that\u2019s not allowed in this case and, if it\u2019s intended not to be allowed more generally, why the Minister wouldn\u2019t consider a more narrow allowance for the transfer of licences\u2014for example, where someone had already held one of these reserve albumin export licences in the past, allowing just the transfer of an existing licence to those former licence holders, pursuant to section 28A of the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022091278e7b12f48f4ecff0d9ec776f75e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022091278e7b12f48f4ecff0d9ec776f75e\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (17:30)\u003C/span\u003E: I can help move us through this quite quickly. The approach is identical to that in the United Kingdom free-trade agreement we have, where I think a reserve quota was set up in a number of areas, including beef. It was a smaller one\u2014it might have been about 3.5 percent. Therefore, it will be governed exactly the same.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan I give an assurance that it will be done properly and fairly? Absolutely, we will. The reason a reserve quota is set up\u2014we don\u2019t have to; it\u2019s not in the agreement\u2014is to allow those who are not already exporting to that market to have the ability to establish themselves\u2014to get a small foothold, should they want, with a reduced tariff rate to grow their business. Without that reserve, they could still export there, but they wouldn\u2019t get a reduction of the tariff rate. In the case of some products\u2014m\u0101nuka honey is an example: it is a significant reduction for high value m\u0101nuka honey\u2014it would be hard for them to get into the market. This would allow some of them to have a foothold there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn the case of albumins, look, it varies, but there is only one export of any significance from New Zealand. Do we want more to, should they choose to put effort into processing this product? The answer is yes; we do. They will have a small reserve that they can ask for if they meet the conditions, which are very similar fare to what we have for other quotas we share around the world. They would at least be able to start building a business export relationship in that market.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022e18b481263e2402d429f8f8b29b4ed5e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e18b481263e2402d429f8f8b29b4ed5e\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (17:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I thank the Minister for that explanation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to move to\u2014still \u201Cclause 7\u201D but\u2014clause 7A. It was an insertion made in the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee to deal with the issue of the commencement of the free-trade agreement. There\u2019s some uncertainty, so my question to the Minister is: when does he foresee this being brought in? If this legislation is passed under urgency, then an Order in Council is required to bring the FTA into force. We\u2019re wondering about that\u2014that\u2019s the first question for him.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen: I guess the commitments here are to ensure that we have, basically, a pro rata system\u2014depending on when the Minister decides, or the Government decides. If we, presumably, pass this legislation within the next week\u2014or soon, I think, under urgency; it might be even today or tomorrow\u2014then when does he see the Order in Council bringing this agreement into force, and what will that mean for new section 26C in clause 7A, the insertion here? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHas there been a calculation done\u2014because I know he did this with the EU FTA\u2014that bringing it in sooner will give tariff relief for some exporters? What\u2019s the approximate value of us facilitating this, as we are\u2014we\u2019re trying to scrutinise but facilitate the passage of this legislation, and then there\u2019s an Order in Council required. The question is: can that be done before Parliament lifts, and when might this FTA be brought into force?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022bcd97de0f4473503c3c8649b98a9837f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bcd97de0f4473503c3c8649b98a9837f\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (17:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Parliament hasn\u2019t voted on the legislation yet, so I don\u2019t want to pre-empt the support of the House to see whether the bill enters into force. But I can assure the member that it is the Government\u2019s intention for the FTA to enter into force. We will meet all of our obligations in both directions. The legislation allows us to pro rata, as was the case with the European Union free-trade agreement, and the amount of the pro rata\u2014and, I suppose, value\u2014will depend upon the amount of the quota which is left. It\u2019s based upon a 12-month period. If there were two months left, it would be two-twelfths or one-sixth of the quota. But it is my expectation that before the free-trade agreement enters into force, the secondary legislation would be in force also.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00226149edbc8c04a6d54fb149c7a142453b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226149edbc8c04a6d54fb149c7a142453b\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (17:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I note that my colleague is mixing up questions for clauses 7 and 7A, but I do want to move on to clause 13, which is Schedule 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, there are quite a few questions I have over here, but for the first one\u2014this is an interesting schedule because it\u2019s rules for allocation of export licences to multiple participants; I\u2019m assuming this is still on the basis of the NZ-India Free Trade Agreement\u2014I want to hone in specifically on clause 3 and when it comes to what we are defining in terms of eligible participant and submitting their export volume history. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to check with the Minister why it would then be relevant for an eligible participant in the New Zealand - India Free Trade Agreement, when it comes to dairy or, specifically in this case, albumin, to have to declare\u2014this is clause 3\u2014for the Japan prepared edible fat market and the European Union dairy processed agricultural products and high protein whey market. Would the Minister be able to just clarify why those two markets, and having the export market volume history declared, be relevant to be an eligible participant for the New Zealand - India Free Trade Agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229f071e5323b640f383726a46f39e8187\u0022 data-id=\u0022a1fe495b593a7cada3723efc2c6a0ffa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229f071e5323b640f383726a46f39e8187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a1fe495b593a7cada3723efc2c6a0ffa\u0022\u003EHon PHIL TWYFORD (Labour\u2014Te Atat\u016B) (17:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to speak to clauses 8 to 11, which extend the existing information, audit, and disclosure powers to albumin participants. I wondered if the Minister could say what guidance and compliance assistance MPI will give, particularly to the smaller exporters who will be covered by this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EUnder section 29G, a participant or their employee or agent cannot refuse to answer a question merely because the answer may incriminate them, and I wonder what protections apply to information obtained through compelled answers in this context. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, how will commercially sensitive information supplied by applicants or obtained through such an audit be protected; and who may receive information disclosed under section 42, and are there any restrictions which apply to its subsequent use?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f9665eb289c5707227bef074bdd0249\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m looking for new material. We\u2019re starting to get down into the weeds.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002283396d101928f19e582a776aaed2050d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002283396d101928f19e582a776aaed2050d\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (17:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m still waiting for my questions around Schedule 1, but I do want to continue on with questions for the Minister on Schedule 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe did discuss a little bit when it comes to\u2014I believe it\u2019s called\u2014the reserve portion, but I do want to check, because in clause 5 of replacement Schedule 5B in Schedule 1 it does talk about what happens in the event of an excess or shortfall in reserve export licence applications. I do want to check with the Minister\u2014because the example that is given here is interesting\u2014based on the existing exporters of albumin into the Indian market, how many licences would the Minister expect would be covered under the quota and in general? We did discuss a little bit about the reserve portion, but I think that is an important question again when it comes to excess or shortfall in reserve export licence application.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf the Minister has given the reserve export licences and then those licenced participants didn\u2019t meet their expected quota within that, what then would happen? Would the reserve portion be then opened up again for tender? How would it be communicated with potential exporters that they can now bid any potential shortfall in that reserve export licence?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022 data-id=\u0022c5ab58a76b2c2f3b520058cda6189273\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c5ab58a76b2c2f3b520058cda6189273\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour) (17:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a very brief question in regards to clause 9. This is the power to require information. I\u2019m quite interested in the fact that it overrides section 60 of the Evidence Act, which is the portion of the Act that provides the non - self-incrimination provisions, both in terms of the criminal law but also in terms of the civil law. It\u2019s an explicit decision to override that, which section 60 does allow.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMy question is, really, how this compares to other comparable provisions in terms of the power to require information and whether like provisions also explicitly override section 60 or whether this is more of a novel provision that the Minister has decided on. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022120edc2064e639e247d6c492351c430f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ve got five minutes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022e3eeaa7a9e179683e76012d2a133e89d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e3eeaa7a9e179683e76012d2a133e89d\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (17:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, thank you very much. I\u2019ll try and move through these quite quickly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe ability to compel to provide information is not unique. It is in other free-trade agreements, and indeed the last ones that the House passed have similar quota systems in them. The European Union, and, before that, under the previous Government, the UK agreement had similar abilities or powers in there. The reason for that is, as the House has decided on a number of occasions\u2014the ability to export is easy; if you want to take advantage of a quota that you have been given as opposed to someone else having it, then you need to provide information, and should you not be meeting the requirements of that, we have the ability to get the information to ensure that we are meeting our obligation to the country we\u2019re exporting to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn as far as the 10 percent in the reserve is concerned and how it\u2019s managed and all these other things, I think I\u2019ve answered that on a number of occasions now in the House during this part of the discussion or debate, and that is that is the same as we have in other situations. The way it is governed and managed is to be fair and open and transparent. It is to allow new entrants to a market who might not be there already, but we will approach this in the same way we do with the EU free-trade agreement (FTA) and the UK FTA, and, in the case of acquisition, the access we have to a number of other countries, including Japan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Part 1 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11;\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 29\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002253c2a5956d84361b2dc20f86807a759f\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00222b63270acbb20d849f4856710048f7ca\u0022\u003EPart 2 Amendments to Overseas Investment Act 2005 and Overseas Investment Regulations 2005, and Schedule 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002297e1eec98b9be88c4a1e3224152cd673\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: We come now to Part 2. This is the debate on clauses 14 to 24, \u201CAmendments to Overseas Investment Act 2005 and Overseas Investment Regulations 2005\u201D, and Schedule 2. The question is that Part 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u00223929d7f8d5f1f0911ba43758448d9340\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223929d7f8d5f1f0911ba43758448d9340\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (17:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much. This is a critical part of this agreement, and perhaps one of the areas where, I guess, the New Zealand negotiators had something to put on the table. My questions go to the Minister for Trade and Investment, and there are a number of technical regulations in here. Clause 18, regulation 85 is the definitions, and it says, \u201CIndia branch means a branch of an enterprise if the branch is (a) located in the India territory; and (b) is carrying out business activities in the India territory\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMy question to the Minister is, how do we know and is he sure that we have negotiated sufficient protection to ensure that companies from other parts of the world are not going to access this trade agreement\u2014and it\u2019s effectively their right to invest up to $200 million in our country\u2014and that we\u2019re not opening the door to some other non-Indian companies. I\u2019m sure the Minister has gone through this, and he\u2019s probably got a reasonably solid explanation, but I\u2019d like for him to put it on the floor of the House here, because I know, from New Zealand First\u2019s perspective, it seems to be an area of grave concern. I think the House and Parliament deserves at least a clear explanation that this and the provisions in here will not be rorted or sidestepped for whatever reasons for companies from other than India to come into our country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022495b70269a0e76b5b99faa737dba7461\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Unfortunately, there\u2019s not time for the Minister to respond. The committee is suspended for a valedictory statement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002239ff3d756a4e3240537c7e78ebd4d058\u0022\u003EValedictory Statements\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b1109c443800994b6dacda87ddb71017\u0022\u003ECelia Wade-Brown\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022edef71ae8f4bd89a3b336e1f0a8b58c4\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Members, I\u2019ll indicate now that at the conclusion of the valedictory statement by Celia Wade-Brown, the House will suspend for the dinner break. For now, I call on Celia Wade-Brown to make her valedictory statement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022 data-id=\u0022184eb243d28e01bb4f420e830965f199\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022184eb243d28e01bb4f420e830965f199\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN (Green) (17:45)\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003ET\u0113n\u0101 koe e te M\u0101ngai o te Whare. E ng\u0101 hoa, e rau rangatira m\u0101, e ng\u0101 iwi o ng\u0101 hau e wh\u0101, t\u0113n\u0101 koutou, t\u0113n\u0101 koutou, t\u0113n\u0101 koutou katoa. Ng\u0101 mihi o te Wiki o te Reo M\u0101ori ki a koutou katoa.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have only been in this House for five minutes compared to many of you\u2014though I haven\u2019t been told to go back to my own country. Thank you, Aotearoa, for letting this immigrant become a councillor, a mayor, and now an MP. I have been allowed to belong, but belonging is being made harder.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet\u2019s start with voting\u2014with who\u2019s included. We are truly proud of being the first country to achieve women\u2019s suffrage. We should be equally proud that in 1975, this Parliament extended the right to vote to everyone who can live here indefinitely. Many countries are less generous than New Zealand about dual citizenship, so people genuinely committed to living here may not wish to relinquish their first passport. These are many of our nurses, our surgeons, our early childhood teachers. Shame on anyone who wants to narrow our democracy further by restricting who can vote. I started with the right to vote because today is the International Day of Democracy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are two more threads I want to draw on for both politics and my personal life. The first is Predator Free. For 20 years, I have been kayaking out to Taputeranga Island, on Wellington\u2019s south coast, to kill rats and protect the lizards and seabirds that live there. In the 1990s, I led a Wellington City Council working group that examined the feasibility of the then Karori Sanctuary. We gave it a big tick. Reserves have been planted, tracks created, and the birds have flown out of Zealandia to recolonise the city. My final signature as mayor was on the Predator Free agreement between two councils and the NEXT Foundation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESince then, I served six years on the board of Predator Free Wellington. The professional and community effort has been extraordinary. That mahi is underfunded across the country\u2014especially as Jobs for Nature was canned. As the Greens\u2019 Predator Free spokesperson, I\u2019ve taken time to meet groups working around the motu. My popular Cat Management Bill still languishes in the ballot tin. Several MPs have vowed to bring cat management forward next term\u2014and maybe the existence of that bill encouraged the Minister of Conservation to put feral cats into the Predator Free 2050 Strategy. I will keep trapping and keep advocating for te taiao after I leave this building. Healthy nature is the foundation for all of us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second thread\u2014you can probably guess this\u2014is cycling. In 2008, this capital city agreed to a cycling plan, but there was zero budget. In 2009, I amended the budget to half a million dollars, and in 2010, advocates held a meeting called \u201CFix the Gap\u201D to try to connect Petone and Ngauranga. That same year, I became mayor, and I cycled out to the airport to meet Hillary Clinton with my bike shorts hidden underneath my suit, which caused a bit of a furore. In 2013, the Rt Hon John Key opened the Remutaka cycleway and said it should really start in Wellington City\u2014and I got into trouble with his comms staff because I let him ride my e-bike without a helmet.  We now have the bones of a genuinely good network, and this year, the marvellous Te Ara Tupua opened, with Julie Anne Genter, Minister Bishop, and me first across once the ribbon was cut. Walkers, runners, and cyclists are loving this part of the Great Harbour Way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAffordable living isn\u2019t just about rent and kai; it\u2019s about whether your family can get to school or work or to the shops without always needing a car. The \u201CGreat Rides\u201D are a wild success, with 50 percent walkers and 50 percent cyclists supporting regional tourism. But recently, the Prime Minister said he was nervous about crossing Molesworth Street. There are two lanes of motor traffic, two lanes of parked cars, a signalised crossing just up the road, and one very terrifying cycle lane. But given the lack of public sympathy for his plight, the tide may be turning in the cycling culture wars.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETalking of culture, it has been a huge honour to join official visits to R\u0101tana, to Waitangi, and to Koroneihana. Those are occasions that showcase leadership for 500 years, not just for the next election. As a Green MP, I came into this House committed to Te Tiriti. I have watched settlements pass here with unanimous support, but I have also seen division. In my very first summer in Wellington\u2014the 1983-84 summer\u2014I visited Tapu-te-Ranga Marae. I wonder if more P\u0101keh\u0101 took up the invitation to step onto a marae, they might understand this remarkable, unique mechanism for social cohesion. Empowering marae resilience is for all of us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELeadership has never rested on a handful of individuals. Representative democracy should not be the only way we make decisions\u2014I mean, the Westminster system doesn\u2019t work that well in Westminster\u2014and it must not be allowed to further privilege the wealthy and the powerful. There is a long tradition\u2014certainly in the M\u0101ori world; also in the Celtic world\u2014of deliberative decision-making: getting people to reason things through, not simply counting votes every three years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOur economy has grown more than a hundredfold since 1960, yet the gap between our lowest decile and our wealthiest has grown wider. Waiting for economic growth to fix that is wilful blindness. Affordable living must be a deliberate choice a country makes, not a myth of trickle-down hopes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOther things got worse since the 1960s: the state of our climate, our biodiversity, child poverty, addictions, homelessness. What has got better includes exactly what some parties long to wind back: we have reduced stigmatism towards rainbow, takat\u0101pui, and disabled communities. That\u2019s progress worth defending. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI tremble a little for our mokopuna, and their mokopuna to come, as extreme rainfall, high winds, and warming oceans begin to trigger feedback loops. All of us bear some responsibility for those floods in Nepal, the heatwaves in Spain, and the wildfires in America. Individual action will never be enough, and neither will technology alone. We need systemic change in land use, transport, and science funding. This country has a far better future available for all of us if we cooperate, base decisions on evidence, and think seriously about consequences for future generations. Honest politics is just that: telling people the truth, unbiased by corporate donations, instead of promising them more while saying \u201Cno\u201D to a fairer tax system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI may have arrived here five minutes ago, but it wasn\u2019t altogether an accidental journey. In 1996, I first put my name forward for Parliament\u2014I don\u2019t give up easily\u2014on the Alliance list at a modest number 44. Then I campaigned for the Greens in London in 1999\u2014that was a Rod Donald idea. In 2002, I ran in a collegial contest in Rongotai with Glenda Hughes and Annette King\u2014and we actually agreed on a remarkable amount. The 2020 and 2023 Wairarapa campaigns were also mutually respectful, with the Hons\u00A0Butterick and McAnulty swapping places, but always focused on policy, not personal attacks. Thank you to campaign managers Chrissie and Annie for those years. I wish Lauren Craig and the Wairarapa Party Vote Green team all the best. And a shoutout to all the local body politicians who are living through some tough times.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to record my huge respect for Julie Anne Genter, having run in Rongotai myself\u2014and I came third. She won in 2023, and I expect her to win Wellington Bays again in November\u2014and, of course, Tam in Wellington Central. But Julie Anne and I share an office that\u2019s sort of a bicycle depot. You need some lights, you need a pump, and I will really miss cycling off with Julie Anne, either at 10 p.m. or midnight. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMidnight! Urgency has been misused. Our communities, our iwi, our students\u2014they\u2019ve all got plenty of wisdom to draw on. If we let the select committees do that, I think we\u2019d have better legislation. For example, the modest lifejackets bill improved immensely from the first reading to its final passage because it wasn\u2019t rushed. On the other hand, we\u2019ve seen what happens when a contentious bill\u2014or 30\u2014is rushed through all stages. Winter energy payments, anyone?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy personal view is that a four-year term, with the Opposition chairing most select committees\u2014not necessarily a majority; just chairing the select committees\u2014would buy this House some breathing space. So would consulting\u2014yes, consulting\u2014on the Budget, the way local government already builds its long-term plans, and a higher threshold for urgency should be required. I look forward to a future Government that sees the four wellbeings as the point of central government and local government, and that honours Te Tiriti as a matter of course.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, to some thankyous. First, thank you to Alastair\u2014who still refused to sit in the front row, but never mind\u2014for standing by me through all these years, with coffee and hot water bottles as required. Thank you to our boys, who grew up in and around political campaigns and Green Party conferences. Ramsay and Jono can\u2019t be here tonight, but I look forward to spending a lot more time with them, and with our grandson, Reid. Jono once asked me, \u201CMum, why do you always speak to people you don\u2019t know?\u201D That, my fellow MPs, is our superpower.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI thank Chl\u00F6e and Marama for their leadership, and my caucus colleagues for mutual support. Thank you to all our parliamentary staff: Kevin, Meg, Raewyn, Tom, Daniel, but all of you. Also, to our party staff and the volunteers around the country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA huge thanks to Parliamentary Service, especially the outreach team and the library; our select committee clerks and advisers are awesome. Thank you to the House staff for keeping us always hydrated. Thanks to MPs and friends across the political spectrum, for the times we listened to each other. It\u2019s really worthwhile.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, there\u2019s a lot of leadership outside this House, whether it\u2019s Te Arikinui Kuini Nga wai hono i te po showing rangatahi what is possible; whether it\u2019s Helmut Modlik reshaping democracy conversations; Max Rashbrooke, Catherine Knight, and Ganesh Ahirao helping us face inconvenient truths. But the important leadership comes from people who hold no title and no elected role. They\u2019re the night shelter managers, the community leaders, the artists, the founders of new organisations working out how to reduce waste, to fix disease, and to make life better. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhy am I standing down, given my continuing passion for change? It isn\u2019t my health\u2014though I have to say an emergency appendectomy in May gave me a fright, but as the oldest woman in this House, I reckon I\u2019m still reasonably fit. The reason is the calibre of our caucus, the calibre of our candidates: their energy, their commitment, and their willingness to be here at midnight. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am going to spend time with my friends and family in our regenerating forest, and on some exciting expeditions on foot, on bike, and in my kayak. I\u2019m going to enjoy November\u2019s Wairarapa Walking Festival\u2014you\u2019re all welcome to book a walk\u2014and I\u2019m going to be chasing some p\u016Btea for completing the Wairarapa Five Towns Trail, so don\u2019t expect me to retire quietly. To those who have gone before and those who will come after: t\u0113n\u0101 koutou, t\u0113n\u0101 koutou, t\u0113n\u0101 koutou katoa.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EWaiata\u003C/span\u003E\u2014\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EPurea Nei\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 6.03 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00228aa42559d3809708db62385ad4642c60\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e302acb85268d0285ed0f0f41b8b2c34\u0022\u003EIndia Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00229802ae2314fc5e27142172754db4d077\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000687\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022037c866b7bba38535e6a2b3fb6801dc8\u0022\u003EPart 2 Amendments to Overseas Investment Act 2005 and Overseas Investment Regulations 2005, and Schedule 2 (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0ea58522ab259d40715ac440d02d3e6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the committee is resumed. Prior to the dinner leave, we were considering Part 2 of the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022d7a279a01b197a4eac2360974adc7b15\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d7a279a01b197a4eac2360974adc7b15\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (19:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I know we put aside the committee for the valedictory; I think we all enjoyed that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EJust going back to this quite critical area of this piece of legislation that relates to amendments to the Overseas Investment Act and the investment regulations, I was asking the Minister in clause 18 around definitions of Indian companies and branches and individuals. The question was whether he is sure that the door is not left open for, I guess, individuals or companies or multinationals from other places around the world coming in through some kind of Indian re-export regime. I know that they have left a door open for us when it comes to dairy if we\u2019re re-exporting. India has an interest in developing its own export capability; how do we know that the definitions in this piece of legislation, in clause 18, actually mean that we will have genuine investment from genuine Indian nationals? Maybe the Minister can take a call on that one. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00226d8da92dc68ef75fe06a6cf0d6ad3818\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226d8da92dc68ef75fe06a6cf0d6ad3818\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (19:31)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m very happy to. There are two differences here. The member maybe is confusing them\u2014not purposely.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EOne is around export of products. The member is right\u2014dairy products can be exported to India from New Zealand at a zero tariff rate and they can be re-exported with value added or something else, and therefore that\u2019s why there\u2019s a zero tariff rate. This is about investment into New Zealand, and I can give him the assurance that I am very sure that other nationalities will not be able to take advantage of this, because it is identical language to that in the New Zealand \u2013 European Union Free Trade Agreement and the New Zealand \u2013 United Kingdom Free Trade Agreement. All it actually is doing is applying a threshold of investment and different types of screening that will be required, lining up will all of our other free-trade agreements. All of our free-trade agreements, bar one, are at the same level as what this will be. The one that\u2019s not is the Australia-New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Agreement, of course, a large amount of which is historically for very, very different reasons. So it doesn\u2019t change anything around investment screening or anything else, other than saying that this is the investment threshold, and it lines it up with all other trade agreements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022150639c04a5a07df057dd46021748133\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022150639c04a5a07df057dd46021748133\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (19:33)\u003C/span\u003E: I just want to carry on\u2014I thank the Minister for that; I appreciate that India has a relationship with Russia, for example, and so I appreciate that it\u2019s not the threshold, and that we\u2019re moving from $100 million to $200 million. But the issue is: how do we know? Are we relying on the Indians to then ensure that the money has not come from Russia, through India, into New Zealand? I think most Kiwis would object to that backdoor way of inappropriate investment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022b6fc725a9b7a02ac7678a39250be1f65\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b6fc725a9b7a02ac7678a39250be1f65\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (19:33)\u003C/span\u003E: In the very same way that this is dealt with under the New Zealand \u2013 European Union Free Trade Agreement and the New Zealand \u2013 United Kingdom Free Trade Agreement, both of which that member, at the time he was a Minister, was involved in negotiating. It doesn\u2019t alter how New Zealand makes a decision around whether or not they get access under it; that is set out elsewhere. This is merely saying the threshold is moved to this level.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is a concept called \u201Cdenial of benefits\u201D, though. In the case that somebody has tried to use it and they haven\u2019t established themselves in such a way that they have a legal entitlement, New Zealand has the ability to deny those benefits. But it doesn\u2019t alter the screening or ability or what needs to be done for a company or someone else from India. It is the same as all other previous agreements, and it really is merely only moving the threshold up to be equal to those. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd in every one of our free-trade agreements, it is the same threshold\u2014it\u2019s a $200 million threshold\u2014except for the CER with Australia, which is higher. This is the same as China, the UK, the European Union, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership countries, the UAE\u2014which this Parliament has signed off during this term of Parliament\u2014and the EU one. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022c59bc872b65b5070971972b43647bd80\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c59bc872b65b5070971972b43647bd80\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just on that, in terms of \u201CIndia branch\u201D, I understand that particularly for Part 2, we\u2019re looking at the Overseas Investment Act and investment regulations, but this idea of what an India branch is as located in the India territory, and I feel like this is something that potentially will come up both in this part in terms of overseas investment into Aotearoa New Zealand but also later on, when we\u2019re looking at Part 4.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI would be interested to know, for example, who then determines what is considered Indian territory. For example, there are a lot of contentions around where the boundary of India is, particularly in northern India, around the Kashmiri region. There are obviously a lot of\u2014this is more, kind of, looking at international relations and international diplomacy. But, for example, if something that is within that particular region that is kind of very grey in terms of jurisdiction boundaries between India and Pakistan in Kashmir, what then determines what that would be? Who then determines what we consider Indian territory? I think that\u2019s my question for this part, if the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind giving a response to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u002200f81994c267808bb5117ace280a4bce\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002200f81994c267808bb5117ace280a4bce\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (19:36)\u003C/span\u003E: This is a trade agreement. It\u2019s not foreign affairs. It\u2019s not determining territories of countries. But I can give the member Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan an absolute assurance that this part of the bill is identical to that which was done in the European Union Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill that that member\u2019s party voted for. I accept you\u2019re not supporting this, but it is the same. All it is doing is lining the threshold up, which is a commitment we\u2019ve made, which in all of our free-trade agreements is the same amount. It doesn\u2019t alter anything else other than that. Some of the things he\u2019s talking about are dealt with in legislation or policy elsewhere, but they are not within the scope of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002289ddb90caa8e969f7e0a853c10433612\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002289ddb90caa8e969f7e0a853c10433612\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Just following up on that. The difference is that there are, as far as I know\u2014and please correct me if I\u2019m wrong\u2014no border disputes within the EU. For example, there is nothing between France and the UK that determines what is part of France and what is part of the UK\u2014it doesn\u2019t apply to things like Jersey, Guernsey, etc.\u2014but when it comes to jurisdictions or regions like India, there is a very clear border dispute. My question, then, would be: are we going by what Aotearoa New Zealand would consider to be the boundary for this to be considered India territory? Are we going with the Indians\u2019 interpretation of what is going to be the India territory? I just want to know which side we\u2019re going with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022f6b19600f12c2c69dde4d7c151aa0d1a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f6b19600f12c2c69dde4d7c151aa0d1a\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (19:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it\u2019s an interesting debating point, but that\u2019s a discussion that should have taken place during treaty examination. This legislation\u2014any part of it, but to this part\u2014doesn\u2019t deal with that. What the member\u2019s talking about is outside of scope. One is to do with the remit overall and how you might decide this. This is merely changing a threshold around investment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002223cef8e0e1f3d3dcf8cb8fb3d345e7dd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002223cef8e0e1f3d3dcf8cb8fb3d345e7dd\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:37)\u003C/span\u003E: One final tiny question. All I\u2019m asking for from the Minister is how the Minister would define paragraph (a) in clause 18(1) of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022 data-id=\u0022cc527f017566f1136cb6e71731238b12\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cc527f017566f1136cb6e71731238b12\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour) (19:38)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m also on clause 18, but a slightly different question relating to the definition of \u201CIndia individual\u201D. I think the interesting thing about India is, of course, that it doesn\u2019t allow dual citizenship but the Citizenship Act does have a term that is \u201Coverseas citizen of India\u201D. It\u2019s quite a unique category, because in many ways that individual has very similar rights as a citizen except they don\u2019t get the right to vote and they aren\u2019t entitled to hold particular positions of office either. But for all other effects and purposes\u2014they can come into the country without needing a visa and there\u2019s no notification that\u2019s required in terms of advising police of one\u2019s whereabouts or travel. And so it\u2019s just a question as to whether those individuals would be covered within that definition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022dc902fac6ecaaac9379763b97c30ddf4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dc902fac6ecaaac9379763b97c30ddf4\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (19:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the simple answer is that a definition of citizenship comes with a passport. If you think about, in New Zealand, you can have residents and permanent residents that have similar status to that of a citizen. They don\u2019t have the passport; they\u2019re not citizens. In this case, an Indian national citizen would have to have a passport. Anything else is an arrangement India has; it\u2019s not to do with New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022a90e31df45739e56b50eb95317358dbb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a90e31df45739e56b50eb95317358dbb\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m going to move on to a new clause. I\u2019m moving on to clause 20, \u201CRegulation 88 amended\u201D. Now, this specifically looks at the Overseas Investment Regulations 2005, and after regulation 88(2)(i), inserts paragraph (j), which is article 8.2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, regulation 88(2) specifically refers to exclusions\u2014I think the term is apply \u201Csubject to the exclusions contained in the following provisions\u201D, and in this case, specifically reference article 8.2 of the India free-trade agreement (FTA). Now, looking at article 2 of the India FTA, some of these do, I guess, in some ways, make sense, when it says that the chapter, in terms of scope, should not apply to measures affecting Government procurement, etc. But what I don\u2019t understand is, for example, how would paragraph 3(e) of article 8.2 in the agreement be excluded or is needing to be excluded in this particular regulation. So when it comes to air transport services affecting traffic rights, would the Minister just clarify on, in this case, it says just article 8.2, but rather than specifically certain parts of 8.2, is there any part in article 8.2 that, for example, should not be excluded as a part of the regulation? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00228c4a2acdc326a795dffefc43556fcbf3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228c4a2acdc326a795dffefc43556fcbf3\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (19:41)\u003C/span\u003E: When agreements are negotiated, you can have a general clause around investment. If the member looks at some of the detail of what this does, it increases the threshold to $200 million, it provides transitional provisions for how this might work; but equally, at the same time, there\u2019ll be areas that countries reserve. So increasing a threshold to allow $200 million to be invested, whereas some other countries that don\u2019t have a trade agreement with New Zealand, it will be a much lower amount\u2014for instance, World Trade Organization members that we don\u2019t have a bilateral or collective agreement with have $10 million only. So this is a significant benefit to those that we have negotiated a free trade agreement with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut there are always things that you will reserve and have different abilities too. An example in many trade agreements: the ability for us to create conditions around screening is the way that a previous Government has looked at how we might create some guardrails around who might invest in types of property in New Zealand. We reserve the right to do it and it\u2019s for New Zealand to make those changes. The example the member\u2019s just given around aviation: there are separate aviation agreements that give people rights to come and fly in and out of New Zealand\u2014to have a right automatically to have access to New Zealand. I\u2019m speaking hypothetically now. I know it would be a separate arrangement not covered by the free trade agreement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo this clause merely lines up for an Indian group of New Zealand trading partners for which an increase of monetary threshold to $200 million applies to investments in New Zealand by non-Government investors in significant business assets for the purposes of providing services in New Zealand, but there are always a range of things that we have reserved or there is more conditionality around or other bits of legislation or policy will govern.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u002279860630e445067fa3981e10a71e1b16\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002279860630e445067fa3981e10a71e1b16\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (19:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, thank you very much, Mr Chair. This is in clause 18 again, and it\u2019s relating to \u201CIndia territory means the territory of India as defined by Article 1.2(q)(i) of the India FTA\u201D. Relating to the marine territorial areas of India, the Minister will be familiar with the World Trade Organization Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies, where India played quite a substantive, if not disruptive, part in blocking or assisting or disrupting the agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo the question for the Minister is: if there are Indian fisheries companies working in India territory, and they may or may not be involved in illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing, then does the agreement allow us an ability to block or intervene or, indeed, take produce\u2014as fish, it would be, or some kind of marine product\u2014from the area, given the importance of this issue in trying to reduce fish subsidies around the world? The Minister himself\u2014and I acknowledge that\u2014has been involved in trying to progress this agreement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question for him is: would this agreement allow operators fishing in Indian territorial waters, who might or might not be conducting IUU fishing, to then be blocked from an investment into New Zealand? Because we have seen, as the Indian economy grows, the huge investments out of India into all sorts of industries, and into fishing would be a possible one that we might have down here. So I leave that question with the Minister as to whether there\u2019s any ability to intervene.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00228e76bec57d060f557681c20bf6f96054\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228e76bec57d060f557681c20bf6f96054\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (19:44)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Two separate issues again. One is the sale of product into New Zealand\u2014in this case fish products, I suppose. That\u2019s governed differently because this part is about investment in New Zealand, not where goods may come from; that\u2019s governed elsewhere in the free trade agreement, including around the rules of origin. But in as far as the hypothetical example the member\u2019s given\u2014somebody\u2019s ability to invest in New Zealand\u2014there is a good conduct or good character test anyway that sits there, separate from this, not in this agreement, but we have reserved the right in all of our trade agreements for that to apply.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022547819272772ee4b1d8b890bc525593f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022547819272772ee4b1d8b890bc525593f\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m going to move ahead to the final clause of this part, which is clause 24, specifically looking at Schedule 2 of this bill. Now, this Schedule 2, New Part 15 inserted into Schedule 1AA of Overseas Investment Regulations 2005, regulation 33 makes sense in terms of duplication. Nothing in terms of acquisition of rights or interests in securities or of other properties will take effect until after commencement of this Act\u2014that makes sense.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ERegulation 34 in terms of no refund\u2014I do remember seeing comparable clauses in other comparable bills, but I don\u2019t remember asking it previously. I think, now, looking at things from a different lens, what has jumped out to me is that there\u2019s been no refund of any fees on the grounds that the matter, for example, is no longer relevant\u2014i.e. that the consent that has been applied for is no longer required. I want to check with the Minister: is that something that, for example, is retrospective, being my first question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think my second question is: if a consent is in the process of being granted or denied and this bill comes into effect and they no longer need the consent, it\u2019s automatically granted, I get that. But what happens if, for example, a consent is still required and a person is in the process of doing that, but the bill changes the nature of the criteria of that consent? Would, then, a person be entitled to a refund of any fees during that period or will their consent application simply be judged under the new system?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022bc83c255b296b81b3f1ba26bca0ab0c7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bc83c255b296b81b3f1ba26bca0ab0c7\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (19:47)\u003C/span\u003E: This is an easy one to deal with. If somebody has put in a fee before entry into force, they don\u2019t get a refund; after entry into force, they don\u2019t have to pay a fee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022ab447857777ec021b3ebb048bf20916c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ab447857777ec021b3ebb048bf20916c\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (19:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Really it\u2019s an opportunity for the Minister, Hon Todd McClay, to explain the difference between type 2, type 3, and type 5 investors, as explained in the bill here, because I think anyone reading this might be somewhat confused, as it makes reference to the UAE individual, an India individual or, indeed, as one here, to Hong Kong. While this is amending legislation, some who go through this bill here might be somewhat confused. I\u2019d really be interested in having the Minister\u2019s explanation of those different types of investors and the relationship with the UAE, as pointed out and referred to in this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022111984e9e84755fd32b4b35b51d3d75a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022111984e9e84755fd32b4b35b51d3d75a\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (19:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, again, this is really lining things up with elsewhere. The types are actually defined elsewhere in the Overseas Investment Act, and this is the same provision that is in those previous agreements. My understanding of advice is it\u2019s the same as the UAE as well as the EU and the UK\u2014the last three that we\u2019ve done. The description of the definition sits outside of this somewhere else\u2014it\u2019s merely borrowing it. There are, from time to time, updates to line things up\u2014not from the point of view of changing it, but if you think about that you\u2019re going to extend something to India, rather than amendments that are hard to see, they will from time to time just reproduce with it put in there so that when someone else looks at it, they see it flows clearly, rather than an amendment to an Act somewhere else that you\u2019ve got to find how it fits together. So it\u2019s merely to be more functional.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022 data-id=\u0022c41ce47e597b71e64d22d59140bc8c63\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c41ce47e597b71e64d22d59140bc8c63\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (19:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Look, my question is in respect of clause 15\u2014so it\u2019s the section 61A amended of the Overseas Investment Act. I look at section 61A, and it\u2019s got a long list of various free trade agreements. What I wanted to know was just whether those free trade agreements are all lined up. This is about inward investment, as I understand it. We\u2019re concerned about both outward and inward investment, but this is about inward investment, OK\u2014I understand that. But if they\u2019re all lined up in terms of the regimes which are there, because there\u2019s a long, long list there of trade agreements: China, Hong Kong, etc., etc., all the way through to UAE and so on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIf the amounts of money which are allowed for in each of those free-trade agreements are more or less in line with each other, or if there are any which are distinctly\u2014if this is outside of the parameters, they\u2019re all the same, so we\u2019re talking about $200 million, roughly speaking. If the Minister could just explain the regime which is there, in terms of what is allowed for in terms of inward investment, the nature of those kinds of investments, and if there are any restrictions on those at all. It would be most useful to understand that. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022bb5e6f3c2e970feaa22e48628542b9f8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bb5e6f3c2e970feaa22e48628542b9f8\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (19:50)\u003C/span\u003E: As far as this legislation is concerned, it merely lines it up to say that India also is at $200 million, as the others are. We\u2019ve negotiated different amounts, so most of the investment agreements\u2014free-trade agreements around investment\u2014have a most favoured nation clause. As it\u2019s gone up, it\u2019s extended to others, we\u2019ve put in the list, and it goes up to $200 million for all of them. As far as the list of what you can invest in, unless it is excluded, actually it is not dealt with in this legislation. It is separate, and it\u2019s under the Overseas Investment Act. So it\u2019s not directly in the scope of this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022 data-id=\u0022680dcee34c6a295eca682e74f63f9e13\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022680dcee34c6a295eca682e74f63f9e13\u0022\u003EHon MARK PATTERSON (Minister for Rural Communities) (19:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Just picking up on that point, the $200 million threshold, is there any obligation\u2014I can\u2019t see it in here, and I assume it\u2019s here somewhere. Is there any obligation on the Indians to actually invest any money here? The most egregious part of what is a terrible deal is the US$20 billion, which as of today is nearly NZ$35 billion that we\u2019re expected to send into the Indian economy. It\u2019s unbelievable that we would sign up to that\u2014I cannot believe it. I cannot see within these clauses the inward investment\u2014any threshold or any obligation on the Indians to reciprocate what seems to be an unbelievably generous concession that we\u2019ve made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe in New Zealand First obviously want to see New Zealand businesses investing in New Zealand. I\u2019m part of the wool industry, as you know, Minister, and we\u2019ve got a 2.5, 2.75 percent reduction in our tariff. The amount of that goes up and down every week at the auction\u2014I mean, it\u2019s negligible; it\u2019s nothing. We\u2019re trading away, potentially, the ability to\u2014our own manufacturing base. That\u2019s what I\u2019m really worried about here. I want to grow the New Zealand wool industry and the New Zealand manufacturing base, but here we\u2019ve got an obligation in the deal itself to NZ$35 billion offshore, but I can\u2019t see where it\u2019s in here\u2014and I hope the Minister can put me right on this\u2014where there\u2019s a corresponding obligation on the Indians to actually invest in productivity and growth in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESurely our negotiating team looked at those two equations and said something does not add up here. We\u2019re expecting to send $35 billion offshore\u2014that\u2019s money we desperately need to double our exports here; the investment needed to add value to New Zealand. The concern here is that we\u2019re actually going to incentivise more export of raw material into India so it can be processed over there, because that\u2019s where our companies are investing, but, correspondingly, we\u2019ve got no obligation, as I can see within this threshold of $200 million that\u2019s referenced in Part 2, that they\u2019re actually going to spend a red dime here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is nothing there, so can the Minister please explain what the reciprocal obligations on the Indian Government or the Indian economy to actually invest in New Zealand and to our productivity and our growth, because that\u2019s exactly what this Parliament\u2014and the Labour Party can hang their heads in shame here as well\u2014is looking at, extraordinarily, sending off overseas. I would like to know what the reciprocal obligation is within Part 2 that we get our fair share in this deal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022e57a315500e231f362bbc744f034907d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e57a315500e231f362bbc744f034907d\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (19:54)\u003C/span\u003E: This bit of the legislation is merely about aligning a threshold for India, as that member\u2019s party voted in favour of in the European Union free-trade agreement. They didn\u2019t in the UK one, because they weren\u2019t in Parliament then. They probably didn\u2019t in the China agreement because, actually, they weren\u2019t in favour of that. But it\u2019s merely lining this up, so there\u2019s no difference here to last time that member voted on a free-trade agreement in this Chamber. The clause is identical\u2014exactly the same. The other things he\u2019s raised are outside the scope of this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe did canvass this very, very widely when we did the discussions around treaty examination, and that\u2019s the time when we go into all parts of the legislation. This legislation, very, very narrowly, does a small number of things, including setting the quotas so New Zealanders can get product into India for the first time, in some cases where no one else in the world is able to, and then a few other minor changes not within scope.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would just comment for a moment that it\u2019s fair for members of the House to have views; they should not mislead, because that member knows good and well that any obligation the Government has taken on around investment is a commitment to promote, nothing more. I do note that when he went to India and put out a press release that he enjoyed the hospitality of Indians and he dined with them and he spoke positively about the relationship, he was very, very different than he is tonight in this Chamber. But I do like the woollen suit he\u2019s wearing, that he bought when he was in India.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223dfdefdfbf08cb426318b1b7192b8ee4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Mark Patterson\u2014but just a reminder to the Minister to keep it within scope of the bill. There are issues, of course, within the agreement, but this is about the legislation, which is about amending the agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022 data-id=\u0022e1007d9cb466090462306bfd03320949\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e1007d9cb466090462306bfd03320949\u0022\u003EHon MARK PATTERSON (Minister for Rural Communities) (19:56)\u003C/span\u003E: I am trying desperately to keep it within scope. The Minister referenced in his answer the European free-trade deal, which we absolutely did. I don\u2019t recall a clause in that deal where there was an outward investment clause, so that would seem to be a disparity here that is unexplained. Could he explain that, since he\u2019s raised this, not me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u00222c6c9456d816f5ab3611f3e68b940bca\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222c6c9456d816f5ab3611f3e68b940bca\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (19:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, thank you very much, and I\u2019ll go back to clause 18. It does define, as I say, Indian branch companies or individuals who might be able to invest in our country, so the question for the Minister: if there was to be an Indian company that might want to\u2014given there seems to be some concern about the export of raw materials, if we were to have investment in New Zealand in, say, a wool processing plant or a wood processing plant, would the Minister think that that\u2019s a positive move and that this clause 18 would enable, indeed, investment from India into New Zealand that might add value to our exports out around the world in wood or wool?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00227f171478c61c1afa19ee4ac32c517cef\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227f171478c61c1afa19ee4ac32c517cef\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (19:57)\u003C/span\u003E: This bit of the legislation doesn\u2019t speak to whether things are good things or not; this merely sets the threshold when you come in. There\u2019s a different Act of Parliament that makes those determinations and those decisions. That Act of Parliament is not being amended by this, other than there\u2019s a $200 million threshold for investments in India, which does go back to being exactly the same. Although the name European Union versus India is different, the clause is virtually identical in this piece of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022 data-id=\u002215e899a4065c17f418f3e0b639076f4e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002215e899a4065c17f418f3e0b639076f4e\u0022\u003EDr VANESSA WEENINK (National\u2014Banks Peninsula) (19:57)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000736\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 59\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 63\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022e53eaf3bf63a2affb7267529fdb7ebeb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e53eaf3bf63a2affb7267529fdb7ebeb\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Considering we\u2019re still on Part 2, I think what the Hon Mark Patterson has raised\u2014and, actually, the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor raised\u2014are both really important points. What we are not seeing in previous trade agreements are a comparable examples.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EJust seeking your guidance as well, Mr Chair: while it is true that the agreement itself has received a treaty examination process not unlike a select committee, we have actually never had the opportunity to debate, even if it\u2019s not the agreement itself\u2014when we\u2019re looking at the content of the bill, a comparable regulatory impact statement, which we do often debate, is in the form of the national interest analysis. Therefore, like we would do with a normal committee stage on a bill\u2014putting policy intent, etc., from a regulatory impact statement\u2014we should be able to also draw on the national interest analysis as a part of the debate on this bill. I think it is important, while we\u2019re still debating Part 2, that we are able to pull on the content of the national interest analysis as well as consider the fact that we have not had a chance to debate the agreement as part of a committee of the whole House in this Chamber\u2014that we should be able to draw on certain elements of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220cc04f38db7ad3b0a4f0d4f2aefadd33\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: But we\u2019re not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a19864f561e82384d7f99e11a85dadc2\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: You can, by all means, take a closure motion. I think, with that, we do just want to elaborate on the point that\u2014this is quite interesting, because this must be what it feels like for a members\u2019 day when we can actually expand the scope quite broadly. I think, in this case, we do need to discuss the fact that, within the policy intent that sits behind this, we understand that we are comparatively speaking a much smaller economy\u2014we\u2019ve got to admit, in terms of economies of scale\u2014compared to India and there is this idea that there is an intention to promote the investment of US$20\u00A0billion, but surely there is also, through the Overseas Investment Act, a comparable expectation. I guess my question to the Minister for Trade and Investment then is: when we\u2019re looking at overseas investment from India here to Aotearoa New Zealand, what modelling has been done to ensure that there is some level of comparable investment also to here. Now, it might not be locked into the agreement itself, but I am assuming this is something that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade has previously looked into or that the Minister would have looked into. I think we could have a little more conversation around that modelling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u00226735222c6802c96dc7a1cd8fd10bae02\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226735222c6802c96dc7a1cd8fd10bae02\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (20:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019ll go back to clause 14, which is in Part 2: \u201CThis subpart amends the Overseas Investment Act 2005.\u201D, and then Subpart 2, of course, amends the Overseas Investment Regulations 2005. Those people who are listening, or who might be reading through or following on their iPhones, possibly, will be saying that that is quite an old piece of legislation and indeed, \u201CHas it caught up?\u201D One of the changes that the Government announced yesterday or the day before was changes to the charging regime and the time frames for overseas investors. My question to the Minister for Trade and Investment is: do the new provisions that were announced yesterday\u2014and I am not quite sure of the detail; many of the things announced by the Government, you take with a pinch of salt. While they have said it will be cheaper and faster, my question is: how does that relate back to the 2005 regulations which we are amending here, and will it make it easier or cheaper for Indian investors to come into New Zealand? Indeed, the question is: why?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022352b26bcd641742958a8e9b921b4dc19\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022352b26bcd641742958a8e9b921b4dc19\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. We\u2019re still waiting on quite a few responses, I think, from the Minister for Trade and Investment regarding our questions. When we are looking at, let\u2019s say, clause 19\u2014in terms of \u201Cownership and control test\u201D\u2014I understand that when we are looking at Part 2, a large part of this, particularly when it comes to Subpart 2, is to do with the regulations themselves. Usually, when we\u2019re looking at regulations, we are looking at a piece of secondary legislation. I want to check with the Minister for Trade and Investment: with the Overseas Investment Regulations 2005, surely it will require some form of Order in Council when we\u2019re looking at this? We have asked the Minister previously. When the agreement comes into effect, what then is the timeline for the Order in Council to enact certain secondary legislation as a part of the requirements of this bill, particularly when we\u2019re looking at overseas investment regulations?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, when we\u2019re looking at \u201Cownership and control test\u201D in the definitions, or any other parts of this particular part of the bill\u2014I think the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor was asking questions about the different types of investors that we still haven\u2019t got a clear response on from the Minister. When we\u2019re looking at \u201Cownership and control test\u201D, how would this particular bill and this particular part look at the ownership and control test differently that what we have seen previously, if it does at all?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, when it comes to this part, is there, I guess, a comparable ownership and control test when we\u2019re looking at India, the other party to this particular agreement? While we are enacting a particular bill in response to an agreement that has been signed between two parties, surely the Indian Government would need to do something comparable, which would then mean\u2014or are they a monist system, in which case any agreement they sign is automatically a part of their domestic legislation? When we are looking at their comparable version of the Overseas Investment Act and overseas investment regulations, has there been any work that has been done by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade or any part of the national interest analysis that looks at that comparability between the two jurisdictions and the way that we look at overseas investment in general? Again, we\u2019re looking at this from our side, and India will look at things from their side, but if we have fundamentally different interpretations of that, there might be mistakes or mishaps with the interpretation of that. I just want to check with the Minister how the Minister or the ministry would deal with differences in the interpretation and definition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022a175febacb4128fb451285cf5ec8cbab\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a175febacb4128fb451285cf5ec8cbab\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (20:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, maybe I can read something here that will help members with this. Part 2 amends the Overseas Investment Act 2005 to add the India free-trade agreement to the list of free-trade agreements in section 61A of the Overseas Investment Act 2005. It doesn\u2019t alter anything other than adding that name\u2014and, of course, that brings the threshold up to the same as all the others. In as far as how India meets its obligations, this bit of legislation doesn\u2019t deal with this; this legislation doesn\u2019t alter or amend another Act other than adding the name \u201CIndia\u201D to it. It doesn\u2019t change the definitions of the classes of types of investors: that is dealt with elsewhere. Should the Overseas Investment Act ever be amended, and those amendments would cover some of these things, it would flow through to all of our free-trade agreements, one supposes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ETo answer all of the member\u2019s questions, this legislation doesn\u2019t do any of the things other than adding India to the list of countries we have a free-trade agreement with, number one; and then, number two, of course, is aligning the thresholds. I\u2019ve said previously in the debate that it lines up the threshold of $200 million investment, which is the same in every free-trade agreement we have except with Australia\u2019s closer economic relations, CER, which is higher for historical reasons.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228becf2392b601ee332cc12fe3a74bf25\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Just before I take the next calls, just to sort of give us a way that we will approach all the parts, including this part: we are debating part by part. The scope has to be within that part as well. What will also be useful for the committee is if you refer to the clauses\u2014that will also assist the committee. I appreciate the comments that people have made about scope, but the clauses and the parts will help to guide the scope. Vanushi Walters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022 data-id=\u00225fdb081596c175211fbc2f33aedd79e5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225fdb081596c175211fbc2f33aedd79e5\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour) (20:09)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m on clause 22, which is in Part 2\u2014let\u2019s see if there\u2019s a subpart\u2014it might be Subpart 2, from what I can see\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002275380332d16876531ba0c4734a4b3c08\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c79f1f2650fde3cca856368e030c0899\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS\u003C/span\u003E: This is a clause that amends Regulation 94 to add the India free-trade agreement (FTA) effectively to that regulation in the definition of a \u201Ctype 3 investor\u201D. As the Minister for Trade and Investment has said, that lifts the threshold from $100\u00A0million to $200 million\u2014I understand that. My question is about the types of investment the type 3 investor includes in relation to the India FTA compared to a type 3 investor under a different FTA.  As far as I can see, under the China FTA, it is an investor who is investing to establish a commercial presence in New Zealand through which they\u2019ll supply a service, or who is investing in a commercial presence they\u2019ve already established in New Zealand through which they\u2019re supplying or they will supply their service, but those services have to fall within a specific area for China that are either environmental services, construction or engineering, agriculture or forestry, pure engineering, integrated engineering, computer-related services, or tourism- and travel-related services.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMy question is whether the categories of service are the same for the India FTA under that type 3 investor, as compared to the China FTA and the categories that I\u2019ve just listed, or whether those are different, and if they\u2019re different, then what binds that category together across different FTAs? Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022 data-id=\u0022d1af0956da1a52c98abae8705c449a35\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d1af0956da1a52c98abae8705c449a35\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (20:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I want to return to clause 15, which I asked a question about before. I just wanted to make sure that I understood the requirements we\u2019ve got here, and I\u2019d certainly like the Minister for Trade and Investment\u2019s response on this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI am assuming that if we were not to pass this piece of legislation, then the free-trade agreement (FTA) itself would be unimplementable, although\u2014and I notice that he\u2019s taking advice at the moment\u2014obviously, the FTA itself has been signed. The FTA has been signed\u2014and I turn to you now, with you having taken that advice, Minister\u2014but we need to pass this to make that FTA implementable. Presumably, that is an indivisible document, because if there was any part of this that were to fail, then the FTA would itself be compromised. That\u2019s what I\u2019m looking for your advice on, because I think the advice you\u2019ve given us it that the only time that this House has actually debated the FTA itself to any degree whatsoever was in the first reading, if at all, and, therefore, we\u2019ve never had the opportunity to debate the content of the FTA itself, other than what is here\u2014yes? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a43aa3e2ea32723b2ffae68ae17df86\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: It wasn\u2019t even called a debate; it was just a first reading speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002262859114193b155818335581ef4f8ffd\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, yeah, that\u2019s what I thought. I think it\u2019s very important that people understand that that\u2019s exactly what is going on, because the kinds of concerns which we have about this piece of legislation which we\u2019ve articulated, which are the issues about the investment externally\u2014the requirement to put that sort of $20 billion into India\u2014and I\u2019ve looked at that also.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e602c8c963cb62905730fc08dad96a48\u0022\u003EHon Mark Patterson\u003C/span\u003E: US dollars.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022058b34851854c1c922458fc27a422032\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER\u003C/span\u003E: US dollars\u2014yes, as I say, it\u2019s in US dollars. If the Indians decide\u2014and it\u2019s them that decide\u2014whether we have put sufficient effort into doing that, then they can appropriately chastise us and take us to task, and, in fact, it says that they can impose \u201Cproportionate remedial measures\u201D and rebalance tariff concessions. There\u2019s a lot of important detail in that which this House has not had the ability to have a look at, and we are told that it\u2019s outside of the scope of this conversation we\u2019ve got here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAll we\u2019ve got in front of us\u2014and I just want to be really, really clear; well, to make sure that I\u2019m clear\u2014is that we have a small set of items in this bill, but those things are also required to be passed for the FTA to be passed. If they were not to be passed, then the FTA would be compromised. Now, that\u2019s the assumption, and the question I\u2019m asking the Minister is that if these were not to be passed, then the FTA, I assume, would be compromised.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d also be really interested in the process which the FTA itself went through to be approved, because that would seem to have been done by the executive, but the executive, clearly, on this free-trade agreement, was divided, and so it would be appreciated if the Minister could respond to those questions. Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002212eeabec30ed13f6d54e8843c4301656\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002212eeabec30ed13f6d54e8843c4301656\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I think that it is an important point that has been raised by Andy Foster, but if we are looking at this, although the Minister for Trade and Investment has said that this particular part\u2014if you are looking at clause 15\u2014the changes to the Overseas Investment Act are something that is standard. Yes, I do believe that when we are looking at comparable agreements, whether it\u2019s the New Zealand - UAE Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement or the New Zealand - European Union free-trade agreement, the New Zealand - United Kingdom free-trade agreement, or anything else, we do see comparables, and the Minister is absolutely right in terms of the $200 million threshold. That\u2019s not been changed and that has not been adjusted. That\u2019s true, but in none of the other agreements we have seen have we seen from the other side an expectation of, essentially, overseas investment, and I think that this is where the crux of this particular part is really important for us to unpack.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor example, if we\u2019re looking at page 106 of the national interest analysis, it says \u201CNew Zealand is required to promote foreign direct investment from investors\u201D, but I guess in this case, for example, when we\u2019re looking at the definition of \u201COverseas Investment Act\u201D, would the promotion of overseas investment under our Overseas Investment Act be considered overseas investment? If the promotion of overseas investment in our Overseas Investment Act is not considered overseas investment, I guess, in some ways, how then do we expect the other party to this agreement\u2014particularly from the Indian Government\u2019s side. When they are looking at updating their overseas investment Act, how then would they put it in their legislation\u2014if they have to\u2014to ensure that the word \u201Cpromotion\u201D is captured in their domestic legislation? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAgain, if the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind clarifying that promotion is not in our Overseas Investment Act\u2014I think that that is an important part for us to tease out here. Again, none of the other agreements that we\u2019ve seen previously contains a similar comparable clause such as chapter 9 of the New Zealand - India free-trade agreement. I do want to check that with the Minister, and my specific question then is around this: is promotion itself considered an overseas investment in the Overseas Investment Act 2005? That is specifically for when we\u2019re looking at clauses 14 and 15 in Part 2. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022b39b2f21b5e0beadd73115043a1b8804\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b39b2f21b5e0beadd73115043a1b8804\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (20:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I can help very quickly with this. This piece of the legislation\u2014Part 2\u2014deals with the Overseas Investment Act, and it merely adds India to the list of free-trade agreements (FTAs), lining it up with a threshold of $200 million. It makes no other legislative commitment by this House other than putting India in around that threshold of $200 million and adding them to that list of all other free-trade agreements, as I\u2019ve said, except for one, which is the CER Agreement, which is a different amount.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAs far as the different categories are concerned\u2014which the member from the Opposition raised earlier\u2014in effect, what this does is it lines up India with the EU and the UK free-trade agreements. Some others have a slightly different treatment when it comes to each of the five categories, but that is based upon something that was negotiated at the time in a limited most favoured nations provision. That means that in some areas, as an example, when the threshold increases, that is extended out, but in some cases where we may agree something\u2014as an example\u2014with the EU FTA, it wouldn\u2019t automatically extend out to other countries, and so this is being treated the same as those last two agreements. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022 data-id=\u002272d0588fc53759f63ec86a3a8b25d927\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002272d0588fc53759f63ec86a3a8b25d927\u0022\u003EHon MARK PATTERSON (Minister for Rural Communities) (20:18)\u003C/span\u003E: I want to go back to this $200 million threshold and the national interest test levers that we would still have. That\u2019s quite a high amount of money, and if I look at some of the examples in the bill in terms of where the tariffs are getting reduced, m\u0101nuka honey is one where tariffs are being reduced. I reckon $200 million would just about buy the whole New Zealand supply chain.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf I look at the wool industry, which is another one captured in here, we have one scourer, one company\u2014well, we have two scourers, but they\u2019re owned by one company. It\u2019s a monopoly. Now, with that $200 million threshold and without the protection of a national interest test, we could lose control of a key piece of infrastructure where, essentially, if it wasn\u2019t in New Zealand ownership, all the wool could be just sent offshore and our manufacturing base could be starved of scoured wool. We\u2019d have to buy it back from overseas. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EActually, within the context of the New Zealand economy and some of our smaller primary sectors, that $200 million is quite high, and so I want to understand what levers we have. What\u2019s our national interest test? With scouring, it would be devastating for the industry if we lost that scouring to foreign ownership. How would we intervene in that situation?  Are we powerless under this $200 million threshold, or is there at least some\u2014at least some\u2014protection there for our industries so that we\u2019re not just being prepared to wave some of them away for the sake of making a commitment that the Prime Minister made in a debate speech before the last election to get this through expediently before this election? Have we really taken the time to consider the consequences? As Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan pointed out, there are substantive parts of this bill that we\u2019re not actually, really, getting the chance to debate. This is the only chance we\u2019ve got to ask some of these more fundamental questions. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022c1ec6ff9a04b6cde04125c28dc63d256\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c1ec6ff9a04b6cde04125c28dc63d256\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (20:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Where there\u2019s an opportunity to ask questions about what is different and what is within scope, it\u2019s for the chair to determine that. All I can really say is that the part of the discussion around the $200 million and whether that is a significant amount, an important amount, or not might well have been debated by that member when the UAE free-trade agreement went through that he voted in favour of, because it is the same amount, or the EU free-trade agreement during this term, because it is the same amount and that member\u2019s party voted in favour of it. Outside of the scope of this bill is around thresholds, and it\u2019s around regimes to consider investment and so on. That\u2019s a different Act of Parliament. It\u2019s not here. Whilst there have been changes during this term of Parliament around that under the Overseas Investment Act, that member\u2019s party, in coalition, has supported those as well. What is unclear to me is whether this is a concern about a $200 million amount and what it might do or about the country the money is coming from.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022 data-id=\u002206df2140378670115e3d7a600bfb2bff\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002206df2140378670115e3d7a600bfb2bff\u0022\u003EHon MARK PATTERSON (Minister for Rural Communities) (20:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Chair. I take offence at that last comment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222bceff27ec02aa01e89198a4da22f081\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: What\u2019s your point of order?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022884b701a6b6a4c6c5ec7f170a666c21a\u0022\u003EHon MARK PATTERSON\u003C/span\u003E: I take offence to that last comment, which, essentially, said that it was because of the country, not the actual contents of the bill, which is absolutely wrong. We think this is a terrible deal. It\u2019s nothing against India as a country. So I do take offence to that comment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002286f0dbb5dbc335ca78924845c20ff024\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, sorry, that\u2019s not actually a point of order. I take your point, but it\u2019s not actually a point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022 data-id=\u0022d95b10c0b13a35bfcc7f0ca39aa9bd91\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d95b10c0b13a35bfcc7f0ca39aa9bd91\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (20:22)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, thank you. I just wanted to note that the Minister hasn\u2019t actually answered the questions that I asked earlier. The first of those questions was around the issue around the process that we\u2019ve got to. You\u2019re quite clearly hearing from certainly the parties here who are opposed to this bill\u2014not the bill, but the free-trade agreement (FTA) itself. There hasn\u2019t really been an opportunity to discuss that in this Chamber. Now, that said, I know that we need to focus on what is in front of us in terms of the bill. I take that. The question that I asked was: if this bill were not to pass, what would happen to the FTA itself? Is this legislation integral to the FTA? I\u2019m assuming that it would be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, the Minister has also said that there is nothing different between what we\u2019re doing with the $200 million inward investment to any other\u2014the UAE one, the EU one, and so on\u2014so it\u2019s exactly the same. I take that point. The question I would ask you is whether there is a corollary to this FTA in any of those arrangements that says that New Zealand has to show best endeavours to send $20 billion USD, or $35-odd billion New Zealand dollars, of investment to another country, to the UAE, or to the EU. Do we have to do that in any of those arrangements? That is the concern. It\u2019s not the country that it is coming from, as the Minister said. That is the issue that we are concerned about. It\u2019s our ability to do that. It\u2019s also the one-sided bit at the end of that process, which is if India decides that it doesn\u2019t think that we\u2019ve given enough effort to do that and to demonstrate that we collectively, New Zealand Inc, have invested that $35 billion in India\u2014and the wording is quite clear here\u2014it allows them to impose \u201Cproportionate remedial measures\u201D to rebalance tariff concessions and to continue to do so until they are satisfied that we have invested sufficiently in India. Now, if that is also reflected in the EU and UAE arrangements, fine; tell us that. That will be really useful, but if it\u2019s not, that is the concern that we\u2019ve got, not the country of origin.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220b027244d0086b74e61547bd6d410115\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Just before the Minister takes a call, we are constrained by the legislation that\u2019s in front of us. This is a debate about Part 2, which includes those particular clauses. I have noticed that some members want to be able to talk around some of the issues around the agreement. The Government enters into agreements, but the legislation that\u2019s in front of us is about implementing that agreement. It is possible to be able to talk about the issues that you clearly have some interest in, but I ask members to do that within the context of the clauses that are in front of us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022edf5944796358f24f5802708b7f2cee0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022edf5944796358f24f5802708b7f2cee0\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Thank you, Chair. Thank you for that clarification. I agree, but also, at the same time, we understand\u2014when it comes to the agreement or the policy intent itself and when are we going to change the agreement or change the policy intent in this case\u2014however, that having the ministerial intent and having the Minister\u2019s intent in the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E in terms of clarifying certain aspects of the agreement that pertain to a particular part of the bill is quite important, and it is a fundamental purpose of the committee stage. Yes, I do agree with you, Mr Chair, and I think the questions we have seen so far are specifically referencing a particular clause and the impact that this clause will have in the context of this bill, which is only in front of this committee because of the agreement. I think it is important for us to have some of the Minister\u2019s intent on record.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f82d88fa094b8148501fced946aad987\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Just to respond to the point of order, that is entirely possible within the context of the different clauses. I know members are very skilled across the Chamber here and will be able to ask those questions within those particular clauses and within Part 2, which is what this debate is about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022168430d186b587f5360680a1a6085b09\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022168430d186b587f5360680a1a6085b09\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (20:26)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Chairman. I refer to clause 15, which is \u201CRegulations regarding alternative \u2026 thresholds for overseas investments in significant business assets\u201D. It\u2019s in relation to the points raised by New Zealand First here, I guess. They had some concerns, and we are moving from $100\u00A0million to $200\u00A0million\u2014that\u2019s what this change is doing. The question to the Minister, though, is around the safeguards, if you like. Most of these applications will still be scrutinised, I guess, by the Overseas Investment Office, and unless there\u2019s exceptional reasons why not, it will probably give approval to them. But there may be some instances where the Overseas Investment Office might say no, because most of the agreements\u2014and I\u2019m guessing this one; and if I\u2019m wrong, Minister, please clarify\u2014retain the ability for our sovereign judgment over these investments to say no, for good reason. It has to have a good reason. What we\u2019re doing is shifting the threshold from $100 to $200 million. It\u2019s generally easier under $200 million, but there\u2019s still an ability to intervene.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000784\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWhat we have said\u2014and I guess it\u2019s a question relating to New Zealand First\u2014is if the Overseas Investment Office says no and the Ministers intervene and say yes, will the Indian Government be able to challenge that? Or if the Overseas Investment Office says yes and the Ministers say no, will it be the same thing? I guess the question is for officials and the Minister, because I understand that Ministers have overridden advice from the Overseas Investment Office and these sales have gone through, endorsed by New Zealand First in Government. So I\u2019m wanting to check whether that will continue or whether these changes to the legislation will open the door for any litigation from India or from a potential investor.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00220cd2cfe0505fbcf41670a06b2118539c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220cd2cfe0505fbcf41670a06b2118539c\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (20:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, thank you. That\u2019s a good question. It was constructive. It doesn\u2019t alter the definitions at all. They remain the same across free-trade agreements (FTAs) except where, in an FTA, it\u2019s been negotiated differently. I gave an example earlier where, in some cases, a qualified most favoured nation provision for some areas could be liberalised in one agreement but it may not apply to another one. Sometimes they\u2019re older; sometimes they\u2019re newer. Equally, the safeguards are not altered by this clause of this legislation. In as far as the definitions of a \u201Csignificant business\u201D or the safeguards around an investment, those don\u2019t change. They remain outside of the scope of this bill. They\u2019re in the scope of the Overseas Investment Act. Where the Government has the ability to change that, they could do so. Again, I would refer the member to the previous groups I\u2019ve talked about, because it is the same as those from the EU to the UK and some other ones. It doesn\u2019t alter it at all; it\u2019s merely adding the name \u201CIndia\u201D to it, the threshold goes to $200\u00A0million, and those safeguards and definitions around business and so on remain the same. That\u2019s a different Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002293a9f70364b278b11b216ff94fa9c54e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002293a9f70364b278b11b216ff94fa9c54e\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:30)\u003C/span\u003E: I do want to pick up on what the Minister for Trade and Investment has been consistently saying, which is about the $200\u00A0million threshold. My recollection was that the threshold was increased from $100 to $200\u00A0million for the United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill (CEPA)\u2014now Act. That was where $100 was increased to $200\u00A0million, but I thought it was for the context of that agreement only, because in this agreement, as clause\u00A015 stands, it\u2019s drawing on section 61 of the Overseas Investment Act. Now, section\u00A061 of the Overseas Investment Act is referencing section 13 of the Overseas Investment Act, and section 13 of the Overseas Investment Act, subsection (1)(a)(ii), still has the amount at $100 million. Would the Minister be able to clarify where the $200\u00A0million amount came from? It\u2019s not added in this bill, but it\u2019s also not in Overseas Investment Act, but it\u2019s in the CEPA.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00221c7932cd12239ed04be9718a919afdd0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221c7932cd12239ed04be9718a919afdd0\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (20:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Within the Overseas Investment Act, the threshold is $100\u00A0million. Free-trade agreements have lifted it up. I would need to be sure, but from recollection, I think, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and then Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) agreement took the threshold to $200\u00A0million. There was then a most favoured nation (MFN) clause in some other agreements, including China, which increased their threshold to $200\u00A0million as well. The most favoured nations clause in the UK agreement was set at $200, in the EU, $200. Actually, as a result of subsequent agreements negotiated after CPTPP\u2014whichever one it first was\u2014and that most favoured nation clause, which looks backwards to increase it, they remain the same.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe member is correct that the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) went to $200\u00A0million because, under the Overseas Investment Act, they already had access to a $100\u00A0million threshold, even though we didn\u2019t have an agreement. That\u2019s what the Overseas Investment Act says. This has increased it for them. The reason we do it in this way is that a benefit of additional investment is with a partner we have a trade agreement with. Any country we don\u2019t have a trade agreement with doesn\u2019t get the benefit of the higher amount. They would sit at the $100\u00A0million threshold.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, any country outside of that\u2014if we take, for example, World Trade Organization (WTO) countries, a commitment that New Zealand and others have made to the WTO is for $10 million. Over time, New Zealand has put that at a $100\u00A0million threshold through legislation. Free-trade agreements have put it up in the case that, with any of those agreements, we had gone higher than $200\u00A0million. Any trade we had a most favoured nation clause would have increased to that as well, just as was the case for China, as an example.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022 data-id=\u00222688c69faa0bbb6a15ab4f23a88c3cb7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222688c69faa0bbb6a15ab4f23a88c3cb7\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (20:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Look, I rise again\u2014I didn\u2019t really want to have to do this, but, Minister McClay, you\u2019ve been on your feet at least twice since I asked three questions and you haven\u2019t answered any of them. If I might, do you want me to remind you what the questions were?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022291292d321ecad1510d09e2a2f048827\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: No, no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e87e16eaf9c800948d3661051252cbc4\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER\u003C/span\u003E: OK, thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00226344f33fc19112c8faf035040b3de094\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226344f33fc19112c8faf035040b3de094\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (20:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, the reason I didn\u2019t is that they\u2019re all out of scope.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ac023bcc14bcd1a5288423262bb874bb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Steve Abel.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022976e3cb2e32a601660a5b1e345aee198\u0022\u003EAndy Foster\u003C/span\u003E: No, one of them certainly was not so I\u2019ll have another go.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u00221e3c78c780203c5a1b940d021aeb8f39\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221e3c78c780203c5a1b940d021aeb8f39\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (20:33)\u003C/span\u003E: You have, Minister McClay, been talking a lot about this threshold\u2014$100,000, $200,000\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f0e27d6a7753f7557cd3aa7d6ca6a08\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: Million.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281a7694b1c041431b1d2a24800e25fb4\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: $200 million. A fifth of a billion dollars.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022077abd793455f261bb75536aa25139ce\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: Cheaper than a KiwiMart.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002218d35939a2ba12675b1ff74df8f2bd09\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right, but perhaps much worse for the country. The question I have, Minister, in regards to that, and notwithstanding the point that my colleague Mark Patterson made about the importance of retaining the scourger in New Zealand\u2014the two scourgers\u2014the risk to us, as an economy, if we lose it. Is there some component to having a higher threshold, notwithstanding that it hasn\u2019t got precedent in free-trade agreements elsewhere, to try and clawback some of the exported capital that we are obliged to send to India as part of this agreement, which runs counter to our chronic current account deficit because we can\u2019t afford to be exporting that capital. Is this an attempt or a rationale for trying to get some investment back so that we are not punished by the loss of those domestic funds into India in the form of, currently, $35 billion?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMy question, Minister, is, surely, in the process of making a decision about these clauses, 14 and 15 in this part, there was some advice sought on your part as to the probability of there being investments that either meet that threshold\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221772d6120478c2f018701481482a2da3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Don\u2019t use \u201Cyour\u201D, you\u2019ll bring the Chair into the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b121c5d09b031815e660ac647457a0b9\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014or exceed it\u2014pardon me, Mr Chair. Surely, the Minister undertook some advice as to what the probability or the volumes of investments that might meet that threshold or fall below that threshold were. And I wonder, if that\u2019s the case, whether the Minister can give us some of the information and advice that he received.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022c6b80937d01a625761e8ed94730cabf9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c6b80937d01a625761e8ed94730cabf9\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (20:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, there\u2019s a range of advice that we receive when getting ready to bring a bill before the House to implement a free-trade agreement. The advice that\u2019s given in this one around clause 2 is very much identical to that under the United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, the EU, and, one assumes, the UK, because they\u2019re very narrow in what it does; it increases the threshold for India, as it did with all these other countries, to $200 million.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe advice would also show that it doesn\u2019t alter anything else in the Overseas Investment Act, which deals with all the other things that have been raised by members, other than inserting the name \u201CIndia\u201D into that so it fits within other free-trade agreement partners. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00224cdaae48925f4be3cfa1b2a55c185bc9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224cdaae48925f4be3cfa1b2a55c185bc9\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just while we\u2019re on that threshold amount, did I just hear correctly that the amount is $200? Is the amount $200\u00A0million for this bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d3fd802ec76977413d58281823b2f58\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002248a046c1c8ea6673a9a131253df4ac57\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: No? It\u2019s $100?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e313a137ade6470b4bca4938da7d3fe\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: There\u2019s no amount in the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022551b035d7389a257e1869cb3a159991b\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: No amount in the bill\u2014sorry, I didn\u2019t quite catch the Minister for Trade and Investment\u2019s first part of that response, which is the Minister kept on referring to a $200 million threshold, which is the standard, which is not in this bill but in the Overseas Investment Act. Can I just clarify whether the Minister did say $200 or $100?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00223e74e99ba81cfb6c59e0b04d8349ffc8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223e74e99ba81cfb6c59e0b04d8349ffc8\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (20:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I can be very clear: all of our free-trade agreements have a $200 million threshold, except for one agreement and that\u2019s the CER with Australia, which is a higher amount. There is no amount in this bill because it is inserting the name \u201CIndia Free Trade Agreement\u201D into another Act that lines up with all other free-trade agreements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022 data-id=\u0022bd82e8f5ee14770939388757a02a0619\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bd82e8f5ee14770939388757a02a0619\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (20:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, Minister McClay, you just kind of flippantly said that those three questions I asked were out of scope, but one of those questions was that if this bill were to fail\u2014that clearly cannot be out of scope because it is about this bill\u2014if this bill were to fail, what would it do to the free-trade agreement (FTA), which has not itself been in front of this committee, because this is the one chance that we get to debate this, in terms of what\u2019s actually in there, and we only get to debate a small part of what\u2019s in there. So the first question there is: if this bill were to fail, what would happen to the FTA?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESecondly, the other thing, Minister, you\u2019ve said quite consistently is that this clause 15 is bringing the India FTA into line with all the others\u2014and you\u2019ve mentioned the $200 million amount\u2014but again, I asked you that question and you said that you\u2019ve talked about our New Zealand First position on the EU bill and the UAE bill and said that we were in favour of those, and we were, but it is not the inward side that was inconsistent there, because the inward side is the same\u2014that\u2019s what you\u2019re saying to us\u2014but it\u2019s the outgoing side. And the question you had said\u2014you might say it\u2019s just out of scope and we\u2019ll just have to take that as being read that there\u2019s nothing there, but there is nothing that we\u2019ve heard from you that gives us any confidence that this is not a unique outward situation in terms of the amount of investment that is required to be made by New Zealand in another country, and that that is not replicated in any other agreement. That\u2019s our big concern. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225b7c8b6f9dde80d5c07e3450a3102e2a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I was just trying to figure a way for the member to get his answers. I mean, look, we are talking about Part 2, so the question on whether parts of this might fail and how that would impact the agreement actually isn\u2019t in scope with Part 2. But as I was thinking that, it is really a process question. So I\u2019m just trying to figure out whether the clerks could answer your question. You go and have a chat with them to see whether you could get a satisfactory answer that way. That might be the best way to deal with it. But we might have a contribution here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00226173520ef6fa1c83c1778f9a90ace2da\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226173520ef6fa1c83c1778f9a90ace2da\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (20:39)\u003C/span\u003E: On that, the member might use his phone and Google, and I\u2019m sure that would help him with the last bit, but it\u2019s not within the scope of this part as to what happens around enactment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI have some recommended reading for the member. It is the Overseas Investment Act 2005 and Overseas Investment Regulations 2005. It will be very clear that is New Zealand governing investment into New Zealand\u2014very, very clear. All that this Part 2 does\u2014the only thing that Part 2 does\u2014is changes a law, the Overseas Investment Act, to insert the India Free Trade Agreement along with all the other free-trade agreements so they have a similar treatment. It doesn\u2019t do anything more than that; it doesn\u2019t do anything less than that. But I think\u2014I\u2019m not entirely sure, but there may be a hint in the name of the Act that it\u2019s amending the Overseas Investment Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00222fe617f349aea8a5f04f1c6e332c51d1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000817\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222fe617f349aea8a5f04f1c6e332c51d1\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and thank you for that clarification, Minister. I did go back and have a look at it again in terms of the different types, and I did go back and check that the $200 million threshold was added as part of that UAE Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA), which is a type 5 investment type. That does clarify things, so I do appreciate that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan I just check: when we did have the other bill, one of the arguments that was there was that type 5 investor was added as a part of the United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill, and that was something that was deemed necessary for that one. So we have a precedent where, as a part of a new trade agreement, a new investment type has been created as a part of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess my question then is, for the Minister: has there been any consideration whether, in the context of this particular agreement, that a new investor type be included as a part of this part? So, for example, in the UAE comprehensive economic partnership agreement, clause 11 added new regulations 96A and 96B, which was the type 5 investor which we\u2019re seeing over here in clause 23, regulations 96B amended. So I wondered whether there have been any conversations or discussions between the Minister and the ministry on whether in the context of the NZ-India FTA that a type 6 investor be included or be introduced as a part of this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor example, we could very easily include a new amendment 23A, for example, that is, let\u2019s say, new regulations 97A and 96\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022214c9586632fea31b3adec64e0a7ecf0\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: Speak to the bill!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022500fd2be9b235c27f61daba854a3d6cb\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, we are referring to the Overseas Investment Regulations 2005, and I\u2019m checking with the Minister on whether a new investor type has been considered, considering we\u2019re seeing changes to type 2, 3, and 5. I think my colleague the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor or Vanushi Walters has also asked previously\u2014and I wondered\u2014what happened to type 4. Maybe type 4 is no longer in existence. But, yeah, has a type 6 investor been considered with potentially a $300 million threshold or even a $500 million threshold in response to that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s my first question. I think the other one is, when we\u2019re looking at the rationale for those regulations and the different types of investors in the first place\u2014and please correct me if, you know; this is not something, in terms of the Overseas Investment Act, that is my area of expertise. But a lot of that is to do with the kind of, I guess, checks and compliance or even background check requirements of the investors in those kind of instances. And there are obviously different thresholds based on the types of investors. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the questions I remembered\u2014I\u2019m possibly checking previously with the UAE CEPA\u2014was around how someone would do a background check in overseas jurisdiction of the potential fraud or mismanagement, etc., of a particular investor in those countries. I do want to check with the Minister, when we\u2019re looking at the scrutiny or looking at approving a certain type of investor, the way that we\u2019re able to communicate with the Indian Government to ensure that there is good screening and background checks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220228216a15e9979c46129d44a9c796e2\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Just before the Minister takes a call, just to note that there was a question over there from Andy Foster around what happens if parts are not supported. The relevant part to have that debate is on clause 1 and 2, title and commencement. So if Andy Foster wants to take it up at that point, that would be the time and place to do it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022b4e743d24cb4a3bcc9339b1f738ed855\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000826\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b4e743d24cb4a3bcc9339b1f738ed855\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (20:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, Mr Chair. In as far as screening thresholds are concerned, that doesn\u2019t change between agreement to agreement. It\u2019s not dealt with under this Act; it\u2019s the Overseas Investment Act. It remains the same.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EFor the UAE agreement, there was a new category created, which is why it was part of that bill. There is no new category created in this bill, which is why the member can\u2019t find one. It doesn\u2019t alter thresholds that go up, but that\u2019s not the way that would be done. If a future agreement negotiated a threshold to increase, where there\u2019s a most favoured nations clause in other free-trade agreements, it would naturally flow through, but, in this case, that is not the case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022 data-id=\u00221cd87dc053ed8b7fdca4385d4da9e740\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221cd87dc053ed8b7fdca4385d4da9e740\u0022\u003EFRANCISCO HERNANDEZ (Green) (20:46)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I have a question around Part 2, clause 18(1). I\u2019ve been following the debate in my office, so I\u2019m pretty sure that this question hasn\u2019t been asked. My question is around the definition around \u201Cpermanent residence\u201D around the definition of \u201CIndia individual\u201D. Is that the same threshold that we apply for reciprocal investment to India, and is that also the same investment that we apply, for example, for Hong Kong individuals and other countries that we have free-trade agreements with? Is that just permanent residence threshold sufficient, or is the requirement for the other nations to be nationals of their country for our other FTAs and for the reciprocal part of our investment into India?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EJust wanting to ask that really quick question to the Minister. I think he\u2019s looking to his officials for advice on that. I think he\u2019s sought it now, so I\u2019ll sit down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022a13a1020a70e51691f2afda1863b5d6e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a13a1020a70e51691f2afda1863b5d6e\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (20:47)\u003C/span\u003E: No, I was just checking. We treat nationalities\u2014in that case, we treat it the same in New Zealand domestic legislation, yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000831\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000834\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 28\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000835\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 101, Noes 20.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fda981ba17df9aac215e4c6b7f509d67\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00227b5e3105adafa7a25baa16bfbe7f78a5\u0022\u003EPart 3 Amendments to Tariff Act 1988, Tariff, Customs and Excise Act 2018, and Customs and Excise Regulations 1996\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000840\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002215baae0b5d4d289f0b664d95c4307b8e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: We come now to Part 3. This is the debate on clauses 25 to 36, \u201CAmendments to Tariff Act 1988, Tariff, Customs and Excise Act 2018, and Customs and Excise Regulations 1996\u201D. The question is that Part 3 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022ddce4d524f9167b4f42ddebba8b735e4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000841\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ddce4d524f9167b4f42ddebba8b735e4\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (20:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I guess, to many people, this is probably at the heart of the trade agreement\u2014that is, it deals with tariffs, or the reduction of them or the management of them. These are the barriers that cost us more if we export into the Indian market. We go through here, and it\u2019s kind of bland if you look at the wording of what we\u2019re doing in Part 3. Starting at clause 25, it amends the Tariff Act 1988, which is a wee way back. It does a number of things in here, and maybe the Minister for Trade and Investment can answer a few questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000842\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EOne is that there\u2019s a transitional safeguard measure in this piece of the bill: that is that if New Zealand and India too\u2014and I guess the reciprocity of this is something the Minister can explain\u2014if we believe that there\u2019s a large volume of products coming in that might be really upsetting one of our sectors. There may be large volumes of wool coming into New Zealand\u2014highly unlikely, but maybe large volumes going into India where they think it\u2019s upsetting a fragile market. The question is: I jest a little bit, but there are legitimate concerns for both goods and, to a lesser extent, services where\u2014and the Minister can perhaps explain\u2014the transitional safeguard measures, where they are in the legislation and how they can be applied to ensure that New Zealand industries are not decimated. Because there will be small fledgling manufacturing areas that may be concerned about this, given the scope and the size and the scale of manufacturing in India. That\u2019s the first question I have: how will these transitional safeguard measures be implemented, and what\u2019s the reciprocity of those in both countries?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022 data-id=\u0022e939bbd70c158571c4fdbb783a9feeec\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000843\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e939bbd70c158571c4fdbb783a9feeec\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour) (20:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Perhaps just a supplementary to add on to that question. My question is really about whether those measures\u2014so the import surges criteria\u2014are contained in the free-trade agreement (FTA) or whether they are in legislation. Because my understanding is that the different FTAs we have have potentially different import surge thresholds\u2014shall we say\u2014and so whether the Minister for Trade and Investment considered just applying or negotiating the same thresholds that are in existing legislation, so those could just be repeated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000844\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe second question is in relation to clause 32, which is about concessions. This reference is number 66, which is a list of other FTAs where, when goods are repaired and then re-entered into a country, they\u2019re not subject to an additional tariff because they have effectively already come through. I\u2019m really just wondering about the policy that either does already or will sit behind that. I can\u2019t see detail of whether there\u2019s a proof element required. I know that when goods initially come into a country, you would have something like a certificate of origin, for example\u2014that is your proof point. But if it were returned and then comes back in, it looks like that\u2019s exempt, but I can\u2019t point to anything in the legislation that requires an equivalent certificate. Could the Minister tell me whether there is such a provision in the legislation; or, if there\u2019s not, if there is existing policy that none the less requires some sort of proof point to say that the goods have been repaired and that there hasn\u2019t been a substantially transformed element of the goods post repair to deem it subject to a requirement for a new certificate of origin? Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022d2fe2314223cb8cbf0e560fb2da2e7ba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000845\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d2fe2314223cb8cbf0e560fb2da2e7ba\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (20:53)\u003C/span\u003E: I might deal with these few as they go along so we don\u2019t get too much of a backlog. In as far as transitional safeguard measures are concerned, this is merely stating in law that we are able to do this\u2014it was negotiated is part of the free-trade agreement. It gives us the ability to, and of course a provisional or transitional safeguard is put in place while an investigation into harm is being done. It\u2019s a different act of determination as to the condition around that and the thresholds and so on. It doesn\u2019t alter that; it just means that, under the free-trade agreement, we\u2019re able to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000846\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second question was around how this is done. Well, it\u2019s different legislation. The Tariffs Act or the safeguard Act permits this. After a Tariff Act reduces\u2014or, in this case, goes to zero\u2014there\u2019s a period of time by which you are still able to do these\u2014either the safeguard Act or other measures to be put in place. Again, this is merely allowing that to happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000847\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor export, for repairs for reimport, Customs do that. It\u2019s often certified before it goes away. There are proof points, of course. This legislation doesn\u2019t alter that. It is standard practice for Customs. Just as, in some cases, where New Zealanders are leaving and they may have something of value with them\u2014they\u2019re taking with them for business or work, a camera\u2014they can get a certificate on the way out to show that when they come back in it is being reimported, as opposed to having been purchased offshore.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022f0797c47af213a3858aafc767c23ca64\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000848\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f0797c47af213a3858aafc767c23ca64\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (20:55)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Just following on from that, I know, for example, there is a business in Wellington here that imports a lot of diamonds to process and then re-export. It\u2019s been an issue with Customs as to how we set up a regime that doesn\u2019t mean that they are effectively stripped of cash in what is a normal business transaction. I guess the question of whether there is some sort of reciprocity there as well, for us\u2014and I can\u2019t think off the top of my head of something like that. But Customs, rightfully, is pretty staunch and rigid in ensuring that, like repairs where we have online purchase\u2014which is actually a new phenomenon, probably over the last 10 years where people can just go on and buy from anywhere in the world. You receive a product that\u2019s faulty, you send it back, you\u2019ve paid the duty on it once, it\u2019s repaired, and then it comes back in. These are new provisions and new legislation\u2014new trade agreements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000849\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI\u2019m just seeking an assurance that\u2014and we\u2019re told that this is covered in this part of the bill here, the repairs. But can I just check on that one around some flexibility around Customs for what may be a growing\u2014and take, for example, diamonds, where they might be sourced from India into here to be processed and exported back out. I think we will build up more partnerships with Indian business, and we\u2019ll need to be flexible. I\u2019m just checking with the Minister for Trade and Investment on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022c5405fb3075e03734a0d6162b5874566\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000850\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c5405fb3075e03734a0d6162b5874566\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (20:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, there will be men and women all around the country watching tonight\u2014single men and women\u2014who are excited by that member\u2019s great knowledge of the importation of diamonds to a shop in Wellington. But it is a separate piece of legislation. I actually have great sympathy for what he is saying. In the case somebody brings something to send out again, there may well be duty and GST and so on, which can be a burden, but that doesn\u2019t alter any other Act; it doesn\u2019t change that at all. There is not a commitment we have taken on with India around any special arrangements in that area.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00220d439831b3f8db9ff209c5db2eae23c8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000851\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220d439831b3f8db9ff209c5db2eae23c8\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:57)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to check, in terms of Part 3, starting with Subpart 2, when it comes to tariffs. Now, we\u2019ve just in Part 1 been discussing kind of tariffs on the other end in the form of quotas. Can I just check: is there a quota system from our end for tariffs? No, I\u2019m seeing head shaking. That\u2019s good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000852\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to check with the Minister for Trade and Investment on clause 32, \u201CPart II Concessions amended\u201D. I guess this is something that both the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor and maybe Vanushi Walters touched on. But I think if we\u2019re able to pull it back even a bit further, if the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind clarifying exactly what Concession Reference Number 66 is. Because it\u2019s been mentioned here and I don\u2019t know if that is standard knowledge or understanding.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000853\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to check with the Minister whether this is a typo or something that is supposed to be structured like that. I\u2019m assuming in here, after subsection (8), \u201C(9) Goods re-entered after repair or alteration\u2014(a) in the territory of India; and (b) in accordance with\u201D\u2014that is \u201Cfree\u201D in terms of concessions; is that what the \u201Cfree\u201D on the corner of that particular page is referring to? If the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind, I just wanted to clarify what that \u201Cfree\u201D is in reference to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00221eeaa7c6de24a17877ef8d0541aaea58\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000854\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221eeaa7c6de24a17877ef8d0541aaea58\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (20:59)\u003C/span\u003E: The term \u201Cconcession\u201D is the tariff rate\u2014a concessionary tariff rate that applies and that brings it to zero. The India - New Zealand free-trade agreement means that on entry into force, goods exports from India to New Zealand fall to a concessionary rate of zero. That word \u201Cconcession\u201D is not something different; it just is lining it up, just as it lines the language up with the European Union free-trade agreement, where the same thing happened. It is a zero-tariff rate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000855\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn as far as exports for goods sent out for repair\u2014sent to New Zealand for repair and so on\u2014of course, if they came from India, they would have a zero-tariff rate against them when they came in. That would be somewhere to India to know whether there was a tariff treatment. But in the case that New Zealanders send something out to India to be repaired and then brought back in, that concession means that if it\u2019s sent out, if it\u2019s certified and the same good comes back in, then there isn\u2019t a duty or tariff to pay on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022beab40836f3c0689cd5ec495014833d1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022beab40836f3c0689cd5ec495014833d1\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (21:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Look, under Part 3, there\u2019s also a provision for the Minister for Trade and Investment to designate an authorised certification body to certify that goods originate in New Zealand, for the purposes of the India free-trade agreement. Can I just ask: what body will that be? Will it be a Government agency or will that be sent out to a private sector or is it a body within the particular industry? I know we have, not necessarily\u2014FernMark might be one of them. I guess there\u2019s provision for that, so an indication of whether it will be privatised, which is what the Government seems to want to do with everything else, or will it be closer to Government to ensure that, actually, what is deemed a product of New Zealand has a Government endorsement. Maybe the Minister can explain.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022e8f4cccd5cdac663334ccb775f5d674b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000857\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e8f4cccd5cdac663334ccb775f5d674b\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:01)\u003C/span\u003E: So this is the Minister of Customs that does this, not the trade Minister, and the Minister of Customs gets to designate organisations in New Zealand that can certify that something is of New Zealand origin. There are a range of these things, but in many cases chambers of commerce have that ability in other agreements, and so on. I won\u2019t get ahead of what the customs Minister may do, but the member will be interested to know it will be no different than other trade agreements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002247e87436a5a47f5d938fa94ca1a4eb29\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000858\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002247e87436a5a47f5d938fa94ca1a4eb29\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (21:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just on that particular part, which is clause 26, in terms of regulations regarding the provisions relating to originating food; 51ZPP, originating goods. I understand that the Minister for Trade and Investment, in the chair, is not the Minister of Customs, but this falls under his purview as, I guess, the person who oversees the entire trade agreement. What would the process be for the agency or a private company or any organisation to be able to determine rules for originating goods in line with Chapter 3, Annex 3A, 3B and 3C of the India Free Trade Agreement? That would be my first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000859\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMy second question is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000860\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe9d2b726326926d5f614ee71188e0d5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m just going to check to see if the Minister got the gist of the first question, because there was some administrative stuff going on here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000861\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261e600c086426e0d4f55c0fb56ab84fc\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: Most of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000862\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b2ce988ef33c84c0a3c3b79d3783f71\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Most of it. OK, keep going.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000863\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d6f269a2a65dbd86c2b2eb741bdad75a\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll just finish with the second question, which is: if someone was told, for example, that it\u2019s been determined that it\u2019s not their origin or the rules of the origin, is there a dispute process for, in this case, an Indian exporter importing into Aotearoa New Zealand\u2014is there a dispute mechanism for them to go to a particular New Zealand agency to be able to dispute on the rules of origin?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022a2c26332ace082fa5f8233b37439c79b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000864\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a2c26332ace082fa5f8233b37439c79b\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:03)\u003C/span\u003E: In the case that something\u2019s important to New Zealand and was outside of the definition of rules of origin, that\u2019s a customs issue. There is a customs dispute panel that could look into this, but duty would be levied upon that import to the importer at that point in time, so it\u2019s not a matter of us having to check something before it comes into the country. If it does come, and we find the origin is not correct as defined under the free-trade agreement, then customs deal with that\u2014and it happens from time to time for a range of reasons\u2014but there is a dedicated process for that to happen under customs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000865\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Part 3 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000866\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000867\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000868\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 28\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000869\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000870\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000871\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002221846701b9fe4d52500d29c8c6dfb0cc\u0022\u003EVote Correction\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000872\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b55d03c65d31ff03de5f721a6bee9c9e\u0022\u003EIndia Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225f6c5b1a97f24773a8aaeb3a8e3b0e7b\u0022 data-id=\u00228e8b25e3c48ada2e40b419b3d3d4824f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000873\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f6c5b1a97f24773a8aaeb3a8e3b0e7b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228e8b25e3c48ada2e40b419b3d3d4824f\u0022\u003EJAMIE ARBUCKLE (Whip\u2014NZ First) (21:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Can I seek leave to correct a vote?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000874\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e9693a99aa8ac5034f72e11d22384509\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000875\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f6c5b1a97f24773a8aaeb3a8e3b0e7b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f80baf012369bbebd0bba4c70711e450\u0022\u003EJAMIE ARBUCKLE\u003C/span\u003E: To Part 2 of the committee stage of the bill: New Zealand First\u2019s vote to be recorded as eight opposed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000876\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f25335c53b89a73436411c381a41e86\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: OK, thank you. We\u2019ll change that and make sure it appears on the record.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000877\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002294ba8c47b05337d5d02059088ecfc590\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: They\u2019re meant to be in favour for the final vote.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000878\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0f789859ca31d64187fdb3e4ff63fc6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I think we\u2019ll face that when we get to the final vote. You can debate that offline.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000879\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022547f11988d340014229e84f666d23158\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000880\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00225e5119f02781b1157402dd66ae27ae7e\u0022\u003EIndia Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000881\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022be9a5bb9cfb053f69d13dc8a397e12ac\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000882\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00224676c85ac16bea3886b7c7b36da965a0\u0022\u003EPart 4 India export quotas (apples, kiwifruit, and m\u0101nuka honey), and Schedule\u00A03\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000883\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222df0c8e91283b71cd02e2f758d21c17a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: We now come to Part 4. This is the debate on clauses 37 to 73, \u2018India export quotas (apples, kiwifruit, and m\u0101nuka honey)\u201D and Schedule 3. The question is that Part 4 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022acba6786678bf22ffda245f07b124055\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000884\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022acba6786678bf22ffda245f07b124055\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (21:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. This is probably the most substantial part of this agreement, with a number of new clauses. I want to start with clause 38, with some of the interpretations. The first one, we didn\u2019t actually get sufficient clarity within the committee stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000885\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256c1cb32f4365407f9e1ac39d87e48b4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, can you repeat which\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000886\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022683198a4e2fbd89a0bd90eb695e670dc\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, sorry. Clause 38, \u201CInterpretation\u201D, specifically focused on the interpretation for m\u0101nuka honey. I want to check: my understanding\u2014I think the Minister for Trade and Investment has mentioned this previously as well\u2014is that there is a free-trade agreement that\u2019s been signed between Australia and India. I know that the term m\u0101nuka honey is highly contested when it comes to who owns the intellectual property of m\u0101nuka between New Zealand and Australia. In here and also in the free-trade agreement, it does specifically state \u201Cm\u0101nuka honey\u201D. I want to check: does that mean in the context of the Indian market that New Zealand has the branding of m\u0101nuka honey but Australia doesn\u2019t? Can I get that clarification from the Minister, first?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00228577ee2544ca542e2e7089ea6554b709\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000887\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228577ee2544ca542e2e7089ea6554b709\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:07)\u003C/span\u003E: There is a difference. When New Zealand honey arrives in India, it will be called m\u0101nuka honey; when Australia\u2014it\u2019s manuka honey, because they\u2019ll pronounce it very differently. Our one sounds better, so people will want it. No, it doesn\u2019t mean that there is protection for the name m\u0101nuka honey in that market. However, quite significantly compared to Australia, we have a very large quota with a significant tariff reduction. We are the only country in the world to get preferential access to the Indian market for honey and all of our honey is better than Australia\u2019s honey, but it\u2019s also more competitive because it has a halving of the tariff rate whereas the Australian free-trade agreement does not include honey. As far as protections of the name are concerned, it is not an intellectual property component of this part of the agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u00223f483662dee331289daedacd63fb7978\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223f483662dee331289daedacd63fb7978\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (21:08)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. This is the part of the bill that we\u2019re told will be separated out under a separate piece of legislation. I guess this is an area where there\u2019s been a lot of excitement about the free-trade agreement\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e02d27fb31e7092cc6518b1e62d119d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Just for clarification, this bill will be split into two parts, but we\u2019ll be debating those two parts together when we do the readings afterwards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000890\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a0de5c051a632519e94605a9f44434c\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. The purpose, of course, of Part 4 is to set up a quota management regime for apples, kiwifruit, and m\u0101nuka honey. The question to the Minister for Trade and Investment is: why not hops, pears, other honey, and avocados? It is a list of just three, which has been a huge disappointment to some other areas, so the question is a legitimate one. I\u2019m not trying to relitigate the negotiations, but I think people need to know, given this is the opportunity in the House as to why we don\u2019t have other areas, particularly around horticulture in this clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022e0f774326f64412248d00e0e191f4c99\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000891\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e0f774326f64412248d00e0e191f4c99\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:09)\u003C/span\u003E: Because there\u2019s no quotas there, just as there is not a quota system being set up for lamb; because there is no quota required for lamb. There is no quantitative restriction under the free-trade agreement for those other products, but in as far as the three that we\u2019re talking about in clause 4, there is a quota and that quota goes in. Kiwifruit, as an example, has a duty-free quota, a tariff-free quota for kiwifruit, an amount; the only country in the world to have received that. Outside of that quota, there is no quantitative restriction. Sell as many as we want and the tariff rate is halved; it\u2019s not a zero-tariff rate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022bfab07ed9eca9c41ef6e11b702b860e6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000892\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bfab07ed9eca9c41ef6e11b702b860e6\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (21:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry\u2014just a clarification. As I say, it\u2019s a slightly wider explanation as to the pushback, and, indeed, I understand the Minister for Trade and Investment\u2019s point about the quotas, but these are other valuable export crops that\u2014is the Minister saying that there will be no tariffs on hops, pears, other honey, or avocados, or indeed, what was the point of contention in those areas?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u002228eb7d1d909f82c117533a5c997c089a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002228eb7d1d909f82c117533a5c997c089a\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:10)\u003C/span\u003E: No, I\u2019m saying that Part 4 deals with three things and sets up a quota regime for them, just as Part 1 dealt with some dairy products only, and so the scope of Part 4 is m\u0101nuka honey, it\u2019s apples, and it is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000894\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226c02f119378b7f5fa3e13b2eaa9305f0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Kiwifruit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000895\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222012e4576d4d9332cc29ac662244d472\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, how could I forget kiwifruit from Te Puke? I\u2019ll say it three times\u2014kiwifruit, kiwifruit, kiwifruit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022 data-id=\u00220f2303d04f60b04edcbd8d1d7ec29a75\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000896\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220f2303d04f60b04edcbd8d1d7ec29a75\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour) (21:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. A couple of quick questions from me. On clause 38, the interpretation section for this Part, I\u2019m just curious about whether a quota holder could be someone to whom a quota is transferred\u2014 so not the original grantee but someone who it\u2019s transferred to\u2014and if that\u2019s the case, whether they would be covered by that definition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000897\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen my second question is in relation to clause 43. This is the quota management system itself, and new subclause 2 has three powers: one is a directive power, so this is the power to specify the allocation methodology, and the other two\u2014paragraphs (b) and (c)\u2014are permissive. Paragraph (b) is \u201Cmay require the quota manager to publicly notify [some] information:\u201D, and it sets that information out; and then paragraph (c) is, \u201Cmay specify any other technical and administrative requirements for operating the quota management system.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000898\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m just curious why those two additional powers, paragraphs (b) and (c), aren\u2019t also directive and whether there\u2019s\u2014I imagine, in relation to paragraph (b), there might perhaps be some privacy requirements that are in play, but I can\u2019t work out why the directive power isn\u2019t there in relation to paragraph (c). So if the Minister for Trade and Investment could \u2026\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022da3c3fd30edf4bc76c5b689eea25a0de\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000899\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022da3c3fd30edf4bc76c5b689eea25a0de\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:12)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, thank you. The reason that we\u2019re doing this, where the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) will set up and manage this quota management system, is because the debate earlier in the day around Part 1, under the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act (DIRA), is well established and has been functionally working for a period of time. In as far as these three products are concerned, we don\u2019t have another piece of legislation as significant or as long running, and so MPI has already consulted with the sector about how we might do this and manage it, and this is now setting that up for them to manage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000900\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMy advice is that, on the questions the members have, it is lining up closely to the DIRA Act rather than recreating it, reinventing it, doing it anew, and moving it over so that we can ensure that those who want to export will get a quota cheap and fairly, are treated equally, and that the system can work well but very quickly. In as far as a transfer concerned, yes, it is possible to transfer it. If somebody receives a quota and they can\u2019t use it for a reason, they can pass it to somebody else of course. They must notify the regulator\u2014in this case MPI\u2014but they don\u2019t need permission to do that. That will be possible with apples, and it will be possible with m\u0101nuka honey, but, of course, it won\u2019t be for kiwifruit because we have a single desk, and there is only one organisation that is able to export kiwifruit on behalf of kiwifruit growers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u00222901fd36eb42a23da5800c945f73205b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000901\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222901fd36eb42a23da5800c945f73205b\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (21:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Look, I\u2019d just like to go to clause 38. It\u2019s in the interpretation here, and it\u2019s of \u201Cenforcement officer\u201D. It was an area that the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee spent quite a bit of time on, effectively changing from \u201Cinspection officer\u201D to \u201Cenforcement officer\u201D, and it relates to the Search and Surveillance Act 2012.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000902\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI guess I\u2019m asking the Minister for Trade and Investment how we\u2019ve got to this point of recommendations from the select committee to make the changes, but is the Minister happy with the changes as directed, and the fact that we have now an enforcement officer rather than an inspection officer and that they have the power to go in to find whatever information they need when it comes to enforcing the conditions of any quota? It is quite critical, and there were views that some of the proposals were overzealous and we\u2019ve eased off on those. But the question to the Minister is: is he comfortable and can he explain how this will be rolled out?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022a369006746f18a95b9e372e8097b8f95\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000903\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a369006746f18a95b9e372e8097b8f95\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:15)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, yes, I am. \u201CEnforcement officer\u201D is an established term under the Search and Surveillance Act 2012, and, therefore, it is used and copied across from that. It\u2019s already defined elsewhere rather than creating a new one, which would need a definition, and, therefore, it\u2019s lining up legislative definitions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022 data-id=\u0022035b4ecff4ccc17e8318b8db719361b8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000904\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022035b4ecff4ccc17e8318b8db719361b8\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON (NZ First) (21:15)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just referring to the \u201CInterpretation\u201D in clause 38, and we\u2019ve got a list of these interpretations around \u201Ckiwifruit\u201D, \u201Ckiwifruit vine\u201D, \u201Cm\u0101nuka honey\u201D, and so on. We\u2019re just wondering here, from the Minister for Trade and Investment, whether or not, in terms of us being worried about incursions into the usage of our intellectual property, and I mean that in the wider sense in the sense, that we have a whole lot of tacit knowledge and knowledge built up within the industries about how we produce some of the best kiwifruit in the world, as one example. Another example is all the fantastic work that Plant and Food Research did in relation to Psa-V virus, which almost devastated our whole crop.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000905\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, this is all knowledge that we have that we now seem to be giving away. We now seem to be behind that whole idea, and we\u2019ve got this narrow definition here around the genus, but we\u2019re not taking account of everything else that has gone into decades of investment in this particular crop. I\u2019d just like the Minister to assure us that New Zealand Inc. can preserve that knowledge, that tacit knowledge, and its understanding of what we\u2019re doing here, because we are giving away cultivars, seeds, and the opportunity for a similar incursion such as SunGold (Gold3) in China.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022dadb6ac877d5ce803d3877958bb89558\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000906\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dadb6ac877d5ce803d3877958bb89558\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, Madam Chair, I think the member\u2019s question is a genuine one, but it is very, very broad from the scope of this. I\u2019ll try my best to stay within the scope to answer. This is a free-trade agreement; it\u2019s not a give something away agreement, and so the definitions allow us, in this section, to set up the distribution of the quota for people to send kiwifruit to India at a zero-tariff rate, and thereafter, the tariff rate is higher. But I suppose, should the exporter want to buy the kiwifruit from a grower, put it through a pack-house, put it on a ship, pay to get it to India, and then give it away, then that would be their business. They\u2019re not compelled to, but, generally, I find that our kiwifruit exporter does a very good job of record returns in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000907\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe member is absolutely wrong in one thing he said. He said that New Zealand kiwifruit is generally or often the best in the world. He\u2019s wrong because it is the best in the world\u2014it is called kiwifruit. It is not Chinese-fruit, and it\u2019s not Chilean-fruit, and it\u2019s not something else. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000908\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e57d90dd52fe835c69f8a1753c2673b6\u0022\u003ESteve Abel\u003C/span\u003E: I mean, I think it is Chinese-fruit. It used to be Chinese gooseberry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000909\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212e25b44414ed1d6ffd4266f641df884\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: It used to be, when I grew up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022451577d9550b28f44f7acecfc75979f8\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right. But interestingly, I went down to the supermarket in Rotorua the other day, and I spent a long time in a long queue waiting to buy Chinese gooseberries, and there weren\u2019t any. I bought kiwifruit instead and paid well for it. The point that I\u2019m making here is that New Zealand has exported kiwifruit all around the world, and they do it very, very well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000911\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere have also been decisions on the part of the owners of the plant variety\u2014it\u2019s not the Government; it\u2019s the owners of the plant variety\u2014to export that to parts of the world where they grow themselves. That is a decision they have made; it\u2019s not one the Government is in. Therefore, for that to happen, the owners, which are the kiwifruit growers themselves, need to vote and to vote in favour of doing that, and that is separate from the Government. But for that to happen, it is governed by legislation, which is the legislation that sets up the equivalent of the exporting body. Nothing is being given away. We\u2019re not compelled to do those sorts of things, and so on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000912\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut the intellectual property of New Zealand kiwifruit is guaranteed in New Zealand and in New Zealand legislation, as it is in other agreements around the world. In the case that somebody somehow gets hold of a New Zealand kiwifruit variety and cultivates it and they\u2019re doing so outside of permission or a licence, then the owner of that variety has the ability and the right to go and enforce their rights in another country and to seek prosecution, and the New Zealand exporting body, Zespri, has done that to great effect. This does not give anybody the right to take something or send it away. It doesn\u2019t alter that, and should kiwifruit growers in New Zealand want to cooperate in any country in the world, there is a dedicated function under legislation for them to be allowed to do so, but it is not automatic.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022d52d7cbb0b80a51096c8abc90be4cc55\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000913\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d52d7cbb0b80a51096c8abc90be4cc55\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (21:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to carry on with this particular line of questioning. I agree with the Minister for Trade and Investment that when we\u2019re looking at the quota management system it\u2019s different from the Kiwifruit Action Plan, the Apple Action Plan, and the honey action plan\u2014is it the m\u0101nuka honey action plan? No, it\u2019s not m\u0101nuka honey; it was the third action plan anyway. It doesn\u2019t matter; it wasn\u2019t what I was going to ask about anyway.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000914\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI do want to check\u2014the question around the G3 variety is a really important one. I guess under this particular bill, if we introduce a quota management system, we\u2019re going to be seeing more exports of kiwifruit, and, in the bill, kiwifruit is simply defined as the fruit of the kiwifruit vine. It doesn\u2019t define \u201Cspecies\u201D or even define \u201Csubgenus\u201D in this case. So if anyone has a licence to it, they could potentially get to export it. Gold kiwifruit or red kiwifruit? No, they can\u2019t export any of that; only green kiwifruit. So maybe this question first: is it just the green kiwifruit?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022927adc303a5ec73741b29bed8e307cc8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022927adc303a5ec73741b29bed8e307cc8\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:21)\u003C/span\u003E: To be allowed to grow kiwifruit in New Zealand, you must purchase a licence to do so. You don\u2019t have the permission to export it. It goes back to, in this case, Zespri\u2014they are the exporter. So if the member decides to grow G3 kiwifruit in his own home and he hasn\u2019t got a licence, he is breaking the law\u2014I know he wouldn\u2019t do that. If he buys a licence and he wants to take himself overseas to sell it, he is not able to do so. The export body is Zespri in that case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000916\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAs far as a cultivar is concerned and the quota to export kiwifruit itself, it could well be G3, it could be green, or it could be something else. This doesn\u2019t define it. It doesn\u2019t say what kiwifruit should be exported for consumption. It is for the exporter to make that decision, as they do. As an example, they often export a lot more green kiwifruit to Japan because it is more desirable to Japanese consumers and they pay more for it than they may somewhere else.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000917\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d768cfa8580eba9a27b6947ca99afc12\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2014is this a clarification?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002243a26b9f14fb2ef109daf13b42ba6be0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000918\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002243a26b9f14fb2ef109daf13b42ba6be0\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (21:22)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. I think that is really helpful, but let\u2019s say Zespri, the exporter, is able to export different varieties of kiwifruit\u2014their choice; they go for a decision with their members. We know that the cheaper variety gets exported and gets cultivated. What mechanisms would there be for us to be able to challenge not just India but any country?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000919\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002239422b6bef4ece4b337bd58e9c619507\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister is actually just agreeing with what you\u2019re saying, so maybe we could clarify that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00220878d0ac3bdd0ef831a5ba53b0ca4e96\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000920\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220878d0ac3bdd0ef831a5ba53b0ca4e96\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:23)\u003C/span\u003E: I can clarify. If we move away from kiwifruit, for example\u2014hypothetically; just an example\u2014and think about grapes and wine, the wine is exported; the grape is not. In this case, it is the kiwifruit to eat that is exported; it is not the variety, it is not the right to grow it, it\u2019s not the right to do anything else. It\u2019s a little bit like if the member goes to a shop tomorrow morning and buys a can of Coca-Cola, he\u2019s able to consume it but he does not own the Coca-Cola recipe or the ability to produce Coca-Cola. I would recommend he doesn\u2019t drink Coca-Cola; I would recommend he eats kiwifruit because I come from Te Puke.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022 data-id=\u00220d935b5d63315b99cf0411cd7d9a8000\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000921\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220d935b5d63315b99cf0411cd7d9a8000\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour) (21:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I am on clause 44, \u201CReview of quota allocation decisions\u201D. This is a question about the scope of this clause and whether a broader scope was considered. Clause 44(1) allows for a review of a decision not to grant a quota allocation or to grant a specific amount. I\u2019m wondering whether the Minister for Trade and Investment considered third-party challenges to grant a full amount or to grant a partial amount in terms of a quota allocated\u2014so almost a challenge to that by a third party. Is that done, or is that done in relation to other free-trade agreements?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000922\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe second part of my question is in relation to clause 44(2), which restricts what an applicant may seek a review of in terms of a quota manager\u2019s decision. So they can seek a review of the decision itself but they can\u2019t seek a review of the allocation methodology, if you like. I just wondered if the Minister has considered a situation where the allocation methodology is substandard and why that individual would not be able to seek a review of the methodology itself, understanding that that individual could still bring a judicial review, potentially, but that\u2019s at considerable cost and considerable time. So if there was something woven into this review mechanism, it would be much more accessible to an individual. And the way in which the Minister could have done that is through a high-bar threshold where it was about a significant flaw in the methodology itself as opposed to a small technical one allowing a complaint in that regard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00223c4af2dff2aa00cda0fdf94a56f2af1d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000923\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223c4af2dff2aa00cda0fdf94a56f2af1d\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:26)\u003C/span\u003E: An individual can seek a clarification and challenge an allocation they got\u2014I think that\u2019s right\u2014but not the system overall. The member is right in that if somebody is worried about the system overall, there is an opportunity for a judicial review, and although that feels heavy-handed, it happens from time to time, but, as far as a review of the process for allocation is concerned, there is the ability for ministerial review.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000924\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EHowever, before the regulation is put in place, there is consultation with the sector about what it should look like and how it would work and so on, and that feedback is taken on board when the quota allocation system is set up, and that system has to be followed fairly and properly. But this is not the first time this has happened. There are quotas across the board in a number of areas\u2014and we\u2019ve had the conversation about the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act, which is there to govern dairy production but also quota allocation. So, in essence, for kiwifruit and for apples and also for m\u0101nuka honey, the quota allocation system replicates or mirrors closely quota allocation systems used elsewhere in New Zealand, albeit that when we get industry feedback through consultation, there can be changes made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022 data-id=\u00220fca064b93c2246d29cb8f2d354fdbb5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220fca064b93c2246d29cb8f2d354fdbb5\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON (NZ First) (21:27)\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister for Trade and Investment will appreciate that I\u2019m trying to establish that plant varieties that are bred and born in New Zealand will not be shared that easily through this legislation. However, it can be in their own intellectual property framework, which goes back to the Act in 2001, where a farmer shall be deemed to be entitled to save, sow, use, resow, exchange, share, or sell his farm produce, including seed varieties that are protected under that Act. Before that Act came into force, India had no plant variety protection. Also, we have the problem with the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants, which the Minister will be well accustomed to. You see where I\u2019m going with this\u2014article 14A3(5)(B) commits New Zealand to help India enhance India\u2019s regulatory framework, particularly in areas of plant variety rights and intellectual property protection, to enable the introduction of high-value, globally developed intellectual property and protected plant varieties into India.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000926\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ECan the Minister assure the committee that the operative purpose of that statement is not to share those protected plant varieties that we have developed here in New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00224e5f77a13d7d1ebf22ebf62f2b98c8ad\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000927\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224e5f77a13d7d1ebf22ebf62f2b98c8ad\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:29)\u003C/span\u003E: There is nothing in this agreement or in this legislation that compels you to share in that way, and I can be very clear that the cooperation programmes the member has been talking about do not involve the transfer of any protected varieties or protected commercial know-how. It doesn\u2019t involve any transfer. In the case of kiwifruit, the only plant material supplied from New Zealand will be open-source roots, plants that are not protected by plant breeders\u2019 rights and can be bought by anybody around the world. In terms of the definition the member read out around the ability for farmers to sow and so on, in the case of kiwifruit it is different. It has its own Act of Parliament and there are plant variety rules and protections around that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000928\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EShould a plant variety owner, in this case Zespri, decide it wants to do something in Japan, Singapore, the United Kingdom, or India, they make that decision for themselves, and they would consider what protection there could be in the market they\u2019re putting their product into. But there\u2019s nothing in this agreement that compels them to do that, nothing that encourages them to, nothing that forces them to. It is a commercial decision that the owner of the plant variety, in this case Zespri, would make. And as I mentioned earlier in the discussion, for them to do so, the legislation is very, very clear about needing to get the agreement of the growers, who are also the owners of the cooperative.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022ac4e3073e26d3cb4d336dc01558f2b2d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000929\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ac4e3073e26d3cb4d336dc01558f2b2d\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (21:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Part 4 here is quite extensive, and deals with, as we\u2019ve said before, quota management provisions. There are a number of clauses here, I\u2019m not going to go through them all, but they cover everything from conflicts of interest, setting it up, review provisions when the quota is allocated and people don\u2019t agree\u2014all of that\u2014and that\u2019s all great. I asked questions around why some species were left out, but anyway, that was part of the negotiations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000930\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI just want to raise an issue and a question for the Minister. Under the biosecurity provisions in this piece of legislation, there are no dispute settlement provisions, from recollection. So in allocating quota and the right of access, if India, or indeed New Zealand\u2014and the reverse\u2014was to say, \u201CSorry, we\u2019re going to block the entry of these goods,\u201D even though they might have been under quota, for biosecurity reasons. I would just asked the Minister: what does he see as a pathway through a dispute like that, that would affect all the goods covered under quota management? That has been, not under anything here, but it has been under logs, of course\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000931\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228b5138b17c205d55590f79b7c0357d51\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: It would be good if you actually would bring it back to here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000932\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d624d34775435aef79368c38fea8868d\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: I mean, I can go clause by clause if you wish, but I\u2019m just, I\u2019m talking\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000933\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d8315722182920f5d9c69ba4773361be\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I think what you\u2019re talking about is actually broader than the\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000934\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea90a7d4e3b75dbbb905b45ebf28ed68\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s in Part 4, and it\u2019s around quota\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022148eaefd4bd7960613806e7015074adb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, but if you can point us to the specific clause with the question, because it\u2019s seems to be\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000936\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c0b40c52316149198d7b6645a828119e\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CQuota manager may gather information\u201D\u2014Subpart (4), clause 53. I guess if the quota manager is looking at issues around biosecurity\u2014I think the Minister probably understands what I\u2019m getting at\u2014it\u2019s an explanation for the wider public around something that could make all of this redundant, because we could have an intervention that puts all this good work to waste.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022f3b55883eb3453ea48caa028a1a9a44d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000937\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f3b55883eb3453ea48caa028a1a9a44d\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:33)\u003C/span\u003E: I can speak broadly, because there is a broad explanation, but it doesn\u2019t affect the quota. Biosecurity is important to all nations, extremely important to New Zealand. As we know, we don\u2019t import eggs into New Zealand from anywhere, because of a biosecurity risk. That doesn\u2019t mean that the tariff rate for eggs doesn\u2019t go to zero, but there is a separate consideration as to whether or not things can be imported.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000938\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf we take an example of mangoes, under this agreement the tariff rate for mangoes will fall to zero. But India or any other nation wouldn\u2019t automatically have a right to send mangoes to New Zealand, unless we were sure there would not be a biosecurity risk to New Zealand as a result. There\u2019s a separate regime that considers that away from trade, and so on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000939\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn the case that New Zealand, hypothetically, had a quota system for the importation of chicken from, say, Australia\u2014and we had that set-up and they were managing it as this legislation is setting up for kiwifruit in the other direction\u2014and bird flu arrived in Australia, as it did a short while ago, we would still have the ability to stop products from coming into New Zealand because of a risk, irrespective of the quota. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000940\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, that would mean the quota would not be filled for the period of time, perhaps of a year, that there was a restriction. And then, ultimately, whether Australia thinks that is a purposeful or not\u2014or the right thing to do\u2014is separate from the trade agreement, because it comes to biosecurity. It\u2019s extremely important that New Zealand has that in place, as other countries do, but, of course, a decision around biosecurity has to be proportionate. As the member will remember, from probably his first day in Parliament, when we could not export apples to Australia, because they said there was a biosecurity risk, we challenged in other ways and eventually we won that case. And, of course, the day afterwards, when we were able to export apples from New Zealand to Australia, not only did the Australian apple industry not collapse; Australians, for once, had good apples.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00223399223440d9c10ec468de3e140de605\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000941\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223399223440d9c10ec468de3e140de605\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (21:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to start by just asking the Minister for Trade and Investment about clauses 44 and 49 regarding regulations. Has the Minister considered at what point those regulations would be determined or be approved as part of that process?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000942\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to focus on clause 50 in terms of what the quota manager is able to do regarding export certificates. It does list the criteria of why they would cancel the export certificate, but I want to check in terms of the process. The process is either to suspend or cancel, and then, in clause 51, the person may seek a review of that decision. But during that review period, I\u2019m guessing that the certificate that is issued is either suspended or cancelled\u2014that being the first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe next question is whether there has been consideration of, rather than suspending or cancelling\u2014has there been a warning system in other areas: you give a warning and say, \u201CYou need to do this, but we\u2019re not going to suspend it or cancel it.\u201D It just seems like we\u2019ve kind of gone immediately to suspension and cancellation, and then giving them the ability to review. So I just want to check if that warning system has been considered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00221207d10e46d429ee9a3b79e09fa49243\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000944\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221207d10e46d429ee9a3b79e09fa49243\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it says \u201Cmay\u201D; it doesn\u2019t say \u201Cmust\u201D. So the quota manager may cancel, suspend, or refuse, should they wish. It provides avenues for enforcement where there\u2019s non-compliance by an exporter. Generally, the quota manager\u2014in this case, the Ministry for Primary Industries\u2014works very closely with exporters. It\u2019s in New Zealand\u2019s best interests to make sure that our exports are able to travel overseas. We don\u2019t have a quota manager there saying, \u201CI want to cancel this one without any warning because I don\u2019t want apples to be exported.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000945\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, we\u2019re setting the system up so we can export within the 45,000-tonne quota that we\u2019ve received. The member will know and be very proud that New Zealand is the first country in the world to get a quota for apples, with the reduced tariff rate. No one else in the world had got that previously. I think now the EU might have, but, of course, not in competition to New Zealand, because they have a different season to us, so they won\u2019t compete with us. They will compete with Indian apple producers because the season is the same, more or less, in India.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000946\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe point of this is that it is within our interests for the exports to happen\u2014we want them to\u2014and that\u2019s why we negotiated a free-trade agreement. But where an exporter is not meeting their export certificate circumstances or requirements, then it provides us with the avenue to enforce.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000947\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229e39422eff8ab855731e83adc2007622\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m just going to take a couple more quick questions, because we have had a select committee here, and I just want to say to Dr Xu-Nan that your questions around the timing of regulations probably fits better with the commencement clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000948\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022388754872d9c01f1a0fd7d808509253a\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: OK. Sure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000949\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c09432f066f457990d33258ecce16fc\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah. But I\u2019ll just take a call from Vanushi Walters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022 data-id=\u0022b2e507bd3cdcb0cc88bea60d5a08de46\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000950\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b2e507bd3cdcb0cc88bea60d5a08de46\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour) (21:38)\u003C/span\u003E: My question is on clause 45, so this is on the return of a quota allocation. Essentially, it allows a quota manager, where an allocation has been returned in part, to reduce the quota allocation for year 2. But it doesn\u2019t explicitly point to a right of the quota holder to provide the circumstances of why they\u2019re having to return that portion of the quota allocation. So subclause (3)(b)(iii) does allow the quota manager to use discretion not to reduce a quota allocation in year 2 if they\u2019re satisfied that there are exceptional circumstances. But, again, I would expect that there would be a pre-emptive right to be able to present those circumstances so that it\u2019s not after the case that someone has to make a complaint. So I was just wanting clarification on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00220a331423386b695c0df4365dc37d13a0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000951\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220a331423386b695c0df4365dc37d13a0\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, thank you. The detail gets set out in regulation, rather than primary legislation, because, mainly, if you change it, it\u2019s easier, therefore, to change. It would be more flexible or specific in regulation; this merely sets up the ability to do so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000952\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is important that when one thinks that where somebody has a right to a quota because of export history and they may not use it and they choose not to, they will still have the ability every second year to have a right to the quota again, based on previous history. It gives the regulator, the administrator, or quota manager the ability to say, \u201CYou haven\u2019t used it. Therefore, is it fair or reasonable that we give it to you again if there wasn\u2019t a good reason not to?\u201D, and also the ability to say, \u201CWell, there are exceptional circumstances where we would allow you to still have a new quota.\u201D There may have been a weather event, for example, that meant that that grower or exporter didn\u2019t have a crop to export that year, but the following year they would, and so it wasn\u2019t purposeful, or something like that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000953\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we\u2019re seeing in other areas is that often exporters may look to get quota and not use it so that there is not the competition in the market against other New Zealand exporters, and whilst I can understand that from a business point of view, it is not something that would be viewed as acceptable in as far as having negotiated access for New Zealand, where we want the export of the product to take place. So it allows there to be an ability for the quota manager to consider these sorts of things. If it gets set out in regulation, of course there has to be a process where if somebody is affected by this, they have the ability to seek appeal or a change. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022d0e3c339d04909a30de0548ef0d5e765\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000954\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d0e3c339d04909a30de0548ef0d5e765\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (21:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I refer to clause 55, \u201CQuota manager must manage conflicts of interest\u201D, which is quite a critical area here. A recommendation came from the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee to eliminate the ministry\u2014well, eliminate from what?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000955\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt says, \u201CThis section applies to the following parties \u2026 a quota manager, other than the Ministry:\u201D. The proposal put to the select committee was to not have the ministry subject to scrutiny over possible conflicts of interest, and I guess the question to the Minister is this. I know that there is the Public Service Act and there are other kinds of obligations on public servants, but this is a small country and I think the select committee decided that we should take out the exclusion for the ministry. So the question to the Minister is this: is he comfortable now that his ministry will be subject to the scrutiny over possible conflicts of interest? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000956\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen it comes to quota management in areas such as we are speaking of here, there are not thousands and thousands of people with the knowledge and experience, and it is possible that there may be conflicts of interest. So the question to the Minister is whether he is happy now that within his department, these things will be managed appropriately to ensure that there\u2019s a fair and balanced allocation of the quota and then ongoing management\u2014because they are two separate things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u002272ec2597dbb0a181cbae1664370b90d7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000957\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002272ec2597dbb0a181cbae1664370b90d7\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:42)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I am. The ministry has scrutiny through other parts of legislation. They have\u2014as across all ministries\u2014through the Public Service Act the ability to manage conflicts of interest internally with those who may be employed in a ministry, but the ministry has scrutiny upon it also through this House and through Parliament. I would expect that at the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee and maybe the Primary Production Committee, at a given point in time in the future, this member and others will have the ability to question in detail the application and processes around the running of the quota system and the sharing or distribution of the quota.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000958\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThere are many areas where there is scrutiny of our ministries and their roles. The individuals themselves get dealt with internally, but the ministries also take this seriously. I am comfortable with where we have landed with this part. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a87bd8b79d9de568c0937c5a53e59b48\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2014but you look a bit like you\u2019ve just got a follow-up question here? OK, yeah.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022ffaf3abac2fc09ad2ced20057efb9f59\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000960\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ffaf3abac2fc09ad2ced20057efb9f59\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (21:43)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Damien O\u2019Connor may have a follow-up question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000961\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022144e28e4c552b79daba06e79bac4814f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019s ceding to you, if you want, the follow-up. Otherwise, I\u2019m going to go to Dr Xu-Nan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u00226f92e3789091dd16febde8d1e06d0b88\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000962\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226f92e3789091dd16febde8d1e06d0b88\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (21:44)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I\u2019ve got a follow-up, and it\u2019s just off to the Minister for Trade and Investment\u2014and thank you for his assurance on that. The other one is that the Minister has the ability to conduct an audit, and, basically, at the other end of the scale, we opened up the Minister\u2019s discretion to intervene where he thinks he or she would think that there\u2019s something wrong. So I guess a comment from the Minister on how that will be managed is probably something of interest, as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022880bf1852b3c470180b7ad85fbaad32a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000963\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022880bf1852b3c470180b7ad85fbaad32a\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:44)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the ability to audit is an important one. If it\u2019s not set in the legislation, it can\u2019t happen, and if a Minister, for a range of reasons, may decide he wants to make sure that the quota system has been running well and properly as a result of the legislation setting it up, then I think that\u2019s important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000964\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI mean, it\u2019s not quite the same, but if you think about some of the levy bodies, there is a process that they go through to set their levy and it\u2019s very, very clear in legislation for that body, but, often, a Minister will have the ability to look at that and make determinations as to whether they agree or not that it has actually met the requirement in the legislation. In this case, a Minister\u2019s ability to have an audit is, I think, a very, very good idea. The circumstances in which that may happen may well vary, but it will be a tool that future Ministers can consider. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000965\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222157e2e96a55a2b39075efc6b9ff1c38\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Lawrence Xu-Nan is just going to round us off nicely now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022c60c9a261e85ed5fc6834700916a2215\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000966\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c60c9a261e85ed5fc6834700916a2215\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (21:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have a few questions regarding clause 62, \u201CPowers of search and seizure to investigate offence\u201D. Again, this was something where, although it was discussed, the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee didn\u2019t have full agreement on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000967\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, Minister, you mentioned before in terms of, for example, non-compliance when it comes to export certificates and all of those things. One of the issues here is that there is no way for an issuing officer or enforcement officer to investigate for areas of non-compliance without getting a warrant, which then also means that there are some inconsistencies between this legislation and other comparable legislation around this. We did have a conversation around whether the wording before of a warrantless search was too severe and we said that something needs to be kind of softened, but I guess the first question to the Minister is: how then would an enforcement officer or an issuing officer investigate for non-compliance if the only way for them to do that is to have a warrant which requires there to be some suspicion that the person is non-compliant? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u002252a00ab965cf2d09e7c8eb3073c26860\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000968\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002252a00ab965cf2d09e7c8eb3073c26860\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (21:46)\u003C/span\u003E: This is only one tool. There are many ways that they engage and have the ability to do that, but where a search warrant may be required to search under the law\u2014and this is under Part 4 of the Search and Surveillance Act 2012\u2014it aligns with that power. It has the ability to do so, and it merely dictates what can happen. It allows for a search warrant in the circumstances of a search of a place in order to copy documents and seize computer systems or data storage devices, but there is often ongoing engagement with exporters before this, and this is just one of the powers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000969\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s another part to this. It says that the search must be exercised with regard to the culture of any place the enforcement officer enters. If we take again, hypothetically, where a search warrant is issued to go to a church that has products in it, and so on, one may assume that at a time of worship, it may not be enforced, but at another time it may well could be. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022 data-id=\u0022e06aab8d947ef88b19290c87ecd656ec\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000970\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e06aab8d947ef88b19290c87ecd656ec\u0022\u003ETIM COSTLEY (National\u2014\u014Ctaki) (21:47)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000971\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000972\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000973\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000974\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000975\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000976\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000977\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Part 4 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000978\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000979\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000980\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 28\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000981\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000982\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 4 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000983\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022614c4e7cc60e236a398ad268f26bf2f5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: We come now to Schedule 1AA.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 1AA be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000985\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000986\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000987\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 28\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000988\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000989\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 1AA agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000990\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000991\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000992\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000993\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 28\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000995\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000996\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000997\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000998\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0000999\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 28\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 3 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 28\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00220e3c904cb9dbbffbea0c5ffa2903837d\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00224418c131cc42f9afb24dcdbb9703fa74\u0022\u003EClauses 1 and 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f67b4d1d53dbced4c2100326443d573\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to clauses 1 and 2, the debate on \u201CTitle\u201D and \u201CCommencement\u201D. Lawrence Xu-Nan had a question about commencement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00228f7eafb3fa4a39f5bafe1a14b44f41ba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228f7eafb3fa4a39f5bafe1a14b44f41ba\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (21:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I will start with the commencement. I do want to check, not so much when this\u2014I\u2019m assuming that the Order in Council date is going to be when the other remaining aspects of the agreement has been sorted. I do want to check: when this whole bill comes into effect, by Order in Council, does that also mean that the regulations I mentioned in other parts of this bill, overall, will also be\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EMinister in the chair shakes head\u003C/span\u003E] No? OK, that\u2019s fine. Thank you, Minister. That\u2019s an easy question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThen I guess I\u2019ll move on to the title. I think it\u2019s important to note that while this bill specifically, as the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill, it has been something we\u2019ve seen not only in the context of this free-trade agreement legislation but also other free-trade agreement legislation, where there is no effective way for this committee to be able to debate on the agreement itself in any effective manner. Yes, while we are here talking about how this is the bill and here is the national interest analysis, but it is a concern, and it\u2019s not just in terms of this agreement; it\u2019s in terms of, in general, how we look at international treaty examination\u2014that a lot of the things that should be in scope, because, fundamentally, these sort of things, that the executive branch of our Government signed ourselves up to, does actually affect all of us. But we are not given a chance to be able to do that because the only opportunity for us to be able to examine an international treaty, whether it is a trade agreement or whether it\u2019s any other forms of treaty, is through a select committee stage after the treaty has been signed by the relevant Minister. There is, effectively, no way that a select committee\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022649c32fdf0a7d9c6595444686b8444fa\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: So the member said you were going to ask something about the title.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022861ebf5cc49429281df7fa8d23f0b149\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: I think that this title is inappropriate for this legislation because, although we are referring to the \u201CIndia Free Trade Agreement\u201D, there is no part of this debate where we are able to effectively debate on the India Free Trade Agreement. So I think a better title, if the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind entertaining the committee, is that this bill is actually just the \u201CIndia Free Trade Legislation\u201D because there is no agreement to speak of, because we have not been given the chance to debate on the agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is part of the issue when it comes to our international treaty examination process, because when we had the international treaty examination through the select committee, and the Minister has mentioned during this entire committee of the whole House stage, on multiple occasions\u2014and I do appreciate the Minister\u2019s engagement, and the Minister has been very engaging in responding to questions around this bill. Everything that is to do with the agreement\u2014to a certain degree, the Minister has been saying that this is outside the scope, despite the fact that it is part of the national interest analysis. At the same time, as I mentioned in my second reading, there was supposed to be a 15-sitting-day time frame for the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee to consider the agreement and were only given nine sitting days because the Minister wanted to push this through before the end of this Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo the recommendation that I\u2019m making to the Minister is simply remove the \u201CAgreement\u201D because we have not been able to have a robust discussion or debate on the agreement itself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022 data-id=\u0022d062da951057a3531773192e257d2829\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d062da951057a3531773192e257d2829\u0022\u003ETIM VAN DE MOLEN (National\u2014Waikato) (21:57)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001018\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 59\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 62\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b73d34131139bae9d124400f2d688fac\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The time has come for me to leave the Chair. We will resume this committee again at 9 a.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 9.58 p.m. to 9 a.m. (Wednesday)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225ee427014ec10710af6557c781d6ee1d\u0022\u003EUrgency\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e5e3f48603004e27e4a9a56740a125c0\u0022\u003EWednesday, 16 September 2026\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f6b9c93f5babcba6e853ce3db2fcd978\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f3c934c75b6121368c125af91e81f0da\u0022\u003EIndia Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002293fad31e3d9d87f4e51f2ad201a5d70a\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b9bb96f584d217df0224ee4478f8b4b7\u0022\u003EClauses 1 and 2 (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e29c275e4dc8441fff5fca19c6d5582\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the House is resumed. When the House suspended last evening, we were considering the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill and were debating clauses 1 and 2. Clauses 1 and 2\u2014this is the debate on clauses 1 and 2, \u201CTitle\u201D and \u201CCommencement\u201D. Is anyone taking a call?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022153abee184bb479484798f61911fad47\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022153abee184bb479484798f61911fad47\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (09:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chairman, look, thank you very much. I\u2019ve had a couple last night\u2014interesting numbers in the House here over this piece of legislation. We are supporting it, but the title\u2014the point was made last night, and it might seem somewhat frivolous, but it actually does go to the truth of this piece of legislation, which is amending the customs Act and amending the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act. The question of whether the Minister had thought about a different title for the bill\u2014and then, of course, we have later on the splitting of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EEffectively, this first bill is amendments to existing legislation, and the second is setting up the quota management system for all the areas of apples, of kiwifruit, of honey that we have negotiated through this agreement. So it\u2019s two separate bills; the one of the title that is in part covering both bills, and I\u2019m not quite sure what the Minister will call the second bill. Maybe he could explain whether the bill could have been renamed and more appropriately be named \u201CAmendment to Customs and Excise and Amendment to Dairy Industry Restructuring Bill\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bdcde213c4e081781f50edf6ea4d5d4a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Steve Abel\u2014wakey wakey, folks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u00227c240f3f7921f500328e50b74bb0d442\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227c240f3f7921f500328e50b74bb0d442\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (09:01)\u003C/span\u003E: I thought my colleagues from New Zealand First might take a call on this one. I think the most notable factor of this bill, which has been somewhat touched on but for which we\u2019ve had no satisfactory response from the Minister, frankly, is that in weighing up the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill, one has to determine whether what New Zealand gets from the bill is greater than what we potentially lose through the deal. The most glaring component of that is the $35 billion price tag over 15 years for whatever we\u2019re supposed to get from this free-trade agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to note that in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade estimates of what New Zealand will gain by 2037\u2014after 10 years of this free-trade agreement being in force\u2014is an expectation that the tariff cuts that will have come into force by then will be just 0.7 percent of our GDP, or $401 million relative to the non - free trade agreement baseline. In 15 years\u2019 time, we will have had to invest in India $35 billion. Anyone who does maths on those numbers\u2014$401 million versus $35 billion\u2014has got to be asking, \u201CWhat are we signing up to here?\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy proposal for the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill is a new title that I\u2019m happy to make up on the spot. I\u2019m going to call it the \u201CIndia Free Ride Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill\u201D, because when our negotiators sat down at the table to say, \u201CWe want access to your markets, we want you to lift your tariffs.\u201D\u2014India to lift its tariffs\u2014India said back to New Zealand, no doubt, \u201CWell, what do we get in terms of what you\u2019re going to make way for?\u201D. New Zealand has already got rid of nearly all of its tariffs. We forfeited them under an ideological view of neoliberalism. We long ago gave up tariff barriers to trade. Nigh on no products into our country have tariffs, and they\u2019re mostly under 5 percent. So what did New Zealand have to offer?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIndia rightly, and sensibly, put the pressure on us and said, \u201CWell, New Zealand can only offer a huge investment in India.\u201D, not only in the form of the $35 billion, but also in the form of intellectual property (IP) and investment through our germplasm of kiwifruit and apples and our knowhow on how to produce those products. The very products that we are seeking to get tariff relief on are the products that we are making India more capable of competing with us on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think, on balance, the public should be alerted to the fact that this is not a good deal for New Zealand. This is a great deal for India but it is not a good deal for New Zealand, and that\u2019s why I propose that new title for the bill. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022 data-id=\u00220f366c01d144fe5e54c4f40c9e4ed62e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220f366c01d144fe5e54c4f40c9e4ed62e\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (09:05)\u003C/span\u003E: I think I wasn\u2019t in the Chamber at the time when you got some advice after the question that I asked yesterday, which was, essentially, what is going to be the effect on the free trade agreement (FTA)? I\u2019m told there\u2019s no effect on the FTA itself\u2014the FTA is the FTA, it\u2019s been approved by the executive rather than being approved by this House. What will be the effect on the operation, the making operational of the FTA, if this bill were not to pass? That\u2019s the question I wanted to ask.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy understanding of what\u2019s happened is that we\u2019ve got an FTA which has been approved by the executive\u2014effectively, it\u2019s had a first reading in this House where we could allude to the bill and whether we agreed with it or didn\u2019t agree with it. Obviously, there\u2019s been an agreement to disagree right from the FTA being able to be read by anybody. New Zealand First has certainly said we don\u2019t agree with the FTA as it came out, so we\u2019ve made that very, very clear.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s gone through the executive process\u2014at least, that\u2019s my understanding; it\u2019s a question I asked yesterday. New Zealand First has said no, we don\u2019t agree with that, and we\u2019re told now that we can\u2019t change things, but I am interested in what the impact of this bill\u2014if this bill were to fail, the impact this bill would be on the FTA itself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also just wanted to just follow up on Steve Abel\u2019s comments, because in all of these FTAs, essentially we have virtually no tariffs, so we\u2019ve got very little to bargain with in terms of saying \u201CWe would like your tariffs to come down\u201D\u2014in this case it\u2019s India, it could be any other country. We have, essentially, no tariffs to give up, so what is it that they will come and say, \u201CWell, we\u2019re giving you a reduction in tariffs; what are you giving us in return?\u201D. What we\u2019ve got is a mix of a migration and study arrangement. We\u2019ve got investing up to $35 billion over the next\u2014or best endeavours, $35 billion over the next 15 years in India, and then, also, we\u2019ve got the transfer of intellectual property (IP).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf I was to look at potential names for this bill, we could have the \u201CIndia FTA Agreed By Most of the Executive Rather than the Parliament Bill\u201D; we could have the \u201CIndia FTA Requirement for New Zealand Businesses to, Best Endeavours, Invest $35 Billion in India Over the Next 15 Years When New Zealand Needs that Investment at Least as Much Bill\u201D; or we could have, possibly, the \u201CIndia FTA Transfer of Valued New Zealand IP and Future Undermining of Our Own Agricultural Industries Bill\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to make clear, obviously, New Zealand First said right from the outset that we agree there is a need for FTAs. We think FTAs are important, but we don\u2019t think that this is a good deal. The reasons for that not being a good deal I\u2019ve already mentioned, which is the transfer of IP, the best endeavours need to transfer $35 billion of investment into another economy rather than investing it in our own economy, and then there are all the issues around migration, the jobs that go with migration and study, and the impact of that on, particularly, our young people. We\u2019re obviously not commending this bill to the House, but I will be very appreciative of some answers to those questions. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022379a413e3f9c688703ab27817329884a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022379a413e3f9c688703ab27817329884a\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (09:09)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, thank you very much. Damien O\u2019Connor asked what would happen to the bill\u2019s names when they\u2019re split; of course, the splitting of the bill is signalled very early and I\u2019ll move that motion at an appropriate time, but the division of the bill was outlined at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade\u2019s (MFAT) initial briefing to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee. Any member who was there at the time of the briefing would have been aware of that. The division of the bill was also included in the general policy statement of the introduced bill and the legislative statements presented to the House at the bill\u2019s first reading, so any member that was in the House at the time or had an opportunity to read those documents would be aware of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt was recommended by the Parliamentary Counsel Office (PCO), and PCO advised that, with a split bill, the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill\u2014currently Parts 1 to 3 of the bill\u2014will do its work and effectively fall away. The Act\u2014that is currently Part 4\u2014will come into force without including all the amendments of the other legislation. This is done for clarity for the public and for others. Indeed, the second bill will become the India Export Quotas (Apples, Kiwifruit, and M\u0101nuka Honey) Act, and so it will treat that separately than other components. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere have been a lot of questions about whether we consider changing the name of the bill, but the first thing I want to address is why we\u2019re here having this debate today. It is not a result of the executive making a decision; it is a result of there being a very large majority at first reading in this Parliament\u2014a majority of 92 votes to 20-odd\u2014for it to go to a committee, and it was returned from the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee with a majority in recommendations for a change. At its second reading, it was the House\u2019s desire for it to go on to the next stage. Therefore, every time we have a debate, there is a vote, and if the majority of members are in favour, then it continues through. What happens if it doesn\u2019t pass? Well, that\u2019s hypothetical.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut, very clearly, if the India \u2013 New Zealand free-trade agreement was not to enter into force, then the promises that Mark Patterson made to sheep growers and wool farmers all around the country when he travelled on the taxpayer resource to India to promote wool under the free-trade agreement and said the wonderful thing that there will be carpets for everybody because of the sheep wool that\u2019s grown in New Zealand\u2014well, they wouldn\u2019t get those benefits. To the kiwifruit growers who will have the world\u2019s only tariff-free quota into India of kiwifruit, and outside of that very substantial quota worth $125 million to New Zealand over the next few years in reduction of duty, plus a halving of the tariff right outside of the quota\u2014well, they wouldn\u2019t get those benefits. I suppose our kiwifruit exports to India would not increase in the way they have to every other country where we have a free-trade agreement, including China where, last year, we sold 1 billion kiwifruit to China, a significant return for growers in New Zealand that, in turn, spend it in the provinces and in our communities so that they create jobs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc14276432908de8e29a5329b2bf6cc3\u0022\u003EHon Damien O\u0027Connor\u003C/span\u003E: New Zealand First objected to that too.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab84141bd2dfe2fe267a2cbf9b6d7c0b\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY\u003C/span\u003E: That is the point that I was coming to. It is fair that, in this House, different parties will have challenges with trade agreements. Some have supported every single one, some have supported the odd one, and some have supported none. But the China free-trade agreement was not supported by a majority of Government parties at the time, and the Opposition\u2014my party\u2014had to provide support to pass it into law so it could take effect just before an election in that year, not so different to this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis year, we will export $23 billion worth of goods to China under a free-trade agreement. China has more than a billion people, is larger than New Zealand, and that free-trade agreement has done nothing but create opportunities and jobs and higher incomes for men and women throughout the country over the last 20 years. The India free-trade agreement will do the same. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe haven\u2019t looked at changing the name of it because it is a free-trade agreement. It will deliver for all New Zealanders. I could think up just as many smart comments about positions others take in the House and put them into the bill, but what I\u2019d prefer to do is focus on the substance of the significant opportunity for New Zealand exporters into that market. All over the country, New Zealand businesses, and the people that are working for them, are getting ready to sell more to 1.4 billion people, and with that in mind, I will be commending the bill to the House. The National Party, along with ACT in Government, will be supporting it because trade is in the best interest of New Zealand. I\u2019m yet to see a perfect trade deal, but this one is one of the best that\u2019s ever been negotiated with India.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022 data-id=\u0022bcf3103792cb1c3ab4f8921b4cf033f5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bcf3103792cb1c3ab4f8921b4cf033f5\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour) (09:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the Minister for Trade and Investment for that very thorough explanation of the value of the agreement. I think, probably, the question on everyone\u2019s minds as we head towards this last stage of debating the bill is when it will come into force, so the commencement date, which comes into force with Order of Council. Now, that\u2019s not unusual. We\u2019ve seen that occur in relation to other free-trade agreements, and rather beautifully in relation to some, they have come into force on the day in which the international agreement also comes into force. The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership is one example of that, and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership is another. No doubt the Minister is currently having conversations behind the scenes with Chinese counterparts\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228697be8904615b5e0af710849fa09731\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: Indian.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fcfca422b9c265da82362f70cee3ed45\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014sorry, Indian counterparts; my mind was stuck on the other agreement\u2014with Indian counterparts, and I\u2019m just wondering when we can expect the legislation to come into force and whether he envisages that there will be synchronicity and that will come into force with the agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other question I had was in relation to the title, and if the Minister bears with me, there\u2019s a slight segue, but I do think it\u2019s important and I propose a name like the \u201CIndian Free-Trade Agreement and the Bill of Unusual Search and Seizure Powers\u201D. The reason I do that is because, when we were debating Part 4 yesterday, a very small amount of time was spent on what I thought was quite a significant issue, and that was the change that the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee made removing the non-warranted search powers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI understand that there are other comparable powers in relation to dairy and other free-trade agreements where you have both warranted and non-warranted search powers. I was just wanting the Minister\u2019s view of the framework in this bill, whether it\u2019s appropriate, and whether, in his view, there\u2019s a need for us to think in the future about a search regime that allows for things like a duty of production and inspection powers that doesn\u2019t lean on Part 4 of the Search and Seizure Act, which, in my view, is built for criminal proceedings. I know it\u2019s a slight stretch, but I do think we were pressed for time yesterday and we didn\u2019t manage to get to that important issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022b1b3b6e87fef04df3ac1adc2f56a6475\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b1b3b6e87fef04df3ac1adc2f56a6475\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (09:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I don\u2019t think we were pressed for time yesterday. We probably spent five or six hours debating this part, which is a very good use of the House\u2019s time because it allows it to make sure that the bill that will allow New Zealand to deliver commitments, and for New Zealanders to receive the benefits of the free-trade agreement, will work as intended. In as far as the obligations we\u2019re taking on, or what this bill does when it enters into force, the way it always works as a trade agreement is that if the Parliament should adopt this and vote it into law, at a given point of time, it goes to the Governor-General who will sign it off; but, actually, the commitments we make, such as, for example, tariff rates coming down to zero, only take effect when the free-trade agreement (FTA) enters into force.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIf that was not to be the case, then Indian exporters could benefit with a lower tariff rate into New Zealand before the FTA comes into force because this is the legal way that we lower the tariff rate. It adds India to another Act where tariff rates will come to zero, but only on the day that the free-trade agreement enters into force. The agreement talks about that, but the exact date will need to be agreed with India when they are also able to show that they can meet their obligations to New Zealand and New Zealand exporters under the free-trade agreement. In respect of the member\u2019s question, no, I haven\u2019t considered changing the name of the bill to the one she suggested.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022 data-id=\u0022e497304cad47afeee700fc07677d2415\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e497304cad47afeee700fc07677d2415\u0022\u003EFRANCISCO HERNANDEZ (Green) (09:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. While we\u2019re on the subject of the title and commencement, I would like to propose an amendment to the title of this Act to the \u201CIndia Free-Trade Agreement (Offshoring) Legislation Amendment Act\u201D. I propose that because of, as already discussed, the requirement incentives, depending on which side of the debate you\u2019re listening to and whether you\u2019re listening to the Indian Government or the New Zealand Government, on the requirement for private sector investment into India to the tune of US$20 billion. That\u2019s very concerning from our point of view because, ideally, the investment should be going to New Zealand instead of India.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I say this not because I\u2019m not of an internationalist-minded streak, but because I do think that the people and the Government of India are very capable of investing in their own people and in their own industries rather than relying on offshore investment. I just looked at the latest defence spending statistics. I think, in the last year, India spent something like US$93 billion on defence spending. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI don\u2019t think anyone can disagree that, instead of spending money on military weapons and on militarisation, perhaps that money could be better spent on investing in the needs of people in India, rather than relying on New Zealanders to be investing in that to the tune of US$20\u00A0billion. I do say the word \u201Coffshoring\u201D because, if a New Zealand company chooses to make private investments\u2014for example, if they have a company over here in New Zealand and they choose to invest over in India by starting a call centre or a hub for manufacturing, or something\u2014that would be counted in that US$20\u00A0billion threshold. Clearly, we can see that this free-trade agreement (FTA), which this legislation amendment bill helps to enable, is something that will contribute, potentially in a very strong way, to the loss of jobs in New Zealand, at a time when we\u2019re already losing a lot of critical jobs in the regions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn the electorate of Dunedin, which I am based in, we\u2019ve seen this loss, in terms of the Gregg\u2019s factory near the university. We\u2019re seeing losses like that right across the country, at a time when our own regions and our own industries in New Zealand need the active support of investment here in New Zealand. Why are we enabling, through this free-trade agreement, US$20 billion\u2014which is, I believe, about NZ$35 billion\u2014to be offshored into another country? This is a country which is more than capable. India is an emerging superpower with its own space programme, with its own substantial investments in the defence industries, and with its own foreign aid programme. It really doesn\u2019t make sense that this legislation is encouraging investment into a country which is already relatively prosperous and is relatively capable of looking after itself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy second point is around the commencement date. It comes into force on a single date by Order in Council. I think the Minister for Trade and Investment already said that, in a previous Parliament, the big New Zealand - China FTA came into force after the election. Well, obviously, we\u2019re two months away from an election\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f3bbeba1f5bf5e81bcb039500a5865e1\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: Before the election.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242ee44fe7bb285ea01ff16d4d2364735\u0022\u003EFRANCISCO HERNANDEZ\u003C/span\u003E: Before the election, sorry. I meant: before the election. Now, we\u2019re two months away from the next general election, and three or four parties here in this Parliament, depending on whether you count the Te Tai Tokerau party, do oppose this legislation. So, if you count the number of parties, as opposed to the number of MPs they have in the House, you could argue that a majority of the parties in this Parliament actually oppose the New Zealand - India FTA. We should, arguably, delay it till after the election. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00220a6fd4fefc4b9eb59fb8750f371511d0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220a6fd4fefc4b9eb59fb8750f371511d0\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (09:23)\u003C/span\u003E: Just on that last point, I think it\u2019s very, very important to underline that the House is based on individual members. Each member of this House can vote any way they want\u2014unless their party tells them they\u2019re not allowed to and they might throw them out or put them down on the list as a result\u2014and so, ultimately, if we were to go in the direction the member Francisco Hernandez has just proposed for this House, you may end up with 122 parties here, as opposed to the very loose number he has given at the moment. Probably a more reliable definition of democracy is the one that this Parliament has inherited from Westminster, which is the number of votes, so I think what we will do is see what the final vote will be on the third reading of this bill. If a majority of members are in favour of the free-trade agreement called the Indian - New Zealand free-trade agreement\u2014this bill, which is the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill\u2014that will be the name, and exporters all over the country will benefit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI did want to make just one final point about forecasts of growth and delivery for the economy. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) analysis is, rightly, always extremely cautious about how free-trade agreements will perform. As an example, for the European Union free-trade agreement, whose rights and obligations are very similar to this\u2014in fact, the bill we\u2019re putting through this Parliament now is very similar to the one that enacted the European Union free-trade agreement\u2014MFAT\u2019s analysis was that, over five or six or seven years, we might see an increase of $2\u00A0billion worth of exports. In fact, that happened in the first two years\u2014many, many years sooner than they modelled in their forecast. I actually prefer them to be cautious in their modelling rather than overstating, because it is about opportunity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat free-trade agreements do, when you first negotiate their entry into force, is they talk about tariff savings based upon the amount of exports and trade you have at that time. As an example, when the Chinese free-trade agreement entered into force, with a very large majority of support in this Parliament\u2014although I think New Zealand First probably at the time didn\u2019t support it\u2014ultimately our two-way trade was a couple of billion dollars. This year, we will export $23\u00A0billion to them, and we will sell China more than we import from them\u2014a $43\u00A0billion two-way trade. If you had looked at the modelling at the time, I\u2019m sure you would have found it was very, very small, but, actually, a quick working out of what our GDP was at the time, compared to the $23\u00A0billion we exported this year, it is 12\u00A0percent growth annually of GDP on that day. And that was over a 20-year-period.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I\u2019m not saying that we achieve that in the same way, but, with every free-trade agreement New Zealand signs, our exports go up. We sell them more, but we also import more. If we take the example of kiwifruit: with 5 million people in New Zealand, if everyone in New Zealand eats one kiwifruit this year, we sell 5 million kiwifruit. If they have 10, I guess that\u2019s 50\u00A0million kiwifruit. Well, Zespri is responsible for $5 billion worth of sales around the world now annually, a new record, and we sold 1\u00A0billion kiwifruit to China as a result of the zero tariff rate in there. What trade agreements allow us to do is to produce more to sell to the world, which grows our economy. In effect, even if it was only a 1\u00A0percent increase in GDP as a result of this FTA\u2014and I believe it will be much more over time\u2014that\u2019s about $4 billion extra for the economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo replace $4 billion, you could have a capital gains tax, you could have a wealth tax, you could have a land tax, or we could back New Zealand businesses to produce more and sell more. We have to remember, when companies in New Zealand export, they earn more for the country, on average they pay their workers more, and they employ more women. I know those opposing the bill are not doing it for that reason, but, actually, New Zealand workers should earn more through being productive. We have an opportunity to sell much more of what we produce to 1.4 billion people. That\u2019s 5 million people working hard to feed 1.4\u00A0billion people. New Zealand is a winner under this agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bfb7459281c84e2f7b5b08b5dc8333b6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Well done, we\u2019re all hungry for kiwifruit right now! Before I take the next call, I have noted that members are using this as an opportunity to summarise\u2014that\u2019s what many people use the title and commencement debate for\u2014but, if you\u2019re going to continue to summarise, you\u2019re not summarising; that\u2019s just a thesis. If you\u2019ve got specific questions focused on the title and commencement, those are welcome, but I would encourage members not to disappear down a philosophical path.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022c143f16fa0f6f1194368bc259b198e74\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c143f16fa0f6f1194368bc259b198e74\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (09:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much for that guidance, Mr Chair. It is around the commencement date, and I\u2019ve asked the Minister for Trade and Investment this before. I haven\u2019t had a clear answer. The commencement date will be laid out through an Order in Council. It is important, and I think there were questions from my colleague Vanushi Walters about whether it should be aligned, as normally occurs with the introduction of a free-trade agreement (FTA), or for some other reason, should it be another date? I guess the question is: will it be before the election or not, ensuring that Parliament still has the mandate and the authority to bring this into play? Questions around that are really important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a unique trade agreement, and the Minister talks it up. I support his ambition, but I\u2019m also realistic around it as well\u2014that is, the increasing risk that goes with this trade agreement every year that we move down the path towards a 15-year deadline. There is an obligation to promote the investment of US$20 billion. Actually, New Zealand First pointed out yesterday that it was NZ$33 billion; it\u2019s now NZ$35 billion because the coalition Government has mismanaged this economy and driven down the value of the dollar. Thanks very much, New Zealand First. Yes, that bill is going up; the liability is going up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe commencement date is quite important, because I\u2019m guessing that the Indian Government will be monitoring this agreement from the day that it begins through to that 15-year period. So the question to the Minister is about when he intends to or if he has a date in mind.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other point I\u2019d like to make around the title of the bill\u2014and my colleague pointed it out\u2014is that maybe it should have been the \u201CLiberation Day Unintended Consequences Bill\u201D, because we have President Trump to thank, in part, for this trade agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222deb6f7b93673921640a1bb281e0c78c\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: Liberation Day.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022466d1e3a3aa7a407575ef3802e948b9f\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: Liberation Day\u2014yes, that\u2019s right. Liberation Day was his idea. I acknowledge the Minister\u2014I think he seized upon the opportunity when President Trump turned the world of trade on its ear and imposed sanctions on India, like other countries, that were completely ridiculous, and I think we should state that on the record. I think we should be brave enough to say that what the US has done to international trade is just abhorrent. The stability and peace across the globe that has been improved through trade agreements has now been reversed by decisions made in Washington.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI come back to the opportunity that the Minister took up. I guess that India has sought value in driving forward with more trade agreements with more countries, and one of them with New Zealand, and that is great. I think that over time we can seize the opportunities from that whilst mindful\u2014to come back to my first point\u2014that the clock will be ticking on our promotion of trade into India and, I guess, the question of whether the Minister of Foreign Affairs will be committed to promoting that investment\u2014because the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Rt Hon Winston Peters\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002271f2e921b1210b7b1c26e56e3a61cf61\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: Minister of Foreign Affairs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224db717e59f99c2b83ae20f9a83e85738\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry\u2014Foreign Affairs; yes. He\u2019s in charge of the overall budget for Ministry of Foreign Affairs, so I\u2019m not convinced\u2014and neither will the Indians be, given New Zealand First\u2019s stance on this trade agreement\u2014that he will commit the resources to promote investment into India, given what we\u2019ve heard from New Zealand First.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESo we are facing a bit dilemma, and exporters should be fully aware that in taking up the opportunities through greater access into this market\u2014which are huge and are beneficial, as the Minister said, to our country\u2014there\u2019s also a little cloud on the horizon that they should be mindful of. I\u2019ve certainly, as I\u2019ve said before, had discussions with them at this point. There\u2019s not a huge commitment to a huge amount of investment into India. I hope that will grow over time. It will be through partnerships that we actually consolidate the value of this trade agreement over time, but the commencement date, which is a question for the Minister, is quite critical to those calculations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u00228d428456bc5b7c03348f42344abef09a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228d428456bc5b7c03348f42344abef09a\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (09:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I just, Mr Chair, would ask you to note, further to your point about final summaries, that the Minister for Trade and Investment has taken a couple of what I think are quite useful calls; his last two calls, where he\u2019s\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e9b12693148dccd2b1989c9507ee4509\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: They\u2019ve all been useful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e0ff99125bac36207a97499f79040af8\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: Just to be very clear about this, the Minister has expanded on the case for the free-trade agreement, and, in a sense, what he\u2019s done in his last two calls is what we would have liked to have done more substantively, which is probably argue it and hear the case for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo acknowledge the Minister, I note that he has worked very hard for this agreement, and it\u2019s not an easy thing to achieve. He\u2019s spent many hours, and he\u2019s travelled across to the other side of the globe, and not spent time with his family, and he\u2019s tried to get this thing across the line. And he should, as much as any of us, have a chance in the fullness of this debating chamber to hear the case for and to hear the case against. I\u2019ve appreciated his recent comments on making the case for the free-trade agreement itself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the specific things that he raised was the value of the China free-trade agreement, which is $23 billion, I believe he said, in terms of export value to New Zealand. I have a very specific question on that, as he has sought to use that as a comparator with this free-trade agreement before us. What is the foreign direct investment commitment in the China free-trade agreement, Minister? Given that you\u2019re arguing that we\u2019re going to get a great return from this India free-trade agreement, the major concern that has been expressed by the parties in this House that are not supporting the current formulation of this agreement is around that foreign direct investment commitment over 15 years of up to $35 billion or more, depending on what the foreign exchange rate is doing to the American dollar. Because, of course, it\u2019s down as $20 billion in US dollars, which could be NZ$35 billion or more or less.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat is the foreign direct investment commitment that New Zealand signed up to in the China free-trade agreement? Because only then can we understand whether the $23 billion of value that we get from our exports to China is greater than the amount that we are expected to invest in China in terms of foreign direct investment. And that is a greater comparator of what we are getting or what we are risking in this India free-trade agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022 data-id=\u0022617d03b3e8a8bf2596e9158a78f234de\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022617d03b3e8a8bf2596e9158a78f234de\u0022\u003EHon MARK PATTERSON (Minister for Rural Communities) (09:36)\u003C/span\u003E: I rise to speak on the title and the commencement date. Just picking up on the points that Steve Abel made, the title of the bill does not reflect what we\u2019re discussing here or what would like to have been discussing here\u2014the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill. It is far more than a free-trade deal. New Zealand First is all for a free-trade deal with India. It\u2019s in our coalition agreement. We\u2019ve supported other free-trade deals that have gone through in this Parliament. So we are absolutely on board with the free-trade deal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022521461d7e6eec30254333baee191da5c\u0022\u003EHon Damien O\u0027Connor\u003C/span\u003E: Stop digging.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a937342d80c697793e9648921c1e90f5\u0022\u003EHon MARK PATTERSON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the Labour Party should have read this a bit more carefully too, because there are wide implications in this bill, far beyond anything that we\u2019ve ever signed up to with another free-trade deal in the past. This is not the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill; it is the \u201CIndia Free Trade, IP Concession, Immigration Relaxing, Outward Investment Amendment Bill\u201D and it should be known as such, and I would propose that it is because there are vast elements to this bill that do not in any way just relate to the tariff reductions, which, obviously, we are supportive of.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe are supportive of trade with India. It\u2019s a big opportunity for us, but what is in this for New Zealand? What are we trading away? We have had very little opportunity to go through some of those immigration settings we\u2019ve got particularly with that community. There has been migrant exploitation\u2014we won\u2019t shy away from that. That community has a track record of exploiting its own. What are the protections in here for student visas with an uncapped 25 hours, currently, in work rights? How are they going to be protected? What is the pastoral care that sits around that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the intellectual property (IP), we know that in China Zespri took a court case over there and won on IP. In this deal, it appears that you could drive a bus through the Indian IP arrangements. We could be giving away our G3 kiwifruit variety. We could be giving away our Envy apples and m\u0101nuka honey. We really haven\u2019t had the chance to explore that through this debate. Their domestic IP laws are much, much weaker than ours are in terms of plant varieties in the sense that you can, for your own use, use some of these varieties when they are over there. So long before we\u2019ve got 100,000 hectares of G3 growing somewhere in India? Have we got control over those things? We did have control in the China free-trade agreement and in other jurisdictions where we\u2019ve signed up for free trade, but it is not clear to New Zealand First that we are actually not giving away some of our most valuable plant variety IP rights. On the outward investment, there has been crickets on how the $35 billion\u2014as of the exchange rate of yesterday, it was $34.75 billion\u2014that we\u2019re obligated or aspirational\u2014well, it\u2019s not aspirational to me; my aspiration is to have that money invested in New Zealand, and it\u2019s New Zealand First\u2019s aspiration. But we\u2019re on such a preposterous number\u2014it is a preposterous number\u2014and we\u2019ve almost admitted as such; that its aspirational, and \u201Cnod, nod, wink, wink\u201D, we\u2019re not actually going to do it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut that\u2019s not what Prime Minister Modi said on three occasions when he was in this very country. That\u2019s their expectation. We\u2019re signing a deal. We\u2019re going to be asked to vote on a deal shortly that commits New Zealand to $35 billion in outward expenditure into the Indian economy. And there are parties in this Chamber that are prepared to wave that away and not even ask questions about it. That is outrageous. I can\u2019t believe the Labour Party, who have, kind of, made some weak suggestions, saying \u201COh, that looks a bit concerning\u201D, have not held their feet to the floor. You had the chance, the Labour Party. New Zealand First has taken a principled stand here; you could have taken a principled stand, but no. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I will suggest those amendments to the bill\u2019s name because it is not a free-trade agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u00221ac1ccd40735a0a5f74cd17759158fd0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221ac1ccd40735a0a5f74cd17759158fd0\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (09:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chairman. As an ex-contract fencer to an ex-farmer, I\u2019ve got to take the shovel away from you to stop digging; you\u2019re going further and further into the hole.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ERegarding the commencement and the amendment that New Zealand First indicated it could table here, I just want to speak to that because the member who\u2019s just previously spoken may have forgotten that his leader is the Minister of Foreign Affairs, sits at the Cabinet table with the Minister in the chair, the Hon Todd McClay, and was fully aware of the process of negotiating this agreement all the way through\u2014the Labour Party was not. So all of the conditions that the Government agreed to, the Minister of Foreign Affairs had the ability, at the Cabinet table, to have input into.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226122f64651dc46771612f192d9dadb9b\u0022\u003EHon Mark Patterson\u003C/span\u003E: We read it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225c799de3bf1d0fceafbc9b47c419d922\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: Absolutely.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETrade agreements are never perfect. I agree with the Minister. We know that they\u2019re always a compromise. And on the balance, what is the greater good? Do you sign it or not? The Minister of Foreign Affairs and the New Zealand First Party had the ability to input into and change and adjust and negotiate this trade agreement. And having done so, they now want to step back. But now, in the committee, want to step forward and say, \u201COh, no, but we\u2019d like a trade agreement with India.\u201D Well, make up your mind. It will never be perfect. This is not the trade agreement that Labour Party would have negotiated. We accept that it\u2019s the one that the Government has negotiated. We\u2019ve looked at it, we\u2019ve gone through. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe member from New Zealand First makes reference to migrant exploitation\u2014he\u2019s been in a Government that has dumbed down and reduced resources to the Department of Labour that we negotiated to increase again as part of our support for this trade agreement. You can\u2019t have it both ways. Agree to dumb down the oversight of migrant workers in this country through Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment\u2014because that\u2019s what you did; you agreed to that, to take resources from it to pay for tax cuts\u2014and then bleat about the potential for that to occur in our country. We have never for a moment believed\u2014because we looked at the agreement\u2014that we would be flooded by migrant workers, as New Zealand First said would be. Actually, we appreciate, in the commencement, which is really important\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee5add5b47195477264cb6032b62a3b3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Come back to the title and commencement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022292a977b1ef7a15819cda5ce86562fcf\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: I appreciate that, but I\u2019m kind of speaking to what was indicated might be an amendment tabled in the Chamber around the change of the title to the bill from New Zealand First. So I\u2019m just trying to clarify some of the logic to that and get a response to it, because, in my view, it seems that it\u2019s absolute hypocrisy\u2014absolute hypocrisy. And now, New Zealand First has realised that this is a trade agreement, while not perfect, there has potential and, indeed, has opportunities for exporters across our country. And I acknowledge the Minister for that. That\u2019s why Labour supporting it. It\u2019s maybe not quite as good as he says, but, you know, it\u2019s a good solid agreement that we have to\u2014New Zealand First are stuck out on a limb, not supporting it. Stupid\u2014stupid and hypocrisy to come into this Chamber and then go on about what they care about, when, in fact, they\u2019ve been in the Government that has actually opened up the opportunity for exploitation, unfortunately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWe appreciate the wonderful Indian people who have come into this country, are working in healthcare, are working in services, and in small businesses across our country. They have given vitality, vibrancy, and opportunity for many thousands of Kiwis because of their presence here. That\u2019s why we support the agreement. That\u2019s why we say that this agreement is an opportunity to build stronger relationships and partnerships between India and New Zealand. And the commencement date, which is the part that we\u2019re debating, of course, is still a question for the Minister as to when he thinks this might actually come into force.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002234ddb45d7e762f3266f8d654cb43d4cc\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: OK, I\u2019m going to put the question. I think we\u2019re there, folks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001108\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 29\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat clause 2 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 29\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill to be reported without amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00225ebc81f2b066bca1512607505b04c620\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225ebc81f2b066bca1512607505b04c620\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (09:47)\u003C/span\u003E: I move Amendment Paper 791 dividing the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001122\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 101\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 21\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe committee divided the bill into the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill and the India Export Quotas (Apples, Kiwifruit, and M\u0101nuka Honey) Bill, as set out on Amendment Paper 791.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022052e9ba9f170a51de436df60857c43d3\u0022\u003EReport of Committee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002269a6d8b5369811866089d7ad9d3f2b57\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, the committee has considered the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill and reports it without amendment and divided into the following bills: India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill and the India Export Quotas (Apples, Kiwifruit, and M\u0101nuka Honey) Bill. I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the report be adopted\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa95c4c9f6db8bd5ee5321c3419241a7\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Those bills are set down for third reading immediately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a1f8267e715850a6bc2dafcd0ce48320\u0022\u003EIndia Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a1f8267e715850a6bc2dafcd0ce48320\u0022\u003EIndia Export Quotas (Apples, Kiwifruit, and M\u0101nuka Honey) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022090dd4d8ff352146723103747c361b9d\u0022\u003ELegislative Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00223e8fb41c886a22f767360f7931281a52\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223e8fb41c886a22f767360f7931281a52\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (09:49)\u003C/span\u003E: I present a legislative statement on the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill and the India Export Quotas (Apples, Kiwifruit, and M\u0101nuka Honey) Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f100ad3eafaf76619a76ad0b196d607\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00226cb896ed4b681ab49ad712f8deb945c3\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u00227fb63a36d61a4feb9779c68486752b3e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227fb63a36d61a4feb9779c68486752b3e\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (09:50)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill and the India Export Quotas (Apples, Kiwifruit, and M\u0101nuka Honey) Bill be now read a third time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is the culmination of a journey that began more than 16 years ago when first discussions were held with India around starting free-trade agreement (FTA) negotiations. The Government made it a priority, recommitted to negotiations, and worked at pace with India to secure an agreement that delivers for New Zealand exporters, workers, growers, farmers, businesses, consumers, and all New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIndia is the world\u2019s fastest growing economy. It is home to 1.4 billion people and is on track to become one of the world\u2019s largest consumer markets. For too long, New Zealand exporters have faced significant barriers in India while competitors benefited from preferential access. This agreement changes that. It will open up significant new opportunities for New Zealand businesses already trading in India and will also help level the playing field with our competitors. The FTA will reduce or eliminate tariffs on 95 percent of current exports to India, and with the FTA our exporters will get the boost they need to sell competitively in India. The benefits are substantial, and they are immediate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand apple exporters will be able to export 32,500 tonnes next season, increasing to 35,000 tonnes if we can get the agreement ratified this year. The current 50 percent tariff will be cut in half to 25 percent, within the quota. Industry estimates tariff savings of up to $25 million per year\u2014money directly into the pockets of New Zealand apple growers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EKiwifruit will receive tariff-free access for a quota that grows to 15,000 tonnes over the next six years\u2014four times more than we\u2019ve ever sold India in a year\u2014plus a 50 percent tariff reduction for any out-of-quota trade exports to India.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOur exporters of sheep meat, wool, coal, and almost all forest goods will see tariffs immediately drop to zero from entry into force.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFish and seafood exporters will see the current 33 percent tariff eliminated on most goods over seven years. M\u0101nuka honey tariffs will reduce from a whopping 66 percent to 16.5 percent over five years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThese are real commercial gains for New Zealanders. They mean more exports, more sales, more jobs, and more income flowing back into the New Zealand economy and into New Zealand communities. They mean greater returns at the farm gate, pack-houses, processing plants, ports, and businesses across the whole of New Zealand. This agreement positions New Zealand for the future. It will boost the businesses of those who are already selling in India and open up new opportunities for those interested in expanding into the Indian market and having access to 1.4 billion people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe FTA references several international instruments, including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), which was first included in the New Zealand - UK FTA and then the New Zealand - EU FTA. However, the inclusion of reference to UNDRIP in the India free-trade agreement does not impose and is not intended to impose any obligation on New Zealand law or Government policy, and we reaffirm the reservations that were made by the New Zealand Government to the United Nations in 2010.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe strong support we have seen for the bills from across Parliament demonstrates our shared understanding of the importance of expanding New Zealand\u2019s international opportunities. It has enabled us to progress quickly through our ratification process. This means that we\u2019re able to bring the agreements into force this year, bringing the benefits to our exporters as fast as possible. Of course, because it is entering into force this year, the second round of tariff reduction or quota increases will take place on 1 January, rather than our exporters having to wait an additional year. It\u2019s a great result for New Zealand businesses and New Zealand consumers more generally. From here, we will continue to engage with the business community to make sure they are poised to take full advantage of the agreement and all the benefits that it brings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe India FTA is a significant achievement that advances New Zealand\u2019s interests; it strengthens our international connections, and it supports the people and businesses who drive our economy. New Zealand is a trading nation; one in four jobs depends on our exports. Our future prosperity depends on our ability to compete, grow, and succeed in international markets. This agreement achieves exactly that. I will deliver real opportunities for our exporters to compete on a more level playing field, create new opportunities for growth, and lift incomes and living standards for New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EToday, we demonstrate our ambition and determination to pursue opportunities that will benefit New Zealanders for decades to come. This landmark agreement is good for our economy, good for our exporters, and good for New Zealand. I thank all those who have contributed to bringing us to this point, I thank the Labour Party for their support, and I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289d5a5c2f44d5a49f1d6ec10b2a054dc\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u00227f8f3fc978695a322201775ffb1f2ada\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227f8f3fc978695a322201775ffb1f2ada\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (09:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. This is not the agreement that Labour would have negotiated, but it is an agreement and a big step forward for our country in terms of our connection with the world\u2019s most populous country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe unfortunately have to acknowledge \u201CLiberation Day\u201D and President Trump for tipping the world of trade on its ear and making countries like New Zealand and India appreciate the value of trade agreements and formal connections. Can I acknowledge the Government that picked up the opportunity\u2014a relationship that had been built, as the Minister for Trade and Investment said, over 16 or many more long years with the Indian people and with that country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe had certainly visited, while in Government, on a number of occasions\u2014as had the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Hon Winston Peters\u2014to build the partnerships that India indicated were the way forward. Not a free-trade agreement (FTA); at that time, they saw that as a risk to their economy\u2014an economy that they were trying to build as an export nation, not one that wanted to import. We in New Zealand, as a dairy-exporting nation, were seen as a threat to India.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is unfortunate that we don\u2019t have many opportunities for the dairy industry in this trade agreement; albumins, which are water-soluble proteins that go into infant formula and other high-value products, have got through the door, but it\u2019s a very, very small part of our total dairy export portfolio. While there may be potential to build that over time, if I was in the dairy industry, I wouldn\u2019t be holding my breath for massive opportunities. Nonetheless, what has been negotiation\u2014quotas for kiwifruit, for m\u0101nuka honey, and for apples\u2014is certainly valuable. Along with the services through tourism and through education, there is potential to a strong trading relationship with India.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are, of course, some risks. It has been pointed out in the House by New Zealand First, and I\u2019m right to say that the commitment to promote US$20 billion of investment into India is indeed ambitious\u2014very, very ambitious. I\u2019m not sure that we will come anywhere close to achieving that target, but if the Indian Government is convinced that we are promoting that, then maybe we will meet their expectations. Prime Minister Modi certainly indicated, on a number of occasions, that that\u2019s what they\u2019re looking for from this trade agreement, and we accept that. Exporters moving into this market, building greater export volumes and opportunities, must be mindful of that risk, which is the point we make as the Labour Party about this being a unique trade agreement. There\u2019s not one that I can recall that actually has a growing risk over time rather than declining risks or removal of barriers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENonetheless, on balance, Labour\u2014when we finally got access to the information; we weren\u2019t included in the negotiation process, and even being updated was not part of it. We were told that an agreement had been reached and that we would get access to the information at some point. That was at the end of January; we got access to the documents; we looked over them in confidence; we went through them and asked for more information to try to clarify points, because we had the Minister of Foreign Affairs saying that this was a terrible agreement, and because it wasn\u2019t going to be supported by a coalition partner. So we had to ask on behalf of those people who were confused. One coalition partner was saying this is the best thing since sliced bread, and the other coalition partner\u2014New Zealand First\u2014was saying that this is a terrible agreement for New Zealand.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELabour took the responsible approach. We looked at the agreement. We went over it very, very carefully and weighed up the downsides. I\u2019ll point to another one, around biosecurity: there being no disputes settlement process. If a call is made on a biosecurity risk, by either country, unfortunately we don\u2019t have a process by which to settle that. We\u2019ve faced one of those barriers in the past, with our log exports to India, and we had to work through the issue of methyl bromide\u2014the alternative treatment processes\u2014to assure the Indians that there was no biosecurity threat. Fair enough, but the absence of a disputes settlement process is one of the downsides to this agreement, which Labour would not have negotiated. None the less, it is what we have on the table.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn moving forward, we said, \u201CYes, on balance, we will support this agreement\u201D, but we wanted to do a couple of things to ensure that the claims made by New Zealand First about mass migration and migrant exploitation could be addressed. The coalition Government had dumbed down and reduced resources to the labour inspectorate. That\u2019s the organisation that runs around the country and tries to expose and prevent any migrant exploitation. Indeed, in spite of assurances by the Government that this doesn\u2019t happen\u2014that we don\u2019t have abuse\u2014it is occurring on a regular basis, and we need to ensure that the labour inspectorate is up to scratch. We negotiated with the Government and said we would support the agreement on the basis of an increased number of labour inspectors, and the Government has indicated that it is moving in that direction.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe also said that we wanted to progress the modern slavery legislation. It\u2019s a requirement, in most OECD countries, that we have a piece of legislation in place that prevents, and indeed makes illegal, any migrant worker exploitation that might be deemed to be called \u201Cmodern slavery\u201D. Indeed, we have exposed that in our country on a semi-regular basis, so it\u2019s no good pretending that it doesn\u2019t occur. We said that we wanted legislation in place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220b6127af80b418591287a85f81b197ec\u0022\u003EHon Mark Patterson\u003C/span\u003E: It does. We\u2019re trying to stop it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264b0388281b468a4a1df1082c6e6dd10\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: I look forward to New Zealand First supporting that legislation through the House. Indeed, the Government has again been a bit slow in moving that forward. I say, in the Chamber of this House, that the Government committed to the passage of modern slavery legislation for our support for this trade agreement. We want to see that progress, as we did with the labour inspectorate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing that we asked for was an assurance, because the Indian Government and diaspora in this country have been somewhat confused by a coalition Government that, on the one hand, says this a good trade agreement and, on the other hand, says it\u2019s terrible. They don\u2019t know where things might go into the future. We said to the Government: to ensure bipartisan support for this, Labour would like to be at the events that promote the opportunities from this free-trade agreement. The Government has been OK, but I have to say they have dropped the ball on occasions. I\u2019d like to say in this House that we want to be part of those events, not just for political purposes but actually to ensure that there is support for this across the House. As the other major party, being eliminated from those is, in fact, somewhat insulting and may be not reassuring to the Indian people of this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn balance, Labour will support this piece of legislation that enables the free-trade agreement to be brought into place. It makes some adjustments to legislation across the dairy industry, which is quite critical\u2014across customs and excise, to ensure that we can monitor the inward and outward flow of goods to and from India\u2014and it brings in a quota management system for the goods that we\u2019ve negotiated to get into India: apples, m\u0101nuka honey, and kiwifruit. Where there is potential, the volumes are still small\u2014let\u2019s not overplay that\u2014but they do have the potential to grow if you\u2019re selling into a market of 1.4\u00A0billion people. Labour has always supported trade negotiations and agreements\u2014good quality agreements. We have negotiated many of them, going back to the India free-trade agreement that Phil Goff in Government did, and the value from that has flowed from that. There\u2019s the EU agreement, and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. These are agreements that the major parties have supported and that New Zealand has benefited from.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan I acknowledge\u2014and I know the Minister for Trade and Investment has\u2014the good work of the officials. This is tough work, and the officials, I know\u2014given, I guess, the speed of this process\u2014did have to commit to many trips to India. It\u2019s not always easy for them over there, but they did a great job\u2014the best they could. Labour supports the India - New Zealand free-trade agreement, and we will work with exporters and importers to build the relationship between our two countries.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u00228e71ff625f93163b8728fad72462ccda\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228e71ff625f93163b8728fad72462ccda\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (10:06)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. The Green Party will not be supporting this free-trade agreement. I want to make it clear that the Minister for Trade and Investment likes to say we never support free-trade agreements, but, in fact, we did support the European Union free-trade agreement. There were some key components in that agreement that made it an appropriate one to support, one of the obvious ones being there being climate and environmental obligations placed on both parties to that agreement. There are no such equivalent obligations in this agreement, at but one point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the most radical things this Government has done, as the most radically anti-environmental and anti-climate Government in a generation, is actually threaten the integrity of that very agreement, because it has backed down on the calibre of the stance we are taking in regard to the climate and the environment and is actually undermining the integrity of that EU trade agreement. Our ability to fulfil the agreement that is before us is going to be threatened by this absolutely preposterous\u2014in the words of my colleague Mark Patterson: \u201Cpreposterous\u201D\u2014commitment that we shall endeavour to invest $35\u00A0billion over 15 years in foreign direct investment (FDI).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI asked the Minister for Trade and Investment, when he was elucidating or expounding the value of the China free-trade agreement\u2014$23 billion currently\u2014to let us know what the foreign direct investment commitment was that New Zealand made to China in that China free-trade agreement. He refused to answer, because the answer is that there is no FDI agreement. There is no foreign direct investment component in the China free-trade agreement. This is an exceptional and novel precedent set here with India that I believe will come back to bite us, in a way that future Governments will be standing in this Parliament and lamenting, including the purple coalition that we\u2019ve got today between Labour and National.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA wise man once observed that New Zealand First and the Greens have something in common, which is that we are both economic nationalists. We are not racial nationalists in the Green Party, however, and we\u2019re not militarists. Economic nationalism has a very important lineage, and I believe, as my colleague Damien O\u2019Connor alluded to, in this new Trumpian world\u2014where the rule of law has been abandoned, where we\u2019re back to \u201Cmight is right\u201D\u2014we will quickly find out that our willingness to protect our economic sovereignty, our ability to produce for ourselves and process for ourselves and manufacture for ourselves, is all the more vital. Our globalised world becomes less stable once it is back to \u201Cmight is right\u201D, once we lose the rule of law, which has been rapidly abandoned by that very dangerous man occupying the White House right now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s why we should be much more cautious about these sorts of agreements.  One of the consequences of us being expected to invest $35 billion in India is that we thereby weaken our own chronic current account deficit because we\u2019re exporting such massive amounts of capital that we should be better investing right here in New Zealand. Part of the problem with our current account deficit is we\u2019re already outflowing profits from foreign companies owned in New Zealand and we have loss of sovereignty over our own economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regard to the question of food production, this is very acutely brought into stark relief by what has occurred in this term of Government. We are seeing deindustrialisation of New Zealand, in part by an energy crisis, in part driven by a unilateral attack on Iran by the United States\u2014again, Trump\u2014but also by the fact that the likes of Heinz-Watties and Gregg\u2019s and McCain are owned by overseas companies that are not as committed to upholding the ability of New Zealanders to produce and process our own food as a New Zealand - owned entity would be, as a locally owned cooperative or company would be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf we are to try and recompense for some of the supposed investment we\u2019re going to make to India, it might be by trying to get India to invest in New Zealand, but that actually exacerbates that problem. You actually then create another situation where you get more New Zealand companies and more of the New Zealand economy owned by an overseas economy. When are we going to have that honest conversation about the fact we haven\u2019t thought very deeply about that part of the consequence of the last 40 years of neoliberalism?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen people on the other side of the House say if you like farmers, then you\u2019ll support this free-trade agreement, that sort of glib, shallow thinking doesn\u2019t take account of the fact that the growers down in the Hawke\u2019s Bay right now have no one to sell their peas to because they don\u2019t have processing capability. It takes no account of the effect of the impact on actual growers and producers because we\u2019ve been outcompeted by cheaper overseas products and we don\u2019t have our local commitment to buying New Zealand - made and New Zealand - produced and we\u2019re losing the capability to even retain that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is not a zero-sum game. The question of loss of ownership and economic sovereignty and our means of production and processing and manufacturing is intimately tied up with the nature of this sort of agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e675e1264c51c5ff69f218077b3f7048\u0022\u003EKatie Nimon\u003C/span\u003E: Are you finished?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022441c41b1aab1cbfdd955861614572b5f\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: I haven\u2019t. I\u2019m just having a little think about what I want to say next.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022908148c086aa586e3dab3429419abba0\u0022\u003ETim van de Molen\u003C/span\u003E: Get on with it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc5b6bcc1bd3383de569fb73009171e8\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: I could do that if you like. There\u2019s another component to this that the Greens are not happy with\u2014the lack of a decent Treaty commitment. This Government, we know, has gone to great lengths to undermine the M\u0101ori-Crown relationship, to both pick a fight with M\u0101ori directly but also to undermine Treaty obligations. What we see in this agreement undermines the indigenous rights of both New Zealand M\u0101ori but also the indigenous people of India, because their rights are not recognised in India either by this fair-trade agreement\u2014free-trade agreement. I wish it was a fair-trade agreement. That is another thing that we\u2019re not happy with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to finish by pointing out that the nature of that commitment of $35 billion or $20 billion American dollars is so far from what we are currently investing in foreign direct investment (FDI) overseas. I pointed out in the first reading that our current foreign direct investment, if you add it up over the last 10 years, is well short of what this $35\u00A0billion is. I\u2019m just trying to find the figure now. The idea that we\u2019re somehow going to rapidly increase our FDI is not consistent with the track record we currently have. In fact, over 10 years, we\u2019ve had an average of minus $28 million. It was a net disinvestment. Our total FDI in 2025 was $1.46 billion and we\u2019re going to ramp that up by thirtyfold. It\u2019s not credible\u2014it is not credible. It is the duty of this House to sign our country up and our future generations up to deals that are actually going to be fulfilled. More than anything, I would be concerned that if we know we can\u2019t do that, we should not have made that commitment to India. That is not a reasonable commitment for us to make.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe final component I\u2019ll speak to is it seems extraordinary that we\u2019re getting tariff deals on export apples and kiwifruit in return for us agreeing to develop an action plan designed to enhance India\u2019s production and quality of those very products and hence enable them to compete with us on the products we\u2019re trying to export to them at a tariff discount. It makes no sense, and that is why the Green Party will be voting against this particular free-trade agreement with India.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fa370c0016e740998a2816116c8e4365\u0022 data-id=\u0022898e0b57436114107db4b54fffadab48\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fa370c0016e740998a2816116c8e4365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022898e0b57436114107db4b54fffadab48\u0022\u003EHon ANDREW HOGGARD (Associate Minister of Agriculture) (10:16)\u003C/span\u003E: I rise in support of the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill on behalf of the ACT Party. Trade has generally had a very bipartisan approach across New Zealand over many years and it has led to a hell of a lot of the success that this country has in that we approach it looking to make it fairer and better for our exporters around the world. Now, we\u2019re getting to a point where we have done a lot of deals and we are a very open economy. We don\u2019t put many barriers on anyone coming to it, and you\u2019ve got to ask the question: what is in it for some of these other countries? This does mean that we do get some of the concerns we have raised here but have been answered by the Minister for Trade and Investment and by the Opposition spokesperson as well around these concerns have been raised. We are not signing ourselves up to \u201Cwe must do this\u201D; it is an ambition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut I do want to point to the fact that, as the Minister mentioned, there are a number of benefits here in this agreement, particularly for our lamb meat exports. I believe we have faced a 33 percent tariff into India. The Australians used to be on something similar. We had good trade into there. They got a reduction. They basically cut our lunch. This enables our sheep meat exporters to get back on a level playing field with the Australians. We\u2019re the first country ever to secure a preferential access for apples, and, as has been mentioned, kiwifruit and m\u0101nuka honey. These are important sectors in New Zealand and we will get better access from that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs a proud dairy farmer, I do want to touch on the fact that we\u2019re not getting a lot of dairy access, but that\u2019s probably no surprise to anyone in the dairy industry. I recall being at the 2019 World Dairy Summit, where the chairperson of Amul Dairy, Dr Sodhi, was speaking on a topic around South Asian trade or something like that. Completely out of the blue he decided to tell all 1,000 audience members that there will never be a free-trade deal with New Zealand for dairy access. It was pretty clear. We had just beaten India in the World Test Championship; that may have played into his reason to put the boot into New Zealand at that point in time, but we\u2019re always going to be up against it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut I guess the point I want to make is dairy is our largest\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002257ec02a66d6c2e95dc32ef0881199655\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Donald Trump.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fa370c0016e740998a2816116c8e4365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002259445b178adc68d85bb46bb9a73a429b\u0022\u003EHon ANDREW HOGGARD\u003C/span\u003E: Blame Donald\u2014yep. Dairy is our largest industry here in New Zealand, and yes, it\u2019s been particularly tough. We haven\u2019t had great access through the India free-trade agreement (FTA), and previous to that the EU FTA. Excellent access through the UK FTA\u2014the one praise that I\u2019ll offer to the former trade Minister. That\u2019s sort of a benchmark that we should aspire to in the future, quite frankly. But going forward, we do need to ensure that where we can we break down barriers for our dairy industry and open up access. We\u2019ve got to be stronger on that because it is our biggest industry. We do need to make sure we are creating more access to more markets for it. It\u2019s very important. But I do want to say we do support this bill and I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022 data-id=\u00228ef383364fdaa05fcc3ba374aeb32d5f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228ef383364fdaa05fcc3ba374aeb32d5f\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON (NZ First) (10:19)\u003C/span\u003E: I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to oppose this free-trade agreement. Just at this particular time, I would just like to take some grace from the House to remember the Hon Jim Peters MNZM, a true gentleman and a scholar, and his beautiful wife Robyn, who have tributed so much to New Zealand First. He was very acute and very astute.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA key question, what I reflected on overnight: is this agreement in our national interest? I think this Parliament owes it to New Zealanders to actually answer that question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe national interest test is interesting. The Hon Priyanca Radhakrishnan yesterday was eager to point out that some people here are racist and xenophobic. It\u2019s very interesting, because the Hon Phil Twyford was part of the process that led to the national interest test because he dared to question Chinese nationals buying houses and raising the prices in Auckland, and that kicked off the agreement between our leader and David Parker to come up with a national interest test. Well, I\u2019ve got to say it\u2019s just as well we\u2019ve got one, because as a new member, and there are plenty of members here who have been here a lot longer than me and have a lot of experience in this House\u2014it seems a shame to me that the Minister has left the room, but it\u2019s very important for New Zealand to actually consider this. The process is one that troubles me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe had a first reading, whereby the agreement had already been decided. It then went to a select committee, whereby the agreement had already been decided. We had a second reading where, in both of those occasions, we had an opportunity to say and voice our reasons around why we disagree with this FTA. Now we\u2019re at third reading. Where was the debate on the agreement itself? Don\u2019t we owe it to New Zealanders to have that debate? Where and when were we, as New Zealand First, given the opportunity to contribute to shaping this FTA?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe are a nationalist economic party, as the member from the Green Party said, and we hold the line on national interest, which is why we were so keen to get it in the place for us. My reflection on this is that at this point in our journey as New Zealand, we\u2019ve got an awfully big job ahead of us to rebuild our economy and to add value here so that we\u2019re not stuck in a constant primary produce export nation; that we will move towards more value-added exports and employ people on higher wages, which are all things that we as New Zealand First really, really want for our country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet me say this about free trade. This one doesn\u2019t seem \u201Cfree\u201D to me\u2014this one seems more expensive to me\u2014but, yes, absolutely: opening up the opportunity to trade with the rest of the world is fundamental to this country\u2019s success. However, we need the ability to trade, and we don\u2019t want to trade away our competitive advantages. What we are playing with here are three crucial competitive advantages that New Zealand has in the world through horticulture, agriculture, and, of course, honey. These things are really important to us, so there is reason for us to take some care around what we do with this free-trade agreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the one that has come up in debate and drawn a lot of heat is this outward investment of $35 billion to India. What has not come up is the fact that that investment is made on behalf of New Zealand by this Parliament for the private sector to invest. I\u2019d like to know where they are\u2014I\u2019d like to know where they are. Have we lined that up? Have we questioned them? Have we talked to them about how we\u2019re going to achieve this? Or have we just made this agreement up as we\u2019re going along? There are a number of things here that we are still not happy with, and we feel, as others do, that we needed the chance to actually participate in the development of this FTA.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EImmigration is being traversed quite a lot here. The investment that we just talked about, the $35 billion\u2014what about the trade imbalance? We\u2019re dealing with a country that is 280 times our size. Do you think those two previous things add up in light of that, and the rising middle class in India? It is huge. They will swamp us if we are not sure about how we deal with this agreement. And, yes, I agree with the Minister and he has worked extremely hard and I agree with him on the Chinese FTA. That is a true reflection of us taking on one of the biggest nations in the world and coming out with a good deal, right? It\u2019s worked for us, and we agree with that. However, this trade imbalance is really concerning for us. We know what we\u2019re dealing with here, and there are a number of things around it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet me just take the albumins, for example, reflecting what I\u2019ve just said. Albumins go into value-added products, so we\u2019re exporting them. So, come on, why would we do that? Why would we not keep those important ingredients, along with all the others\u2014the bioactives around m\u0101nuka honey and the bioactives, actually, and biofunctional foods around kiwifruit, for example; our apples; the list goes on. Why aren\u2019t we investing that money in our own industry so that we can export those value-added products and take the benefit here for higher-cost, higher-wage jobs? It\u2019s so, so important to us. The rules of origin\u2014we didn\u2019t cover much about that, but, essentially, those ingredients go into other products and other nations will be interested in them. How are we going to keep track of the rules of origin of our exports in that process? Good luck with that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe agricultural cooperation quotas done through the agreements and the action plans that we have in place\u2014now, do you think that that\u2019s not important? Actually, I do think that\u2019s important that we\u2019re going to be training India how to grow apples and grow kiwifruit. I do actually think that\u2019s a bit of an issue for us. We may have missed that article 9.10 allows India to impose proportionate remedial measures to rebalance the concessions given to New Zealand under its tariff schedule if India determines that New Zealand has not fulfilled its commitment to investing $35 billion in their economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s so much more here. I\u2019ll jump down to financial systems. We\u2019re jumping into bed with one of the most advanced countries in the world in terms of technology, and we are looking at sharing our cooperation on digital payments, on unified payments interface integration, fintechs, digital currencies, central bank digital currencies, data governance and sovereign data, scams, privacy, and financial sovereignty. We haven\u2019t resolved those things ourselves, and yet here we are. It\u2019s in the free-trade agreement. We\u2019re just going to go right ahead and join up to what\u2019s happening with India and see if we can manage ourselves through that process. Those are huge things. Blockchain is coming at us like there\u2019s no tomorrow. Do you think that we need to be concerned and involved in those processes with our new partner? Why is it even here? Why is it even in this agreement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe understand that our coalition partners want to usher this through, and we can see the opportunity, as well\u2014but as this is already agreed and we have had little chance to influence the outcome, were it not for the Labour Party agreeing to this FTA, it could not be called a Government bill. We\u2019ve got a problem here right from the start, and this debate opened up yesterday, as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESuffice to say, we believe that New Zealanders deserve to know that our national interests are uppermost in our considerations. New Zealand First, our party and our party\u2019s members and its constituents, are not convinced, and we believe that many of the citizens and voters that support the parties in Parliament here are also in that place supporting them, similarly concerned. So we\u2019re going ask New Zealanders: do you believe this is a good deal?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002295231d37e957d133d8cf6be130cbd527\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The member\u2019s time has expired. I\u2019ll just use the opportunity to point out to members that this is a debate not on the free-trade agreement but on the enabling legislation, and, also, to the member Dr David Wilson, it is inappropriate to mention the names of people who may or may not be in the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u002292c9a4b8b7199cac93fc9874c7977a57\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002292c9a4b8b7199cac93fc9874c7977a57\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (10:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you so much, Madam Speaker. Seeing as this is the third reading, I just want to reflect a little bit on the debate and processes that we followed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think there is something to be said about the reality that, throughout history, trade has been a backbone of development of all peoples, in exchanges of cultures, goods, and ideas that have led to innovation. But as we evolve, and our societies become more connected, in my view trade deals should first and foremost benefit the working people of both nations involved in it. The legislation enabling it should work towards that as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen I look at the legislation enabling this free-trade agreement, and the rhetoric, I think, that has been thrown in this debate more broadly, a reflection that I wanted to make\u2014particularly in the contributions from other speakers, including from the Government side\u2014has been a lack of commentary on, for example, whether this legislation which enables a trade agreement, furthers or protects labour rights. In the legislation, I don\u2019t see anything that, for example, enables binding language in relationship to labour rights. It\u2019s not covered in the dispute settlement chapter either. I think this is something that is really amiss, because we should be concerned about the fact that our trade agreements are not enhancing labour rights amongst both nations. Or, in the legislation that we\u2019ve seen here, and submitters touched on this in the select committee process\u2014so reflecting on some of our supporters\u2019 concerns on this, I do think that the non-binding language on labour rights is particularly concerning due to the fact that India does have, unfortunately, a poor track record when it comes to labour rights. There are many workers in India who unfortunately still experience very little to no labour rights.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think our contribution, both in the process in this legislation and more broadly whenever we design trade deals, should be seeking to enhance the wellbeing of working-class people across the globe. So I think this is particularly concerning. I know that, through this debate, while not explicitly in the legislation enabling the trade agreement, immigration has nonetheless still been a component of the debate, including within this legislation because of the rhetoric that ties to it. I would encourage any members that would have raised concerns throughout this debate on the immigration components of the deal to reflect on whether their concerns are actually coming from a place of wanting to enhance labour rights across the board or whether they come from just more broadly scapegoating.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe do share, though, our concerns with New Zealand First on the ability to genuinely enact some of the obligations on foreign investment, and actually being able to meet them; and echo the risks that exist of the unilateral ability for India to call back some of the tariff cuts if these are not met. I think this is something that particularly concerns us, because we have not seen the evidence that we\u2019ll be able to meet those commitments. Therefore, the sort of merit off this legislation which enables a trade deal should then be questioned, as a result. I particularly questioned the timing of this legislation to enable the trade agreement due to the reality that I think New Zealanders deserve a robust public debate on the merits of this trade deal. It should not be dangled as a sort of \u201Celection win\u201D or sort of \u201Celection cycle win\u201D by the Government members. I want to make sure that New Zealanders remain confident that the trade agreements that Governments are signing us up to genuinely are to the benefit of everyday working people. I regret that this debate, and this process, has not enabled this to be the case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also welcome and want to reflect on the committee of the whole House process that we underwent in this House. It was definitely unusual to see New Zealand First members blocking closure motions, and I welcome them onto scrutinising Government bills a bit more. Like, I think this actually is a good thing, where there are differences in Government parties, that we actually do enable Government parties to voice their differences and actually adequately try to scrutinise this. This is something the Green Party in the previous two terms we were in Government actually took really seriously. I would welcome this as actually a healthy part of our democratic processes. I think it\u2019s good practice for members who may have not had the opportunity to perhaps scrutinise Government bills to partake in these.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think the more we\u2019re able to have legislation that follows due processes, that engages with the broader public, the committee of the whole House, they just actually will be a lot richer and will be able to reflect those contributions. I do not think this legislation or the trade deal process has actually brought the public on board with enough information and engagement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022 data-id=\u00226648396f5cadb5f4a6ec116e4e7bd504\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226648396f5cadb5f4a6ec116e4e7bd504\u0022\u003ETIM VAN DE MOLEN (National\u2014Waikato) (10:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I\u2019m happy to take a call here on the final reading of this bill. It\u2019s a good piece of legislation that gives effect to an agreement that will be very valuable and meaningful for New Zealand. It\u2019s a shame the last couple of speakers have demonstrated a lack of understanding about the agreement and what is included; and, indeed, have not spent anytime focusing on the legislation itself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWe made some pretty straight forward changes around the quota management process, to ensure that it was efficient, and reduced red tape where possible. We also put in stronger oversight for the Minister around the audit process; ensured that the Ministry for Primary Industries was accountable, like other quota managers; and shortened up the appeal process time frame. So all succinct things that I am confident will deliver a better outcome for us. So I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022 data-id=\u00223c913934dc583eaa83474f0b938aa98c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223c913934dc583eaa83474f0b938aa98c\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour) (10:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Like my colleague, the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor, I rise to speak in favour of the India fair-trade agreement bills\u2014what are now two bills before us\u2014at this third reading. As my colleague has pointed out, it isn\u2019t the agreement that Labour would have negotiated, it\u2019s not the legislation that precisely we would be bringing to the House, but it is a step in the right direction. One that allows us the opportunity to grow and develop the relationship between the two countries over the 15-year horizon.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI know, Madam Speaker, as you\u2019ve pointed out, we\u2019re not speaking about the agreement but rather the legislation specifically. There is, of course, the important tether between the two, which is the commencement date. As the Minister spoke to in the chair earlier, the finalisation of the agreement itself is very much waiting for this legislation to pass, and then the agreement will come into force as well. So with the Speaker\u2019s permission, I did just want to acknowledge not only the Minister who\u2019s concluded the agreement but also my colleague the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor, and the Hon Nanaia Mahuta\u2014last term\u2014for her work, which I\u2019ll speak to briefly in a moment. But also to thank Vangelis Vitalis, our chief negotiator; Richard Griffin, who was the lead on the legal team; and the broader Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade staff, who played both a role in the agreement but also the drafting of the legislation, and who were in front of us at select committee answering many, many questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe agreement itself runs into 20 chapters that cover a range of issues that I won\u2019t speak about, because I feel like, for me, the important thing in terms of what it\u2019s doing is opening lanes. Both lanes in terms of relationships across academia and trade and people-to-people contact, and really ensuring that New Zealanders into the future are fluent in both worlds. So from an internationalist\u2019s perspective, my view is that this is not only appropriate, but so important in changing times. Others have referenced Liberation Day in the context of a changing world. That is important for the legislation that we\u2019re bringing to the House; it is important for timing and making sure that we\u2019re making the most of opportunities not only for us but for the young people coming out of university who are looking for those job opportunities. The Minister mentioned that one in every four jobs are connected directly to trade. Those are direct connections. There is so much opportunity ahead that the legislation\u2014that, hopefully, we will be passing today\u2014will present for young people, as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf I could also recognise the role of the Indian community, who have rallied around the agreement, and the legislation to give effect to the agreement, including the New Zealand Indian Central Association under the president Veer Khar, who\u2019s welcomed the agreement publicly and pushed for cross-party support. And the India New Zealand Business Council, led by the chief executive Sunil Kaushal, who called the signing of the agreement \u201Ca momentous occasion\u201D. I know those community leaders have been watching this legislation pass through the House, and will be welcoming the passage today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs I mentioned earlier, getting to the signing or to passage of legislation, often requires work across parties for a number of years. Certainly, that has happened in this case; beginning, in many ways, in February 2020 with Labour\u2019s India - New Zealand 2025 plan that talked about the development of the relationship to this point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd that focused on things like strengthening our PhD programmes with the University of Auckland, growing diplomatic relationships, and opening technical dialogue on how cyber-relationships could develop and evolve. I mention this because we had some critique from New Zealand First members about how we were going to engage in the cyber-technology space. That work has been done over the last several years and it replicates some of our agreement with the EU and the UK as well. So this isn\u2019t a piece of legislation that has arrived in the House without that work being done in the background. I do think members ought to be confident and that there has been that cross-party support for years and for years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, in terms of getting to this legislation being in the House, Labour was privy to some discussions in the lead up to the legislation being presented to the House. We were very firm on our view that there was a need for protections and the labour space to match this legislation being brought to the House. So capacity for the labour inspectorate, but also legal advice being provided to those individuals who were coming to New Zealand, to ensure that we didn\u2019t end up with a problem where we would have an escalation in terms of individuals who were being exploited through entering New Zealand on those visas. We will continue to monitor that as this legislation passes and is enforced. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would caution the House on the irresponsible use of language in terms of those visas. I spoke to this at the second reading of the bill yesterday in that the settings when you look at them\u2014and you just need to read through the settings of the visas\u2014do not stretch our commitments to India in a grandiose, new, novel way. They reflect the visas that we already have under New Zealand law. They continue to allow for the Minister\u2019s discretion in terms of policy settings, much like the other visas that we have as well. Indeed when you look at the student visa settings, they are lower in terms of the guarantee of employment. I do think that once this legislation passes, I would just caution members of the House to be responsible with their language in regards to what this legislation does and what it does not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELikewise, in terms of the investment commitments that multiple members have spoken about today and yesterday in the House, this is a duty to promote and it is not one where benefits in terms of tariff reduction can be clawed back retrospectively. So at the 15-year point, if a determination is made by India that we have not met that promotion obligation, the businesses, the exporters who have benefited over that 15-year period time of time cannot have those benefits removed from them. It is very much forward-looking. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYesterday, in committee of the whole House, the Minister was questioned by New Zealand First members about the investment provisions into New Zealand, and the Minister made the very good point that those investment provisions in this legislation are a cut and paste of the provisions that are offered under other agreements as well. So there isn\u2019t preferential treatment. There is nothing new here, and if New Zealand First members are objecting to the investment provisions internally in relation to this agreement and this legislation, then one would think that they would also object to the identical provisions in the EU agreement, which they did not disagree with. That is the point of discrimination that I spoke to earlier as well. So again, for those members, if they are validly concerned, that needs to be a line that they hold across agreements, and it is simply not, in this case. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First members also lamented many times that they hadn\u2019t had sufficient say in this agreement, and asked when New Zealand First had. They had it in Cabinet. They had more of a say than many parties in this House and there was certainly an opportunity if their intention was to change or alter the agreement and the legislation in any way, to do it in that scenario. As a member of the Government, in terms of committing to this legislation, what should have happened at the stage that Cabinet agreed as a whole was that there should have been a commitment from the Foreign Minister to give effect to the promotion clause of that agreement, which must now be worked on. There must be a commitment going forward. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPolitics is politics, but we must remember that this is one in four jobs we\u2019re talking about in terms of export. There is an opportunity here for New Zealand to begin a relationship that we can certainly develop and improve on in the coming decade-plus, and we would hope that members across the House can continue to work on this in the coming years ahead. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022673069789fe74d02ac517109c173ccbd\u0022 data-id=\u0022399aac704f31cf7e6ed45f2cdb6c0d26\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022673069789fe74d02ac517109c173ccbd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022399aac704f31cf7e6ed45f2cdb6c0d26\u0022\u003EHon Dr SHANE RETI (National\u2014Whang\u0101rei) (10:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I\u2019m very pleased to be a small part of this bill and to support it. For those naysayers in the House over yesterday and today, I think the mantra, with time, will become true; that success has many fathers and failure will be an orphan. And I think those orphans will become fathers very quickly. With that, I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1502968a11c7c42d8a47ca6cdc5bac4\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: This is a split call. The Hon Dr Phil Twyford\u2014oh, sorry, the Hon Phil Twyford.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229f071e5323b640f383726a46f39e8187\u0022 data-id=\u0022cf678d14f1876697509f92fa85526e9f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229f071e5323b640f383726a46f39e8187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cf678d14f1876697509f92fa85526e9f\u0022\u003EHon PHIL TWYFORD (Labour\u2014Te Atat\u016B) (10:46)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker for that temporary elevation. I want to just add a few comments\u2014actually, three key points to those that have been made by my colleagues in this debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs has been said a number of times, this agreement is far from perfect. It\u2019s not the agreement that Labour believes that it would have negotiated, but on balance\u2014and this is the important point\u2014we believe that this agreement is in New Zealand\u2019s national interest, and that\u2019s why Labour is supporting it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe key elements, I think, are significant reductions in tariffs for a list of key New Zealand exports. That will make a difference. That will create jobs and generate wealth that our country needs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe argument about immigration and labour mobility in this agreement has been revealing in many ways. I want to echo Vanushi Walters\u2019 comments that the immigration provisions in this bill do not open the floodgates, as some people have been arguing in this House and outside. They are actually quite constrained and quite modest and fit well within New Zealand\u2019s existing policy settings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe third and hotly debated issue has been the question of the commitment that New Zealand makes in this agreement to promote up to $33 billion of investment from New Zealand into India over 15 years. And we\u2019ve raised questions about that from the beginning of this process. Questioning its credibility and how wise, how prudent it is to have that kind of commitment in this agreement. Ultimately, it is about best endeavours. It\u2019s a commitment to promote, and the agreement does contain mechanisms for India, over time, to be able to review and assess whether or not New Zealand has met its commitment in this regard. I guess it\u2019s our hope that New Zealand exporters will price in and will factor in any risk associated with that clause. And by the time that the Indian Government does come to assess whether or not we\u2019ve met our commitments, that in fact so much shared value will have been created through this agreement that that particular provision will pale into insignificance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to say, in relation to New Zealand First and Green Party colleagues in this debate, that it is always OK, I believe, to be debating economic policy and policy considerations around trade agreements, whether you\u2019re coming from an economic nationalist perspective or other perspectives. And to David Wilson, I would say that I don\u2019t believe anybody, certainly on this side of the House, has suggested that New Zealand First\u2019s opposition to this bill or its conduct in this debate is in any way racist. I don\u2019t think it is. But, actually, when New Zealand First\u2019s leaders in this House routinely denigrate people on the basis of their ethnicity or country of origin in this House and in the community and use anti-immigration and anti-migrant rhetoric, that ramps up a hostile and abusive climate towards people who have come to this country as migrants at some time in the past, that is racist and is highly regrettable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to make the final point that the geopolitical environment really is critically important in this, and Vanushi Walters made, I thought, some excellent comments on this. The direction of US foreign policy under the Trump administration, really, removing the United States as any kind of reliable ally, whether it\u2019s in trade or security or anything else, has meant that under New Zealand\u2019s independent foreign policy\u2014which, hopefully, will become a lot more independent after the coming election\u2014we have to look at other partners and other relationships. India is the most populous country in the world, well on the way to becoming a great power. We must develop and deepen our bilateral relationship with India and other friends in Asia, including ASEAN. This trade agreement is an important way that we can do that, and so I\u2019m glad to commend this bill to the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022 data-id=\u0022f88bc93e52fafae78f330eac38e26473\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f88bc93e52fafae78f330eac38e26473\u0022\u003EKATIE NIMON (National\u2014Napier) (10:51)\u003C/span\u003E: To the doubters and the haters: the doubters that thought we wouldn\u2019t get this done in a term, and yet here we are, and to the haters who think this is not going to make a difference, it will. It\u2019s going to make a massive difference for the people of Hawke\u2019s Bay and for New Zealand. With that, I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022154727523a59431ab210aea1cf707272\u0022 data-id=\u0022690ea0475aa9ad9377e8c2633d9efb9c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022154727523a59431ab210aea1cf707272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022690ea0475aa9ad9377e8c2633d9efb9c\u0022\u003EHon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour) (10:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This legislation, as many of us in this House have said, is enabling legislation. It brings the New Zealand - India Free Trade Agreement, which has already been signed, into effect. It does a bunch of things: it amends the Tariff Act 1988, and, basically, it makes changes to allow for preferential tariff rates that have been agreed through the free-trade agreement (FTA). That is good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs many of my colleagues on this side of the House have already said, while this is by no means a perfect FTA, and it is not one that Labour would have necessarily landed on\u2014and I will touch upon some of that in a short while\u2014it does for the first time give us preferential access for New Zealand honey, for example. That has a 66 percent tariff that will be cut to about three-quarters of that over a five-year period, and this amendment to the Tariff Act allows for this to happen. New Zealand wine: a 150 percent tariff going down to at least 50 percent, or perhaps a quarter\u201425 percent\u2014over 10 years, and further reductions that will match improvements that are granted to future FTA partners, as well. This part of the legislation goes towards allowing for the tariff reductions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is also a part of this legislation that goes towards investment screening, and so it amends the Overseas Investment Act 2005 and the Overseas Investment Regulations 2005 to lift the consent threshold for non-Government Indian investors in significant business assets from $100 million to $200 million. On the point of the investment clause, though, that is a risk that Labour has repeatedly raised with the Government. It is a risk of the necessity for effort towards NZ$33 billion being invested in India, but, again, there are a number of companies that asked for bipartisan support for the FTA and they, ultimately, will have to wear the risk if, at the end of the 15-year period, India unilaterally decides that New Zealand hasn\u2019t put enough effort into progressing that $33 billion of investment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is one aspect of it that we didn\u2019t agree with. But, on balance, as many others have said, we have supported the agreement and, therefore, we support the enabling legislation that we are debating in the House today, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, this legislation also allows quota management systems for apples, for kiwifruit, and for m\u0101nuka honey to be established through regulation. An Amendment Paper that was already debated in the committee stage has split the bill in two, which brings me to a point around the process of this legislation, given that it is enabling the FTA off that, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Government knew that they didn\u2019t have the numbers to pass this legislation and that they would need Labour\u2019s support to bring the FTA into force. Astonishingly, they chose to exclude us from the negotiation phase of it, from the early briefings, and from any copy of unredacted advice at any point of this, and that is not how enduring trade policy is made. That is not how you treat the other major party in Parliament who you will need to rely on to rescue your legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022661d0a0143c235153d394de3609a46fb\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: What did you do when you were in Government? Not an invite, not a single shared briefing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022154727523a59431ab210aea1cf707272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002243b3a9eab752c10814e8d3a3462e141b\u0022\u003EHon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the Minister for Trade and Investment said, \u201CWhat did we do in Government?\u201D We didn\u2019t have a split Government that was fighting amongst themselves where one part of the Government wouldn\u2019t support what the other part of the Government was doing, where the Foreign Minister exited the chat, and\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f75891b9fb334db82106149dc849d71\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: What about the CPTPP?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022154727523a59431ab210aea1cf707272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e3b654e0c8f3b6efa4928e329edac405\u0022\u003EHon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN\u003C/span\u003E: If we\u2019d relied on the other major party in this House, we wouldn\u2019t have treated Parliament as an afterthought. We would have included the other major party right at the start of that process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThis is a shoddy process from the Government, and I will also then make the point that while the previous speaker Katie Nimon, who resumed her seat before I spoke, said that there were many doubters who claimed that this Government wouldn\u2019t be able to negotiate within one term, implying that it was all down to this Government\u2019s negotiation skills. It wasn\u2019t. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e29eb36b6513d4856c075c99044b6c60\u0022\u003ETom Rutherford\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right\u2014got it done.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022154727523a59431ab210aea1cf707272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022022a4d497b45b821e7d5329983848d24\u0022\u003EHon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN\u003C/span\u003E: It wasn\u2019t, Tom Rutherford. That\u2019s not right, because it was very clear from the Indian side that geopolitical changes had meant that while New Zealand also had to look to diversify our trade, so did India. India has been actively negotiating 10 trade agreements in this time, whereas they had not been quite so inclined to be supportive of bilateral trade agreements prior to the US administration.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhile members opposite may quibble about this, it is very clear from the Indian side that it wasn\u2019t down to just the power of negotiation by this Government. Of course, there was a huge amount of work that was done before by the former Labour Government\u2014by Nanaia Mahuta, by David Parker, and by Damien O\u2019Connor\u2014to strengthen the foreign relationship between the two countries that led to this, as well, but the major point there is the shift in geopolitical necessities, or the US administration, basically, requiring India to look differently. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other point that I wanted to touch on in terms of what I said I would come back to previously with regard to the fact that Labour would have done this differently is our focus on our trade-for-all policy agenda. That was developed by David Parker in the previous administration to ensure that trade delivers broad, equitable benefits across communities while also upholding Te Tiriti obligations and environmental standards, none of which, of course, is taken seriously by the current Government in terms of their focus on negotiating trade agreements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI will also quickly touch on some of Labour\u2019s caveats. When we agreed to support the FTA\u2014and now the enabling legislation, as well, which brings that agreement into force\u2014we were very clear that we would also want to ensure that we strengthen protections against migrant exploitation in this country and that the Government then needs to expand the labour inspectorate to fund at least 14 additional staff that are focused on addressing migrant worker exploitation, serious and complex immigration offending, and a few other things around faster visa changes and progressing the Modern Slavery Bill, all of which the Government has agreed to in principle but must also deliver in full, including progressing the Modern Slavery Bill. Of course, the previous Government had done a fair bit of work on that, and all this Government needs to do is to progress that work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to touch briefly on the reason why certain other parties like New Zealand First have stated quite clearly that they won\u2019t support either the FTA or this enabling legislation, and that is the narrative around immigration. I agree absolutely with what my colleague the Hon Phil Twyford has said. I know that David Wilson in his contribution specifically pointed to what I have said in the second reading. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo underscore or to highlight what Phil Twyford said in response, which is absolutely correct, I was not referring to any New Zealand First members\u2019 contributions in the House on this legislation. What I was referring to were comments made by the leadership of New Zealand First, by senior Cabinet Ministers, who have continually subjected Indian New Zealanders to a rhetoric that paints them as a problem rather than a community to be valued, where through their claims of \u201Cunfettered migration\u201D\u2014I won\u2019t repeat the supposed hyperbole by some of their senior Cabinet Ministers where they paint Indian migration to be something that is out of control, a narrative that others an entire group of New Zealanders, that has led to a barrage of vile and hateful comments online, graffiti outside an Auckland school that a number of Indian children attend, graffiti that calls for violence against Indians. That is hateful, racist, and xenophobic. We all know that online violence can translate into physical violence in real life as well, and therein lies the irresponsibility of the Foreign Minister and senior Cabinet Ministers to stoke division and hate and to make a group of people feel less safe and like they don\u2019t belong, simply because they may have a different skin colour or have been born somewhere else. The Prime Minister, who did absolutely nothing, called it out as racist but refused to act on it. For a party that talks about being tough on consequences, there were no consequences here, and that is wrong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022 data-id=\u0022f18eca23320ff734fe097bd132e53876\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f18eca23320ff734fe097bd132e53876\u0022\u003EMILES ANDERSON (National\u2014Waitaki) (11:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Madam Speaker. I\u2019m thrilled to be able to take this call on the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill. As the chair of the Primary Production Committee and as a farmer and grower myself, this piece of legislation is going to make a huge difference to the primary producers in New Zealand. I think it\u2019s a disgrace that some parties are scaremongering to justify their opposition to this bill. With that, I\u2019d just like to commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022297bc572c27f45308dffb067ca3e7915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224df32f6da190196bf708c9916859876a\u0022\u003EDr Hamish Campbell\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd82f593b630b2045d2be4e577cdb72a\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022123cbaf54c5788dac83538a07ce5a2c7\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Hamish Campbell\u2014Hamish Campbell clearly was up first.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb7fe26ae2fb37a5dd7ac022912f72e1\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: He hadn\u2019t sat down; he hadn\u2019t finished.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223167f9090c7829f64d5219219c441bb9\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, I\u2019ve made the call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228bfdc74ba28eb3b655c099e6881cda37\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec5a5d43c060baaaf2f110c87c0846fe\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve got a point of order from the Hon Rachel Brooking. I hope it\u2019s not questioning my judgment. I have got very good peripheral vision, and if it\u2019s a point of order about something else, I will take it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u002229fbda9702e11ff2a5269a2be0de6ff8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002229fbda9702e11ff2a5269a2be0de6ff8\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (11:02)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a clarification, Madam Speaker, and that is that the member who had been making this speech, Miles Anderson, had not finished when the next member was standing up next to him. He was standing up before me\u2014I\u2019m not disputing that question. Is the ruling now that you can stand up whilst a person is still taking their call and that that counts?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220cd9d765b4e8e5b6be07a34e28b62a1c\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, it\u2019s not, but Miles Anderson had clearly suggested he was signing off, at which point Hamish Campbell stood. You both stood up really quickly, but Hamish Campbell was first.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022297bc572c27f45308dffb067ca3e7915\u0022 data-id=\u002290c2cb9666308c86c7ad1d6590f73065\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022297bc572c27f45308dffb067ca3e7915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002290c2cb9666308c86c7ad1d6590f73065\u0022\u003EDr HAMISH CAMPBELL (National\u2014Ilam) (11:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It\u2019s a great honour to stand up and speak in support of the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill. This is a once-in-a-generation agreement that gives our exporters amazing access to 1.4\u00A0billion customers and an economy which is soon going be the third biggest in the world. Therefore, I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill and the India Export Quotas (Apples, Kiwifruit, and M\u0101nuka Honey) Bill be now read a third time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 93\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 29\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBills read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227fd07bc45d9a258b750c8b76351e6ebf\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00226d16eaa066ca972d065ca9812f7f9f6b\u0022\u003ELocal Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022db92f85b15512553e9d5ba71c53a30bf\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cbf4e702b5e74b3daa67696fb16c9355\u0022\u003EPart 1 Amendments relating to system improvements\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a8eb38254bc1c8b43889c626d255465e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the House is in committee on the Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill. I am aware that the Government released two Amendment Papers containing substantive new policies just a few hours before the House started sitting. This committee stage may, therefore, take longer to ensure that members have time to fully examine those new Amendment Papers. We start with Part 1, which is the debate on clauses 4 to 22, \u201CAmendments relating to system improvements\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=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u0022bbf3cbdcc6747f5bbfcea074402ab43d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bbf3cbdcc6747f5bbfcea074402ab43d\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (11:06)\u003C/span\u003E: Kia orana, thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for identifying the fairly late landing of those two Amendment Papers. My first question is just seeking some clarity to help us move through this as swiftly as we can but also in a logical form. The two Amendment Papers from the Minister of Local Government\u2014the most recent ones\u2014I take it that 803 is dealt with in Part 1, and his other one is dealt with in Part 2, but, perhaps, the Minister can assist the committee in terms of clarifying that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ll move on to couple of the issues that I have in terms of wanting to raise them with the Minister. The first is clause 4. I\u2019m just signalling that\u2014certainly as Labour\u2019s local government spokesperson\u2014it is my intention to move through these matters in a chronological clause order, and as I dispense with things, I\u2019ll just move on to the next one, rather than jumping all around the place. If we start with clause 4, this is the amended purpose for the piece of legislation. What it is seeking to do\u2014and this was clarified in the in the select committee in terms of a starting point\u2014is to, effectively, remove a broader approach in terms of what the purpose of local government is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, what we see there is a little bit of a change in terms of the ordering of the language that is there. But my question to the Minister is: why is it the case that the Government intends to simply remove a reference to local government, given they are decision makers and representatives, just like every single person in this Parliament is, of the local community? Why is it that there is a need to remove that reference of, effectively, councils and decision makers playing what is a clear broader role in terms of meeting the needs of local communities and replacing it with what is a much more narrow definition in terms of that focus on infrastructure? This is not to say that infrastructure needs are not being addressed by local government, perhaps, in terms of their consideration. There are other conversations around revenue around that and what the prioritisation might be, but this is fundamentally around what the purpose of local government is in terms of its existence. So my first question is really around why that broad nature of the role has been removed and a pure narrow focus on the issue of infrastructure, on services, and on the regulatory functions that councils undertake.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022749641e2e9cc83702457bafa76837e51\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022749641e2e9cc83702457bafa76837e51\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (11:09)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I will follow Tangi Utikere\u2019s lead in terms of how we\u2019re working through this, but I do very much encourage the Minister of Local Government to engage with us on these late Amendment Papers and where he sees those fitting into the debates\u2014it\u2019s just a very basic process question there. But my question on clause 4, which is \u201CSection 3 amended (Purpose)\u201D is that, as we\u2019ve just heard, there\u2019s now this focus on things\u2014so that is infrastructure, public services, and performance of regulatory functions. And I\u2019m looking at the bill, rather than one of the Minister\u2019s Amendment Papers. So noting that there is this big Amendment Paper 565, and that appears to be the whole bill, but in the Amendment Paper form, and then there are these two newer Amendment Papers released yesterday, and they are 803 and 755, so we might have a bit of jumping around. I\u2019m looking just at the bill as it was reported back from select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs I was saying, the purpose moves on to things, and those things are infrastructure, public services, and performance of regulatory functions. When I looked back at the Local Government Act 2002, there doesn\u2019t appear to be any definitions for \u201Cinfrastructure\u201D or \u201Cpublic services\u201D or \u201Cperformance of regulatory functions\u201D. I couldn\u2019t see one in either what is reported back from the select committee or when I\u2019ve been looking at the Minister\u2019s amendments. Could he please comment on whether he expects that there will be interpretations or definitions for them somewhere, that I\u2019ve misplaced, and if there are no definitions for them, then what does he see them in?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of infrastructure, we\u2019ve just had a lot of discussion in the resource management replacement bills about infrastructure and whether or not this can include, say, green infrastructure\u2014so it might be trees that are going to soak up the rain and prevent flooding, can they be considered as infrastructure? That\u2019s a real question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve had the Aotearoa Circle do a lot of work on the importance of nature-based solutions. Does that fit into the definition of \u201Cinfrastructure\u201D. Then we\u2019ve got public services, and I note there\u2019s other changes that we\u2019ll get to that talk a bit more about what might be public services. Does the Minister think that a public service would be putting on a Matariki festival. Is that a public service? Or does he see public services as being more about the libraries and the swimming pools? Where are the public services?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think the simplest one in that list of three is the performance of regulatory functions. I take that to mean\u2014but I\u2019m interested in the Minister\u2019s comment as well\u2014that those are the functions that, at the moment, councils have under the Resource Management Act, that they have under the Dog Control Act, that they have under the reserve management Act, that they have under the Waste Minimisation Act, and under the Litter Act\u2014and all the other pieces of legislation from this House that require councils, and local authorities, to undertake regulatory functions. That one is much more simple, and I\u2019m just looking for the Minister to say \u201CYes, yes, Rachel Brooking, you\u2019re quite correct. The performance of regulatory functions are those that are required by legislation that comes from this place.\u201D; if not, if it\u2019s anything wider than that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second questions relate to those definitions of \u201Cinfrastructure\u201D\u2014how narrow or wide does the Minister expect it to be? And public services again\u2014how narrow and wide? Are these terms defined anywhere, or does he expect them to be interpreted in relation to the definitions that are found in some other pieces of legislation? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy first question was, again, if he can take us through his Amendment Papers and what parts of the debate he expects those to be covered in. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u0022e92e670295081ad3f437f584e1d5a1ac\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e92e670295081ad3f437f584e1d5a1ac\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (11:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Like my colleagues, I too want to work through this one clause by clause and also get some clarification exactly where the new Amendment Papers sit in this debate we\u2019re having at the moment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do also want to start on clause 4, the amended purpose, which is, obviously, changing section 3(d), which is around the broad role in promoting social, economic, environmental, and cultural wellbeing, and obviously that\u2019s been changed to focusing on infrastructure, public service, and the performance of regulatory functions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is actually whereabouts environmental enhancement and protection sits within that scope, which is obviously quite an important remit that councils have had for a long time, and to remove that visibility from the purposes is concerning. I do have an Amendment Paper that is time stamped 16 September 2026, 09.07, which just adds one wee extra point to this clause, so there will be a (d)(iv) \u201Cenvironmental enhancement and protection\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it\u2019s really an important addition to the purpose, because it does ensure it\u2019s in plain sight, that roles of council will be to look after their environment, because the environment is actually really important in many aspects, including the waterways, wetlands, reserves, that also act as a kind of infrastructure. I know my colleague talked about the definition of \u201Cinfrastructure\u201D, so it\u2019s important that we do consider what that looks like, but the actual role of councils in environmental enhancement and protection I think is also required into this purpose, to ensure that they have the ability to clearly be outlined with the role of the local government, that that is a core component of the purpose of local government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is: will the Minister accept my tabled amendment around including environmental enhancement and protection, and if not, why not? Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00225e6fbb1f682e17ebe6c3af2799254911\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225e6fbb1f682e17ebe6c3af2799254911\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (11:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, colleagues, for questions, and I will do my best to engage regularly in regards to the back and forth on the questions I\u2019m being asked in regards to this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to the questions asked around the Amendment Papers (APs) from my perspective, Amendment Paper 755 amends both parts of the bill, and Amendment Paper 803 deals specifically with Part 1. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFrom a point around definition, the definitions included\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022646cb8057bdfee8bca891c318957ed58\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: Point of Order. Can the Minister put up his microphone? And can you repeat what you said about the second Amendment Paper? You said something; I couldn\u2019t catch it. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fad0b0d269999a417ef5ab13b6bca5f9\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: Amendment Paper 803, which is in regards to development contributions, it does not amend the bill as reported back, it is all new in that context. It is related to Part 1 from my assessment. Obviously, the Clerk may have a differing view but I\u2019m just giving you my view.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e519f5aa4764c2c458e309c9af113215\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just suggest that the Schedule 2 that is in that AP is in Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b990f6fd11cbe2371e5bf2a831e8277\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: OK, we\u2019re all on the same page on that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229270742cad63a931f9396d87ab1c0953\u0022\u003EMike Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Point of Order. Sorry, I also couldn\u2019t hear the very first amendment, so\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223791d6c7c95d758c8299573fc6b2fe9d\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll repeat again. Thanks, colleagues, I was just giving you all some kudos, engaging in saying we\u2019ll do so proactively. In regards to AP 803, that Amendment Paper will relate to Part 1. In regards to Amendment Paper 755, that amends both parts of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to the questions around definitions, I refer the member to section 197, which does include a number of definitions regarded, that was actually some of the feedback from the select committee process, to have more defined terms as part of the legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere was a question in regard to community facilities asked by the member, and the definition of that. The core services are services that the public generally accept as being core council business. In regards to core services related to community facilities\u2014which was an area that the select committee requested to be added to the bill, which we accepted\u2014would include aspects such as libraries, museums, reserves, and other community and recreational facilities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022f3a270b216c2a815c84909e562537da8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f3a270b216c2a815c84909e562537da8\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (11:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. It\u2019s a pleasure to take part in this committee stage on the Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill. I just had a few questions around the initial clauses for 4, 5, and 6, which, if I may surmise to say that they are looking at, essentially, what the Minister or the Government is amending the purpose of the local government system to be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason I wanted to take a call on this\u2014and I know colleagues have had some very specific questions about this\u2014is to ask the Minister of Local Government this. I stand here as an MP from Auckland and I know that the Minister is also from Auckland, and I reflect on the comments that the Minister and his colleagues have made around the importance of localism over an extended period of time. I wanted to ask; how does the stated role of local authorities fit with the Minister\u2019s\u2014and I know we\u2019re talking about the amendments in more detail today. But in terms of how they fit with the purpose, how does he see the local governments that are working within New Zealand\u2014specifically speaking from an Auckland context\u2014being able to meet the priorities that they establish for themselves and their communities when the Minister and his colleagues have consistently undermined that through making unilateral, unconsented decisions around the internal process that lead to decision making for their community? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDoes the Minister think that local authorities\u2014when we look at their purpose and when we look at how they must \u201Cplay a broad role\u201D, as it states in clause 4, \u201Cin meeting the current and future needs of their communities\u201D, are they able to make independent decisions, as local representatives, about the types of views and perspectives that they take into account before setting their priorities? It\u2019s all very well to say that local government must, as a purpose, meet the current and future needs of their communities, but how, Minister, are they meant to be able to do this when they have central government coming in and stating that the way that they choose to make their decisions and the people that they choose to be involved in what they determine is important for their local communities are unilaterally\u2014according to central government\u2014not good enough?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002237f3638539e4316b5a1a9f101703dfa4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002237f3638539e4316b5a1a9f101703dfa4\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (11:22)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, Madam Chair. Well, firstly, I strongly refute the statements made by the member in regard to this Government. What we inherited as a Government was a situation around the purpose of local government that was \u201Cwellbeings\u201D. Well, no one in this country can define the scope of wellbeing. It, basically, includes everything, and, as a result of that, we\u2019ve got councils as monopolies spending local community and ratepayer money on everything. We\u2019ve got so many examples, including if you go down the road in Wellington here, of just wasteful spending.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI make no apology for narrowing the definition in the purpose statement, in regard to new section 3(d) in clause 4, to say that they need to meet \u201Cthe current and future needs of their communities for good-quality, cost-effective, and local\u2014(i) infrastructure; and (ii) public services; and (iii) performance of regulatory functions.\u201D I make no apology for being very specific on what local government should deliver and what it should not, and one of the challenges that we inherited was that the definition was so loose and wide that councils did not have clarity of what their core purpose was. The changes that we\u2019ve made\u2014which were recommended through the select committee process\u2014in regard to clauses 4, 5, and 6 have defined that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe should have \u201Ccost-effective,\u201D in the definition. We should ensure that councils are delivering services to their community in a cost-effective manner. I mean, that sort of, for many, is common sense. I appreciate that many on my left don\u2019t have that same common sense, but that is the reality and that\u2019s what we\u2019re doing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022 data-id=\u0022c8caa24f3429b3d0ca237d8bb71437a7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c8caa24f3429b3d0ca237d8bb71437a7\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN (Green) (11:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I wondered if the Minister of Local Government would like to elucidate a little further on wasteful spending. Does he think wasteful spending includes buying the land and then the building for the T\u0101kina conference centre, which is surely fundamental to economic wellbeing? Does he think wasteful spending in Wellington would include the support for Zealandia and for Predator Free? Or does he think that supporting World of Wearable Art, as an event that brings a huge number of people and a huge amount of positivity to the city, would be an example of wasteful spending? If not, does he think that local communities are incapable during consultation of saying what they think is important for a city or a district?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u00225aff6e9c8afd963b856a9773e899a797\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225aff6e9c8afd963b856a9773e899a797\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (11:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I think I infer from the Minister of Local Government\u2019s most recent exchange\u2014I was going to ask him what evidence there is around the previous definition there, basically, preventing councils from operating effectively. I infer from the Minister\u2019s response that it\u2019s because this definition of wellbeing is something that can\u2019t be kind of measured. That\u2019s what I\u2019m hearing from the Minister, and so I\u2019ll move on to my next question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen we\u2019re looking at the purpose, which we know is the overriding focus of local government and what it can, can\u2019t, should, or shouldn\u2019t do, the question for the Minister is: how does this suggested change outlined in clause 4 as the purpose provide any assistance to councils in the sector who are dealing with a whole range of issues that, on first glance, you may actually think are not perhaps covered? Some aspects of that are things like community safety and how councils are going to address issues of community safety outlined under the proposed purpose here. If it\u2019s still possible, where would he see that fitting in?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother example could be around the engagement of young people, or homelessness in terms of the approach that that might bring for councils\u2014and I see the responsible Minister is just in the Chamber here today. How are these sorts of things going to be able to be undertaken by councils, given the change in definition? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe could go a little bit further and talk about climate adaptation. Yes, there are aspects of infrastructure there, but if councils are not either pre-emptively or responsively undertaking some infrastructure piece but are doing pieces of work to mitigate or to adapt, where does that fit in terms of the proposed change outlined in clause 4? It might be that maybe the Minister actually thinks that those are things that fall outside the purpose of local government, and so I think it is important to get some clarity around whether that is the case or not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would like to also just focus on economic growth, and Celia Wade-Brown has just touched on that. Where in clause 4 is the provision for councils to have, as their purpose, economic growth opportunities for their communities? Where there are communities where there is potential population decline, how are councils able to turn their minds to effectively doing work in that space, if at all? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EActually, it would be interesting to hear whether the Minister sees that there is a role for local government in that regional economic development space. If I think about my own community, our council, alongside our neighbouring Manawat\u016B District Council, effectively funds the local economic development agency, CEDA\u2014the Central Economic Development Agency. Where would those sorts of spending decisions or priorities fall within the purpose, because I think that there is an acceptance\u2014certainly, in my community\u2014that the work they do is really important in terms of generating opportunities. Where does economic development sit within the purpose? It would be helpful for the Minister to identify that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00224200ee76d50d641f84e1f46d70144dc8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224200ee76d50d641f84e1f46d70144dc8\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (11:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Now, going back to my question about definitions of infrastructure, public services, and performance of regulatory function, the Minister of Local Government mentioned in his answer to me before \u201Csection 197\u201D, and I presume he means section 197 of the principal legislation, the Local Government Act 2002. That says, \u201CIn this subpart, and Schedule 13,\u2014\u201D and then it lists some definitions. I can\u2019t see any amendments to section 197 in this bill, although they might be in an Amendment Paper that I haven\u2019t picked up. But those definitions in section 197 are limited to that specific part of the Act, and that part of the Act has to do with things like development contributions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, there\u2019s more, because not only does that not apply to the purpose section; it also doesn\u2019t use the same words. Some of the words are familiar. The word \u201Cinfrastructure\u201D is used, but only with the word \u201Ccommunity\u201D in front of it, and that \u201C(a) means land, or development assets on land, owned or controlled by the territorial authority for the purpose of providing public amenities; and (b) includes land that the territorial authority will acquire for that purpose\u201D.  Because that definition is \u201Ccommunity infrastructure\u201D, and is what is applied to development contributions, it is different from infrastructure, which I presume would be wider. Maybe the Minister was saying, well, community infrastructure is a subset of infrastructure and infrastructure, in fact, includes much more than community infrastructure\u2014because also defined at section 197 of the principal Act is \u201Cnetwork infrastructure\u201D, and that means \u201Cthe provision of roads and other transport, water, wastewater, and stormwater collection and management\u201D. But there are still many types of infrastructure that we can argue over that would not be included in either network infrastructure or community infrastructure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI note, going back to these Resource Management Act debates that we\u2019ve had recently, we\u2019ve been told by every provider of everything that they are critical infrastructure and should be considered infrastructure. I think we even got to the level of private early childhood centres being infrastructure. So it is really important that we are clear about what this definition of \u201Cinfrastructure\u201D means in the purpose of the Local Government Act and if it is wide or narrow, because the Minister has told us that it\u2019s important that we get rid of the wellbeings because they are not specific enough. He said, \u201CWe\u2019re being very specific.\u201D This definition is not very specific; it could mean a whole lot of things. And I have heard, I think, this Minister, or definitely other Ministers from his Government, say that a garden on the roof of a bus stop is terrible wasteful spending. Now, when I have seen gardens on top of bus stops, they have been stormwater infrastructure. There is a whole lot of science behind this, as well. They are there to slow down the water getting to the roads and causing flooding. Is that included in the definition of \u201Cinfrastructure\u201D? Sorry, his answer before gave me no help whatsoever. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd then, public services\u2014they\u2019re not defined in section 197 of the principal Act, either. Neither is the \u201Cperformance of regulatory functions\u201D. I know he went over the page to new section 11A, inserted by clause 7, where there is this change so that museums are specified\u2014something else is specified; I can\u2019t see it now\u2014but that does not address my question of the definitions of these words. Do we look to other legislation? Is he saying that existing section 197 is it? Are there any other changes to section 197? Does he take my point that, if these are left undefined, then, in fact, he is undermining his own objective, which is to be very specific? By having these terms undefined, it\u2019s not specific and, therefore, it will be important for the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E that he gives some indication of where he thinks they will go. And do those public services include the festivals that have now been mentioned a couple of times? The Minister has not answered that question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022a9f62404a1650f235f0f3fd83b1a0618\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a9f62404a1650f235f0f3fd83b1a0618\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (11:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you for that. If I could just ask\u2014if you could mention the clause that you\u2019re referring to, it will help me to be more specific with my answer in regards to that. There are 22 clauses in this part, and I know that we\u2019ve just focused on one so far.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe purpose question related to clause 4: the new purpose does not stop any councils from doing these things. The question was related to economic growth more broadly; however, the new purpose does force councils to prioritise on that purpose first and foremost. One of the aspects is obviously infrastructure, and infrastructure investment enables economic growth. We don\u2019t want the legislation to try and legislate for every single activity that one can imagine and think of. We know that that is not practical nor going to be possible. Any legislation, including this, uses broader terms which are outlined very clearly in the clauses, which talk about community purpose, the cost-effective aspect of that, and the delivery of the public services. I\u2019ll leave it there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u00228ce5304087bd466481c70cf070f33de7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228ce5304087bd466481c70cf070f33de7\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (11:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to continue the conversation with the Minister of Local Government in relation to his Amendment Paper 755, amended clause 5(1A), when we\u2019re talking about the clause that defines \u201Ccost-effective\u201D. I think this is a very interesting intervention on behalf of the Government and I have a few questions for the Minister around this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen we are looking at \u201Ccost-effective\u201D\u2014and I appreciate his comments that it\u2019s not possible for the Government to legislate for every different type of activity that the local government may do; of course that\u2019s the case. But what the Government has decided to do is to put a definition into a bill that governs the actions of local government and put that definition of \u201Ccost-effective\u201D in, but it isn\u2019t clear to me\u2014and I\u2019m interested in the Minister\u2019s answer to this question\u2014who is the arbiter of whether or not a decision is cost-effective, because there are a few things and, reading the clause, there are issues that the clause itself raises in terms of the types of functions that local government could be involved with\u2014for example, infrastructure; for example, public services\u2014that may have decisions that need to be made on the basis of common sense and the basis of knowledge of their community. It may be that there are infrastructure decisions that might be more expensive than the cheapest possible option, but that infrastructure is likely to last longer. That infrastructure is likely to require fewer repairs, therefore saving the ratepayer over the long term. Those types of decisions are a matter of judgment, and what we have seen with this Government and the attitude to local government is a refusal to allow local government a respectable level of autonomy to be able to make those types of judgments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I want to know is, when he talks about \u201Ccost-effective\u201D, is it in his view what is cost-effective, or is it in the view of what the local council considers to be the most cost-effective, accepting that they are elected and they have the right to make decisions on behalf of their community and they may have more awareness than central government? Or is it an objective standard that some third party will be able to able to impose? Or, conversely, is it something that would only apply in situations where there is such a clear lack of compliance with this particular clause that that would be the only place or the only time that there would be a challenge in relation to the cost-effectiveness of local government? Or is this simply meant to be a directional instruction from central government, which we know delegates responsibility to local government to say, \u201CWell, you should be cost-effective, but we\u2019re actually not going to follow up on this.\u201D? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s a lot in here, and there are a few examples that I think the Minister may want to think about. In Auckland, we know that we had devastating floods in relation to the Auckland floods in 2023. We know that the city wasn\u2019t prepared for the amount of water that came down, and we had terrible consequences for the people who died in that tragedy, we had terrible consequences for homeowners, and we had terrible consequences for infrastructure. It was a tragic event and it was near to Cyclone Gabrielle, which also had impacts on Auckland, but it was generally a very, very disruptive and terrible chapter in relation to how our infrastructure was able to deal with the effects of climate change - induced severe weather events. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf the Auckland Council is making decisions that are more expensive but do provide greater resilience for their communities in relation to flood protection, will they be compliant with this clause 5(1A), which sets out the definition of \u201Ccost-effective\u201D, or won\u2019t they be, and who will be the judge of that? When we look at decisions that council makes that may be a choice, a judgment call, is the Minister saying with this clause that he\u2019s going to be stepping in and involving himself in those judgment calls, or is he going to allow local government the respect to be able to make decisions in the best interests of the community that are cost-effective in the short or the long term?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00220eca9f7e8fe82e3c1e8cf3788add5828\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220eca9f7e8fe82e3c1e8cf3788add5828\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (11:40)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for the question in regards to clause 5(1A) on page 4. That clause actually includes the definition that the member is referring to it. So it is a defined term and it outlines, clearly, what we are referring to in regards to what is cost-effective. Again, the member can see that it\u2019s also based on the definition of \u201Cpublic value\u201D in the latest Government procurement rules. So we have taken that consistency. It is important to be clear and concise in regards to what we expect of local government to deliver, and, again, that is more helpful than something that is undefined and, therefore, is open to significant interpretation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EBut the points that the member has raised in regards to infrastructure, such as waste water or stormwater, to prevent flooding, which I acknowledge to the member, and for many in the room, is a significant issue and concern for our communities. The definition clearly states that when these decisions are made, they need to be considered from a perspective of value for money. They need to be using resources effectively and economically and without waste, and taking into account the total costs and benefits. So I don\u2019t think those are, again, at all unreasonable, but, at the moment, those checks and balances aren\u2019t specified in a way in which we are intending they are here. As a result of that, local governments can proceed with decision making in a more robust manner than what they have been able to do in the past.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u002200f2c67fc92a94d2be832af7f0131c75\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002200f2c67fc92a94d2be832af7f0131c75\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (11:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019ll move on to clause 5 now as well, which is the interpretation. I\u2019m just wondering about community outcomes, which is defined, again, in relation to that infrastructure, public services, and performance of regulatory function. But what I\u2019m interested in is the link between the outcomes that the local authority aims to achieve and meeting the current and future needs of communities for those infrastructure, public services, and performance of regulatory functions. So just if the Minister of Local Government can clarify that those outcomes are quite different and if he could explain how it is that the outcomes are different from the underlying infrastructure, public services, and performance of regulatory functions. Would an example be that you have infrastructure and the public service to provide public transport, but the outcome you are looking for is people using buses? Is that how he sees that link between the outcome and his listed three things that go to the purpose of local government?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAnd then a subsequent follow-up question from the definition discussion, if we can call it that. The performance of regulatory functions, does he consider that it includes biodiversity functions that are included in the Resource Management Act? That\u2019s a specific question on that performance of regulatory functions that wasn\u2019t in the list\u2014well, I mentioned the Resource Management Act, but I was actually thinking more of the consenting functions under that Act, rather than the biodiversity\u2014also biosecurity functions as well. Thank you, Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u0022abe8960f93f5c460fcc786d8929e5af1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022abe8960f93f5c460fcc786d8929e5af1\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (11:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I also have some questions on clause 5(1A). They\u2019re different questions to what we heard before around \u201Ccost-effective\u201D. My questions relate to 5(1A)(a) and 5(1A)(b). The first one is where it talks about \u201Cusing resources effectively, economically and without waste\u201D. That\u2019s actually a very strong term, \u201Cwithout waste\u201D\u2014\u201Cusing resources effectively, economically and without waste\u201D. I think it\u2019s really important to establish what this actually means. Are we saying that cost-effective means that councils need to aim for zero waste in their delivery of infrastructure and public services, given those words \u201Cwithout waste\u201D? Because, if that\u2019s the case, that\u2019s actually significant legislation. It\u2019s very rigid, it\u2019s not flexible\u2014it\u2019s rigid; it says \u201Cwithout waste\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo it would be good to get some clarification on that, because the way that can be interpreted is that, actually, councils need to look at their projects and actually do them as zero waste projects, which is actually good, but it would be nice to know if that\u2019s the case when he refers to \u201Cwithout waste\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other part of that is 5(1A)(b). Taking into account the total costs and benefits of decisions or actions, and, obviously, benefit-cost ratios (BCRs) are very topical in councils and especially transport projects. I\u2019m curious if the Minister has any thoughts on: if you look at a transport project, is there a BCR in mind\u2014a threshold\u2014that a transport project should meet for it actually to be considered cost-effective? For example, maybe, two? That\u2019s getting real value for money; if for every dollar you invest, you get benefits of two. So it\u2019d be really good to know if there is, I guess, a threshold the Minister would recommend, and, actually, BCRs should meet, when councils take into consideration costs and benefits. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other question I have around 5(1A)(b) is, I guess, the total cost. For clarity, do the total costs mentioned in this new definition refer to the total cost of the infrastructure of public services delivered over time or just in the short term, and what would that look like in practice for a new infrastructure project like a bridge? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo there\u2019s three questions I\u2019m asking around that definition of \u201Ccost-effectiveness\u201D: one is around the definition of \u201Cwithout waste\u201D and whether that means that councils need to be aiming for zero waste in their projects; the other one is around the BCRs, and does the Minister have in mind, when we\u2019re looking at transport projects especially, a BCR threshold that councils need to meet for transport projects before they are considered cost-effective, which I think is, actually, a really important clarification to make so councils can actually know what to aim for when they\u2019re doing their projects. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELastly, is around the total cost and actually are we looking at total costs for short term? Are we looking long term over the span\u2014especially infrastructure projects which are designed to last for four generations. So they\u2019re my three questions around clause 5(1A)(a) and (b) around the interpretation of cost-effectiveness.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022c27d055b3b8aa398a1840f9685623e85\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c27d055b3b8aa398a1840f9685623e85\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (11:47)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member Mike Davidson for his questions in regards to clause 5(1A)(a) and (b)\u2014three questions there. The question in regards to total costs relates to the long-term view.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to the questions around specific examples on the benefit-cost ratio for transport projects, it is not the intent of the legislation to be definitive around the specific threshold points in which is deemed appropriate. Those mechanisms in regards to assessment already exist within the transport arena. The purpose, here, is to ensure that there is consideration around any deployment of investment with those rigour, and, obviously, at the moment, some parts of our system already have that but other parts don\u2019t. So this is to ensure we have consistency. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELastly, the question in regards to \u201Cwithout waste\u201D. That doesn\u2019t mean zero waste, but it does imply and mean that councils, when making decisions in regards to investment decisions, that they should do so in a way in which is, obviously, minimising waste as much as possible. At the end of the day, the assessment or the mechanism\u2014to the member\u2019s point around who will judge\u2014at the end of the day, that will be the ratepayer in the community that will have that assessment judgment. Again, the precedent here is to apply that that needs to be a consideration. I think some of the feedback that we\u2019ve had from councils as is, you know, the ability to be quite specific around expectation, and having that within legislation, then ensures that through their processes and procedures that apply, that they have those questions as part of a formal decision-making process. And a result of that, the intent is that the finite amount of capital that is available to be deployed by councils to a wide range of projects, which communities want, will be best targeted or more efficiently targeted than the status quo.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u002216181b699406d10a15f5538eeb018338\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002216181b699406d10a15f5538eeb018338\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (11:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Minister, I have a question on clause 5, but just on clause 4, I do have an Amendment Paper 651 that the Minister of Local Government hasn\u2019t indicated whether he supports it that not. So I\u2019ll just park it with him. I also have an Amendment Paper relating to amending clause 5, which is Amendment Paper 652. It will seek to delete subclause (1) in its entirety. I think I know what the Minister\u2019s view on that might be, but I\u2019ll give him the chance to indicate that. But just in terms of clause 5, section 5 amended, when we\u2019re looking at the definition of community outcomes, the word that\u2019s used there on behalf of the local authority is where it \u201Caims\u201D to achieve something. Now, we all know that the definition of \u201Caim\u201D can be aspirational in many regards, from community to community. That does, obviously, depend on context. But I take on board the responses that the Minister has given around who makes these decisions. It sounds as though it\u2019s a little bit up in the air there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut I\u2019m interested in his thoughts around the definition in clause 5, permitting or encouraging councils to, effectively, prioritise lower-cost options about anything\u2014a whole range of different things\u2014over what might be a higher-cost option but it could provide a more durable, longer-lasting solution to something. Now, we\u2019ve already touched on climate adaptation, for example, where some of the costs could be perhaps not the lowest-cost option, but still could ensure longevity in that the investment is such that you\u2019re actually saving money in the long run because you are mitigating against particular decisions that most of us know in this House will naturally happen over time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I guess it\u2019s just from the Minister\u2014and maybe the saving word is around \u201Cgood-quality\u201D, so maybe it is a qualitative view on a particular decision to be taken by a council, which financially, in terms of the raw dollar cost, might not be the cheapest option, but, in the greater scheme of things, might still be the better option for the community in the long run. So I just wanted to get some clarity that this is not going to fully constrain council\u2019s democratic ability to make decisions in that particular sort of vein.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022be65c0408d08799538a25df6d8857d2e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022be65c0408d08799538a25df6d8857d2e\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (11:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, Madam Chair. Just for the member Tangi Utikere\u2019s feedback, I do apologise, but I won\u2019t be accepting his Amendment Papers, nor for the member from the Greens either. They are not consistent with the Government policy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to the member\u2019s question around cost-effectiveness and does this, in effect, mean lowest cost, the answer is no in that regard. This is about\u2014as the definition notes\u2014value for money. The clear definition in regards to effective and economic and in regards to the point around waste, it\u2019s an \u201Cand, and, and\u201D consideration. This is about value for money. Obviously, when we think about adaptation or, say, flood resilience projects, then the total cost and benefit across the project needs to be considered, including the fact is that investment going to be effective, economic, and reducing waste. So in that context, that is for the council to decide in terms of the appropriateness of deployment of that investment to meet the needs of the problem they\u2019re trying to solve.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022ed41e55452c5a70c56482c3fab27bced\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ed41e55452c5a70c56482c3fab27bced\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (11:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just following on from the Minister\u2019s response to some of those questions, I thank the Minister, the Hon Simon Watts, for being engaged in this committee of the whole House stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220827faa12d0ab9b6198d8a9313449eaf\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: Not with my questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224d48e771b5208225a96247da517036c\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, excepting that there are some questions on the table.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe answer that the Minister gave in relation to my previous questions on clause 5, amended section 5(1)(a), appeared to be that there will be no necessary way of checking or enforcing cost effectiveness, apart from the election that all local government representatives are subjected to anyway. I\u2019m happy to be corrected, but that appeared to be his response to that question. So that, essentially, is the status quo, that members of the public are able to hold their elected representatives to account if they don\u2019t like the spending decisions or the decisions that they make collectively for the community.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I wanted to know what then is the purpose, apart from signalling that this is something that the Government thinks is good\u2014which may be a legitimate policy or legislative flag\u2014is there any other way that this is actually going to be effective? Because what he\u2019s just described is what happens currently at the moment. There is a tiny fish-hook to that, which is when you put obligations in legislation, there is a much clearer pathway for individuals who may want to challenge the decisions of their locally elected authorities through mechanisms such as judicial review determinations to take those particular cases\u2014they may not like a project, they may not want to wait until the next local body election in order to cast their vote for someone else, who stands for something different. So they may take matters into their own hands and they may say, \u201CCouncil, you are acting inconsistent with clause 5, amended section 5(1)(a) of the Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill. I am going to take a judicial review and I am going to get you to respond to that, because you\u2019re not being held to account.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo if we think about the use of public money and the Minister\u2019s stated objective here of making sure that every cent of local government spending is used in the most cost-effective way possible, that outcome appears to be contradictory to that, because that would mean that local government is spending money justifying decisions that they\u2019ve already made. The reason that they\u2019re able to do that is partly empowered by the change that the Minister has put in place, which, essentially, allows, in his summation of the effectiveness, exactly the same procedure that currently exists in terms of holding democratic elected members to account. So just wondered, from the Minister, if I was correct.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00223f3fd5c63aac8b0fe107478307a0067e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223f3fd5c63aac8b0fe107478307a0067e\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (11:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks to the member Camilla Belich for that question. I mean, look, the reality of what we are doing here is to set a very clear expectation through legislation around what the purpose is of local government. It is therefore the role of local government to take that on board and get on with it and deliver those services to their communities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe Minister of Local Government, as the member will be aware, does have a range of powers to intervene in local government matters, as and where the threshold is met, which is generally a very high threshold for intervention. But there are powers that, from time to time, Ministers in this role across Governments do utilise where the governance mechanisms within council are not delivering upon their purpose and therefore there is intervention. I think that is the subtle balance that one is operating here. What we are doing here is being very clear and concise on what we require as the purpose of local government. As a result of that, that clearer definition around purpose ensures that what they do do will be delivering services that communities expect in a way in which delivers value for money. That versus the status quo is an important point of difference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ecdc8fdb8802656d5ff8ee632c251f7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m just going to make a point before we carry on. Obviously, at the beginning of this committee stage, we talked about how a few hours before the House started sitting there were some Amendment Papers, so I\u2019m not wanting to rush this section. I\u2019m just wanting to say that we\u2019ve spent quite a bit of time on clause 5, so if anyone wants to take a call if there\u2019s anything to round up on clause 5, we could then move forward again, OK.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221bdc57d91eec99ce815a6a6e3649b796\u0022\u003EAndy Foster\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair\u2014Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022467cf639d520587d08753827ba4eb337\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Hon Rachel Brooking\u2014oh, sorry, I know; I\u2019ll come to you. I\u2019m aware you want to take a call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f21ce125b6e79e9dcc53c7cebb79f8c2\u0022\u003EAndy Foster\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s OK. It\u2019s a question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236442c84dbe9a1c64892f79254f9e533\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Great, thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00224248c6c1f9232086360e50f71d05f0dc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224248c6c1f9232086360e50f71d05f0dc\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (11:58)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. A small question on clause 6, section 10 replaced, which is the new purpose of local government, rather than the purpose of the Act, and then I\u2019ll move on to clause 7.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn clause 6, at replacement section 10(c), I\u2019m wondering if subsection (c) is just totally redundant or not, and if the Minister can explain why it\u2019s not redundant. That is because of the use of the phrase \u201Cby fulfilling\u201D. So subsection (c) is about supporting local economic growth and development\u2014excellent. Then is says, \u201Cby fulfilling the purpose set out\u201D above, which is the needs of the communities for infrastructure, public services, and performance of regulatory functions. So is that use of the word \u201Cfulfilling\u201D supposed to restrain the purpose of local government with regards to local economic growth and development? Because it\u2019s only doing that growth and development where it\u2019s carrying out its functions regarding infrastructure, public services, and performance of regulatory functions. Or are they able to do more than that as well? Is the use of the word \u201Cfulfilling\u201D constraining the work supporting the local economic growth, or am I over-reading that? But if I\u2019m not over-reading it, if it is constrained, then what is the point of that subsection (c)? It would seem redundant.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, moving on to clause 7, inserting new section 11A, and the Minister of Local Government was referring to it a little bit before. These are the core services, and the core services are listed at subsection (1)(a) through to (e), and I think it\u2019s the same on the Amendment Paper\u2014yes, it is\u2014but what I\u2019m interested in is how these new paragraphs (a) to (e) differ from subparagraphs (i) to (iii) of section 10, replaced by clause 6, that we\u2019ve been talking about in the preceding clause. All the purpose language is about \u201Cinfrastructure\u201D, \u201Cpublic services\u201D, and \u201Cregulatory functions\u201D. Yet here the language is different and its \u201Cnetwork infrastructure\u201D\u2014presumably, that is a subset of infrastructure\u2014it is \u201Cpublic transport services\u201D, etc., and I note that, \u201CIn performing its role, of local authority must have particular regard to [these] core services\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECould the Minister explain to us why it is that those core services are chosen and how they differ from the infrastructure, public services, and performance of regulatory functions? And if the particular regard is just to say, \u201COh, if you\u2019re wondering whether or not something does fall under section 10(b)(i) to (iii)\u2014\u2018infrastructure\u2019, \u2018public service\u2019, or \u2018regulatory functions\u2019\u2014and you\u2019re not sure if it is, don\u2019t worry because you can still have particular regard to it under new section 11A if it is a public transport service, for example.\u201D, is that how it\u2019s supposed to link? Or is it actually acting in totally the reverse, and is it meant to be a narrowing of those subparagraphs (i) to (iii) \u2014\u201Cinfrastructure\u201D, \u201Cpublic services\u201D, and \u201Cregulatory functions\u201D? Is it saying, \u201CActually, when you\u2019re performing your role, council, what we really want you to look at is just these core things, even though we\u2019ve just told you that your purpose is wider than that\u201D? My question is about that interaction, the systems interaction, between the purpose of the local government, which is for all infrastructure, versus the core services, which is not all infrastructure\u2014it is restricted to network infrastructure\u2014and then there\u2019s other things that are listed. That is a sort of structural question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen I have one other question on this, and that is at new section 11A(1)(e), inserted by clause 7, where the Minister referred to the specification here of \u201Clibraries, museums, reserves and other community and recreational facilities.\u201D I\u2019m particularly interested in that word \u201Cfacilities\u201D, because that sounds like it must be a thing to be a facility. My question here is a specific one and that is: is subparagraph (e) only related to CapEx? Is that only capital development for the library, the museum, and the reserve, or is it also for the operational expenditure of those things; if so, should \u201Cfacilities\u201D include some other word like \u201Cfunctions\u201D or \u201Coperations\u201D as well?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00223c6bf2a14e9dfa0c94e0e0bee5e817a5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223c6bf2a14e9dfa0c94e0e0bee5e817a5\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (12:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, member, for the question. I refer the member to correspondence from the chair of the Governance and Administration Committee, Camilla Belich, on 17 November, which outlines all of the background on the questions of which the member is asking in regards to that. That is on public record.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022 data-id=\u00224aee40f94a40d299f527bc5b70361ca9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224aee40f94a40d299f527bc5b70361ca9\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN (Green) (12:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. You did invite us to continue a little bit on clause 5, so I wanted to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ef7f7cecc9ecfb5773fff3f4ff1db6fd\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019d rather the member didn\u2019t, because I asked just before if anyone had any questions on clause 5 and we moved forward, so I\u2019m not taking calls on clause 5.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022388e3a4d53172ca7153fb027132174d9\u0022\u003EMike Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I agree that you did ask that, but we still had stuff we wanted to discuss on clause 5\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4201bad4f512c079987aa934b3bcbe3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I asked that question at the time\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b87591c29c4c73d0133c9e784841c961\u0022\u003EMike Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and we stood up, but then a member stood up and went straight to clause 6, which didn\u2019t give us that opportunity to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f312c2e3da2a7e8811bf710282256cf\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. On the point of order, there were about five people standing up and I said, \u201CDoes anyone have anything on clause 5?\u201D, and no one indicated that that was the case, so we moved on, and I\u2019m not taking\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227740163cf36748fce0459f5f97ff6f5b\u0022\u003EMike Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, just speaking to the point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224d1e325449100eb583740e787862c29d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: No, I don\u2019t want you to trifle with the Chair. I asked the question and nobody who was standing at the time gave me the indication that they had any more on clause 5, so we\u2019ve moved forward. That is my ruling. We\u2019re moving forward. Celia Wade-Brown, you\u2019re welcome to take a call if it\u2019s after clause 5.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235313e0ba8cb174091a8fccaa6050294\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: I would be delighted to, thank you. I have to say I appreciate the Minister of Local Government trying to make it clear, but I actually find, even with the changes, that there is a lot of repetition. We\u2019re talking about the purpose of local government to meet the current and future needs, and then in clause 7, it talks about \u201CCore services to be considered\u201D, and they\u2019re almost the same, but they\u2019re not quite the same. I think that this, whether it\u2019s going to be a judicial review, whether it\u2019s going to be debated at the council table, is going to be very difficult. I wondered if the Minister could give me some answers on two things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EHow many mayors or councils or organisations like Local Government New Zealand or Taituar\u0101 actually supported the changes in clause 6 that replaces section 10, the \u201CPurpose of local government\u201D, which says it\u2019s \u201Cto enable democratic local decision making\u201D, which is awesome\u2014that\u2019s real localism\u2014but how many submissions actually supported that? I would also like to find out a little bit more\u2014it was touched on by my Labour colleague\u2014about \u201Clocal economic growth and development\u201D. I do acknowledge that the Minister of Tourism has put out a very useful road map. I have great respect for her in that role, though not in every ministerial portfolio she holds, but she\u2019s been very positive\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fbd69f0d2cb28029dcae6e1ec39093c2\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, go back to the purpose of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e56d8e50afe69506977fd78871aa7cb8\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: It says \u201Clocal economic growth\u201D\u2014does that definitely include funding regional tourism organisations that are pretty critical to spreading our tourists out around the regions and supporting local economic growth? Or will some do it and some not? And will the Minister be likely to intervene in either case as to whether they should support regional tourism organisations or not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI also wanted to ask, where you say to meet the current and future needs of communities for good quality, cost-effective, and local public services\u2014which might mean library assistance and lifeguards\u2014does he have any view as to how requiring a council making their local decision to pay the living wage, both for social reasons but also because people who are paid enough not to have to work three jobs can actually participate, can support their children, and so on, does he feel that paying the living wage is a perfectly reasonable thing to do under good quality, cost-effective local public services? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022542f5ebed1d517c116ba91e12be8b13d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022542f5ebed1d517c116ba91e12be8b13d\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (12:08)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, Madam Chair. I refer the member to when questions in regards to submissions were received, I mean that\u2019s all outlined in the Governance and Administration Committee report back, so I\u2019m not going to cover that. The other question I answered around libraries; I\u2019ve provided responses already, so I\u2019ll be replicating myself again in that. The question in regards to \u201CShould councils be paying a living wage?\u201D, well, first and foremost, we have a minimum wage, which is a legislative requirement in this country, and I expect councils to be complying with the law. I also expect that councils are delivering value for money for their ratepayers. The fact that they feel like they want to be spending more for whatever reasons needs to be on the basis that their ratepayers are of the view that that is value for money. I would expect, first and foremost, that they meet the requirements under the law, which is minimum wage, and at that point, over and above that, will be based on the performance deliveries of the functions of that council.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022 data-id=\u00226396e92fe36edb075287d198951ea4df\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226396e92fe36edb075287d198951ea4df\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (12:09)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, Madam Chair. There are two areas I wanted to ask questions about, if I can, on this part. The first one of them is that we specifically identify there in the legislation\u2014and that\u2019s stayed there, I think, right the way through the select committee process\u2014the \u201Csupporting local economic growth and development\u201D, which are obviously two separate things. I\u2019m really interested, because that\u2019s specifically been identified as different to all the other ones about infrastructure, public services, and so on. Although, you could regard it as a public service. But I\u2019m specifically interested in how that interfaces with\u2014we\u2019ve already had the question. I don\u2019t think I heard an answer about RTOs\u2014support of regional tourism organisations\u2014but also how that interfaces with arrangements that might be between the Crown and local government in terms of regional deals, because there are going to be significant elements of that which are about economic development. I\u2019m really interested to understand because that\u2019s been specifically identified there so it doesn\u2019t get lost.  I can see separately we\u2019ve got the rates-capping legislation. I would argue that they should have been together, but that might be one of the casualties. Councils could quite easily go, \u201CHow can we save some money? We\u2019ll do it there.\u201D I would take that the intention of having it identified here is that that doesn\u2019t happen, and we\u2019re saying, \u201CActually, that is important. It\u2019s important that councils are involved in the economic development growth of their area.\u201D So I\u2019d really like some feedback on that as to what you\u2019re anticipating there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe second one is just in terms of the core services. Again, we\u2019ve got the rates capping, and one of the issues that councils have brought up time and time again is the concern that rates capping could erode their ability to be able to manage core services and to maintain assets. We\u2019ve got an issue across the board, and we know that the Crown is more guilty than local government in terms of asset management and maintaining hospitals, education facilities, and so on. We know that\u2019s really, really important, so we\u2019ve been driving towards that. The Infrastructure Commission has said that\u2019s really, really important, and we\u2019ve all said, \u201CThat\u2019s great. That\u2019s really important.\u201D, but what I\u2019m really interested in is: what does the core service mean in terms of the rates capping? If the council is rates capped at a certain level and it can\u2019t manage to maintain those core services, those core assets, what happens and what gives? What is the penalty, effectively, for councils? What\u2019s the regime that a Minister might say, \u201CWell, actually, you\u2019ve spent money on things which are not core services there; you\u2019re not managing the core services.\u201D? What is the regime going to be there, and is there an ability to make sure that councils are going to be able to manage those core services so we don\u2019t end up with them being continued to be depreciated, which has happened not only in local government but also in central government over many years? I look forward to the answer. Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022d1d70759d8d33bc77c4f2e8fad5f91bf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d1d70759d8d33bc77c4f2e8fad5f91bf\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (12:12)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member Andy Foster for his questions. Obviously, you\u2019ll be aware that the rates-capping legislation is in front of select committee, and so that is something that will be considered in that regard. But the interrelationship point around the definition is the point that the member is raising. The purpose of this legislation is to clearly define what are the core services that local government should deliver. It links back to the member\u2019s first point around whether activity A or B is in or out, and I answered that question earlier today, so I don\u2019t wish to repeat myself, but it is an important point to note that the legislation here does not prohibit any specific activity X or Y. However, it does prioritise what the activities are that local government must deliver first and foremost before anything else. That is the important point of detail in regards to that, which does not exist in the current model where community wellbeing is the definition of what councils must deliver. As the member will be aware, that is a much broader definition of \u201Cdelivery of services and activities\u201D than what is being proposed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to the questions around decisions that councils will need to make in an area where they are needing to meet a rates cap threshold versus the services they deliver, again, that will be down to respective councils and the way in which they manage their affairs, and it will be upon them to ensure that they structure themselves to deliver the core services first and foremost. Then that will take them to a position, and then they will need to, obviously, consider where they are at in terms of their ability to sustainably deliver any other core services that are over and above that. Of course, there will be challenges for some councils. We have 67 councils, so there will be a range of differing views around that, but the important point here is that we need to make sure that they are focused on the delivery of core services first and foremost.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u002279d5672aaff48e941ac78e4ccde67a70\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002279d5672aaff48e941ac78e4ccde67a70\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (12:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Now, my question to the Minister of Local Government is: what is this letter that he talks of? This letter that he talks of from the former chair of the Governance and Administration Committee. I\u2019ll tell you one thing: if it was from Ms Belich, I know it would be very, very good letter. But what is it? It\u2019s not on the Table, and we are in urgency, and it might be part of the public record. The reason I\u2019m asking you, Minister, is that given the answer to the questions that have been raised, for example, from my colleague the Hon Rachel Brooking around the facilities component being capital expenditure or operational expenditure. If we could just have a little bit of clarity around this letter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, can I just also have a look at clause 7? This is the proposed new section 11A. Now, when it comes to (1)(e), this is the \u201Clibraries, museums, reserves, and other community and recreational facilities.\u201D Now, further down in new subsection (3), if you do a bit of a cross-check, you can see that the definitions are for many of those items actually referenced in other pieces of legislation. For \u201Ccivil defence\u201D, that\u2019s no problem, and also for \u201Creserve\u201D, and \u201Cwaste management and minimisation\u201D, but it does beg the question: what does \u201Ccommunity and recreational facilities\u201D actually cover and capture if we\u2019re looking at other parts or terms that have been identified in that section being cross-referenced by a legislative definition in another piece of legislation? Could the Minister just provide some understanding of what particularly the \u201Ccommunity and recreational facilities\u201D would actually seek to lead?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan I move on to clause 8. This is looking at subclause (2) in clause 8. There\u2019s a change there which seeks to basically remove \u201Cenvironmental wellbeing\u201D as part of that. It\u2019s simply saying, \u201Cthe social, economic, and cultural interests of people and communities;\u201D This is something that at a principled level, the principles would relate to the functionality of local authorities. Now, why is it that environmental wellbeing has, essentially, been removed as part of that, and does, actually, the Minister accept that environmental considerations specifically go to the heart of infrastructure cost implication considerations that councils might actually need to be making? It seems very strange that you wouldn\u2019t have a reference to environmental aspects for consideration. You\u2019re expecting councils to be focused on infrastructure. I understand that as one of the tenets outlined in the purpose, but when we\u2019re looking at clause 8, the only one that would go would be environmental if we\u2019re looking at the four wellbeings that are contained there. So I do want to know how councils are expected to turn their minds to the environmental considerations and, in particular when thinking about infrastructure, where that responsibility or priority might lie?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022afd12dc2fd7954302c5255a1d54b926d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022afd12dc2fd7954302c5255a1d54b926d\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (12:17)\u003C/span\u003E: I was referring to a letter from the Department of Internal Affairs to the chairperson of the Governance and Administration Committee, dated 17 November 2025, titled \u201CLocal Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill\u2014Responses to information requests\u201D. This letter can be found on the parliamentary website\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ccd030ceaa2ce577c982f8e0308f22b\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: And what does it say?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230578174dffbb97cb66174ee27e324c1\u0022\u003ETangi Utikere\u003C/span\u003E: What does it say?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u002238f17048c65674e31fe6123e6f6db8a6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002238f17048c65674e31fe6123e6f6db8a6\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (12:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. The question is: what\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022602d6365cef788091f8512c5063591c1\u0022\u003EHon Simon Watts\u003C/span\u003E: Google it!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022917cf817caccef3392c7183a27b40909\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, I\u2019m just being told to google it. Is it what the Minister just\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022afee347478a19c36870d6b770b51e8f8\u0022\u003EHon Simon Watts\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s on the parliamentary website. It\u2019s publicly available. I\u2019ve said that about three times.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228eb4f468d513c92a5c6690b54a143696\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: OK. I just want it to be on the record that the Minister is telling me to google it. I\u2019ve asked him specific questions about wording, and he\u2019s referring me somewhere else rather than answering them here in this Chamber when those answers would be in the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E for everybody to look at when they\u2019re trying to work out what these words mean. That is shameful, and that is the approach of this Government. It is callous; it is reckless. It is a reckless approach to lawmaking to refer off to some third document rather than answering the question: are operating expenses included? It\u2019s a simple question. Yes or no? It\u2019s easy. Just tell us, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m going to move on, though, because the Minister wants to be reckless. I do not want to be reckless, and I want to get to these big parts that the Minister\u2019s just dropped on us this week. However, I\u2019m not there yet. At clause 10, \u201CSection 39 amended (Governance principles)\u201D, I\u2019m interested in this term\u2014and we\u2019ll come to more of this, I think, later on in the bill when we\u2019re talking about how councillors work together. But this is this term that a local authority \u201Cshould foster\u201D the free exchange of information and \u201Cshould foster\u201D the responsibility of its elected members to work collaboratively. My question to the Minister is: what weight does he think that this phrase \u201Cshould foster\u201D should have? There are a lot of shoulds here. Is it a term already used in legislation, or is this a new term that comes with these amendments or not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDoes the Minister agree with me that \u201Cshould foster\u201D is a subjective term\u2014that it\u2019s an apple pie type of term? I\u2019m not saying that I disagree with it, but if he could comment on how subjective it is, how apple-pie it is, and if there is any other reference to \u201Cshould foster\u201D in legislation\u2014and what his expectation is that this requirement of \u201Cshould foster\u201D will lead to. Is it just to give a council some comfort, if they\u2019re having a meeting with people to share some information, that if somebody tries to take some sort of review against the council for its decision-making processes, the council will then be able to go back to this amended section 39 and say, \u201CHang on, we\u2019re supposed to foster this, and this is what we\u2019re doing, so don\u2019t give us a hard time.\u201D? Is that why it is included, or is it included for some other reason?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI know we\u2019re going to get to\u2014I think, in the other part\u2014the code of conduct. Again, I\u2019ll be interested in asking the Minister what happens if councillors breach the code of conduct\u2014we\u2019re not there yet\u2014and also, what happens if there is no fostering of the exchange of information. It\u2019s not \u201Cmaking\u201D\u2014because \u201Cmaking\u201D is a requirement\u2014it\u2019s a \u201Cshould\u201D. It\u2019s not at the \u201Cmaking\u201D level. What happens if the council doesn\u2019t foster elected members to work collaboratively? What happens then? Is there any consequence for not fostering, and why is it in here? What is the mischief that the new clauses here are trying to deal with? Is it a well-known term that I\u2019ve just not noticed before, or is it a new one? I think it would be useful for the Minister to give us a little bit of clarity on what his expectations are and the reason for including these amendments to section 39.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00221e24c9d167e4446ce9096938064cb8b5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221e24c9d167e4446ce9096938064cb8b5\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (12:22)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks to the member the Hon Rachel Brooking for the questions in regard to clause 10. The purpose, and the broader intent here, is to ensure that we have a standardisation of these expectations, to provide greater consistency and transparency for councils across the country and to provide clear expectations for elected members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to the question in regards to the governance principles that was asked before, the aim of the principles is to set out the high-level expectations on local government to provide for the good governance of local communities and the accountability of councils to their communities. Obviously, the interpretation is left to councils, in terms of how they deliver those.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u00227c19ac4f6610efbc9340e151d3aa31e0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227c19ac4f6610efbc9340e151d3aa31e0\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (12:23)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I just note that my colleague the Hon Rachel Brooking just spoke to clause 10; however, I haven\u2019t had a chance to speak to clause\u00A07.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227511ec3f544a719ff374fa9d172db83e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s fine.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225fdfebe99935b56c6960d40c396abe17\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: Excellent; thank you very much. I do have just one call to make on clause 7, because I think it\u2019s quite an important clause. Obviously, it\u2019s creating a kind of hierarchy for what councils need to focus their mahi on, especially when you take that together with the eventual rates cap. There\u2019s obviously going to be less room for councils to move, so this is actually a really important clause, and it\u2019s really going to, in a way, dictate what councils can and cannot do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA number of us from the Green Party have put forward a number of amendments, just to see if we can add a little bit more there, because it is quite prescriptive and it is really important that nothing is missed that is actually really important to communities and what councils do. When you look at clause 7, new section 11A(1)(e), it does list \u201Clibraries, museums, reserves, and other community and recreational facilities.\u201D, which, I assume, will be like community halls, gyms, etc. There are some definite things that are missing there, and a lot of these are captured within our amendments. We\u2019ve done them separately because we don\u2019t want the whole lot put into one and then all ruled out of order. We\u2019re not quite sure why, in this space, we\u2019re missing things like public spaces\u2014it\u2019s not a reserve; it\u2019s a public space\u2014like a street mall, like the square in Christchurch, spaces that don\u2019t actually fit in here but are really good public spaces. I note that we have got libraries and museums, but we don\u2019t have art galleries, and also missing from that is heritage, as well. There\u2019s nothing around economic development and, also, adaptation. This is why, I say, we\u2019ve done these amendments separately: to ensure that, actually, if there is something where the Minister says, \u201COh, actually, that should be in here\u201D, we can have a look at that one tabled amendment and potentially include it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ll quickly just go through what we have added as amendments for the Minister to consider\u2014and potentially, he may recognise that that was missing from there\u2014because it is a little bit concerning, when we do list things like libraries and museums, that suddenly we\u2019re ruling out\u2014and I take what the Minister said; it doesn\u2019t technically rule things out. But, when you put a rates cap on, it means things will fall right to the bottom, and therefore the pressure on councils will mean that stuff won\u2019t get looked at. So we have amendments and, if it\u2019s OK, Madam Chair, I won\u2019t talk to the time stamps, because that will take a lot of time\u2014because there are several amendments\u2014but they are all dated 16 September at 9.09, and then a few seconds after that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe first one is around public spaces, which I spoke about earlier. That just makes sure it gives local government particular regard to pedestrian malls and town squares. The next one is around natural hazards and the activities that improve resilience to natural hazards. Then there is one around community support, to ensure that councils actually look at community support. There is another one around environmental enhancement and protection, which I think is quite important Then there is another one around facilities. It\u2019s actually putting the words \u201Cand activities\u201D\u2014so \u201Cfacilities and activities\u201D. We have one that is to add \u201Cart galleries\u201D. I see art galleries are excluded from this\u2014and, as I mentioned earlier, also heritage. They are the extra additions that we\u2019ve put in amendments individually for, and it would be great if the Minister could actually have a look at those amendments and say, \u201CActually, that one probably should sit within there, because it makes sense that councils need to prioritise.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat could be art galleries or something, but I think it\u2019s really important. We know councils have a responsibility in that space, and then suddenly, by legislation, they\u2019re not allowed to prioritise an art gallery, when we say they have to prioritise a museum. Or the town square, for example\u2014that\u2019s something that doesn\u2019t get prioritised. I think we\u2019re going to see, from that, councils and communities actually being worse off. Those are my questions for the Minister on clause\u00A07. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00224beb4b381cf2476aee20be4e6eddc9fd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224beb4b381cf2476aee20be4e6eddc9fd\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (12:27)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member Mike Davidson for the questions. I think the member\u2019s questions relate to similar questions that I have provided a response to, where I said clearly that the point of the definitions is not to prohibit but to prioritise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAgain, on this side of the House, we make no apology that the impetus, in terms of the need for change, is driven by the double-digit rates increases that we\u2019ve seen across the country, in some areas up to 20 percent year-on-year increases. That is not affordable for communities, nor ratepayers, and the need to prioritise is something that I think all New Zealanders have to do as part of their daily life, as a result of the realities of the fact that their income needs to match what their expenses are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI appreciate that, in prior lives, some in this House may have been in a position where there was a bottomless pit of money. That is not the reality in which we are operating now. We need to prioritise, and so does local government. I make no apology for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228491c791b3b11da8ffbb1d7b4d7ad8ec\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m just noting that, up to about clause 10, we\u2019ve taken quite a few calls. We\u2019d just like to finish off that section, and also just make sure that people know there is an Amendment Paper from 11.37 a.m. today, which you may or may not have seen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u00227a24b133f09c384fb7d35a763a945c64\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227a24b133f09c384fb7d35a763a945c64\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (12:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much. I do have a question, and it\u2019s a new amendment I\u2019ve got\u2014it\u2019s actually a new clause 9A\u2014but, before I go on to that, I just want to quickly touch on something. The Minister of Local Government, just in his response, talked about double-digit rates increases year on, year off, and I just want to get some clarification around that. What were the drivers that were actually creating those double digits? There is a lot of blame being put on councils for being out of control with spending, but my understanding is that the drivers for that, Minister, were actually things like inflation in the construction industry\u2014because, obviously, councils don\u2019t buy cereal; they build roads\u2014and interest rates as well. I think we need to be a little bit clear with people who are watching that, actually, there are a lot of drivers that were outside of the control of councils, and it\u2019s unfair, I think, to blame elected members and councils for putting rates up when a lot of that was out of their control.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve tabled an amendment to insert new clause 9A. I hope the Minister is really responsive to this, because he mentioned so in earlier discussions that we\u2019ve had in this House. Obviously, what we\u2019re aware of through his Simplifying Local Government reform is that there are a lot of councils that are going through this reform at the same time they\u2019re having to representation reviews, which comes at a significant cost to the councils\u2014a cost that actually may be absolutely pointless, because they may not exist. This tabled amendment actually just alters section 24A. What it does is it says, \u201CAfter \u2018Schedule\u2019, insert \u2018or if a council has a proposal submitted under the Head Start process as part of Simplifying Local Government reform\u2019\u00A0\u201D. It\u2019s basically going to exempt them from going through that process. The amendment is timestamped 15 September 2026, 4.45.00 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI hope the Minister really takes this amendment under consideration, because I know he expressed some concern at the time about this extra cost that\u2019s going to be placed on councils for something they probably don\u2019t need to do. I was working through it and trying to work out, well, what could be an amendment that we could hang onto this system improvements bill now to actually ensure that they don\u2019t have to go through that, and then we can get that sorted right now, and it\u2019s done. I think this is a really good win for the councils\u2014and for the Minister if he accepts this amendment\u2014because, actually, this is about saving money and not doing something that is just not needed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt would be great if the Minister could take really good consideration of that amendment, because I think he would see some really good benefit in it, as well as local governments, and there are a number\u2014a number\u2014of councils that are forced to go through this representation review at a significant cost when there is absolutely no point of doing it, because they\u2019re going through a reform that the Government have initiated right now. I would like the Minister to consider that and hopefully accept that amendment. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022b79821d0cd4dcaff3f40457d82ba0b93\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b79821d0cd4dcaff3f40457d82ba0b93\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (12:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Just in regards to that last point around representation reviews: I won\u2019t be proceeding with the member\u2019s tabled amendment as part of this legislative process. However, I have made statements in regards to the feedback that we\u2019ve seen through the proposals on Head Start, which, again, is out of scope of this, but just to the members point, it is something that we are taking advice on, and we\u2019ll have more to say on that later.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u0022fa121c6a41b99483d66e9445bd973865\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fa121c6a41b99483d66e9445bd973865\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (12:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for drawing our attention to the recent Amendment Papers\u2014this is just terrible process from the Government, given that this reported back from the Governance and Administration Committee in, I think, November of last year. Anyway, we\u2019ll get to that one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ELook, just for clarity, the Labour Party does support Mr Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment that he just referred to. I know you said clause 10\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002270efac1b882d4fa9bd1025c20313fe0e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m just sort of nearing the finish of up to that point, so if you have another question, I haven\u2019t closed that point off just yet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022956b9da72c378b8b2d077b3e3b00a6db\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE\u003C/span\u003E: I actually want to ask a question on clause 9 that I don\u2019t think has been addressed yet. These are related to what are commonly known in local government circles as section 17A reviews. They are often looked at in terms of a council going through a particular process to identify whether a way of doing something is the most efficient and not necessarily cost-effective but effective for the community. It is, as the Minister of Local Government knows, often similar to the special consultative process in terms of the consultation, and councils, from time to time, do utilise section 17A reviews\u2014often to think about whether a council-controlled organisation is the best away of delivering for a library service or a museum or something like that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a proposed change that seeks to repeal section 17A, subsections (1) through to (4), and just talks about more of the infrastructure and public service but removes the localised aspect to it\u2014which I find fascinating, given that the modus operandi of this Government taking office was about localism, and yet they want to strikethrough a lot of these aspects here. I mean, day by day, it just gets worse.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question to the Minister is: how will councils still have an ability to determine whether the delivery of services, whether they\u2019re in-house or otherwise, is still efficient and effective? These are changes to section 17A in terms of the review of how the delivery of services is actually undertaken, so my question, fundamentally, is why is this change being promoted, and what can councils and therefore their communities expect in terms of an ability to participate in any consultative process that councils might choose to adopt to review?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I think this is actually quite a\u2014section 17A reviews, as they are currently, are a very good way of councils engaging with the community to check how they are achieving the particular delivery of certain services. That\u2019s important. That also aligns with the point of democracy that we\u2019ve already covered, back in clause 6 replacing section 10, the \u201CPurpose of local government\u201D, which talks about the enablement of local decision-making for that to be democratic. I just want to get some clarity from the Minister around what is the only change, as I understand it, to the way in which section 17A is delivered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00221841873c69533635bd539ff7903d59b5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221841873c69533635bd539ff7903d59b5\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (12:36)\u003C/span\u003E: In regards to the questions on the removal of the requirements under section 17A around service delivery reviews and the impact of that on cost-effectiveness of council services, we\u2019ve covered that extensively in earlier conversations around the definitional changes that include cost-effectiveness within that definition and the reality that, actually, undertaking service delivery in a cost-effective way should be a business-as-usual expectation for local government. That is the purpose of the changes that we are making there. Removal of the strict rules around these reviews will allow councils to carry out this work in a way that is most cost effective for each of them. The new \u201CPurpose\u201D of the Local Government Act, which we talked about earlier, around clauses 4 and 5 that we\u2019ve moved on from, makes it very clear around that definitional change and will ensure the delivery of more cost-effective public services.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022 data-id=\u00220ad4dfd35054cdf8637fa5e78fe10144\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220ad4dfd35054cdf8637fa5e78fe10144\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN (Green) (12:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, may I just check before I start, am I able to ask a short question on something on clause 8?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022406b22545d4e50218d784fd40ac02a37\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah\u2014and then I think we\u2019ll move on to clause 11 forward, but I\u2019ll let you have a question there, because we haven\u2019t closed that piece off yet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221884bf6e93b82dabbb3d9591ac4751a5\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question to the Minister of Local Government is really\u2014we\u2019re talking about amending section 14 in clause 8. We talk about replacing section 14(1)(h)(i) with \u201C(i) the social, economic, and cultural interests of people and communities\u201D, which sounds fairly close, may I say, to the four wellbeings, but it misses one of them out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ac3d29ecf9d855c99539604bf08a018\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I think we\u2019ve had that question, so is it a different question on that point, because someone over here in your team asked that question before\u2014I think it was Mike Davidson\u2014about the environmental wellbeing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e9ec87472a691519aa500293eab03ffc\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: It was Tangi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d24ab97ab0c4242990695b68d1de1964\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, it was Tangi Utikere\u2014sorry. I remember the question. Sorry, I apologise if I didn\u2019t get the right member, but I think that question has been asked.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3a72b4dc7bd0b14b103e0ea1a74f6b3\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: I didn\u2019t hear an answer that explained why \u201Cenvironmental\u201D was missing, other than the general disregard for the environment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022882862682bf333fd47183f5d255cd8b8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m going to take a call now from Lemauga Lydia Sosene, but we are moving forward\u2014clause 11 onwards. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022 data-id=\u0022870af8efaa0e0b12f3a68cec9ce137d0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022870af8efaa0e0b12f3a68cec9ce137d0\u0022\u003ELEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE (Labour\u2014M\u0101ngere) (12:38)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019ve been listening really carefully to the questions on the different clauses but also the Minister of Local Government\u2019s responses\u2014it\u2019s really important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do have a tabled amendment with regards to clause 16 amending section 57, which is to delete clause 16. I wanted to ask the Minister, in terms deleting clause 16, for clarification on the skills of directors of council-controlled organisations. I\u2019m interested because the actual section\u2014section 57(3)\u2014talks about \u201CWhen identifying the skills, knowledge, and experience required of directors of a council-controlled organisation, the local authority must consider whether knowledge of tikanga M\u0101ori may be relevant to the governance of that council-controlled organisation.\u201D The Minister has explained very clearly that the Government is moving to restrict or reduce in terms of local government functions, and the Government is wanting to focus on the specifics.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMinister, I wanted to ask: what advice did officials give to you with respect to when directors are being considered for CCOs\u2014the skills that they bring to the table? Because, in my view, specifically within Auckland Council, we hold a very strong view in supporting the knowledge of tikanga, the knowledge of local iwi and hap\u016B, which is really important. Why this is important in decision making of the governance side of council bodies is the understanding of whenua, the understanding of iwi participation, the understanding of hap\u016B, and the M\u0101ori communities that are embedded in our local communities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve been listening in very carefully to the Minister\u2019s answers to the different questions around community participation, but for directors, in terms of the skill set that they bring to the table when making decisions with local councils, can the Minister advise, please, the House and for those listening, how the expectation or the skill set of removing tikanga expectations or knowledge benefits local communities? I\u2019ve understood that the Minister has been very clear around the Government\u2019s intention to move towards a very definitive skill set. That is important, but so is tikanga and so is knowledge of iwi and hap\u016B participation from those communities. So if the Minister could answer those questions. Thank you, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022a72f90de76d20ee0dcb18f2df77d17c6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a72f90de76d20ee0dcb18f2df77d17c6\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (12:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I thank the member Lemauga Lydia Sosene for the question, and the member is correct that under the changes in this legislation, it will no longer require councils to consider the relevance of tikanga M\u0101ori knowledge in council-controlled organisation (CCO) director appointments, affecting M\u0101ori participation and council decision-making.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe member will be aware, I recall Mike Hosking\u2014I think it was\u2014on the radio the other morning making commentary in regards to this, and again, the purpose of the changes here is to remove this requirement, but removal of that requirement does not prohibit councils from considering the relevance of tikanga M\u0101ori knowledge. Instead, it provides the flexibility for councils to determine the appropriate skills and knowledge and experience that are best required in order to guide and deliver the objectives of that CCO. As the member will be aware, we\u2019ve got some CCOs that are delivering and are responsible for billions of dollars of assets, and the appointment of the directors for those CCOs needs to be a matter of precision around timing and capability and experience. It is not this Government\u2019s view that we should be letting the law get in the way of councils making good appointments to deliver services in regards to those areas. That is the change that we\u2019re making, and that\u2019s the basis for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022d2ae111d649bb722244c1a0ce2e54998\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d2ae111d649bb722244c1a0ce2e54998\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (12:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I am ready to move on to this Amendment Paper 803, which is about new clause 18A. I don\u2019t know if you want to check with other members, or if you\u2019re happy for me to press\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002237697f55eb5d0ef1a67c08c5006e64b9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: No, it\u2019s OK. You go ahead.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e3940a2a60e565a16127dc50af051697\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. This Amendment Paper is one of two amendments on the amendment, and this is the one\u2014Amendment Paper 803\u2014that deals with development contributions and how they apply to fast-track approvals. That is what I have a range of questions on; I\u2019m happy to come back to them if we want to jump back and forth.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut I would like the Minister of Local Government to comment on this. This is a substantive policy change that has just come into the House dealing with an issue that the select committee that I was on in 2024 was advised of by local government submitters: that there was a gap in the local government legislation around development contributions. My understanding is\u2014and I\u2019m happy for the Minister to tell me if my understanding is wrong at all\u2014that there are many areas that are zoned something like rural, but they\u2019re certainly not zoned for housing development. That has meant that those councils do not have development contribution policies to apply to those parcels of land, because it is not anticipated that there would be development there and, therefore, it hasn\u2019t been anticipated that there would be a need for development contributions for those areas. Of course, we all know that the fast track just jumps over any community planning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAm I correct in that statement? And is the purpose of this Amendment Paper 803 to fix the problem that I\u2019ve just described and to enable development contributions to be applied to those fast-track developments that don\u2019t have appropriate policies in relation to those particular areas of land? That\u2019s the bigger question. I know that when we get to the Part 2 debate, then we will be\u2014and Madam Chair, you weren\u2019t in the Chair when we discussed this, but we discussed that Schedule 2 of this Amendment Paper is in Part 2 of the debate, and that relates to the transitional provisions. Why that is relevant, and I won\u2019t ask questions on it now, is that the transitional provisions mean that whilst this might be a fix for future fast-track applications, it isn\u2019t a fix for those applications that have already been determined or substantively determined. But we\u2019ll get into that later on. That was my big-picture question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen if we come to new clause 18A, which is \u201CSection 102 amended (Funding and financial policies)\u201D, this is quite a messily written clause, because it says\u2014just listen to these words: \u201CIn addition, subsection (4) does not apply to a development contribution policy to the extent that the policy provides for a development in relation to which a resource consent approval has been granted under the Fast-track Approvals Act\u201D. On the face of it, it\u2019s difficult to understand what that clause means with all of those words like \u201Cdoes not\u201D and \u201Cto the extent\u201D and \u201Cin relation to\u201D. I take it to mean\u2014and the Minister can tell me, again, if I\u2019m wrong\u2014that what this particular clause is doing is saying that where section 102(4) has a requirement for consultation to amend or develop a development contributions policy, that requirement for consultation does not apply in relation to this fast-track approvals part fix/not fix.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo my question is, am I interpreting new clause 18A correctly? And then I\u2019ve got more questions on other clauses, but those are my first two questions. So, overarching, they are: why are we here in urgency and debating this Amendment Paper that was tabled yesterday; and second question, am I correct that new clause 18A, the first substantive clause in this Amendment Paper, is just to say that that requirement for consultation does not apply?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00224f4223723055a437eed7c8bfd43ddd94\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224f4223723055a437eed7c8bfd43ddd94\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (12:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I thank the member the Hon Rachel Brooking for the question and reference to the Amendment Papers that were tabled yesterday at 9 and 9.30, which is an important context. The change, particularly around the fast-track portion, is obviously in response to the need for the ability for councils to be able to obtain the support and mechanisms from developers to be able to ensure that we can recover those costs in order to put in place infrastructure needs to support some of these fast-track aspects. There\u2019s been some clear feedback from the sector that this change will provide significant benefits for that enablement of infrastructure to occur ahead and with these fast-track projects, so that\u2019s the purpose of that. I will, as a member noted as we come to the end of this part, cover off more aspects around that specific portion in later parts, as has been highlighted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00222125b1186578f19ae271cfb95329480b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222125b1186578f19ae271cfb95329480b\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (12:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m surprised that Government members are wanting to speak on this part. I hope they\u2019re not trying to close the debate, because we are in urgency and we have just\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d600aaf0181278ca7c6e358b0a983ba\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, and I\u2019ve made the point that there\u2019s a new Amendment Paper, so I\u2019ve got no intention of taking any closure motion at this point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224967dbe39eb46a8bee8ee81fbe199e62\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002270061e0103f2ef84a5e43c4fee48efc8\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: Auckland MPs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2f789d53af2391ac160a63054c3ef6a\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, maybe the Auckland MPs want to talk about their Auckland issues. I don\u2019t think the Minister answered my question about whether that new clause 18A, which is amending section 102 of the principal Act, is just to remove that requirement for consultation for the development contribution policy, so when he answers the next question, he could go back to that. I think it\u2019s a yes; I think it will be easy for him to say.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, another big question, then\u2014thank you for answering my first question about why we are here in urgency with this amendment\u2014is that if he can also talk us through why the amendments are needed when already the wording in the principal Act around development contributions has various different trigger points. There is the trigger point of when a resource consent is granted under the Resource Management Act, there\u2019s also a trigger point of building consents, there\u2019s also the PIMs\u2014the property information memos\u2014and also service connections, and so there\u2019s a range of different trigger points for the development contribution to be invoiced, to be requested, if the policy applies for it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is, given that there\u2019s been a resource consent or deemed resource consent granted under the fast track, why is it that we cannot rely on those other triggers\u2014the later triggers\u2014because, of course, you get your resource consent first, then you would get your building consent and build your house, and then you are going to plug in to some pipes. Why is it that we need this change to apply at that first stage, or at the consent stage, rather than at those later stages? That\u2019s one question, as well as my previous question about the consultation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen at what is proposed clause 18B, \u201CNew section 102A inserted (Development contribution policy in relation to resource consent approval under Fast-track Approvals Act 2024)\u201D, I\u2019m interested in the tense here. So at new section 102A(1) it says, \u201CThis section applies to a territorial authority if a resource consent approval is granted under that Fast-track Approvals Act\u201D, and it\u2019s the tense of \u201Cis granted\u201D. Does this mean and is it the scheme of the amendment that before the council can initiate a change to their development contributions policy, there has to be a grant under the Fast-track Approvals Act\u2014and I think that is the answer, and is that why \u201Cis granted\u201D is there? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf the Minister can put his mind to being a council\u2014let\u2019s pretend he\u2019s Queenstown and, say, the Queenstown district council doesn\u2019t have a development contributions policy in effect for its rural zoned land. To then amend that policy, does it have to wait before it can amend it until a fast-track proposal is approved, and then it amends its development contributions policy, or is there an ability when it sees that a fast-track project is listed or it\u2019s been referred for it to start that process? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhy I\u2019m asking this is because the word \u201Cthe\u201D development is used throughout this clause, and so is the scheme of this that it\u2019s fast-track development by fast-track development leads to then a consequential change to the development contributions policy? So the project has to be in the fast track and it has to be approved under the fast track, and once that happens\u2014and we\u2019re not talking about ones that have already been approved\u2014then it\u2019s for the council to amend its development contributions policy without consultation, I think, and within six months, because \u201C6 months\u201D is referred to in new section 102A(3), and it goes through development by development. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo if the Minister is Queenstown Lakes District Council\u2014and we know there\u2019s one. I\u2019ve visited Ridgeburn, outside of Arrowtown by the river there, in rural zoned land, and then I visited, on the same day, one in Fernhill, and so it\u2019s quite a different part of the town. It\u2019s above an established area, but at high, rocky altitudes, and so it\u2019s very expensive to build on. Would that Queenstown Lakes District Council then have to do two different changes to its development contributions policy for those two different projects? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s my question. There is the use of the word \u201Cthe\u201D\u2014so if you look at section 102A(2)(a) and (b), it says, \u201Cto require a development contribution for the development;\u201D and then \u201Cthe development.\u201D What is the sequence of when things pop into the fast track\u2014this is my bigger question. When something goes into the fast track, it seems here, under subsection (1), that approval has to be granted. It has to be all the way through the fast track, and then that is the moment and that is the mechanism for the council to be able to say, \u201COK, you\u2019ve gone specific project\u2014project by project\u2014you\u2019ve gone through the process, and now we have the permission to amend our development contributions policy to include you.\u201D That\u2019s the question there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002207d47517ae12d237a0069c7926d2298d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002207d47517ae12d237a0069c7926d2298d\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (12:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, I thank the member Rachel Brooking for the question. I think it\u2019s important to note that Amendment Paper 803 on the Table is putting in place a different trigger than is required for a resource consent under the fast-track approvals process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe answer in regards to the amendment of the development contribution is, yes, it is amending the development contribution after a fast-track resource consent process. I think in regard to the member\u2019s questions in regard to how this will interact between the developer and the council, it would be for the developer and the council to also have the ability to be able to establish a development agreement at any time, and so that will provide the mechanism and the flexibility around that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200a57d3d40433fd2c392183fc8ef499b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the time has come for me to leave the Chair for the lunch break. The committee is suspended and will resume after question time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 12.57 p.m. to 2 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022077f79aed851fe02b6e6ea85b89527ce\u0022\u003EVisitors\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022183037a0939db376955416b35fccf4ba\u0022\u003EKiribati House of Assembly\u2014Business Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022642a70735eeaddeca8acaf701b0d53cd\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Members, I\u2019m sure you will want to join with me in welcoming the Business Committee from the Republic of Kiribati House of Assembly, who are with us here in the House today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d5f9315013d66a8eabd87dc40ed296fc\u0022\u003EPrivilege\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c2e2117ae5d7219aa55ba75c05ec8087\u0022\u003EUnauthorised Release of Confidential Select Committee Proceedings\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225d2962c48309740cf8fb628c01fbf157\u0022\u003EReferral to Privileges Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002267e2f0b3119f80c795eb4bc47424872b\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Members, I\u2019ve received a letter from Tim Costley raising as a matter of privilege the divulging of a draft report of the Governance and Administration Committee contrary to Standing Orders. Mr Costley\u2019s letter refers to a report published in \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThe Post\u003C/span\u003E titled, \u201CLeaked FENZ inquiry report rips into leadership dysfunction, calls for board replacement\u201D. Previously, I received a letter from the Hon Jan Tinetti on the matter but, at the time, no media report had been published. The unauthorised release of confidential select committee proceedings has previously been considered a contempt. It is essential that the confidence of proceedings is respected to enable committee members to work together. Furthermore, the House is entitled to be the first recipient of the finding of its committees. This is a serious matter, not merely a technical one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI find a question of privilege arises and stands referred to the Privileges Committee. It is unfortunate that the Parliament has just over two weeks left until dissolution, but the timing of this matter was not a choice made by me or the House. However, it cannot be overlooked, and I encourage the Privileges Committee to meet as soon as possible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022aad4a1ad546e9379f78dc7e8b132b7ce\u0022\u003EOral Questions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a220e27777cf8417c3b5b22ac355d290\u0022\u003EFinance\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c702cfcfed121645dbf543389fcd41f5\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 1\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022 data-id=\u00229ff52a3b67e0e1bb9394c95049820fcd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229ff52a3b67e0e1bb9394c95049820fcd\u0022\u003EDAVID MacLEOD (National\u2014New Plymouth) (14:02)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Finance\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Government intend to introduce a capital gains tax?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022a022291cc702e5afff5b7840cecab7dc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a022291cc702e5afff5b7840cecab7dc\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (14:02)\u003C/span\u003E: No. In some circumstances, gains on sale are considered income for tax purposes, and that has long been the case. However, the Government has no intention of introducing a specific capital gains tax.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236517fa34b7c352f90557ca901438f37\u0022\u003EDavid MacLeod\u003C/span\u003E: Why is the Government not considering this?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dfac5eb49205e951e9373feebd15ad3c\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, a capital gains tax would increase taxes on savings, investment, and entrepreneurship, loading more costs on to households and businesses\u2014the complete opposite of what the economy needs\u2014and capital gains taxes around the world are always very complex. Compared to other types of tax, compliance costs are high. These costs apply not just to wealthy people and big companies but to ordinary taxpayers, who, in many cases, will need specialised advice when buying and selling property or when running a small business. The biggest beneficiaries of a capital gains tax would be valuers, accountants, and lawyers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bdc8c2e9ecc2c69dfb25debb541a0597\u0022\u003EDavid MacLeod\u003C/span\u003E: Would a capital gains tax make people pay tax on inflation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b7159794bf407e5091b0cfa819c41dd6\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it does depend on how the tax was designed, but if there was no allowance for inflation, a capital gains tax on long-held assets would be grossly unfair. Over 25 years, for example, a property might go up 75 percent in value because of inflation alone, and not through any underlying increase in real value. A household or business selling that property would have to pay capital gains tax when they are no better off. With no allowance for inflation, people would end up with large tax bills on what are only paper gains.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a13e15d191bd6cce0fa0424ab0c03437\u0022\u003EDavid MacLeod\u003C/span\u003E: Has a capital gains tax previously been considered for New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022950ba3df4df7172b091081a3ca37f51c\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: There have been several major reviews of New Zealand\u2019s tax system over the past 25 years. Those reviews have had a range of opinions on a capital gains tax, but no Government in that time has decided to go ahead with one. Case in point, a previous Prime Minister said quite emphatically, \u201CI\u2019m confirming today that under a Government I lead, there will be no wealth or capital gains tax after the election. End of story.\u201D That was Chris Hipkins in 2023.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022872d3ff4df037bdfd87daec23201e5a6\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yep, good. Can\u2019t use a question like that. The Hon David Seymour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba8491d733b4331b04c9052f1b0f05c5\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Here comes the cavalry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002206a0811900e1a041b1c004b988b89ce2\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, just leave it. The Hon David Seymour and no one else.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d746c8f99f0791f207ee9c604b4265eb\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll do the jokes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022237c8147461eb95f90860e6bae11c3e2\u0022\u003EHon Members: \u003C/span\u003EHa, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223579ddb4ff92d6670be27a504284708a\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Government need to\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f28a2129dca72f06efe000045e91b68b\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, no, no. Wait, wait, wait. In spite of everything, we\u2019ll just have the question asked with no other commentary around it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a3843adea8908f92b7f22be4f69ee08\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Government need to save money in order to balance the books with no new taxes; and if so, what plans does the Government have to do that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002244767a16c3845705e165493ef138f1de\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. In order to ensure that their taxes can remain low and that new taxes don\u2019t need to be introduced, the Government will have to remain very fiscally disciplined. This will require prioritising new spending towards its most important priorities, continuing to eliminate wasteful programmes, and ensuring that we get maximum bang for every taxpayer buck. Thank you to my knight, the Deputy Prime Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c318cd0809aa006a97b8486dd8e7fa4\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: Is it possible that the Government can get better outcomes for people while spending less money, or is spending the only kind of aroha that a Government can show?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224bee64ee13d7e3560df4e0534cc72874\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, no Government should be simply judged on the size of the cheques it writes on others\u2019 behalf. The question is what impact and outcome you get for the dollars that you invest, because, after all, those dollars initially belonged to hard-working Kiwis, who always have a good use for their own money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00227c960e5b353ef8b809249e441837d439\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002211da53c948247197d3eed08efcc8be5d\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022 data-id=\u0022fe6b6e1c5daccfb2bf57423b6d5efb0c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fe6b6e1c5daccfb2bf57423b6d5efb0c\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the Opposition) (14:06)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by all of 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=\u0022cb3657bbbe67d21bb45040033eac1da2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cb3657bbbe67d21bb45040033eac1da2\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister) (14:06)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and I just want to reassure the member that we will not be introducing a capital gains tax that taxes inflation, and that this Government is focused on more things than roaming charges.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224237ece6f2b27eb8783f02a7dd20d8f2\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Does he accept that the average worker\u2019s pay has fallen in real terms under his Government, with New Zealand having the lowest real-terms wage recovery in the OECD?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002293270a8096b08dcca122d5c891896389\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that\u2019s why this Government is working incredibly hard to make sure we control spending, we bring inflation and interest rates down, we get the economy growing, and also we get people into work. I just want to assure the member that the forecasts are that in the next four years, we\u2019ll have 220,000 new jobs added to this economy; the economy will be growing at 2.7\u00A0percent, on average, per year; and, most importantly, wages will be growing faster than inflation and prices.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223b44db4314597c0ae406693402537ce9\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: How will freezing the minimum wage for three years help Kiwis get ahead, given minimum wage workers have already had a real-terms pay cut for three years in a row under his leadership\u2014yet another reason working New Zealanders cannot afford three more years of this Government?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d638e5a0cba73a06598f74ec56d955cd\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll just say working New Zealanders can\u2019t afford more taxes, because that takes money out of their back pockets, and that\u2019s not a good thing. But I reject the characterisation of the question, because that\u2019s not what we\u2019re doing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222ac6ba1c7d9b82eb8f43ec81086bea6c\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: How does he expect Kiwi families to pay 20\u00A0percent more for their electricity when their wages have been going backwards in real terms under his leadership while the electricity companies have been gouging them for billions of dollars in profits?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022612d74c9848cf2c0db97e8c21620c7be\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the way you do it is you don\u2019t pass a bed tax that two-thirds will be paid for by Kiwis who might be going to visit a friend or a motel. You don\u2019t add in a capital gains tax that\u2019s going to be paid for by businesses in tax inflation. You don\u2019t actually just keep adding taxes and taxes and taking money off working New Zealanders. Frankly, if the member actually cared about it, instead of petty point-scoring, and wanted to problem solve something, what he would have done if he cared about working New Zealanders is actually support tax relief for working New Zealanders\u2014first time in 14 years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2af6098ebfc1c3b70167a47c1339690\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228dfd62d51e9a6f2dc1f4cba0e818a8f4\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just wait. Just remember that there are reasonably strong rules about how questions should be asked but also answered, and both sides were outside those in that last exchange.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022808ade1c825d30d9af44c54890a6a690\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: How does he expect Kiwis to pay for their groceries, like mince, which is up 30 percent; butter, which is up 40\u00A0percent; and bread, which is up 67\u00A0percent, when their wages are going backwards while the supermarkets make millions of dollars in excess profits?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0e64489c53f3965a91b8ca7358534d7\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, look, I just want to say to the member\u2014I would like to reassure him that tomatoes are down 29\u00A0percent in the last year, eggs are down 16\u00A0percent, lettuce is down 15\u00A0percent, tinned spaghetti is down 6, chicken\u2019s down 4, butter\u2019s down 2, and I just\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220375f1c539d27d68811f3e5b5086eaff\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, we\u2019re going to have a repeat of yesterday if that sort of barrage continues. Ask a question; expect an answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002294b4289e2df50f136143b78958ae658b\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: So can I close it up? I\u2019d just say to the member when he visits his bach, he\u2019s more than welcome to make some nice cheesy chicken omelettes or maybe some chicken parmigiana\u2014it\u2019s going to be cheaper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273d758583b63469e8cc5226d02d0baa1\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary question, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022815371614b0f97deda57055a0f172855\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just wait\u2014just wait.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a63ba984f0c32c1ebb76cf09a4d98e07\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Why should New Zealanders believe him when he says he\u2019s going to do another review of supermarkets to maybe consider breaking up the supermarkets, given his own Government received advice saying they could have saved shoppers $2.9 billion, yet they sat on that until the eve of an election, while the supermarkets continue to gouge them for millions of dollars in excess profits?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022657b3371323f637f80d4abd6e5d664a7\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, I may have missed something, but I haven\u2019t seen a policy to help solve a problem from that member around supermarkets. He had six years; he did absolutely nothing apart from some market studies. We are determined to make sure we get change in the supermarket sector\u2014structural change. You had your go; you didn\u2019t do it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216491784dd550f5bb646b2db099b117d\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Was the Deputy Prime Minister, David Seymour, wrong when he told media today that the National Party doesn\u2019t actually believe in breaking up the supermarkets, which is why they\u2019ve announced another review\u2014so that they don\u2019t actually have to do it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e40d0168b3c0493811755e17d206de6e\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: The Deputy Prime Minister, with all respect, doesn\u2019t speak for the National Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002268b83c14e4a8012c30c647f91d10c338\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: When real wages have fallen, power prices have gone up, insurance prices have gone up, rates have gone up, insurance has gone up\u2014all by more than 20 percent, under his leadership, in just the last two years\u2014will he now admit that the cost of living crisis is not only not over; it\u2019s getting worse under his leadership?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c508b81429f031c8ac16951a0d44a273\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: What I\u2019d say, again\u2014you know, cry me a river. But I\u2019d say if that member was serious about supporting people, why didn\u2019t you support tax relief for the first time for working New Zealanders? Why don\u2019t you come out and support a council rates cap? Why don\u2019t you come out and support structural separation for supermarkets? No idea. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f74c8b9d38a431a6dadfa15fd837fa8\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Three question times left\u2014that\u2019s all he\u2019s got.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002250350e4c1d84d811479db2edb66edc74\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Let\u2019s just\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e9203cce9bce22254bce2366fabd7c3\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Absolute novice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d2cd63eac63e81c9827ad09729721b3\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: If you don\u2019t mind?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5cdd94455871d2433162461cd5b7c9c\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: No, I\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab60152fb197318a860355c9461998fb\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Beg your pardon? You what?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f113611eef7fd590680ec07a9998ac8\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Well, you gave me an option, if I don\u2019t mind\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eedcf9848a93015d0c172c4621a21e80\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, no, no. It was actually more of an instruction than a question, but I\u2019m not surprised there was no understanding in that. Just a general sort of, I suppose, observation that we are very close to the end of this Parliament, close to the election itself. Naturally, there\u2019s going to be heightened tension, but just a little bit of decorum would be good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00227879ff09913225a8d7d5607fc9f8ab56\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c146df6232adc322c1fc4ab364482122\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221685a15940c217dab489487b1979eaa\u0022\u003EHon MARAMA DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EKei te Pir\u012Bmia\u003C/span\u003E, comrade. \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EE tautoko ana ia\u003C/span\u003E\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223cb32c19a60ad7f5fbd83aa66fd2bd09\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Whoa, whoa! Hang on\u2014sorry. Just ask the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022 data-id=\u0022eaa8ffadb24d150bdbc938a3dfa752d1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022eaa8ffadb24d150bdbc938a3dfa752d1\u0022\u003EHon MARAMA DAVIDSON (Co-Leader\u2014Green) (14:12)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001526\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=\u0022340d076f35fd5e1e0267c9761cbce8df\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022340d076f35fd5e1e0267c9761cbce8df\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister) (14:12)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and I just want to reassure that member that we won\u2019t be lifting the income tax rate to 45 percent for those earning $160,000 or more, but I do want to commend the member for at least having some ideas. I don\u2019t agree with them on supermarkets, but that\u2019s better than what we\u2019ve seen from the Labour Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002268e76d0379c26131c0e91bb1cb36cd23\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. How is that question possibly in order, other than just to reflect the Prime Minister\u2019s absolute desperation at this point?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223115cd048a05301a86993e5976628602\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, two things: firstly, before I can even make a decision about that, you were on your feet to take the point of order and I\u2019ve obliged you by hearing it. In making your point of order, you\u2019ve also made your point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223af20c6d0cc4c4eb9c90fd90e8c7fcaa\u0022\u003EHon Marama Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Did his Government weaken the Natural Environment Bill\u2019s protection of the environment following discussions with industry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e062a48761c2b3e7e655345f3f2387b1\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: No, we met with industry groups and we also met with the environmental NGOs, as we\u2019ve discussed yesterday.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d7a2be101c25bd3401642ba59504f5e\u0022\u003EHon Marama Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Whose words got put into the bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200bb19e4a3039682a9b30cd626a4fe1e\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: PCO\u2019s.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204517e1b5fda5522ac7e494573aef78f\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, actually, the Parliamentary Counsel Office (PCO), who drafted the bill, as you well know, but I\u2019d just say to the member that on this side of the House, we engage with many stakeholders. We want to hear the perspectives of as many New Zealanders as possible. We don\u2019t just take our advice from officials and box-tick it through.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278bc8a3727351497fbae24cb8255b8c6\u0022\u003EHon Marama Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227837a2b4cf83b2bc666ce9bd3e1db3f7\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just give yourself a moment while everyone composes, so that we hear your question without any other interference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ed6a437fb168964faf1ed7de66a14e1\u0022\u003EHon Marama Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: What message does he think it tells New Zealanders when he allows the agricultural industry privileged access to Government, while at the same time coalition parties have taken over $1.143 million in political donations from agribusiness-linked donors since 2022 and hundreds of thousands of donations from mining\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3cf0cbfa2da5880d6dbbd17a2ac9644\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: OK. Well, look, the member is making a point, but it\u2019s well outside the provisions of the Standing Orders. Ask a question without the dress up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022deea9c11f6a2a1bfb92345a758f029b0\u0022\u003EHon Marama Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Whose words from which groups that his Ministers met with were finally put into the Natural Environment Bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022767d05bd415c663d1a29773512dc5ef4\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: As the member understands, PCO drafts legislation that comes before this House, but, of course, as a great Government, we\u2019re interested in the interests of all New Zealanders. We take advice from officials, we take advice from\u2014in this case\u2014industry groups, and also the environmental NGOs. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227f701ea66d2bfb8e5765deefed8691af\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, when everyone is quiet, I\u2019ll the Hon David Seymour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd338c52f5d29118e1b3c930963f6944\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: Does this Government have a habit of listening to people affected by laws that it\u2019s making\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022154727523a59431ab210aea1cf707272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222da54b4cbce8af6980b33f020c32ba67\u0022\u003EHon Priyanca Radhakrishnan\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff047d6a8e62073b5e9c562f993d4b10\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and, if so, how long has this been going on?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9c5b8011419662e54dbe754162f7507\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Wait\u2014whoa. Sorry, would whoever was interrupting there like to just apologise to the House for not being able to constrain themselves.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022154727523a59431ab210aea1cf707272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ff8e0352d09771fe44faccb02f11ad1\u0022\u003EHon Priyanca Radhakrishnan\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022acd82e94cf3f7aba03bd454cf90398d7\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. It was very generous of you\u2014you were surrounded by people who were equally guilty. We\u2019ll have the question from the Hon David Seymour, with no one making any comments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b849a281912e3373d40155fcb5b360c7\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: Does this Government have a habit of listening to people affected by the laws it\u2019s making, and, if so, how long has this been going on?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217d1b7f8222fe74a43a94c165f90c42e\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a bit of a surprise to me to hear from the other side that this is not normal practice but that you actually engage and listen to lots of stakeholders and everybody across the community.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226889ca7188e120791f14df7b4e14033d\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Prime Minister confirm\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc28834c964c6ed7116ba1ab70d51fe0\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Whoa, just a minute. Is it necessary?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221af70411124447962d4cca96d81217df\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Prime Minister confirm that the following well-known friends of the National Party have had secret closed-door meetings with the Minister Responsible for RMA Reform: Lan Pham, Julie Anne Genter, the Hon Rachel Brooking, and Greenpeace?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212839b2563fa5c0d1cce77b8882519ae\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: I can, and I just commend the Minister for his very open interest in understanding the perspectives of everybody.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229911ab07b982dd762059728460c116a\u0022\u003EHon Marama Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a62d3065ae828742acb40baf5325be7\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Marama Davidson, and no one else.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227f0d2ec001a8c810b32d6e3b949377e4\u0022\u003EHon Marama Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: What feedback from other groups that his Ministers met with, including the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, local and regional council, iwi and hap\u016B groups, and environmental groups, made it into the actual drafting of their bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022696c8ae7c141e3b42da204ff021ddd59\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I don\u2019t know how to make myself any clearer: PCO draft the bill and the legislation that comes before the House here. Again, we engage, when we\u2019re developing policy, with many people across the whole of the New Zealand, as we should, as a good representative Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225e65b51223cf4eb8aa02a982d92f8959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c743c6d2c212a40cc7ac255ae08ffe8a\u0022\u003EHon Marama Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Why should New Zealanders trust that this Government is going to protect nature when he allows the industries who pollute land and water the most to write the rules?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228ccd0e7e67edcca3e8328ce20a61531a\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I reject the characterisation of that question because this Government in this last quarter has had the lowest level of emissions in this economy since records began in 2010. This Government in the last quarter has had record high renewable energy consumption, at 96.4 percent. We can do both things, but we are going to grow this economy, and we make no apologies about that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002278ea989c3edd4e4684810dca41580978\u0022\u003EHousing\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a2439db395944a63dce33ec98c0a8f02\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 4\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022 data-id=\u0022b9e269c8bad981dcdb207ba38c98ef10\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b9e269c8bad981dcdb207ba38c98ef10\u0022\u003EKATIE NIMON (National\u2014Napier) (14:17)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Housing\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Government considering removing interest deductibility on residential property?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022 data-id=\u002278cf48b991015147ccd93c0a05ab193f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002278cf48b991015147ccd93c0a05ab193f\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP (Minister of Housing) (14:17)\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca6de867bfa117e1c852d5a45bfe8c41\u0022\u003EKatie Nimon\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Government considering limiting, rather than removing, interest deductibility on residential property?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b29995bb6cfe1631fe8a8b57af0a21d0\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EGreat question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220ed51cd96ab7ac3d7a872cd4093643c6\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: That is a good question; thank you for that compliment. Also no. The Government is emphatically not leaving the door open to removing or limiting interest deductibility. We are not considering a half ban\u2014for example, where 50 percent of interest can\u2019t be deducted. If someone provides a rental earning $30,000 in rent and pays $25,000 in interest, their profit is $5,000. With deductibility, tax at 33 percent is about $1,650. Under a half ban, tax is about $5,775 on a property that only made $5,000 profit. This is a great way to disincentivise people from renting out their property or punish people who\u2019ve had to reluctantly rent out their property after a change in personal circumstances. Halfway to unfair is still unfair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b96e8cac708dae27285a218a69d56c01\u0022\u003EKatie Nimon\u003C/span\u003E: What reports has he seen on interest deductibility for residential property?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200f23a57ae289763c514e90797894246\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m still making my way through the Inland Revenue Department\u2019s (IRD\u2019s) 2021 and 2023 regulatory impact statements. They are riveting\u2014or I could be a slow reader; could be both. Page 17 of the 2021 paper is very clear about who ends up paying the price of removing interest deductibility. It says: \u201Cupward pressure on rents\u201D from this policy are \u201Cmore likely to disproportionately impact low-income households, young people, M\u0101ori, and Pacific peoples\u201D\u2014the New Zealanders least likely to own their home. It notes, \u201Caround 43 percent of [New Zealand] children are living in rental accommodation\u201D, and that \u201Cupward pressure on rents could have negative impacts on child wellbeing and child poverty.\u201D The same page warned that higher rents may mean more \u201Cspending on the accommodation supplement and temporary additional support.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221009d005f798763bc12e4178a3395551\u0022\u003EKatie Nimon\u003C/span\u003E: What do the reports he has seen say about the rationale for removing interest deductibility?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225134110d7897955184bc290f117b8a07\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: The 2021 regulatory impact statement outlines that the key policy problem was housing affordability. The problem definition section noted there were concerns about rental affordability and maintaining an adequate supply of new housing stock. However, the same regulatory impact statement went on to describe in detail how removing interest deductibility was unlikely to fix the first problem and would make the other two worse. IRD said additional taxes on rental housing are unlikely to be an effective way of boosting housing affordability; they said it would put upward pressure on rents and may reduce the supply of new housing developments in the longer term. The rationale for removing interest deductibility is a shameless tax grab.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d1af4549c3d50ee1273b57f11112a47f\u0022\u003EFinance\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a60faa22ad50fc3e38d1060650ca50ff\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 5\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u002219d6678dbd62a6c2470db7a721752f41\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002219d6678dbd62a6c2470db7a721752f41\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (14:20)\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=\u002277f9d1f6fda6024de384e7c2f67a3d6b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002277f9d1f6fda6024de384e7c2f67a3d6b\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (14:20)\u003C/span\u003E: In context, yes\u2014particularly my statement that imposing vast additional new taxes on the economy would put it at risk.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6181970c21b8184ba995a233b5aa817\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: Is partially privatising a State-owned asset an asset sale?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e10114e0eed82a60e31cf7b0b5b66e48\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the member would have to elaborate on exactly what she\u2019s talking about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002279c6dbb272fbca2b20c1ad900d62f452\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: Is partially privatising Kiwibank an asset sale?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002295543d1e060cef7598d0e6983d6148dc\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it would depend on what the proposal is that the member is referring to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d9b66e029410e5c5a73812eb4b66859\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: Is asset recycling an asset sale?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022389225d574dd03156116643d1e3f6d85\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: It would depend on the proposal that the member is referring to. Does she have any?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022715759fc05a218c5e008132498732dd3\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: Will she rule out partially privatising Kiwibank?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e375c34ac3543c1e3aefb75336341575\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, what I\u2019ll rule out is that member ever coming up with a useful idea for the New Zealand economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3578dc0aef387c4774970d49c6bedcb\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022307da6443346cd9af778fcf1422fc0c5\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a moment. Everyone, calm down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2112df433f397a25306c089c02ed37d\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: I know it\u2019s a very difficult time for some members on the other side of the House and we are close to an election. However, the Minister\u2019s comments\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002284b693ebc2e1e43d29a74beda2c67e45\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not as tricky as it is for you. How\u2019s your fiscal plan going?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002297c310e207176e6bc490e2a677e73971\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014were a revelation to this side of the House, and particularly to me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022efb6a1a0d1d6aaf8ec1a81671479760a\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Hang on. Look, someone is talking and could leave the House right now\u2014Mr Brown. One of you was talking\u2014was it you, Mr Goldsmith? Away you go.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220944da7076fc90ffe4ac00e9cae78067\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: It was me\u2014it\u2019s me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264eab245f1e00c91f1d6f66feae2f5bf\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Oh well, OK\u2014thank you for the honesty. Off you go. Sorry, I can\u2019t warn all the time and nothing happens. Mr Bishop is leaving the House by volunteering to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EQuestion 5 interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022372d650432e925637e748345d9761bca\u0022\u003EWithdrawal from Chamber\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00227fd41631ecdbd1e2eb4077fb61e20028\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001594\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop withdrew from the Chamber.\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002261c4eb2830ba4cc165ea0d002a287dc5\u0022\u003EOral Questions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fd9692c56f15347c4a36c5e5e06e25cd\u0022\u003EFinance\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022693b31984f7f4d1c6ead1ed086365b26\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 5\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001598\u0022\u003EQuestion 5 resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221225ec5b43d82a35f3e47c46a08943ce\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re just going to wait for everyone to be quiet. It\u2019s a point of order, and we don\u2019t talk during them or comment on them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223bd1f65e7cdb74188ecda2a957773427\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. My point of order was that the Minister failed to address the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002259ac75d8195b966acb04b65b5b2d973b\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, a question about addressing a question is quite a wide one, but I\u2019ll let you ask the question again, and we\u2019ll listen very carefully to the response.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022 data-id=\u002208bfef9c281407c1d545c13fe5417bf6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002208bfef9c281407c1d545c13fe5417bf6\u0022\u003EHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour\u2014Mana) (14:23)\u003C/span\u003E: Will she rule out partially privatising Kiwibank?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022072d73590988cd832b1be7417f82feb9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022072d73590988cd832b1be7417f82feb9\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (14:23)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, what the member defines as partial privatisation is another mystery in the Labour Party policy agenda.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d2742e1d5da4db8985354d2641589c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224be1648229a58a4292f2a648ad23e67\u0022\u003EHon Barbara Edmonds\u003C/span\u003E: Who should Kiwis believe when just yesterday morning, Christopher Luxon and Simeon Brown said they were looking at asset sales and will have an announcement soon, then the Minister has ruled them out, then Simeon Brown rules them out, and then, just a few hours later, she puts asset sales straight back on the table, as reported by the media?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d643e3b95fbb28680a24768149ef6bfd\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that question is full of mischaracterisations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fbbf46ffdc5d7fbcfc388e8896325802\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Question No. 6. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] It would be a really great question time if there were actually no members here at all\u2014I\u2019d just read them to myself. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00227b252c006db490f3b4f734fc4a6f204d\u0022\u003EAgriculture\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00229135b7dfc4fdc76fbbc209112a1b3035\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022 data-id=\u00223fe2e33691ec4d011d22864fed35d2ed\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223fe2e33691ec4d011d22864fed35d2ed\u0022\u003EMILES ANDERSON (National\u2014Waitaki) (14:24)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Agriculture\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Government considering a land tax on farms and orchards?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022a3c68dabbbded0353791aacf01688456\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a3c68dabbbded0353791aacf01688456\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister of Agriculture) (14:24)\u003C/span\u003E: No, we will not be implementing a land tax on farms and orchards, just as we will not be implementing any new taxes. Instead, the Government is keeping taxes low so all New Zealanders, including rural New Zealand, can keep more of what they earn and have more choices about what they and their families can do with their money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f19aa13c2b1a484349944f95958540a3\u0022\u003EMiles Anderson\u003C/span\u003E: What reports has he seen about a land tax on farms and orchards?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242115b279a5ced475ca67948f17386c6\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I\u2019ve seen a report by a reputed and respected commentator and journalist that says about land tax that \u201CAn average sheep and beef property could face around $43,400 a year; an arable farmer, nearly $49,000 a year.\u201D, and they said, \u201CThat, folks, is $1,000 a week.\u201D This would of course be even more if there were other taxes like a capital gains tax or a wealth tax. Instead of more taxes, the Government will continue to support farmers and growers to grow, like with Investment Boost, so that people can invest and innovate, grow their businesses, and create more higher-paying jobs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c34f5965fbd95bc37d0c06aa6cf7f019\u0022\u003EMiles Anderson\u003C/span\u003E: Has he seen any other reports about a land tax?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222feea09d617fa4e8f59e2f02beda194e\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Well, yes, I\u2019ve seen a report of a land tax being described as \u201Cfantasy posing as policy\u201D. That could well be said about any new tax that would harm New Zealand households and rural New Zealanders, sending our economic recovery backwards. This is why the Government won\u2019t be implementing a land tax or any new taxes on New Zealand farms or orchards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c2ee7b011fab34c3e659305903400bb\u0022\u003EMiles Anderson\u003C/span\u003E: Has he seen any other reports about taxes on farms and orchards?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002265aa4efe110749ad1300677a74daf9a9\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY\u003C/span\u003E: Yes\u2014a report by Federated Farmers about the harm that a land tax and any other tax would do to rural New Zealand. Simon Donald Roy Cameron of Federated Farmers, as well as Winston Peters\u2014sorry, Winston Churchill; I often look and confuse the two of them\u2014and Winston Churchill both said: \u201CFor a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.\u201D Minister Peters could well have said that. That\u2019s why we have ruled out a land tax, a capital gains tax, a wealth tax, a ute tax\u2014in fact, every one of the new taxes I have seen proposed by others this year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00227c7d3648c15c52b130547e45647f77d9\u0022\u003EHealth\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022802b0bd8f690b2b1bbf77bb547cf379d\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 7\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022 data-id=\u0022d2d4ceaa1477bc33512a0cb777377a17\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d2d4ceaa1477bc33512a0cb777377a17\u0022\u003EHon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) (14:26)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Health\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree with the Minister of Finance\u2019s statement that \u201CWe\u2019re currently recruiting 2,300 new nurses\u201D; if so, what is the expected growth in nursing FTE from recruiting these nurses?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022 data-id=\u00222150328460e37804e5d30011e4bd7a76\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222150328460e37804e5d30011e4bd7a76\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN (Minister of Health) (14:27)\u003C/span\u003E: Regarding the first part of the member\u2019s question, in the context it was made, yes. Regarding the second part of the member\u2019s question, I\u2019m advised by Health New Zealand that in relation to that statement, all 2,378 roles are fulltime-equivalent (FTE). As would be expected, I\u2019m advised that the exact net growth in nursing FTE would depend on a range of factors, including normal workplace movements such as retirements, resignations, and parental leave.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220bba9b73bb5f213154b3292b8a48e6cb\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The second part of the question was: what is the expected growth in nursing fulltime-equivalents from recruiting these nurses? Now, the Minister was speaking into his chest a little\u2014it was hard to hear his full answer\u2014but I don\u2019t believe there was a comment on the expected growth from those 2,300.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002262e513696134e18520a505a91407fa19\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, he did say that the exact number would be dependent on a number of usual employment factors. I think that was a reasonable address to the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c418ab14900c8ac891d746f6d26fb859\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by his statement that the nursing turnover rate is 8.4 percent, and, if so, is it also correct that Health New Zealand needs to hire 3,000 nurses just to keep a workforce of 35,000 nurses at the same size?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022465cb5d49aa2017a9ab52a77cbb48737\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, the turnover rate, I am advised, has decreased from 11.7 percent in September 2023 to 8.4 percent in March 2026, which shows that the retention of our nursing workforce is improving. Ultimately, that is why we are continuing to recruit to both fill vacancies and to grow the workforce.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208d2b0fdb80f8301427325847bcb21e4\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: Is it correct that the Government could be recruiting 2,300 nurses and not be growing the nursing workforce at all?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281a058466765e73f463b340217961558\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the member is asserting an annualised figure and applying it to recruitment that is happening right now to fill vacancies and to grow the workforce. Ultimately, we are focused on growing our nursing workforce, filling vacancies, and that\u2019s why Health New Zealand is recruiting to so many roles right now, today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229748d7b0bd5fcee6d489835fa5a592bf\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Government committing to a net growth of 2,300 nurses?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab6eb51d4fee08806db359e5821be210\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re committing to growing our workforce, filling vacancies, and ensuring that we are recruiting as we have been since we came to Government, with 2,100 additional nurses since we came to Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022512bed7f1141b4bb4f7d3975f1c5551f\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: When will net growth of 2,300 nurses be achieved by?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222cdb94a4486faaa12f6fc6b3d78a1e77\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, as I said in my answer to the primary question, as would be expected, there are other factors, including normal workforce movements such as retirements, resignations, and parental leave. My expectation for Health New Zealand is that they fill vacancies, grow the workforce, and also grow the services that are delivering for New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223636ab5cd4c9139e3d7b192697fc9dfc\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: Why should New Zealanders believe that after only hiring 54 nurses over two years, and after repeated attempts to conflate gross hiring with net growth of the workforce, they\u2019re actually going to start hiring nurses again?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022551baece95b08a5565c3c6ac7f1501b7\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: We are hiring, as I said in answer to the primary question. Health New Zealand is hiring 2,378 fulltime-equivalent roles now, and we\u2019ve hired an additional 2,100 nurses since we came to Government. There is more work to do and we\u2019re getting on and getting it done, whilst also improving on all of our health targets.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022620246e7e95a8f7f9879f3831c881dd6\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Can I ask the Minister: how many times has Ayesha Verrall asked that question, and when do you think the facts will sink in?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228810c1f35f53f3687304fd90e97e7d93\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, you can\u2019t be commenting on other members. Can I\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fff7d68eb1717363856d637b4473a3b9\u0022\u003EHon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u003C/span\u003E: Especially when they\u2019re right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227872445448f11dc6b068ba9c4f692e30\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a minute. Can we go now to question No. 8; I call Dr David Wilson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002279e64c29e426074a2b093742d71baeab\u0022\u003EPolice\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00226b5f66fde85de340b04bd2a79a1a0636\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 8\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022 data-id=\u00227f19825aab475b510df0493f3e0f4152\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227f19825aab475b510df0493f3e0f4152\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON (NZ First) (14:31)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EAssociate Minister of Police\u003C/span\u003E: What recent announcements has she made about fighting organised crime?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u002211adc1ed2226ad1afc78aca6fbda620d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002211adc1ed2226ad1afc78aca6fbda620d\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Police) (14:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Earlier this month, I announced that the Government is establishing a multi-agency chief executive board (CEB) on Transnational, Serious, and Organised Crime (TSOC). There are a huge range of agencies that have a role in fighting organised crime, and establishing clearer governance and stronger accountability across the system, with a ministerial lead, was a core recommendation from the ministerial advisory group on TSOC. TSOC groups are sophisticated, well networked, and commodity agnostic. They will do anything to make money and will exploit vulnerabilities. This executive board will help deliver a better-organised Government to fight organised crime.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224808ab00158a5f3e6c45cd40601e3708\u0022\u003EDr David Wilson\u003C/span\u003E: Why is this an important move?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225b567d5bd9c47c9be4d4747fd4f09fb3\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: It is important because organised crime is too big a challenge to ignore or not tackle head on. These people don\u2019t care about the damage they cause. Illicit drugs drive cycles of addiction, poverty, violence, and murder. Money made in drugs is supporting international criminals to invest in their businesses and do even more harm. But this is about more than drugs. Organised crime affects every New Zealander every day. It\u2019s why we now live in a world where we have to question the legitimacy of every email and message we receive. Organised crime also undermines legitimate business, drives exploitation and people trafficking, and syphons away Government revenue. Making New Zealand a much harder place for organised criminals to do business is our best chance to protect New Zealanders from all of this harm.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b333c97918e08ddc73742ed04d887bc2\u0022\u003EDr David Wilson\u003C/span\u003E: How are we progressing our response to transnational, serious, and organised crime?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec4f4b4e959e34fee1bd4e8b3920d6cc\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve now met with all the chief executives involved in our response to organised crime. I\u2019m intending for the CEB to have its first meeting in October, at which point they will have their priorities and an initial work programme established. I would add that we haven\u2019t been standing still until the formation of the board. Without getting into an exhaustive list, in the last year we\u2019ve made real progress on actions from the TSOC plan, including adding an additional money-laundering team at Police, posting more customs and police staff offshore, and strengthening capability and cooperation in the Pacific. This has seen huge amounts of drugs stopped offshore and at the border, and in the last year, the Police organised crime group seized 200 kilograms of cocaine, close to a tonne of meth, and 137 firearms. Encouragingly, recent waste-water results are showing decreasing meth use, and we want to see this trajectory continue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b67e79da4e6e75a3c8a7e88a0c21652\u0022\u003EDr David Wilson\u003C/span\u003E: What examples, if any, can she provide of successful cross-agency work to tackle organised crime?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f19e5c210e823e33647b0a1509cce47\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ve seen, in recent media, 14 large-scale grow houses shut down in just one operation\u2014a testament to what\u2019s possible when agencies use all of their powers to identify and take action on organised crime activity. I\u2019ve previously announced an action group on illicit tobacco, where Customs, Police, Health New Zealand, and the Ministry of Health have joined forces to target and dismantle the illicit tobacco trade. The previous siloed approach meant that we weren\u2019t using all the tools available to us for the illicit trade. Now, we\u2019re better coordinated and more proactive.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ce88d025fca83387df6bd26d57202831\u0022\u003ERevenue\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00221003bab5f3d7a19870b0784c11a27738\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022 data-id=\u002215368e9e6705609805909cf0742f890b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002215368e9e6705609805909cf0742f890b\u0022\u003EDAN BIDOIS (National\u2014Northcote) (14:35)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Revenue\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Government considering ending Investment Boost?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022a579299860900582f79252309c2ec83f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a579299860900582f79252309c2ec83f\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (14:35)\u003C/span\u003E: No, Investment Boost is tax savings for businesses to enable a stronger, more productive economy. We want New Zealand businesses investing, expanding, and growing, because when businesses grow, they create jobs, they lift wages, and create more opportunities for New Zealanders. Investment Boost is about backing businesses to do exactly that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002248d641e18e19b7047b42e9a619703b79\u0022\u003EDan Bidois\u003C/span\u003E: Why is Investment Boost important for growing the New Zealand economy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252b69e9f8486acbdb2e98e49e64cabaa\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: If we want higher growth and a more productive economy, we need New Zealand businesses to be growing and investing. That means buying new machinery, farm equipment, vehicles, technology\u2014that all helps them produce more and be more productive. Investment Boost helps make those investments more affordable by providing an immediate 20 percent deduction for eligible new assets.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e43e2d102663f96109c1398495679c09\u0022\u003EDan Bidois\u003C/span\u003E: What evidence has he seen that Investment Boost is encouraging business investment?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2d1ea458e1cfd750acf62896d633fd4\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: Early evidence is very encouraging. Inland Revenue found that businesses who were aware of Investment Boost said it was increasing how much they invested. Looking ahead, almost half of businesses planning to invest over the next five years said Investment Boost was having a positive effect on their plans. That tells us that Investment Boost is doing what it was designed to do: getting businesses investing and growing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227f87170464ea6b2622da22b20d43058b\u0022\u003EDan Bidois\u003C/span\u003E: Did the Government consider putting a cap on the amount a business could claim through Investment Boost?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002241833d2b4e57f0165d2365e3f9209ec0\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: The Government deliberately chose not to impose an arbitrary cap on Investment Boost because our Government doesn\u2019t want to cap aspiration or economic growth. Putting barriers in the way of productive investment, or introducing new taxes, is the last thing we should be doing if we want New Zealand to be a high-growth economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f9a92eced941f31287473dca258f11c9\u0022\u003ECommerce and Consumer Affairs\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002209e44d959310c2ae19708e23871dcc81\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 10\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u002257503f2c890dc9ca8b1f9ab6524dbe41\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002257503f2c890dc9ca8b1f9ab6524dbe41\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (14:37)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003ENg\u0101 mihi o te w\u0101 o te Wiki o te Reo M\u0101ori\u003C/span\u003E, Mr Speaker. Why does he defend sustainable price rises when one in three Kiwi households are struggling to afford food?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022 data-id=\u0022966154c5749d9c091815791edce5fef9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022966154c5749d9c091815791edce5fef9\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs) (14:37)\u003C/span\u003E: I do not defend high grocery prices. New Zealanders, as I have repeatedly said, pay too much for groceries. What I support is low and stable inflation, rather than inflation running at 7.3 percent, as it was in 2022. The Government is also working to increase grocery competition by making it easier to consent and build supermarkets, improving overseas investment pathways, strengthening competition settings and supplier protections, and backing Commerce Commission enforcement. I would also note that independent cost-benefit analysis, released today, estimates restructuring Foodstuffs could be worth around $200 to $1,300 a year per household by full roll-out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002247a4f9e36b1a4b33951f3ab4bd80f9c5\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Are the supermarkets gouging New Zealanders, or is he telling the people who are worried about the price increases of 88 percent for butter, 33 percent for milk, and 31 percent for lamb, since his Government took office, to \u201Ccry me a river\u201D, like his Prime Minister?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee5554bc15ab713aab2e57a76735d2d1\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: As I have repeated said, and I will repeat again, New Zealanders pay too much for their groceries, and that is why we are doing the work that I just outlined. But if I can also point out that food price increases for the year to July 2026\u2014the past year\u2014were 1.9 percent. That compares to 12.5 percent to the year to June 2023, under the last Labour Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d262bd7749c4ae6c5f33c41af3c1601\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Are we up to the third\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d620eb7b5b7d93f85a5ff2472e206a7\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Wait, wait, just wait. Okay.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c3cdd90265866727e84526f6d03e2ad\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Are we up to the third or the fourth or the fifth review that the Government has done to find out whether the supermarkets duopoly still controls around 80\u00A0percent of the market, and prices continue to rise?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022729cf686911d43f1c543634bf36cc090\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: This Government is doing a lot of work that I continue to outline. I can read that paragraph again. I would note that under the last Government, when they had an absolute majority and 65 MPs, food prices went up nearly 22\u00A0percent in three years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228b8849534f26606759ab076e5316fa46\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: When is his Government going to finally deliver on the commitment from Nicola Willis to lower grocery prices?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022519284b50fa45e573253c24c77bed095\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: As I have said, I would encourage the member to get on to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment website and review for herself the independent cost-benefit analysis that shows what could be achieved through potential structural reform.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227dbfa1356dcf6e5aa57742ce4c580640\u0022\u003EHon Nicola Willis\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister confirm that, in fact, lower food prices have been delivered across several grocery categories in the last 12 months, including chicken, down 4\u00A0percent; tomatoes, down 29\u00A0percent; eggs, down 15.5\u00A0percent; and tinned spaghetti, down 6\u00A0percent?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229bde9592cc8f0f8890695a1ce969b223\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: I can confirm all of those. But, most notably\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022199a8552e0dae78691e65ad24ffd1ca9\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Hang on. Just a bit of calm.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d0a708f23f711072b6c6377c446cbfe\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: Most notably, I can confirm that fruit and vegetables are down 1\u00A0percent in the past year, compared to increasing by 22\u00A0percent in the year to June 2023 under the last Labour Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222842b313927fbf8cc8b45fae2decb906\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Why is he highlighting\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d130aedf1d925a71f4a8d00bba1c592\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a moment. Just a moment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221fc0af7c2b2e45f21284a9f0590e2d5a\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Why is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220e16ec4dbcc297070641002707cadfbc\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Hang on a minute. There is far too much noise coming from the Government benches.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c578f612b73225f8233d36fd1c9bd478\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Why is he highlighting his hard work to bring down the price of spaghetti when this tin of spaghetti [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EMember holds up tin\u003C/span\u003E] has come down 1c under National?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe16c8287acb6cf38a74512a80cccafc\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: If I can\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a9c78c7af074de6c900dd0b0a67debf\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a minute. I know that a topic like spaghetti excites the House. You add in a bit of pineapple, and the place is out of control. Can we just, please, let the answer flow.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220b4d45a3c83e42fa6709a7c327b632b8\u0022\u003EHon Nicola Willis\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231cae16becdeddf0555e607ad1249197\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, you\u2019ve still got one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022461d31fe8e90d76b7a2332c260a9b0df\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019s still got to answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022662d9e894d8158a172a007795c50e505\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a minute. I\u2019ll tell you what we\u2019ll do: we\u2019ll try and be really nice\u2014no, we won\u2019t have the question again; just answer the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002263f022b83e278f9ec8cb354913db7f0e\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: Even a small decrease in prices is a lot better than the huge increases that they saw under the last Labour Government in food prices.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd6eed9680215378133c10adab75f6d9\u0022\u003EHon Nicola Willis\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister confirm that in one single 12-month period under the last Labour Government, tinned spaghetti went up 35.4\u00A0percent, and is it the view of the Minister that if members opposite wish to cherry-pick price increases for particular goods, including mince, including bread, and including toast, then they should be aware that two can play at that game?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002257713e07949a7b77342c12f4968d9268\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: I can confirm those numbers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222bfffb29eafc305e6d898d731eb4f67a\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That was, while the question was being asked, completely unacceptable interjection. We\u2019re moving on, we\u2019re moving on. We\u2019re moving on. He\u2019s got to answer a question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226680b601cf58297ce3d95f77300ec4a5\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Mr Speaker, I certainly don\u2019t dispute that, but order in this House is a two-way street, and if Ministers are quite clearly going to refer to the other side of the House and that isn\u2019t pulled up, there\u2019s only one option available to us, and that is to respond.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022363872bb6c99faf82af13883d186b384\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, but the member will also know that it\u2019s quite acceptable for Ministers to refer to historical matters that might have been the circumstance when they came into Government. I thought that question was right on the edge of that, but we\u2019ll get a quick answer, and then we\u2019ll move on to Arena Williams.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb3c709a91e09fccc2e63b1a1231d876\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: I always agree with what the Minister of Finance says. Can I put the contrast? There is no better contrast than fruit and vegetables falling by 1\u00A0percent in the past year, compared to increasing by 22\u00A0percent under a year under the Labour Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229e6cd069eb389c77fad0031644cf05e7\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Is that what Kiwis deserve\u20141c off a tin of spaghetti and a letter from National to the Commerce Commission asking them to do a review?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1d74a569cc8a8e661a902aec240ee2a\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: What they don\u2019t deserve is a 22\u00A0percent increase in food prices that they saw in three years under the last Labour Government. Our work continues, and our results will be a lot better than what they achieve, even with an absolute majority.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f5d32fc1d33cd7fa48b40fa652bc40bb\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002255dc6325c06368bb5241249a57d7ca34\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 11\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb2c598fbfaab3a87bb0690bd0bde68c\u0022\u003EDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER\u003C/span\u003E: E te P\u012Bka\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a3e423d3f1962af6618b60f0096e386c\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Hang on. Just stop all the conversation. Are we stopping the conversations?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273dca134731a71c83fc2e914997f482a\u0022\u003ERt Hon Christopher Luxon\u003C/span\u003E: I wasn\u2019t talking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002283e01c2758c10762300d887d2992c82b\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, you\u2019re not, but the people behind you are. Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and no one else.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022 data-id=\u0022a682ede3a1edb8a946ab4354fa9ed6b8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a682ede3a1edb8a946ab4354fa9ed6b8\u0022\u003EDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Co-Leader\u2014Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori) (14:45)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EDoes he stand by all 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=\u0022c5d545fa6b0d273d4a82662cd45d1eec\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c5d545fa6b0d273d4a82662cd45d1eec\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister) (14:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and I want to reassure the member that we won\u2019t be introducing a capital gains tax that would put a wrecking ball through the economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd1ed957f2ac76ef0693125a9cf61b60\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E: Does his Government have any plans to increase community ownership of electricity generation so that communities share in the benefits generated from their whenua, wai, and natural resources?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d1162772ecefc5f22bbe9879a9f73a0\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Our real focus is making sure we increase the supply of electricity across the country. That\u2019s what we\u2019re doing, with a renewables boom under way. We\u2019re also making sure we\u2019ve got thermal energy in place to support lower wholesale electricity prices.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c7e6c73a0e2d493d45ea3d4322f246f\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E: Will he rule out spending an additional $1 billion on oil and gas exploration under any Government he leads?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022934b6e0c577636d88ddddee673e78d29\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, again, liquefied natural gas plays a very important part, as you\u2019ve seen. Wholesale electricity prices are down 35 percent under this Government as a function of a much more sensible, reasonable energy policy, unlike the Labour-Greens proposal of an oil and gas ban, which shot up wholesale electricity prices to $800 per megawatt hour. That led to regional mills closing and working people, who they used to care about, losing their jobs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e6dc93afe0db5b780660f23e79410d93\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002250006b3bffa7d5dd6b9b7f30fca54ea1\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re just waiting. In the meantime, can we remove that visual aid off the bench there. It\u2019s clearly causing a high degree of distraction across the House. When we\u2019re all quiet, Debbie Ngarewa-Packer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221b0febb974ef01c8ba4267ce643ff975\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E: Why did his Government abandon the 100 percent renewable electricity target while committing public money to expanding the fossil fuel supply?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf178691969f18992c5b28182da53d4e\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, look, I think this is just really quite illustrative of the other side\u2019s poor understanding of energy policy, because under a Labour-Greens Government, they killed oil and gas and sent a chilling effect right through international investment. We ended up importing Indonesian coal rather than domestic gas.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022104363e0815075b475929b4fa50aad7b\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Aside from the fact that what the Prime Minister is saying is untrue\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022493c3deb5f6df13d077c10422fabfe01\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, hang on\u2014hang on. Wait\u2014wait. Hold on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223fba5301214188c6e1ed09596627c355\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: All right\u2014inaccurate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c6735374232c2d847c1d3f75b7f60c6\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Hold on. I can work out where you\u2019re going with this. Just make the point of order and let me rule on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb5be5250bb079227b1bb92ba33daa60\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Speaker\u2019s ruling 205/4: he cannot bring parties that aren\u2019t involved in the question into it. He\u2019s done it the last two times. In fact, he\u2019s done it the whole term, but since you\u2019re pushing back on it, I\u2019m going to raise it today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f78ac502e181773b4d66795035c3cc34\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Right. We\u2019ll just have an answer directly to the question without any other extraneous matter being brought in. Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, ask your question again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022939e792d989ce4aae6c066acb8cf3ff4\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E: Why did his Government abandon the 100 percent renewable electricity target while committing public money to expanding fossil fuel supply?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c53babf9f9bcac06b2972f257ae9bc6\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Because it raised energy prices and people lost their jobs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c841abf1713f3c00fd5ea78852f94a00\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E: Of the 31 permits that were stopped, how many were producing in that period?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a23c7541baa03482816f97044d384ef\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: If the member would like to put that question in writing, we\u2019ll make sure she gets a proper answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d6f5b5e925afe353b667798cc5467873\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Funny how you ask a question if you know the answer, but anyway, can we have a supplementary. Have you finished?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00221f5425bcba2676a009b1fea560e5703e\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a11ee68b14f30e41d2da33328ce3e367\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 12\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022 data-id=\u002244fc7b072e9714f60d38652d6b843f3f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002244fc7b072e9714f60d38652d6b843f3f\u0022\u003ECHL\u00D6E SWARBRICK (Co-Leader\u2014Green) (14:48)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001724\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=\u00227be64147d5df08fbc882e4c1e4d1f118\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227be64147d5df08fbc882e4c1e4d1f118\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister) (14:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes\u2014in particular, our desire never to introduce an inheritance tax.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d7e82efc5b7aefaada007f7997b805d7\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Should Woolworths and Foodstuffs be allowed to continue making excess profits of $1 million a day as New Zealanders struggle to afford their groceries?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a73379a8fbeb1a77d31898bd7f0403d\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that\u2019s why you\u2019re seeing announcements from us this morning on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f120f8117a98d1c7921f1d925e55be97\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Sir, the Prime Minister is answering on behalf of the Government. The Government has not made an announcement on that today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d6dc61872e66e0cbc24005ab9e03bb31\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That is a point. I think the Prime Minister could answer that in a different way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221bd0f502118e50256cfece123eef630\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, we agree, having looked at all the previous reviews of the previous Governments where nothing changed and nothing happened, that there is a real structural problem in the supermarket sector. It\u2019s important that in the future that is addressed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9e6c3b00997118aec303018d8fd9f07\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister understand that his officials\u2019 analysis shows that the biggest possible benefit for consumers to achieve more affordable groceries would be breaking up both Woolworths and Foodstuffs?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c726eddfcdc324b3d1c54335e894c26c\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: I disagree, given the analysis I\u2019ve seen on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220c873ff4a5fc3ed3e38eceec55cf6fc6\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Why does he think that New Zealanders can publicly own an airline but not a supermarket?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6f0dac6ec2c2cac0356fe6f8513f1ee\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Because I have visions of a Labour-Greens Government sending bureaucrats up and down this country, going into supermarkets with clipboards, assessing the price of oranges and Weet-Bix and everything else, and I\u2019d just say that is not the answer. That is a Soviet step backwards, big time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231734e6777f169a18c4d0aae93af6ae8\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: In the Prime Minister\u2019s experience of employing people, would running a cafe in Mount Eden for three weeks qualify you to run a supermarket?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a54c2acd4f14f14495086f1aa0b3b3f3\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Wait on. Sorry. People may want to interject, but don\u2019t. We\u2019ve had one member leave the House. We\u2019re nearly there at the end of question time, and so we\u2019ll have the Hon David Seymour\u2019s question without any interference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dfac2083951f6bb826c42966145bdc78\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: In the Prime Minister\u2019s experience of employing people, would someone who ran a cafe in Mount Eden for three weeks be qualified to run a supermarket chain?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c9f026dcd3f945dda1b7b91091042c2\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I have to give the Greens credit, because they are actually\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d40c7ee96244d41cee25d1d483da73c\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. Sorry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be7b9ba1bfc12c6672580bf036e19090\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: If 2022 Christopher Luxon said that intervening in the supermarkets would be a \u201Cdisaster\u201D, and 2026 Christopher Luxon is advocating for structural separation of supermarkets, just how long will it be until Christopher Luxon starts advocating for a publicly owned supermarket with an affordability mandate?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8f67ed5566ea76df6b1df88ab9bebbb\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The question has just being pulled up because the Prime Minister answered as leader of the National Party when he should be answering for his Government, so there\u2019s a different way you could put that question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dcc2f742ba67532c9d775713d51d965d\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: What exactly is the difference between public ownership of an airline and public ownership of a supermarket?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c29f455823f915202a7f4ed122f7d9d4\u0022\u003EHon Todd McClay\u003C/span\u003E: Supermarkets don\u2019t fly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002248ed836bfd1f3234838163c4c38c7c26\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the bottom line\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022509b5a8354246f14aceb3d5be72fb88b\u0022\u003EHon Members: \u003C/span\u003EHa, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220024656a506ef6ac40c6cea10520bcac\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, that may be amusing to some, but not particularly to me. The Prime Minister will answer and we\u2019ll have the answer without any comment from anyone.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d6ef041b9ba7a5c216cac09f445d627\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, can the member repeat the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022105534bbeef6833a02f1b0528e775fc2\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a minute.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c59cd6ce7cb0f6e2653507e8813b0dfc\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Try and try again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022789ae88f777ce158a4e27a55c8b622bb\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, Mr Peters, please. We want to move on. It\u2019s the last question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c2c782e19b442f039d3f19e00c95bcdf\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: What exactly is the specific difference between public ownership of an airline and public ownership of a supermarket?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274756bfd97823bd0af6894ee23c34a48\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Look, as I said, the thought that we would have bureaucrats and officials roaming around with clipboards trying to implement the\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] No, no, hang on. Calm down. Calm down, people, calm down. It\u2019s all good. Calm down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224a0cc52a7b13f71b6afcff17dfd12ce\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Right. OK, absolute silence for the balance of that answer, which should be very brief.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b380aedfc2595c58e6dc699c34171ce3\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: I want to thank the Green Party for contributing to solving a problem that we have in our supermarket sector with their idea. I don\u2019t support their idea, but at least they have an idea and a policy unlike what we\u2019ve seen from\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d251ee451ed6e0cd85aa036a8f564aed\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s it; don\u2019t bring them into it. That ends\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] That ends oral questions. Members and people in the gallery need to leave without making any noise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI declare the House in committee for consideration of the Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c54a8dff48ba140163f788226e565799\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022262350266a2efd8b1c9bcb311e58ad6a\u0022\u003ELocal Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022dcbd95281c45ca01228d45722328ba63\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001760\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00223156571882a89db5e7ca86ca9472260d\u0022\u003EPart 1 Amendments relating to system improvements (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022339e74c2f1e52b749173a873b253fe4f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, when we suspended for the lunch break, we were considering the Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill and were debating Part 1. Part 1 the debate on clauses 4 to 22, \u201CAmendments relating to system improvements\u201D. The question, again, is that Part 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022cfac65ea439d79b288a7bdb4e2a60ec0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cfac65ea439d79b288a7bdb4e2a60ec0\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (14:55)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I was eager\u2014eager\u2014amongst all the noise in here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust before the lunch break\u2014when, I can inform the committee, I did not have canned spaghetti\u2014we were talking about the link between when a fast track has to be approved and then when the development contributions policy can change. I think the Minister of Local Government\u2019s answer was that, yes, I was correct, in terms of fast track has to be approved, and then the council can change its policy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think what the Minister was, in part, answering with his answer was that, well, despite that sequencing issue, the developer and the council can make a development agreement that would cover off what would have been covered in the development contributions policy. If he can confirm that when he\u2019s\u2014I see he\u2019s nodding, but when he next gets up, if he can confirm that, that would be useful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen one of my questions around that was: does it have to be development by development? The Queenstown examples I gave before lunch\u2014I don\u2019t know where in the process those ones are, but if you have two separate developments that are unlikely to be covered by development contributions going on at the same time, is the council able to do a development contributions policy that applies to more than one fast-track project, or does it have to be a separate process for each discrete fast-track project? That was the question that I would like an answer to as well as the nods that the Minister was just giving. Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u0022811dea244abde80861a934dee244dd83\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022811dea244abde80861a934dee244dd83\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (14:57)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Before lunch\u2014the member who just spoke obviously had moved to clause 18\u2014we were still actually quite a little bit further back at clause 11, amending section 40. I just want to stay where I was talking earlier and just finish off a question that I hadn\u2019t asked on that clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have a tabled amendment to this, and it\u2019s timestamped 16 September 2026, 9.09.11\u00A0a.m. It\u2019s quite interesting when you read clause 11(2), inserting, after section 40(1)(f), new paragraph (fa), \u201Chow the local authority is acting in accordance with the governance principles set out in section 39(f) and (g)\u201D. It\u2019s a little bit bizarre, because obviously this is about the governance principles, and there are a number of governance principles that are actually in the Act, so this is just two more that are going to get added on after paragraph (e)\u2014so (fa) and (g). \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt just seems a little bit bizarre that a local authority has to act in accordance with the governance with the governance principles set out in section 39(f) and (g), but then, to me, this is saying they can then ignore (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e). I don\u2019t think that\u2019s the intention of what this new clause is meant to do; it\u2019s actually meant to ensure that the local authority acts in accordance with all the governance principles that have been set out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I\u2019ve just tabled is a very straightforward amendment, and it\u2019s really just to remove (f) and (g) from that clause, so, instead of saying that they need to act in accordance with the governance principles set out in section 39(f) and (g), it\u2019ll simply say that they need to act in accordance with the governance principles set out in section 39. That will therefore capture everything to ensure that local authorities are actually sticking to the governance principles that have been created in the Act, including the two additional ones that focus on the free exchange of information. That\u2019s just a simple amendment that I\u2019ve put forward to, hopefully, get rid of any confusion that may happen. We understand that once we put this stuff into legislation, it becomes quite rigid.  I\u2019d hate for councils to think they can, therefore, ignore and not act in accordance with all the governance principles that are actually set out. It\u2019s a small amendment, but I think it\u2019s an amendment that actually should be considered, because I think it actually will clarify and make sure there\u2019s no uncertainty within an Act. It\u2019s really important, when we do these bills, that we don\u2019t actually create any uncertainty moving forward. It would be good if the Minister could consider that in good faith to try and actually make that a bit more straightforward. It\u2019s just a simple question. I\u2019ve tabled the amendment to make that better, and I\u2019d like the Minister to reflect on that. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022db32de98e85585a4a9daab46381d352e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022db32de98e85585a4a9daab46381d352e\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (15:00)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for the question. We won\u2019t be proceeding with that member\u2019s tabled amendment. It\u2019s not consistent with Government policy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn the context of the question from the member around applications, they are separate applications. However, where the applications are all put in at the same time, then there is the ability to do so concurrently.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022cbe5e435959ea741e0b79caee78e819f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cbe5e435959ea741e0b79caee78e819f\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (15:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, just the word there\u2014he was using the word \u201Capplications\u201D, and this is important because proposed new section 102A(1)\u2014that\u2019s in proposed clause 18B\u2014says that this section applies if the approval is granted. It\u2019s not to do with applications; it\u2019s to do with grants of fast-track approvals. Can he confirm that when he was talking about \u201Capprovals\u201D, he means \u201Cgrants\u201D, because I don\u2019t think\u2014and this is what my questioning was going to as well\u2014that the sequence of events is that it has to be fully granted the fast-track approval before the council is able to amend its development contributions policy. I need confirmation on that point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThen the second point I think what the Minister of Local Government is saying is that if there were multiple granted fast-track approvals in the same area, then the council would be able to include those multiple projects into its amendment to the development contributions policy. Is that right?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00220ad09936d06d19b71c2e633fc0b214fc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220ad09936d06d19b71c2e633fc0b214fc\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (15:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, well, it would be helpful, firstly, if the member the Hon Rachel Brooking could state the clause specifically that she\u2019s asking a question in regards to, so that I\u2019m not repeating myself in regards to that. The question that was put to me was whether those needed to be separate requests, and my answer to that is yes. However, when they go in together at the same time, then they can be concurrent. I won\u2019t repeat myself again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022ef01c90874370a52261fbd2721b66d50\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ef01c90874370a52261fbd2721b66d50\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (15:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, I would like an apology, actually, from the Minister of Local Government, because I very explicitly said which clause I am talking about, as I almost always do, and I was telling you it was proposed new section\u00A0102A, which is at proposed clause 18B. These words are important, and I don\u2019t think I heard the answer from the Minister about the \u201Cgranted\u201D, at proposed new subsection\u00A0(1). I\u2019m now looking on page 2 of his Amendment Paper 803, right at the top, to be very specific.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb47cd46e9dd21615a2a23258c6a0d5f\u0022\u003EHon Simon Watts\u003C/span\u003E: What line?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002294437f401e2cf9f9afc0d74a696334f9\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, I\u2019m looking at the second line there, which is that \u201Ca resource consent approval is granted\u201D. Why I am now using a different tone of voice from normal is because this is a ridiculous approach. We are here in urgency. No select committee has seen this. I\u2019m asking some very basic questions, and it would be considerate, if nothing else, if the Minister actually tried to, in good faith, answer them so we have something on the record. But it is typical of the reckless approach to this Government with fast track that the Minister is not undertaking that, so I\u2019m giving him an opportunity again. I\u2019m asking very reasonable questions about drafting that we\u2019ve only seen and that has not gone through any process and that nobody has made submissions on. So how does the sequencing work, Minister?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022357af0a703cda1b4425a7a9236c46487\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: You weren\u2019t even on the committee. You don\u2019t know.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261b9e94801b184fef6c1a2ba1eca4f7a\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: I beg your pardon?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c045f1150cac0aa059fc5c253fa2f9ea\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Take a call if you want to make a contribution.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c70dc21404996aec2290a347ce0f6ea9\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Someone was saying I wasn\u2019t in a select committee. That is right, and neither was this amendment, to those members across there. Perhaps if they\u2019d been following this debate, they would know that we are discussing an amendment that has been tabled subsequent to the select committee process. It is a very serious issue that we are debating because it goes to the cost that will be imposed on ratepayers by developers, some of whom we know are donors to that political party. That\u2019s interesting, isn\u2019t it? At the moment, ratepayers will be paying for this, while these developers, these donors, they will just get by without development contributions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, the Government had seen that this is a problem; it\u2019s not going to fix it\u2014because that goes to Part 2; we\u2019ll get to Part 2 soon\u2014for the problems that are already existing, but, for new ones, it is. I am asking questions about the new ones. A fast-track approval comes in and it is approved\u2014this is my question: is it that only then the council can make a change to its development contributions policy under this amendment that members in that select committee have clearly not paid any attention to? That is the question. Please answer it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001784\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d7fcc4cc5b80dc19ceaa703852f384e1\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Just before I do take the next call, just to sort of note what the Hon Rachel Brooking was talking about there. There is an Amendment Paper that has hit the Table today, I understand, and maybe all members are not aware of that, so just to note that for the committee. So questions about that Amendment Paper are important questions to put to the Minister and to the committee as well. Just to acknowledge that. If we can just focus on those particular questions and on the particular clauses and not those external issues, that would help us to move through the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022 data-id=\u00222936cf97b00049173c5bfc610b0ff609\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222936cf97b00049173c5bfc610b0ff609\u0022\u003ETIM COSTLEY (National\u2014\u014Ctaki) (15:06)\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\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u002299d7fa21c715e219cd68d8c1fa540203\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002299d7fa21c715e219cd68d8c1fa540203\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (15:06)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, doesn\u2019t that say what this Government thinks about this important issue? Shameful. Now, I\u2019ve asked many questions that have not been answered, and I invite the Minister of Local Government to answer my questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy next questions are very simple. Running through this Amendment Paper, at clause 18C, it appears that there is no change here except for a reference, a cross-reference, and then again the other amendments\u2014I\u2019m turning now to page 3 of Amendment Paper 803\u2014it seems that there are some other changes there; where, most of it, on its face, is not a policy change. There is one policy change in clause 19C and that is an amendment to section 197, and it\u2019s about cross-boundary developments. I understand that the Government has a policy that works through this Amendment Paper, that, where a fast-track development goes across two different territorial authorities, then they can work together to charge a development contribution for those. The question is a very basic one: apart from that change that we can see in the interpretation at clause 19C, are there any other policy changes from 18C down to 19D? That\u2019s a simple question. No? OK. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMoving on then to new section 198A, inserted by clause 19E, and we go to page 4 of the Amendment Paper. At the top of the page there, it says this is the \u201CPurpose and application of section 198B\u201D. These are all provisions that are being inserted into the development contributions part of the Local Government Act\u2014being the principal Act. It says here that the purpose is to \u201Cprovide the territorial authority with another basis on which to require a development contribution if a resource consent approval is granted under the Fast-track Approvals Act\u201D. I note that \u201Cbasis\u201D is used in sections later on, and I\u2019m wondering if the Minister can inform us why the word \u201Cbasis\u201D was chosen, because I\u2019m not sure that this is a term that\u2019s referred to elsewhere in the legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, elsewhere in the legislation, as I discussed in an earlier contribution, there are different trigger points for a development contribution, and those are not only resource consents but also when you hook on to the networks or you have a property information memo or a building consent. Does \u201Canother basis\u201D mean in addition to those other things, those triggers, or is the idea that it\u2019s something different? It\u2019s not the triggers, it\u2019s a new thing; it\u2019s a new concept, this other basis, for these fast-track approvals. So that is my question about clause 198A. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust reminding the Minister, I was asking him if there\u2019s any policy changes in those proceedings sections, other than that cross-boundary development, that I understand is a clear policy position from the Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd then going back to clause 18B, that is that the fast-track approval has to be granted, and my sequencing question, which the Minister still hasn\u2019t answered with the language that is used in these clauses. It\u2019s a precise question about the sequencing\u2014and I remind the Minister that after he criticised me for not telling him which clause I was on, when I had, that he was saying applications, and an application is what you do before something is granted. That is why I\u2019m asking this question about sequencing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn my mind\u2014maybe the Minister\u2019s mind is different, but an application is the thing that\u2019s in the process and then once it comes out of the process, it\u2019s been granted and it\u2019s no longer an application. That is why I\u2019m asking these questions. Back to clause 18B, about the sequencing of when the councils are going to be able to do these amendments to their development contribution policies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022661a7e1e617b2fe7ee87f78db5b5dda5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022661a7e1e617b2fe7ee87f78db5b5dda5\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (15:11)\u003C/span\u003E: In regards to clause 18C, no, and clause 198A(1) are standing drafting legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u0022a6c84df6ebb6f78597d53f6eee135f20\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a6c84df6ebb6f78597d53f6eee135f20\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (15:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m just going to move on to clause 21. Obviously, my Labour colleague may still be on clause 18, as well; I\u2019d note that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have a couple of amendments. Obviously, we\u2019re stepping into regulations here, and these are pretty simple ones as well. I guess it\u2019s a little bit disappointing that the Minister is just refusing to actually give any consideration to these amendments when we\u2019re trying to actually improve this bill and iron out some of the wrinkles. Like, it\u2019s a bad bill, but let\u2019s get a couple of improvements along the way. It would be really good if the Minister could take a little bit of time to actually consider these in good faith and actually potentially see the merits of some of the amendments that we\u2019re putting forward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to quickly talk to the first one. This one is actually in the name of my colleague to my left: Celia Wade-Brown. Once again, we\u2019d like to do simple amendments that are actually easy to understand and actually improve the bill for people that actually read it when it becomes legislation. This one is timestamped 16 September 2026, 9.09.14.  It deals, in clause 3(1) to new section 259(4)(aa). If you read that section, it gives an example to differentiate between particular local authorities or types of classes of local authorities\u2014for example, regional councils and territorial authorities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI find this puzzling because, obviously, a lot\u2019s changed since this was originally done. Like, this was obviously, before I actually came into Parliament. I wasn\u2019t part of the select committee process, so that\u2019s going back over around a year, now, that this happened. But obviously, since then, there\u2019s been a clear desire to remove regional councils from existence. Therefore, we\u2019re about to pass legislation that still refers, as an example, to regional councils that won\u2019t exist soon.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETherefore, Celia Wade-Brown has a simple amendment that will actually just remove the word \u201Cregional\u201D and replace it with \u201Cunitary\u201D. That just actually clears it up so that actually, no one goes back and goes \u201CWhy are we talking about regional councils? What is a regional council?\u201D Like I said, it\u2019s a very simple, simple amendment, that actually makes it just a little bit more common sense, easy to understand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other amendment that we have is on clause 21 and this is to replace new section 259(4)(b).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229cf66eff896046749d5397ab206e1074\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Have you got the time and date stamp?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022070c61bd9ad293882a0018ecf4e222d3\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: Time stamp? Yes, thank you, Mr Chair. That is 16 September 2026, 9.09.15. The amendment is to replace new section 259(4)(b)(aaa) with \u201Cconsult all local authorities impacted by the regulations\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd this is just to ensure that all local authorities that would be impacted by your proposed regulations are consulted instead of \u201Call relevant local authorities\u201D, which is technically up to interpretation\u2014what you, the Minister, would consider to be relevant. I think it\u2019s really important that we just remove that which is subject to interpretation and just basically put in the words \u201Call local authorities that are impacted by that regulation\u201D, which is a straightforward amendment. But it just removes some of that uncertainty\u2014something that\u2019s up for interpretation\u2014you know, as to what is the relevant local authority. I think if we actually drill down and go \u201Call local authorities\u201D, it\u2019s a straightforward easy amendment that actually does make the bill a lot clearer when it becomes legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo just a couple of amendments that I\u2019d like the Minister to consider. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00228b738adc208ff2769d97811ed377652b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228b738adc208ff2769d97811ed377652b\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (15:15)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m still on Amendment Paper (AP) 803. The Minister of Local Government gave some answers there. I think he said \u201C18B, no\u201D. I\u2019ve got no idea what one of my questions on clause18B the \u201Cno\u201D relates to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216e65d5d7bae77d7f83c39d258354e6b\u0022\u003EHon Simon Watts\u003C/span\u003E: C, sorry; 18C.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227adb262cd19f1b236c0c482cb3990edf\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: It was 18C.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229775f4c5b81b855d5b8b85f0df5d3dc0\u0022\u003EHon Simon Watts\u003C/span\u003E: Any policy changes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222988e91ccf29e86f526303d3d1b4fbbb\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: OK. No policy changes on 18C. Thank you. It\u2019s helpful to talk in full sentences when we\u2019re here, for the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo 18C\u2014there\u2019s no policy changes. Is that the same for the preceding sections? Clauses 19B, 19C; I\u2019ve discussed 19D. I did not hear an answer about clause 18B, and that is the sequencing and if the fast track has to be granted rather than being an application.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDoes the Minister understand what I am asking in terms of the timing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022677b9904ad892151318fe2b5ded9d3a5\u0022\u003EHon Simon Watts\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m just looking at the clock, sorry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222bb0527deb4adbcfc9055ddaa59df8ac\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister is looking at the clock. Wow.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bc4672655a464345f0207ccc618e5bee\u0022\u003EHon Simon Watts\u003C/span\u003E: Ask the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb662654705a307ab6327fec30bff84d\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: This is a terrible, reckless way to make laws.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f87450ccdd75e97e1ad3ebe505188979\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m going to ask people just to talk through the Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229df4bd25540b905ebb52f5faefe6069c\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I would encourage the Chair to encourage the Minister to focus on the questions being asked and to answer questions so that it can be on the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E, noting that this amendment has not gone through a select committee process. The people who know about this sort of law have not had time to make any submissions on it, and so I am trying to go through it to ask the Minister what it means, and he seems to be refusing to do this, which is outrageous.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001817\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf the Minister can please explain the sequencing in clause 18B, noting the difference between an application for a fast track\u2014because, of course, these can be referred or they can already be on the list\u2014and the granting of that approval. Does it have to be granted? The Minister said \u201Capplication\u201D; the words in the bill: \u201Cis granted\u201D. There is a difference between an application and something that is granted. That is the question I\u2019m asking the Minister. Did he misspeak? Did he mean granted, or is there something else in here that is not apparent to me asking these questions? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGoing through then, I don\u2019t think I heard an answer on the use of \u201Cbasis\u201D at clause 19E inserting new section 198A. Again, if the Minister wants to take us through what is happening at section 198B. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso at clause 19E\u2014looking at page 4 of the AP here\u2014is the power to require development contributions in relation to resource consent approvals under the Fast-track Approvals Act. There\u2019s a lot here that it seems to be a discretion on the council. The territorial authority \u201Cmay require a development contribution\u201D after the territorial authority has adopted or amended their plans. And, of course, that contribution must then be consistent with the content of that development contribution policy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd then we go through to clause 19F, which is new section 199AA inserted. This is the \u201CBasis on which development contributions may be required in relation to the Fast-track Approvals Act\u201D. Again, it refers to \u201Ca development\u201D at subclause (2) and at (1). At subclause (2), it refers to \u201Ca development\u201D\u2014not a development contribution; just a development\u2014\u201Cif the effect of the development\u201D. Again, these are singular terms, which is why I was asking before if every amendment made under these sections has to be discrete\u2014its own fast-track approval. And then going further down to new section 199AA(7), it says, \u201CThis section does not prevent a territorial authority from requiring the development contribution that is to be used to pay, in full or in part, for expenditure already incurred by the territorial authority or a service provider in anticipation of the development.\u201D I presume that is the normal development contributions clause, or the normal language, but it would be useful if the Minister of Local Government could confirm that what is outlined in these subsections of new section 199AA, in clause 19F, is what would normally happen in a development contributions policy; or if there is any difference from the primary legislation in its development contribution provisions to this legislation, that would then be specific to these fast-track approvals. Is it different or is it just simply the same terms rejigged a wee bit because we\u2019re talking about these Fast-track Approvals Act again? That\u2019s a question there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat same question applies to the next paragraphs that all look to me like normal development contributions sections, in the legislation, that are simply amended for this fast-track process. I would, rather than going through them one by one, invite the Minister to tell us if there are any differences in these, that go to some policy that mean that a development contributions amended policy for a fast-track approved project will be different somehow from a development contributions policy that would apply to a normal non - fast-track project. That\u2019s a series of questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy last question on this Amendment Paper, before we get to Part 2, is that I see in the Minister\u2019s tabled amendment this morning\u2014I think it was tabled around 11.30 a.m.\u2014he\u2019s deleted clause 22A, which is the last clause before we get into the schedule in Part 2, and that is clause 22A, \u201CSection 290 amended (Development contributions)\u201D, and it\u2019s about transitional provisions. I\u2019m wondering if the Minister can explain why this Amendment Paper 803, which is an amendment to Amendment Paper 565, which is an amendment to the amendment bill, has now been amended with a tabled amendment at 11.30 a.m. this morning, and if it\u2019s significant or not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022ad62053cd782c2c8806cf70b4fee22db\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ad62053cd782c2c8806cf70b4fee22db\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (15:23)\u003C/span\u003E: In regards to clause 18B, I was referring to the word \u201Cgranted\u201D. In regards to clause\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022246c87c1d51578c723774cf5d6196ea4\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, Minister, I can\u2019t hear.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223aa613645753b8c74b45e7a931cdebcc\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: He said \u201Cgranted\u201D. He was referring to the word \u201Cgranted\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001826\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225676ee4eda6d33a68883c009a99b3d5e\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: It seems to be we\u2019re both having a bit of challenges hearing each other. Clause 18B, I was referring to the word \u201Cgranted\u201D. In regards to new section 199AA, inserted by clause 19F, it is predominantly what normally happens. There is no difference with the exception in the interests of cross-boundary, which is new. The Amendment Paper placed on the table today relates to technical drafting issues identified by the Parliamentary Counsel Office.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022 data-id=\u00226c8022f2ec76ec185d4f2f5161736ab3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226c8022f2ec76ec185d4f2f5161736ab3\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN (Green) (15:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Mr Chair. While understanding that there may be some more questions on the development contributions areas, I want to ask some questions on clause 21(2), first of all, where it talks about inserting after section 259(1)(dd) and talks about \u201Cprescribing the groups of activities that \u2026 must [be included] in the long-term plan, annual plan, and annual report:\u201D. I wonder whether the Minister of Local Government could clarify, because I was on the Governance and Administration Committee at the beginning, but it has been a wee while since then and there have been amendments floated around and maybe you could clarify: do you also mean the asset management plans? Because they may be as important as the annual plans. And do you also mean the drafts, or is it only the final that you\u2019re prescribing the groups of activities for? So that\u2019s one on that particular section.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think my colleague has mentioned some concerns I have in that amendment we put forward about taking the word \u201Cregional\u201D out. That\u2019s not because we don\u2019t love regional councils; it\u2019s just that we\u2019re trying to clarify what does the Minister mean by \u201Ctypes or classes of local authority\u201D. Do you mean that there might be different regulations depending on the size, and that might be geographic or it might be population size? Do you mean that it might be different regulations for rural and urban? Which would make some sense, but the example doesn\u2019t really clarify that at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do also have some questions on new subsection (4AB), inserted by clause 21(4), where you\u2019re saying it must not relate to water services. My particular interest in water services is where we\u2019re using natural processes to either reduce the risk of flooding or to protect headwaters. So you\u2019ve got the natural environment, and maybe you\u2019re saying it would make more sense to plant up the banks of this river than it would to do concrete down the side, for example. Now, as I recollect, from looking at the Local Government (Water Services) Act, natural infrastructure was potentially included but it wasn\u2019t very explicit, so, presumably, we can still talk about protecting headwaters and reducing flooding by planting, maybe by the community, maybe by contractors, maybe by staff, but I would like some clarification on that, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u0022d0a8a69a27fc23eee4652061a8ff847b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d0a8a69a27fc23eee4652061a8ff847b\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (15:27)\u003C/span\u003E: Kia orana. Thank you, Mr Chair. I have a number of questions. They actually also relate to clause 21 as well. When we\u2019re looking at the groups of activities\u2014which is very common in local government circles to understand what they are\u2014I guess my question for the Minister of Local Government is: with this change, which will allow regulations to, effectively, be much more direct around what those activity groups will look like, why is it that he believes that Ministers are better placed to determine those sorts of things rather than local communities, who elect people around decision-making tables to make those decisions? Because that is exactly what clause 21 is seeking to do. It is essentially seeking to put into regulation-making powers an ability to describe how particular groups of activities could actually work out. The groups of activities have been with local government for a very long time, so my first question is why he believes that Ministers in central government are better placed to determine what those might be and how they might work, and just also on what principle that is justified as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is a new provision here in the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 755, which just landed on 15 September\u2014and I look at the clock over there that has the date, so it landed today\u2014and it does have a few changes in here, but this does propose a new clause 21A. While most of that Amendment Paper relates to Part 2, my understanding is that Part 1 comes into play here because the new clause 21A is, effectively, standing up the regulation-making powers for Orders in Council to be made around exceptions here. My question for the Minister, and this is in relation to new section 260A, inserted by clause 21A, is that this will provide an ability to exempt some from the application of three clauses: clauses 23(4), 30A(6B), or 31A(1) of schedule 7, and they\u2019re related to three things there. I\u2019m not going to go through all of them, but the one that is perhaps of relevance is the \u201Cany class or type of non-elected member\u201D. Now, we will get to the specifics of that in Part 2 for sure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is an ability there for an order, on the recommendation of the Minister, to do a couple of things: one is time bound, either an unspecified period of time or a specified period of time, and the other, new section 260A(2)(b), is \u201Cwith or without conditions.\u201D What does the Minister see some of those possible conditions might be? It clearly is not related to the timebound nature of it, because that is captured by new subsection (2)(a), but new subsection (2)(b) is there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA question for the Minister: what is this new regulation-making power seeking or intending to cover, particularly those three clauses that I have identified? Further to that, what are some of the possible conditions, or what might be envisaged as the types of conditions, that could or could not be applied, in terms of the Minister recommending to the Governor-General that an Order in Council may or may not be made?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00225a2c938c09ff2d5c86390d8831600108\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001834\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225a2c938c09ff2d5c86390d8831600108\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (15:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, members, for those questions. In regards to Celia Wade-Brown\u2019s questions around the groupings of activities, the question in regards to whether they apply around asset management plans: no. There was a question around whether they apply to draft plans: yes. Do they apply to different types of councils? Again, the answer is yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001835\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to questions relating to the centralised reporting, by Tangi Utikere, in regards to, and also including, clause 2(b), councils are still primarily responsible to their communities and ratepayers and should be reflecting their needs and wishes in their planning and reporting. Across the country, councils provide similar services and facilities, and plan for and report to their communities, and providing consistent information that is easy to access and helps increase the transparency and accountability of councils to ratepayers is a way in which we will ensure that localism remains.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u0022ed0871c654f23e12640935134d4b721b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ed0871c654f23e12640935134d4b721b\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (15:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Actually, I just have a couple of questions. This is on the Minister of Local Government\u2019s recent Amendment Paper 755, which is, obviously, an amendment to Amendment Paper 565. It\u2019s in relation to clause 21A, inserting new section 260A. I have a couple of questions on that, because, obviously, this has been very recent and there has been no real time to scrutinise these new clauses.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m just curious: \u201CNew section 260A inserted (Order in Council may specify exemptions in relation to non-elected member provisions)\u201D\u2014how will the Minister make the decision on when to recommend that an Order in Council be made under proposed new section 260A(1), exempting non-members from clause 31A(1) of Schedule 7 and enabling them to vote on council committees?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy other question in relation to new clause 21A: will an Order in Council under the proposed new section 260A(1) be able to be made in regards to those specifically excluded from voting by new clause 31A(4) of Schedule 7, to enable them to vote? It\u2019s some, really, quite technical questions around this new clause 21A and this new section 260A. I think it\u2019s really important, because we haven\u2019t had time to scrutinise it, that we get a fulsome answer on how this is actually going to work, especially when we have seen a committee be excluded in a later part of this bill. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u00221aa65378202b13eff6c176d231c3122a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221aa65378202b13eff6c176d231c3122a\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (15:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I just wanted to make sure I had the opportunity to comment on Amendment Paper 755, following on from the discussion that my colleagues have had on this Amendment Paper. It\u2019s a very specific question in relation to the changes that the Minister of Local Government is bringing in and the definition in clause 5(1A)\u2014not as we originally discussed but as amended by the Amendment Paper\u2014of \u201Cnon-elected member\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001840\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe reason I am asking this is that it is a commonly utilised provision to allow for, if there is a vacancy within 12 months of a local body election, the first non-successful\u2014arguably, non-elected\u2014member for a local board or for a council to be able to take up the position on the governing body of that authority, in the instance of a vacancy within that 12-month period. My question for the Minister is: as this is a very common occurrence, would that person who was co-opted on be considered a non-elected member under his Amendment Paper 755, or not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022e97cec83c9692d3cd405a6853f7a2b30\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001841\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e97cec83c9692d3cd405a6853f7a2b30\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (15:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Just in regards to that last point, just to clarify: when that occurs, it is not a co-option mechanism; it\u2019s generally as a result of the candidate ceasing to be a candidate and therefore the need to re-appoint, and they take the next person on the list, who has been voted in and who has a position on the list that is second after the one that is in place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001842\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022efc559de6456b1214b23397479ed9f8c\u0022\u003EMike Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s incorrect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001843\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ef96dc0a745cfc5e250bc7c8b7231503\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: No, it is correct. In regards to clause\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001844\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022371d0c170332a17cd9f4a9f3a452a6ba\u0022\u003ETangi Utikere\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s an appointment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001845\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002225549d2e1da67d1747164c9bb14ef760\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: Are we doing a question and answer?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001846\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f41ed5306d60e188a3861dabe5c98148\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Communicate through the Chair, thank you very much. I can give that side a call if they want some clarification.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001847\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b34e86bb975a3b54128630cdd017052\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. In regards to the questions relating to new clause 21A, the Government\u2019s clear expectation is that non-elected members will not vote. We haven\u2019t made decisions around what types of exemptions will be made at this point, but the key premise underlying this is that there should not be responsibility without accountability.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u002219939b0e3fc162db017c37bf730fcab7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001848\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002219939b0e3fc162db017c37bf730fcab7\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (15:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Chair. Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m very concerned because the Minister of Local Government just gave us an answer that is not correct. It\u2019s really important that that gets clarified, so it\u2019s actually in the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E as the correct answer. Elected members on councils\u2014if they step down, there is a by-election; they do not come back from the next off a list. It would be great if we could actually get a proper answer to that question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001849\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee740a1a6d9c3d48f6992b944e3d1564\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: I think what we will do is, if you put those questions again\u2014and I suspect Mr Utikere wants to do that\u2014that might give the Minister further time to reflect, or actually to reject what is being said by members around the committee. Is that OK? I was going to go to Tangi Utikere.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u0022916771a525fe09ca1ebbecab2a14c1c3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001850\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022916771a525fe09ca1ebbecab2a14c1c3\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (15:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. My question to the Minister of Local Government is on what basis he reaches that determination, because my understanding is that that is not correct. Where there is a vacancy\u2014and, I mean, we had the situation where Mr Arbuckle himself vacated his local government seat\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001851\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002201cc9b4c360541cb681a231cbf6724cc\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: Or Mike Davidson\u2019s community board role.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001852\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a4ca3a46283145fa807ac2390c6df2f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Excuse me, I do not want people communicating across the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001853\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d488c7efe6df9b51edd4aeebbaea964\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: They just did it for the last 10 minutes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001854\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223cadc45f4c0ecafa3c161585bcb573b9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Communicate through the Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001855\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc6aac89966ec8c08046e94a51ffebee\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE\u003C/span\u003E: What\u2019s going on here? Where there is a vacancy at a local government level, if it falls within 12 months of the scheduled date of an election, there is the ability for the local authority, if it chooses to, to fill that vacancy by appointment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, it might be a common practice that the successful person who is appointed to take that role may very well be the next highest-polling person, but history will show that in this country that is not always the case. It is entirely within the purview of the council to determine who is going to be appointed\u2014if they choose to do that at all. I am, along with Mr Davidson, concerned that the Minister is giving advice to the committee saying that it is always going to be the next highest-polling person. Our understanding is that that is not the case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001857\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question from Camilla Belich is still there, around what role that person then takes. Does the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper cover the appointment of a member, who then becomes an elected member by definition, in relation to clause 5(1A), or not? It\u2019s important to understand whether or not the Minister\u2019s intention is that someone who is now appointed to fill a role is going to be captured by an inability to vote on matters, because they are not deemed as elected.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002249f337acfc33911caf12dd7923472950\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001858\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002249f337acfc33911caf12dd7923472950\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (15:39)\u003C/span\u003E: To clarify the question\u2014the example that is being given by Tangi Utikere\u2014where that individual is appointed, they will be able to vote. A person who is appointed to a vacancy in the 12\u00A0months before an election is treated as a councillor under the law. Hopefully that clarifies the point that is being asked.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022 data-id=\u0022b371122a9a94d9c7c6559e5f7dae397f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001859\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b371122a9a94d9c7c6559e5f7dae397f\u0022\u003ERYAN HAMILTON (National\u2014Hamilton East) (15:39)\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\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00227ddde48c756a06743ee2b00ada411a14\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001860\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227ddde48c756a06743ee2b00ada411a14\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (15:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019ve just got a few questions, one going back to Amendment Paper 803.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001861\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI thank the Minister for his answer that proposed clause 18C is not a policy change. I think that\u2019s what he said. The Minister said in his answer that there is this cross-boundary change at proposed clause 19C, but can he just confirm if there\u2019s anything else in there that is a policy change. I take his point that proposed clause 22A, the change in his other paper is a drafting change, not policy change. So just if he can confirm that there\u2019s nothing else that we haven\u2019t covered in here that\u2019s a policy change\u2014he\u2019s shaking his head, so we\u2019ll get that on the record, and he\u2019s shaking it in the \u201Cno\u201D, sideways. It is a horizontal rather than a vertical shake.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001862\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, going back to the bill as reported back from the select committee, I was wondering if the Minister\u2014I\u2019ve just got three small questions on this. One is at clause\u00A020. That is \u201CSection 200 amended (Limitations applying to requirement for development contribution)\u201D. There are words in this about third-party provision, so I\u2019m wondering, again, similar to my other questions: is this a policy change to enable more third-party provision of the infrastructure that would normally be charged for or could often be charged for by development contributions, or is it simply some sort of rewording? That\u2019s my question. That\u2019s at clause 20: is that a policy decision to enable more third-party work, or is it simply some other reason?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001863\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen if we move on to clause 21, the \u201C(Regulations)\u201D clause that\u2019s been mentioned a wee bit, I have a couple of questions there. One at new paragraph (dc) is \u201Cprescribing parameters or benchmarks\u201D. I\u2019m wondering how those two things are different\u2014a parameter versus a benchmark. Does the Minister imagine that a parameter is a specific measurement and a benchmark could be a more quantitative statement? Is that the difference between the two of them? And then I note that there is \u201C(ii) performing specified activities or groups of activities in accordance with best practice:\u201D. Does that \u201Cbest practice\u201D mean that the regulation will prescribe what the best practice is, or does the best practice come from somewhere else?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001864\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen my last question on this is at clause 21(3)\u2014so still on clause 21, subsection\u00A0(3). There is a new regulatory power to \u201Cprescribing processes, time frames, and other matters relating to a request for access to documents under clause 26A(2) of Schedule\u00A07:\u201D. I haven\u2019t looked at what that reference is there, but I was wondering if the Minister can let me know if this is different from a requirement under LGOIMA, under the\u2014now I can\u2019t remember what LGOIMA stands for, the Local Government Official Information\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001865\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252c8f01df2f1444ffe5c64242bc41a82\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: I think we all know what you mean.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001866\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb1dfabebb6b0d379161cedb6002c7aa\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. However, that is the LGOIMA. This is what happens when you say a word for 20 years and then you forget that it\u2019s actually got proper words inside it. If this is in addition to LGOIMA\u2014or what is the interaction with the time frames that are already prescribed in LGOIMA at new paragraph (fa). Thank you, Mr Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00221449f7f9fb112b6e94c7e8d916a54ca9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001867\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221449f7f9fb112b6e94c7e8d916a54ca9\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (15:43)\u003C/span\u003E: In regards to questions on clause 20\u2014is it a policy change?\u2014no. In regards to the point of clarification around parameter versus benchmark, parameter\u2014I think, as the member outlined, parameter is a range and benchmark is a target.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u002263f456612d9f6352a54fb883dc11e088\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001868\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002263f456612d9f6352a54fb883dc11e088\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (15:44)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m still waiting for a response from the Minister around the items contained in his Amendment Paper in terms of various conditions that may or may not be imposed as part of the regulation-making powers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001869\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to ask the Minister about clause 22. This is the next step from the performance measures and activity groups that have been identified in clause 21. It actually introduces a role for the Secretary for Local Government to make some rules or to define some parameters around performance measures.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001870\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EVery first question: why is it that the secretary is being seen as the appropriate vehicle to, essentially, impose upon local councils what it is that they should be doing in terms of the performance measures? Is this not just an attack on the very localism that the Government sought to get elected on at the last election, removing the ability for local councils to be making some of those determinations themselves? Certainly, on face value and even at a more basic level, that\u2019s exactly what it looks like. My question to the Minister is: why is it that the secretary is being asked to have not just a role but a fundamental role in terms of setting the performance measures for councils all around the country?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001871\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the particular process that the secretary must go through before making these rules, which is defined in replacement section 261B(3)(b). This is where the secretary, firstly, must consult with all relevant local authorities. But the second one specifies whoever the secretary considers to be appropriate. This is putting into that person\u2019s domain quite a significant level of influence in that particular space, so why is it that this Government, who apparently hail on the issue of localism and yet all their actions certainly indicate and show something quite different, is seeing the secretary as the appropriate vehicle to undertake that work?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022 data-id=\u00226416ccb8e2708a112f19a99bcf9054a5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001872\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226416ccb8e2708a112f19a99bcf9054a5\u0022\u003ESAM UFFINDELL (National\u2014Tauranga) (15:46)\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\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u00226042e020c4912b13321e1d7d34381aa8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001873\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226042e020c4912b13321e1d7d34381aa8\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (15:46)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. There\u2019s still no response in that particular space, but maybe we\u2019ll just keep asking questions. I mean, let\u2019s not forget that some of these changes were only tabled in the Parliament on 15 September\u2014so not that long ago, really, in terms of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001874\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIs it that the position of the Government is such that there isn\u2019t going to be any communication between the Government and the Secretary for Local Government? The suggested changes that have been made through the select committee process talk about the connection between the Minister providing some advice to the secretary, but, actually, reference to the Minister seems to no longer exist, in terms of that part of the clause. Originally, it had that \u201Cthe Minister advises the Secretary that the Minister considers it appropriate to consult\u201D, so this is removing that responsibility from ministerial purview into a completely different area. It would be helpful for the Minister to provide a little bit of clarity around that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001875\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also think that it is still important, given that his Amendment Paper is new and it does give the regulation-making powers, which are, as we know, secondary legislation, so this does provide a limitation on, in this sense, an elected member\u2019s or a committee\u2019s or a local territorial authority\u2019s ability to either do certain things or not do certain things. I don\u2019t think it\u2019s unreasonable for the Minister to explain to the committee or to, indeed, guide the committee through his thoughts around what that will mean in terms of the imposition of regulations for elected members who are duly elected by their communities\u2014whether they are elected or appointed, they are none the less elected.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022e69225c1e598f2c712dbcfa8ee0b5509\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001876\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e69225c1e598f2c712dbcfa8ee0b5509\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (15:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks for that question. In regards to replacement section 261B(3) and the role of the secretary, as the member will be aware, the secretary is probably the most senior public servant within that department. This is not some new element in the context that this is amending an existing section, which makes it more flexible. The secretary already has similar powers to make performance measures. While the member is trying to imply that this is something new, that is not the case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001877\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe question around clause 21(3), again, in regards to prescribing regulations around the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act process\u2014to clarify, this is separate to that process. That covers off all the questions that are outstanding.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00224d3df28496242df50ff115ae07c4253c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001878\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224d3df28496242df50ff115ae07c4253c\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (15:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I\u2019m getting the feeling that we will move on from Part 1 soon. I just want to confirm with you, while you\u2019re in the Chair, that Schedule 2 for Amendment Paper 803 is related to Schedule 2 which is in Amendment Paper 565 and will be considered in the Part 2 debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001879\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e110b709bf4aa6dc0d95798c1d59349\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s a lot of numbers!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001880\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022011589b9f92f5fa2e1af3d0b05564992\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m just asking that because it says, \u201Cin Schedule 2, after new clause 70, insert\u201D, but, in fact, in Amendment Paper 565, in Schedule 2, it goes to 69, not to 70. So that\u2019s why I\u2019m just double-checking that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001881\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da6a938e23b758a5c8b773a3eda77e2d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: That it\u2019s in this debate and not somewhere else?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001882\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216c096b21103826843b7b7d0d9fe6ee3\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: That it\u2019s in the next debate\u2014it\u2019s in Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001883\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232f47e496190a2a7cc69a15ccb0ddd53\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: That it\u2019s in the next debate. Oh, hold on a sec\u2014I\u2019ll just have a quick read.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001884\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2ee8404dbc66109eabf5abef01c7ef9\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Yep, thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001885\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220abacb04df94c9dc32729af4cfa0eecb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s definitely in the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001886\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002258b29f4be367004248bbe2b4a5eb3194\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: In this debate\u2014in Part 1?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001887\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bcb33b19917507bcda35fa08a3ace662\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: In Part 2\u2014Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220f4efe23be361e88ecf35759011f19e9\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: In Part 2. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225102545a2393361b96f4b585d1c7ccef\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: I feel we are naturally coming to a close.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u0022604fd11ad42fc70001756654ebc8ba67\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001890\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022604fd11ad42fc70001756654ebc8ba67\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (15:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, and actually, you might have just answered my question. I was just checking if Schedule 2 is in Part 1 or Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001891\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223842116a30a9166ae85975ab9217d82b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001892\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002282be569a7fe0984c867e5d0e9266f831\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: Part 2. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022 data-id=\u002283b164f264c1d6e775d9a13a98e93240\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002283b164f264c1d6e775d9a13a98e93240\u0022\u003ESAM UFFINDELL (National\u2014Tauranga) (15:50)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001894\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001895\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001896\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001897\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001898\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001899\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001900\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230da912adf72a866be8cf7133fd5a3cb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s tabled amendments to Amendment Paper 803 amending Part 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001901\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments to the amendments be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001902\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 88\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001903\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001904\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 34\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001905\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001906\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments to the amendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001907\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb835926618dd7c8570b67025c6550c9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Amendment Paper 565 amending Part 1 set out on Amendment Papers 755 and 803 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001908\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments to the amendments as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001909\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001911\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001912\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001913\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments to the amendments as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001914\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d9d23120be54991fc3b45e5da1aeb5d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Part 1 set out on Amendment Paper 565 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001916\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001917\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001918\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001919\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001920\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001921\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227ef3f5ff69dbd9c00dcc3507e9e0530\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tangi Utikere\u2019s amendment to delete clause 4 set out on Amendment Paper 651 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001922\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001923\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001924\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001926\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001927\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001928\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9b4a8c9971d18d7f0f45e16243c30ad\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 replacing new section 3(d) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001929\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001930\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001931\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001932\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001933\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001934\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f08eff90fd61d8205aac93853498d99b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tangi Utikere\u2019s amendment to delete clause 5(1) set out on Amendment Paper 652 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001936\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001937\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001938\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001939\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001940\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001941\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001942\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c42f274dd042ad3b75b8dcf61ce285b7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Celia Wade-Brown\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5(1) replacing the definition of \u201Ccommunity outcomes\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001943\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001944\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001945\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001946\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001947\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001948\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001949\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ddba4bce29cebc49b389a3cdfe3021f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5(1A), paragraph (a) in the definition of \u201Ccost-effective\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001950\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001951\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001952\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001953\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001954\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001955\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001956\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022226c088d156965e374a48b2855a6d50a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5(1A), paragraph (b) in the definition of \u201Ccost-effective\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001957\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001958\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001960\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001961\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001962\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001963\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e501e3a8bda54d846564cdfb15a2aeb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5(3) replacing new paragraph (a) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001964\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001965\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001966\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001967\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001968\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001969\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001970\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223fffe5d2a281ed8d731e280b37115f81\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 7 new section 11A(1)(e) inserting \u201Cpublic places\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001971\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001972\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001973\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001974\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001975\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001976\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001977\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221be81d2292702359ec641167c6e2cc00\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Steve Abel\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 7 new section 11A(1)(e) inserting \u201Cand activities\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001978\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001979\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001980\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001981\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001982\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001983\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e19e65292f87592bd5f9c5052033a86e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 7 new section 11A(1)(e) inserting \u201Cart galleries\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001985\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001986\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001987\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001988\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001989\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001990\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001991\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ed6b9c5424d8ef112ab9bb538ce72d41\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 7 new section 11A(1)(e) inserting \u201Cheritage\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001992\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001993\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001995\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001996\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001997\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001998\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db53e6c592f0b0a30fcc00ea82bffd40\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 7 inserting new section 11A(1)(f) relating to natural hazards be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0001999\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225fa1f94a97e5a031cce40ae96b23afeb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Celia Wade-Brown\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 7 inserting new section 11A(1)(f) relating to community support be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002006\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229e2d897dcbaeb5895c627bfa55bd4d7a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 7 inserting new paragraph (f) relating to environmental enhancement and protection is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment deleting clause 8(2) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002014\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223236753cdb283b2a68acb3f469bb0f51\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 9(3) inserting \u201Cdelivery and\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002021\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e64076cfec523607986a8dd6737e018\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment inserting new clause 9A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002028\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229acb125915ca4a051d9c3cda2db63267\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 10 new section 39(1)(f) inserting a reference to the code of conduct be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002035\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc2cb946dd8f85b7e4927da4a4eebd4d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 11 new section 40(2)(fa) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002042\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c8ea7a447fe71b2de87916703d46723\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 12 replacing new section 42(2)(i) is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Lemauga Lydia Sosene\u2019s tabled amendment deleting clause 16 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002050\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002280cec3f5c1df1347ac9cde5a37dc0314\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Celia Wade-Brown\u2019s tabled amendment deleting clause 16 is out of order as being the same in substance as a previous amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 16 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002058\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c93e6e58efb20b4edca6163885e033b0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment deleting clause 18(2) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002065\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b59f534c5bb56f55c461187d7e735ad\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Celia Wade-Brown\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 21 new section 259(4A)(a) replacing \u201Cregional\u201D with \u201Cunitary\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002072\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002078\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00220cfcf9d0a8afe8d3b2acbd1360e7952f\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022eef9ffa69d1593742ca76d84a7a252ce\u0022\u003EPart 2 Miscellaneous provisions, and Schedules 1 and 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296a9fec23f43365488fcea5d05be7be5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to Part 2. This is the debate on clauses 23 to 30\u2014\u201CMiscellaneous provisions\u201D\u2014and Schedules 1 and 2. The question is that Part 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00222f87b5c6bd3642d128ef5603f25a1e7e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222f87b5c6bd3642d128ef5603f25a1e7e\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (16:13)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m just noting that Part 2 is a bit messy. As you said, it\u2019s these \u201CMiscellaneous provisions\u201D, but, then, I know that we have this quite substantive policy change with Amendment Paper 755, which I know a lot of people will want to speak on, and we\u2019re still also dealing with another big policy change with Amendment Paper 803. I know that members will want to have a lot of discussion on Amendment Paper 755 and also on changes to the codes of conduct and other changes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m going to start back on Amendment Paper 803, and this is the one with the development contributions for fast track. There\u2019s just really one clause to talk about on it, so I\u2019ll try and do it in one contribution. I\u2019ll start with the easy part of it. New clause\u00A071 restricts\u2014this is, for the Minister, on page seven of Amendment Paper\u00A0803, and it\u2019s new clause\u00A071 in Schedule 2. Interestingly, it says, \u201Cafter new clause\u00A070\u201D, but if I look back on his Amendment Paper 565, that seems to only get numbered to clause\u00A069, so I don\u2019t know where clause 70 is. That\u2019s my first question. Is there a clause\u00A070?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen my second and very simple question is on the specified provisions at new subclause (2), which has got a lot of letters in it. Is this all just bringing over the development contributions, rights, and provisions to work for the fast track, or is there some policy changes in all of those letters? That is new subclause (2)(q). Then, on that, at (q), I see that his tabled amendment, tabled this morning around 11.30, deletes (q), which is \u201Csection 290(2) (development contributions).\u201D There\u2019s no longer a specified provision. I presume that that is a not a policy decision but a technical change, but I\u2019m going to ask the Minister to take us through these changes. I think that would be useful to have on the record.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut my more substantive contribution is on new subclause (1). This is about what fast-track approvals these new development contribution provisions will apply to. It will not apply to the over 3,000 houses at Sunfield, and it will not apply to the 1,200 houses at Delmore, because\u2014and the Minister is free to tell me that I\u2019m wrong here\u2014this goes to the commencement date of when these provisions start to stick, and that is that they \u201Cdo not apply\u201D\u2014that is a very important word at new subclause (1). They \u201Cdo not apply\u201D if the \u201Cresource consent approval \u2026 has been granted\u201D\u2014so that is both Delmore and Sunfield; then there\u2019s a colon\u2014\u201C: (b) a substantive application for a resource consent approval in relation to which the authorised person has been provided with\u2014(i) a copy of a draft decision document \u2026; or (ii) draft conditions\u201D. My reading of that is that the things that have been approved\u2014Sunfield and Delmore\u2014are out of it but also that, if you have got your substantive application in and the panel has come back with something to you, then you are also out of this process. However, if you are a substantive application and you have not yet, at that stage, by the time these provisions commence, then the development contributions policies can apply to you. You\u2019ve applied, maybe you\u2019ve thought about the development contributions and maybe you haven\u2019t, but they will apply to you if there hasn\u2019t been some sort of draft decision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI saw the Minister nodding, but I think it\u2019s important that he takes a call on this and explains the provisions. But my main question is: what analysis has there been into how many projects have already been approved or have already had a substantive decision and have had a draft decision come back? How many houses are missing? This is the mischief that we\u2019ve all been talking about and that councils have been talking about since 2014\u2014that their development contributions provisions won\u2019t apply. So it seems that they\u2019re not going to apply to the Sunfield project, to those 3,000 houses, and to Delmore, to those 1,200 houses, and, of course, we know that this mischief was enabled by this Government through the beneficiaries who happen to be their donors. This is a very bad gap we have in our system. We have donors being able to reap the rewards of not paying development contributions, because of legislation that this Government has put in, and this doesn\u2019t fix it. It doesn\u2019t fix it. What analysis is there of how many houses are going to go through this process and not have these development contributions provisions applying?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHas the Minister considered, or would the Minister consider, my tabled amendment from 7 p.m. last night to remove the \u201Cnot\u201D so that these provisions do apply to those large controversial projects on land that are totally out of development contributions areas and are the mischief that, surely, everybody here who wants to hold their head up and say that we are constitutionally sound wants to fix?  So those are my big questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have one other smaller question. I presume that where an approval has already been granted, that grant is at the panel stage and not what comes back from an appeal\u2014because, obviously, if the appeal undid the grant, then it wouldn\u2019t be granted, and, if the appeal let the fast-track development continue, then it would still be granted. However, there may be circumstances whereby an appeal leads to quite a different result. It may be that conditions change in an appeal, say, so that there could be quite a lot of changes to that development. Has there been any consideration of that type of situation and whether or not these new development contribution provisions would apply to that situation or not? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo questions on my understanding of what\u2019s in and what\u2019s out; also whether or not there are any policy differences from normal development contributions frameworks in this clause; why it is that (q) has been deleted by the tabled amendment; and the appeal question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat analysis has the Government done about how much this is going to cost councils? When things cost councils, that means that they cost ratepayers, so this is very much a cost of living issue\u2014this is very much. The Government says that they want councils to reduce rates; it is going to have the opposite effect because the councils are still blocked from doing what they would normally have had an opportunity to do and recoup from the developer. Development pays for development. They would have recouped for that because they would have had a development contributions policy. It is only because the fast track has come in in an out of sequence manner that we now have this problem that we\u2019re trying to address today, but we\u2019re not even fixing it. Will the Minister actually fix the problem? Will the Minister agree to my amendment?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229725626754599c75a6d557ee88f4886e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Just before the Minister speaks\u2014and I am going to call the Minister\u2014I just wanted to make a note for this particular part the member rightly talked about what was on this side and the other side of the commencement. We don\u2019t want to turn it into a debate about commencement. It\u2019s about the process\u2014one side or the other. The member, actually\u2014the way you approached that was correct, so I just wanted to make that really clear at this point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022164aa2e808f71919ff34e6a206e95135\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022164aa2e808f71919ff34e6a206e95135\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (16:22)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks to the member for those questions. In regard to specific points relating to Amendment Paper\u00A0803, new clause 71(1)(a) and (b)(i) and (ii) of Schedule 2, to clarify the points around policy and technical, there are no policy changes in that area.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou asked the question around\u2014I think it was\u2014new clause 71(2)(q) of Schedule\u00A02, relating to section 290(2). That, as simply referred to, is going to be deleted by another part of the bill. So, again, a technical matter in that regard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe member asked, in terms of interpretation of new clause 71(1) of Schedule 2 around the words \u201Cdo not apply\u201D. The member\u2019s interpretation is correct. It doesn\u2019t apply, as the legislation outlines, where resource consent approval has been granted, and the reason why is because making a change or including that would be retrospective in nature, and that is inconsistent with this Government\u2019s policy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00227c3382db03631648c8cf67b75448df5f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227c3382db03631648c8cf67b75448df5f\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (16:23)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m very interested in that retrospectivity point, because the Minister\u2019s raised it. How does his logic\u2014that it is retrospective\u2014then apply to applications that have been made but are in the process? Why then does it apply to them? That is one question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut, two, I want to challenge the Minister on two things to do with his comments about being retrospective. One is: when has that ever stopped this Government before? We have seen them do retrospective after retrospective changes all of the time, so that doesn\u2019t seem to be a good argument. But, more importantly, the better argument that I am interested in is that it is not in fact retrospective, because the houses have not been built. The development has not yet happened. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is a well identified quirk in the system that because of the fast track\u2014because of the many disastrous provisions of the fast track that is enabling this jumping of community plans and planning documents\u2014that the mechanism for councils to pay to get some contribution for the development growth that they\u2019re going to have to provide is missing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut the houses are not built, so it\u2019s not retrospective in the sense that a house buyer is going to come and say, \u201COh, look at this. I don\u2019t have to pay development contributions.\u201D We\u2019re not at that stage yet. We\u2019re just at the stage where these developers have\u2014who knows even if they were aware that they wouldn\u2019t have to pay development contributions. I suspect they were aware of that. But let\u2019s presume that they weren\u2019t aware of that. Why is it retrospective if it\u2019s a mechanism and arguably\u2014I mean, you can argue about it\u2014councils might have some other tools to them in the form of targeted rates to pay for some of this, and that is just the machinations of the different tools that councils have and when they click in. They all click in later, when the development starts to happen, and we\u2019re not at that stage yet. There has been no development, so how would it be retrospective to enable the councils to fix up their paperwork as they would and to apply it in the same way. And we\u2019ve heard the Minister say over and over again, \u201CNo, there\u2019s no policy change from a normal development contributions policy for these fast-track approvals.\u201D So how is that retrospective? The houses have not been built. No development has started. All we have is the fast-track approval\u2014and we\u2019re not saying to undo that fast-track approval. That\u2019s all we\u2019ve got. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the Government has been saying over and over again \u201CWe think that growth should pay for growth.\u201D I\u2019ve heard that from Ministers\u2019 mouths over and over again. \u201CGrowth should pay for growth.\u201D This is a mechanism for growth to pay for growth. The growth hasn\u2019t happened yet, so it\u2019s not retrospective. Tell me why I\u2019m wrong, Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u00224d39034aeac8dbb3730cbe50eb369abc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224d39034aeac8dbb3730cbe50eb369abc\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (16:27)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to just refer to the Amendment Paper that was recently dropped, Amendment Paper 755, which was amendments to Amendment Paper 565. I just still want to go into new clause 25.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis Amendment Paper we\u2019re seeing now in this Part of the bill are around the removal of voting and quorum rights of non-elected members on council committees that they\u2019ve currently had. And, obviously, they\u2019ve had that for over 50 years. This is kind of setting the scene because we haven\u2019t had time to scrutinise this. It hasn\u2019t gone through any select committee stage. There\u2019s been no consultation, and it\u2019s a bit of a shame. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to know: what evidence did the Minister actually have to actually make this decision to remove from these people that are not elected their voting rights and their quorum rights? I ask this because I\u2019m not too sure, when I read through everything, that there\u2019s anything that backs up doing this actual change through the evidence that\u2019s been provided. In fact, it\u2019s the reverse because, as I mentioned before, this has been happening for 50-odd years, where councils have used experts to actually add value, which is actually at the benefit of the ratepayer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs the Minister\u2019s aware, I\u2019ve asked several questions of him through this process about how many people have actually complained to him. How many elected members have made a complaint to him about non-elected members being on council committees? It took a lot of time to actually finally get a straight answer from the Minister, and it turned out: one. There has been one elected member over the last year that\u2019s actually complained about non-elected members on council committees, and that elected member was a councillor from the Far North\u2014an ACT-aligned councillor, so no surprise there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other question I asked him was how many people from the public\u2014how many of the public\u2014have actually complained about non-elected members on council committees. How many have given a formal complaint? I still don\u2019t have that answer, and it\u2019s a simple question. It would be great if the Minister could tell me how many formal complaints he has received from the public this year from people that are saying complaints about non-elected members on council committees. So my question to start this debate on quite a serious amendment that\u2019s been dropped, is: how many people have formally complained to the Minister about this issue, and what evidence has he used to justify this change in local government that has been working successfully over the last 50-plus years? They\u2019re my questions to start with, and I have some more questions to follow that up with. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022ce4987a6ba6ae01e39c713098ac4fcc3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ce4987a6ba6ae01e39c713098ac4fcc3\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (16:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you for that question. The question is relating to why this Government is removing the ability for non-elected members of committees on councils not to be able to vote on the spending of ratepayer money. The question asked is have I received any complaints, and \u201CIt\u2019s been fine for 50 years, Minister, so why don\u2019t you just leave it in place?\u201D Well, I\u2019m sorry, but that is not how it works. We make no apology for removing the ability of non-elected individuals to vote on decisions of spending ratepayer money, because that is not democratic. We are making that change in order to correct that issue in the legislation. That means that ratepayers can have accountability at the ballot box to ensure that the people that they elect are the ones that make decisions about how their rates are spent. That is why we\u2019re doing this. We make no apology for that, and democracy is not something we should cut corners on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022 data-id=\u0022de60e873ab6c7479a93c64f319e75645\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022de60e873ab6c7479a93c64f319e75645\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON (Labour) (16:31)\u003C/span\u003E: What a load of nonsense from that Minister. Why don\u2019t you tell John Key that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ef4fc963e4ed8023ad856c9efb4e26b4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: You don\u2019t have to like the answers, all right, but just ask the questions, OK?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e0ee8aa82606290e6c904deb06d44d12\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I\u2019m coming to the question. Here\u2019s the question for the Minister: why don\u2019t you tell John Key that? Why don\u2019t you tell John Key that, who had a totally different view and a National Government that supported the Auckland Independent M\u0101ori Statutory Board having voting rights and having speaking rights? Why didn\u2019t the Minister tell Rodney Hide that, who set up the Independent M\u0101ori Statutory board so that M\u0101ori could have an opportunity in terms of having input? You talk about 50 years; for the last 14\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ffbf0f3a88742ca85ac60f0fd68cceb1\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: What do you know about the capital gains tax?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002203d12618f4ff6a5663cb88ec24c1eb42\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: You wouldn\u2019t know, fool, shush up. For the last 14 years\u2014for the last 14 years\u2014National and ACT have supported M\u0101ori in Auckland having voting rights and having speaking rights. I\u2019m going to ask this Minister: why did you not meet with the members from the Auckland Independent M\u0101ori Statutory Board, who asked\u2014who asked\u2014this Minister to explain to them why, all of a sudden, he falls back into the easy arguments that he\u2019s rolling out. \u201COh, this is about democracy.\u201D\u2014it was about democracy for the ACT Party. It was about democracy for the National Party. It was about democracy for John Key. It was about democracy for Rodney Hide. They were all there, and this Minister wasn\u2019t even anywhere near Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a9e0ddcd6341e8a20426318dc0e6c3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd2a0c8a3c88c3f122faa7b982f42307\u0022\u003EHon Melissa Lee\u003C/span\u003E: What\u2019s this bill about?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf68cc1bc6a4f84bbbd76fb0422f9ac1\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Melissa Lee\u2014you all supported it. They all supported it. I have to say, this is a very, very strong topic, and the Auckland mayor\u2019s already said this lot can go jump in the lake\u2014good on \u201CBrownie\u201D, I say. The Auckland mayor has already said this lot can go jump in the lake, that he\u2019ll chuck the regional deals down the tube, because of this Minister deciding to breach good-faith agreements and partnerships with M\u0101ori. That\u2019s the question, and it\u2019s absolutely related. Ng\u0101ti Wh\u0101tua, for instance, who have a co-governance arrangement worked out with the National Government\u2014who all of a sudden don\u2019t like co-governance\u2014and they\u2019ve worked with Ng\u0101ti Wh\u0101tua through the years. There\u2019s been partnership relationships, partnership agreements, and it\u2019s good to see the Hon Judith Collins in here, because she was a supporter of this relationship until this lot came along. No wonder the Hon Judith Collins got out of that lot over there\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e5a3b02dd48fb9ae4dc131e39b86501\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: OK, you\u2019re off track, Mr Jackson. If the people to my right could be quiet, I did deem that Mr Jackson\u2019s question was relevant, even if the speakers over to my right didn\u2019t think so. Your questions\u2014just stick to your questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022629e5e9e5ab097996833f09558e625a7\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: I have a number of questions. Why did this Minister not meet with the Auckland Independent M\u0101ori Statutory Board? They\u2019ve had this in place for 14 years after Judith Collins and John Key and Rodney Hide set up the Auckland Independent M\u0101ori Statutory Board to give M\u0101ori an opportunity in Auckland who were not getting on to city councils, who were not getting input, who were not playing their part in democracy that this Minister loves to talk about. Well, how come you\u2019re OK in 2012 with the Hon Judith Collins and John Key and Rodney Hide, but this useless lot, they want to put a whole new spin on it? And what are they trying to do? They\u2019re trying to placate the voters six or seven weeks out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESo why did he not meet with the Auckland Independent M\u0101ori Statutory Board? Why was there no proper process in place? Why was there not a proper amendment in place? Why was there no consultation with local M\u0101ori? Why was there not a k\u014Drero with Ng\u0101ti Wh\u0101tua, who are one of the most primary and most important and most influential groups in this country, and who have strong relationships with this Government? The people don\u2019t understand. Also, what is he going to say to Mayor Len Brown\u2014not Len Brown; Mayor Wayne Brown, \u201CBrownie\u201D, who said that National, this Government, can go jump in the lake now. You breach your word with M\u0101ori, and \u201CBrownie\u201D says that he\u2019s finished with you lot. What are you going to say to \u201CBrownie\u201D now\u2014a Minister who loves democracy so much?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002241b2619497ec5c93778bd4136e891936\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002241b2619497ec5c93778bd4136e891936\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) \u003C/span\u003E(16:36:34): I thank the member for his questions. I can be very clear and categoric to the member that the changes which we are putting in place through this bill do not specifically target iwi M\u0101ori. They do not specifically target race. They target the ability of those that are democratically elected into their roles to be able to vote, and those that do not and are not democratically elected to not be able to vote\u2014to spend ratepayer money. This is not about race. This is not about iwi M\u0101ori. This is about democracy, and I make no apology around being categoric around that change. I take no accountability in regards to why those changes were done in the past, but as Minister, I stand here today, I look at the problem, and I have an obligation to make that right, and the changes which we are doing make that right. They restore democratic accountability. That is the right thing to do for New Zealand ratepayers, and, again, I make no apology for that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u002275594799c8a4b961d8208f01f1e233a1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002275594799c8a4b961d8208f01f1e233a1\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (16:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. It\u2019s a pleasure to be able to take a call on this. I will continue with new clause 31A, set out on Amendment Paper 755, as my colleague the Hon Willie Jackson has raised this, as well as my colleague in the Green Party. I do know that there are other provisions prior to this in Part 2 which haven\u2019t been touched on, especially the code of conduct and standing orders, which other members wish to contribute to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s an honour to be an MP from Auckland, and today I do stand for Auckland in this Chamber, because I think what the Government has done in relation to new clause 31A is just totally\u2014you just cannot understand why they would make such a decision. We\u2019ve heard a passionate defence of why we should have Houkura, which was originally the Independent M\u0101ori Statutory Board, from the Hon Willie Jackson, and we\u2019ve heard a passionate defence from the Mayor of Auckland as to why these arrangements are working for Auckland and have been working since they were established\u2014again, by the National Government at that time when they enacted this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to ask the Minister how he can stand by his statement that he isn\u2019t specifically targeting M\u0101ori when we look at new clause 31A and we look at the explanatory note, which explains what new clause 31A in Amendment Paper 755 does, and we see that specifically the Minister and this Government have decided to make sure that the members of Houkura, formerly the Independent M\u0101ori Statutory Board in Auckland, are no longer able to vote under the\u2014and this was originally enacted under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009. To me, that seems like they have specifically decided that the members of that board no longer should have a say in their city, in Auckland, and no longer contribute in a way that has been universally concluded as to be extremely helpful and extremely productive for the city of Auckland. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is targeting M\u0101ori. The people on that board are M\u0101ori. The reason that the Minister has excluded this is clearly to target this particular board. We don\u2019t need to look further on the Order Paper to see that there are other bills that we will be discussing today which have a similar theme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor the Minister to say that it is simply a matter of restoring democratic rights is frankly not entirely believable, because it seems to be that this change has been brought up\u2014no consultation. We haven\u2019t had an answer around the extent of consultation that has been had with Houkura or the Auckland Council. There has been no call for those that we have heard in Auckland to change these very sensible, longstanding, productive relationships that have benefited our city. Suddenly, a year after this was reported back to the House, we are here in the dying days of this Parliament with an Amendment Paper that hasn\u2019t been through select committee, taking away the right of the Independent M\u0101ori Statutory Board in Auckland, Houkura, to actually vote on what is best for their city.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a shameful situation to be in. It\u2019s inexplicable to understand why this has been done in this way. These are longstanding relationships. These are people who are respected. They have mana within Auckland and within the rest of the country. What they were doing was working. The council didn\u2019t call for this. Yet for some reason we are here. Why? That is a genuine question to the Minister. Why has he decided to do this? What harm has the fact of those members of that board\u2014it is not part of the elected governing body. What harm have they been doing? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI had a lot of other points that have been raised by members of the community who have not been able to submit on this particular point in this Amendment Paper. I\u2019m hoping that we have the opportunity to be able to go through some of these, but we do have concerns around some of the decision making in respect of this specific decision. It does specifically target this particular board in Auckland, and it\u2019s listed in the explanatory note. It\u2019s a genuine question to the Minister. Why has he decided to do this? Why has he targeted Houkura, the Independent M\u0101ori Statutory Board?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002290692ba7301837576bb6690851637226\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002290692ba7301837576bb6690851637226\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (16:42)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you to the member Camilla Belich for the question. In short, the answer to that question is one of consistency. The principle which the governance has around its overall policy, as I have noted before, is that voting on council committees should rest with democratically elected members. The reality is that the Houkura Independent M\u0101ori Statutory Board in Auckland, while having a unique status under legislation where it appoints its members onto the Auckland Council committees\u2014the agreement by this Government is that that committee, alongside all other committees, should be treated consistently, and it is the case that if they are not democratically elected then they should not be able to vote. This is not singling out or any other aspect. It is consistent application of policy at a national level.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf you look at it from the counterfactual point of view\u2014and I had made a decision to exclude them because they\u2019re nice and other comments that the member has noted, which, with respect, are not basis\u2014then it would be inconsistent and every other committee that has had that principle applied to them would be treated inconsistently. That\u2019s not how I do business, nor this Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to the reality of that committee, the committee will still exist. It will still contribute and provide advice and feedback to Auckland Council, which is very positive, and that will continue. The point which we are dealing with is the ability to vote. Whether it\u2019s this committee or any other, the point of consistency on this side of the House is that from a democratic point of view, those that vote should be those that are democratically elected by the people. Again, we are not going to cut corners in regards to democracy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022 data-id=\u0022c49f7d6821a6df41428eea67f35a7660\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c49f7d6821a6df41428eea67f35a7660\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN (Green) (16:44)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I do have some questions on a different area of the code of conduct, but I would like to continue this area of questioning for the moment regarding Amendment Paper 755.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI support the intent of the questions from my colleagues Camilla Belich and Willie Jackson, but my area is a little bit different. It\u2019s a very specific committee that all councils have in some form or other. It\u2019s the Audit and Risk Committee. Consistently, Mayor Prendergast, myself, and Mayor Foster all appointed independents who are unlikely to stand for council themselves. They are chartered accountants, they are professional directors, and, again, some members of councils. Councillor Coughlan, myself, and Mayor Prendergast did the Institute of Directors courses, but that is not the general practice of most elected members. Therefore, we appointed to our Audit and Risk Committee some very senior and very experienced people who did not make decisions on expenditure, but they did make extremely useful contributions on whether we were looking at the right risks, interacting with Audit New Zealand, and so forth. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDoes the Minister of Local Government realise that decisions on expenditure in the annual plan, projections in the long-term plan, all fees and charges, all development levies are agreed by the full council? We do not have unelected members on the full councils which make those decisions. It\u2019s only on some of these specialist and important committees that these people are present. Does the Minister not feel it\u2019s somewhat insulting to people to say, \u201COh, come on the committee, but you can\u2019t vote.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002286ca82bfdbf5255cd3f5e5a3ba1ead6d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002286ca82bfdbf5255cd3f5e5a3ba1ead6d\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (16:46)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member Celia Wade-Brown for the question. The question relates to, in this case, a specific committee of an Audit and Risk Committee. I want to clarify clearly for the member that councils can continue to appoint expert representatives on to those Audit and Risk Committees. They can continue to participate. They can continue to provide their expert advice to the committee, but they cannot vote. That, again, from our perspective, is not going to impact the ability of the Audit and Risk Committee in this instance to be able to ensure that their council is making appropriate decisions in regards to technical matters in that area. It does not preclude or prevent or prohibit the ability for a council to have expert advice. What it prohibits is the ability for non-elected members to vote.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u002222f5f54be5b9512b31141b55f7687158\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002222f5f54be5b9512b31141b55f7687158\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (16:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. This is my first opportunity to ask the Minister of Local Government some questions on Part 2. I do want to start with the proposed new clause 31A. I acknowledge that this, by way of an Amendment Paper, has only been landed on today\u2019s date. The concern that I have is that this whole suggestion, and a lot of them\u2014actually all of them, but this whole suggestion has not had an opportunity to go through a select committee process. In a moment I will refer to an email that I\u2019ve received from someone who has indicated their views on this, because they don\u2019t have the normal process that we would have to go through in terms of sharing their views.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe first question for the Minister is why he considers it appropriate to, effectively, bypass the select committee process. He has floated the notion of removing the voting rights from non-elected members for a wee while now but has waited until the 11\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E hour to land the specifics as to how that is going to work. Talking about sort of transparency and the like, this is far from it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat is called into question here is the approach of the Government. The Minister says that it should only be elected members, but he negates or doesn\u2019t head down that path of relying on this notion under this Government that localism is an important thing. On the one hand, they want localism\u2014although let\u2019s be very clear: a lot of the decisions and directions that they\u2019re taking fairly indicate something else\u2014but they\u2019re not actually prepared to back councils who, at a local level, can identify what the skill set is that we need around decision-making tables to make good decisions for our community. What this is about is about how worthy\u2014and the value that central government places on people around the decision-making table.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen it comes to Houkura, Minister, you might as well just invite them to do the karakia and that\u2019s it. How rude it is and devaluing it is to suggest that actually, no, they can come along and they can participate, but they just cannot vote. That is the fundamental issue there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, on the applicability of this, iwi M\u0101ori, yes\u2014one, our colleague Celia Wade-Brown has touched on the audit and risk opportunities. Actually, in many councils, that role of chair is filled by that particular external skillset. So the Minister is saying, \u201CWell, no, they can still participate and be part of that, but they actually can\u2019t be part of the decision-making process.\u201D What that is going to do is potentially hand over an inability to focus on financial aspects, where elected members can\u2019t rely on that. I just do not understand why this Government wants to strip away local decision-making\u2019s capacity and ability to determine who is best placed to sit around that table\u2014that is by majority vote. This is not people just cherry picking who they want to sit around the decision-making table. This is a by majority council elected-member decision as to the role, if any, those particular appointed members would play.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo the first question is around why we are going through this process without actually allowing the public to have their say. I think people like Mayor Wayne Brown and others have had to resort to sharing their views publicly because they haven\u2019t been able to rely on a select committee process. The Auckland City deal was already off to a bad start, and already we hear from Mayor Wayne Brown around the future of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe email that I want to refer to, and I want to ask the Minister\u2019s response on this, because he has not allowed a select committee process for this to be shared\u2014this is from someone who emailed me and said, \u201CThe Government is overturning provisions that have been part of local government legislation for 125 years, without undertaking any proper policy analysis and without taking the changes through select committee\u2014the greatest irony, given the changes are purportedly around saving democracy.\u201D So my final question to the Minister is: what does he say to that person who has been unable to actually engage in a full select committee process, saying that this Government is simply seeking to turn on its head many, many years, in terms of what has been in existing legislation, for something that is going to have a huge impact in terms of councils all around the country?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u00222fb35eb17e4fb2b37340047b0cbf8c3d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222fb35eb17e4fb2b37340047b0cbf8c3d\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (16:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to continue where I left off, because the Minister of Local Government, obviously, broadened the question quite a bit when he stood up proudly and talked about this being about democracy. I just want to ask the Minister then: if this is about democracy and, actually, we have to have elected people on these committees, why then did this Government, just this year, create the Auckland Regional Transport Committee, which is joint between the Crown and the Auckland Council? I can guarantee you now, there won\u2019t be MPs on the Crown side; they\u2019ll be appointed people. So if this is all about democracy, why then is the Government making decisions to be able to appoint people on to committees\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d75b77e901865577bef5c124dbe9aaa\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: Speak to the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d89e36a3458a84423b44c6564cf53ef4\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014including in this bill, where you\u2019ve done it right at the very start, that non-elected members also include a member of a commission? They\u2019re not elected. So this is double-standards. Why is it that councils cannot appoint people to committees, but the Government can any time they want?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is double-standards once again from this Government that clearly has no clue what council committees do compared to actual councils. Does the Minister actually understand how a council works and how committees and subcommittees work? Because from what I\u2019m seeing here, he doesn\u2019t. He still cannot tell us any evidence that backs what he\u2019s trying to do. He just talks about this being about democracy. Well, a democracy is when the elected councillors make decisions about how their councils are governed. It\u2019s the elected councillors that make the decision about who sits on those committees. That is democracy, and that is how democracy works at a local government level. You are riding roughshod over that completely. So my question is, once again: what evidence are you using to actually come to this decision, Minister?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhile I\u2019ve got time in this call, I do want to discuss a couple of amendments that I have put forward. Because, like Mayor Wayne Brown, who is shocked with this shameful decision up in Auckland, we\u2019ve got similar concerns down in Greater Christchurch, where we have the Greater Christchurch Partnership, which is a joint committee of Christchurch City Council, Selwyn District Council, Waimakariri, Canterbury Regional Council, and mana whenua. Once again, this bill will actually remove voting rights from one part of that committee. The committee is not impressed, because it is a committee that functioned extremely well for the benefit of the subregion. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I have an amendment here, and it is timestamped 15 September 4.45.01 p.m. It actually puts into Schedule 7, after clause 30A(6C)\u2014inserted by Amendment Paper 755\u2014that the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee being a joint committee of Christchurch City Council, Selwyn District Council, Waimakariri District Council, and the Canterbury Regional Council, will actually be included in the list of committees that are joint. This will include both quorum and voting rights.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also have from the Christchurch area another amendment, timestamped 15\u00A0September\u00A02026 4.45.02 p.m., which is to actually include in Schedule 7 the \u014Ct\u0101karo Avon River Corridor Regeneration Committee as well to ensure that, actually, what has been established in Christchurch maintains the work that\u2019s been done. Because it\u2019s very important, Minister, when we actually have a look around the country, that we have very, very successful joint committees that are working, that include representatives from councils and representatives from mana whenua making joint decisions for the benefit of the communities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf the Minister was not aware, once again, these decisions that they have are delegated to them from a full elected council, who are the ultimate decision makers, not the committee. So the Minister needs to actually please respond to the questions that we\u2019re asking for, because he\u2019s just not making sense about where he\u2019s coming to, apart from to say that this is about democracy, when it\u2019s clearly not about democracy, it\u2019s about what he thinks is best for local government without any evidence to back it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c77a9899c9863c9650cf6608a94b8d9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Hon Simon Watts\u2014oh, sorry, no, we\u2019re changing Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022 data-id=\u0022ea16e665c396609c39826fb03fdf842a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ea16e665c396609c39826fb03fdf842a\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON (Labour) (16:56)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s good we have an Auckland person, so that\u2019s very good. The Minister\u2019s\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aa4dd48bff44bc8613b253ac9d2d9767\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: We had an Auckland person before.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255c1942697208a5162409797e51e8665\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right, yeah, but he\u2019s over the bridge, I think.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e6c5fdbb5505aa9ac2555084043ba9e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Right, on with the questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f1ec1ac0159b9ac5eab9437319878d3\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, sorry, Minister Stanford\u2014my apologies, Minister. That previous Minister, the Hon Simon Watts, did not answer the questions in terms of consultation. M\u0101ori up there\u2014I\u2019m not sure if the Minister knows the history here in terms of Auckland\u2019s Independent M\u0101ori Statutory Board, but it was a landmark decision to set up that M\u0101ori statutory board. Rodney Hide, the ACT MP who was here, should learn some history, because it was the ACT Party who promoted\u2014believe it or not\u2014and actually entrenched and supported and set up the M\u0101ori statutory board, which gave these M\u0101ori representatives voting rights\u2014it gave them voting rights.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIt was a brilliant move, because the reality was it was borne from M\u0101ori frustration of not getting on councils. So we organised marches in Auckland, we marched in our thousands. And in around 2010 and 2011, a M\u0101ori statutory board was born. Not perfect, too, might I add, but Rodney Hide put it up and was supported by John Key. That\u2019s why I keep talking about John Key.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022abc319ce6db04163a16d0cb5f90f0518\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: This guy loves John Key.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002271f45c45844f40cca634bf720b0d6174\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: What\u2019ve you got to say about John Key? What\u2019s your problem?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002275c524a18a51ac20b927e432030de0df\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: You love him.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc12f055b86032e0ca3efe6df33e1cae\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, no, well, you loved him, and now you\u2019ve\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d73302a112ae4335f37ab07b2ba21cc\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Don\u2019t bring me into the debate. You\u2019re talking to the member over there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002270809d9cea9c4229e4f663c82528bc46\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: No, no, no. Well, I\u2019m sure you did too, Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022776dd3f36268a0f3a86d8e9d3f84dbd6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Don\u2019t cast aspersions on what I said. Just don\u2019t talk to me, talk to the members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232cdf1d84aff47a861b91b765461297f\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: But the reality is, the history of this\u2014and Rt Hon Winston Peters just walked in, and he knows the history better than anyone in terms of the statutory board\u2014the statutory board was supported by the ACT Party, supported by National. Not so much support from that other side over there, and that\u2019s the history of it. The Rt Hon Winston Peters knows this better than anyone. So he can\u2019t say something in 2012, and then say, \u201COh, good, the Minister\u2019s back.\u201D And then change your mind in 2026 and start talking about democracy and saying that, \u201COh, that\u2019s not the way now.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I have some questions from the deputy chair of the Auckland M\u0101ori Statutory Board, former Minister for New Zealand First, Tau Henare\u2014that was a sad part of his life\u2014and former National Party member of Parliament Tau Henare, who said to me that he\u2019s shocked that the Minister did not even decide to meet with the M\u0101ori team. He says, \u201CWhy not tag the amendment to the legislation? Why no select committee process?\u201D Tau Henare also says, \u201CWe don\u2019t even have a vote on the governing body. Our voting happens before the final vote of the governing body.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat is the problem, Minister? What is the problem? Or was it like my good colleague Tangi over here says, who says, \u201CDo you just want the M\u0101oris do the karakia?\u201D Is that what you want us to do? We just do the karakia, do the mihi, and then shut up and go into the corner! I see my good mate Nuk over there\u2014another good National man. I think he\u2019s sick of you lot too. Nuk Korako over there, who\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022909a9a9c5e31d438143d7add2bf93906\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not appropriate to bring our guests into the debate. He didn\u2019t ask you to do it, but he\u2019ll talk to you later!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298472e4f75f737957643d20f7929fdf8\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m only bringing him up because another example of hypocrisy from this Government, because they supported it in the past, in terms of going on to ECAN down there in Christchurch, absolutely supported by National and then, all of a sudden, they start bringing in the democracy nonsense\u2014\u201COh, that\u2019s not democratic now, Nuk. We can\u2019t support you now.\u201D But when it suits\u2014when it suits\u2014this Government. I am asking the questions that Tau Henare is asking today also. Why no select committee process?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cfd141e6b1429510a7c74eb1a80ff78c\u0022\u003ETangi Utikere\u003C/span\u003E: Good question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f3e500cb7ac059eda6095c22657d842\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s a good question. We don\u2019t even have a vote on the governing body; our voting happens before the final vote of the governing body. Why was there no process in terms of a negotiation with M\u0101ori? Why were there no talks with Ng\u0101ti Whatua in terms of something so significant\u2014so significant? I ask the Minister to stand and respond to those questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022 data-id=\u00224138d6ba00ca9a5f549aefe1f616a612\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224138d6ba00ca9a5f549aefe1f616a612\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (17:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I have two amendments to talk to, so I want to deal with the first one of them first, which is Amendment Paper 664. I can\u2019t remember exactly when this was lodged, because this bill has been a very long time in its gestation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e6a1dce7fa61d3c8eea7b732a5a85295\u0022\u003ETangi Utikere\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, it has!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221b2f5f36350992f456c93c0c1babcb95\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER\u003C/span\u003E: In fact\u2014yeah. When we started this bill the first reading was 17\u00A0July last year, not this year\u201417 July 2025\u2014and at one stage there were two bills going literally in parallel, because at the same time the Public Service amendment bill was introduced, also July 2025. That got its third reading in May 2026\u2014so it got advanced a bit further.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe first amendment I\u2019ve got is around the appointment of the chief executive. In new clause 62A we have some changes that are on the last page, page 19 of the document here. We have some changes to the terms of employment of the chief executive for local government which allows essentially in the first instance a chief executive\u2014normally in local government is appointed for five years and then you have the right to appoint for another two years by mutual agreement without going to market. This bill says we\u2019re now going to go five plus five as the maximum. The Public Service amendment bill, now an Act of course, at one stage they were literally on the same day, but because this one got delayed, we didn\u2019t speak to them on the same day. The Public Service amendment bill took away the right to reappoint a chief executive and not go to the market.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn one piece of legislation, we were saying you can only reappoint a person in the Public Service bill by going to the market. In this one, we\u2019ve got five years plus two before you go to the market, and we\u2019re actually now going five plus five. The first reason for this amendment is because those are completely inconsistent. One of them is going in one direction, and the other is going in exactly the opposite direction. The question will obviously be why and why it was the Government was thinking those two different things, or whether people weren\u2019t actually looking at the two pieces of legislation and saying, \u201CThese two are not consistent with each other.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second reason for doing this\u2014consistency is important, but the second one is this issue of power imbalance. We hear a lot about power imbalance between chief executives and councils. A CEO is supposed to provide advice. A CEO is supposed to challenge councils, but then they\u2019re supposed to implement what the council does. A lot of the time that doesn\u2019t happen. In fact, the CEO has an enormous amount of power. Councils, at the moment, are elected for three years. The CEO: five, and then five plus two, and then maybe five plus five. I know the council has the ability to say, \u201CWe\u2019re not going to give you that extra time.\u201D, but that extra length of time makes a difference in terms of power. It makes a huge difference in terms of power, and so there is an issue there about power imbalance. If you look at ratepayer comments, often they will says, \u201CWho\u2019s in charge?\u201D They will tend to say that it\u2019s not the elected council. Now, I might disagree with them. A good council can certainly manage their chief executive, but a lot can\u2019t. They look at this and say there is a power imbalance at the moment, and it is in favour of the unelected person. The amendments that we\u2019ve just been talking about are all about power to the elected people\u2014the elected councils, the elected mayors\u2014but this extension would actually undermine that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I wanted to mention there is of course that we have a bill that must have been supported by the National Party, because that is a bill in the name of Stuart Smith, who has actually just stood up, and that is a bill that is deliberately trying to balance that imbalance at the moment, in favour of more of the elected members. That is the Local Government (Management of Local Authorities) Amendment Bill. That has gone through its first reading; it\u2019s now awaiting the whole select committee process. That is, in this case the National Party and the House has said, \u201CYeah, we agree with that. We want to send that to a select committee process.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0effd5f7ed2d91984923a8faffd5b09\u0022\u003ETangi Utikere\u003C/span\u003E: There won\u2019t be any late Amendment Papers on that one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e6a5f90a84117b793527114c1eb1ea50\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER\u003C/span\u003E: Look, I don\u2019t know, but my point is that that is a piece of legislation that is endeavouring to rebalance the power between elected members and chief executives. This bill at the moment, with that one change, is doing the opposite, so the amendment I have got, Amendment Paper 664, simply says exactly the same as what we have put into the Public Service bill\u2014it\u2019s nice to see the Hon Judith Collins here, because I think she sponsored that; lovely to see you here\u2014to say that it is five years. It is exactly the same as what we said for the Public Service: the chief executive gets five years, and in the local government sector the chief executive gets five years\u2014to bring them into line. It\u2019s consistency but it\u2019s also in line with the directions being taken with several pieces of legislation and the intent of the amendments, in fact, Minister that you\u2019ve made in terms of elected members only being able to vote in committees.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00222b7bef941a22424fdd4b58164c265c64\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222b7bef941a22424fdd4b58164c265c64\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (17:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much to the member Andy Foster. I acknowledge his background experience in local government. I\u2019ll take the two Amendment Paper in order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFirstly, in regards to the chief executive\u2019s appointment: it is our view that the change to the chief executive reappointment process is intended to support reduced operating costs for councils, and it is also important to acknowledge that it subject to a review of the chief executive\u2019s performance. On that basis, we will not be supporting the proposed amendment by the member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to the second amendment from the member, again: this is not consistent with Government policy. The member indicates that the purpose is to reinforce accountability over these decisions. This is already achieved by the Government\u2019s Amendment Paper on non-elected members, Amendment Paper 755. On that basis, we will not be supporting that amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022469b78418ef182dd609fb81bf5de13bb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I call the Hon Rachel Brooking. I just want to make the member aware that we are getting quite close to a couple of important valedictory speeches, so we\u2019ll just monitor the time as we go through. We\u2019re going to be wrapping up this section at 5.15 p.m. I\u2019ll give you the specifics at 5.15 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223992cbc42ad7c2dfa435ace9631ab1bb\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: I can help, Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222adc92bde5970c8aa3bb6195cd2f655d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Costley, I am chairing this session, thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u002259ca02303ef893e1ce1f35032fa81453\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002259ca02303ef893e1ce1f35032fa81453\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (17:08)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I am very happy to be stopped midstream if that means we are making way for what I am sure will be two wonderful valedictory speeches, from two of our very esteemed and accomplished and experienced colleagues, which I am very much looking forward to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve got two different things that I want to talk about. The first is in response to some of the discussion that has happened from the Hon Willie Jackson and from the Minister of Local Government, talking about various different committees or boards and that, whilst they can vote on some things, my issue is that the delegations that go to those different groups are normally limited. The Local Government Act\u2014the principal Act\u2014already reserves different types of decisions to only be made by the full council itself. Those, from memory, include things like rates determinations\u2014decisions on rates\u2014the making of by-laws, and long-term plans. If the Minister can confirm that I\u2019m correct and that, in fact, there are many legislated decisions that can only be made by elected councillors in the first place, and then, if he agrees with me, doesn\u2019t that diminish his argument somewhat that somehow we\u2019ve got to a situation where democracy is at an end because of these various different committees who\u2019ve been delegated some decision making? That is the first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second one is quite different. If we go to Amendment Paper 755, and if we\u2019re looking at, for example\u2014I think there\u2019s a couple of examples of this, but if we go to clause 25, you will see in clause 25, at inserted subclause (5), it says \u201CSubclause (4) does not apply in respect of\u2014\u201D and then it names some specific things, like the Ohai Railway Fund Committee and the Raupo Drainage Committee and a specified committee. My question here is just quite a simple one, and it\u2019s because this has come in in the Amendment Paper that was only tabled on Tuesday: can the Minister explain to us why those exceptions were chosen, what analysis went in to working out why it is those exceptions that need to be named in the legislation, and should there be anything else?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI say that because I know that there are many interesting organisations that are part created by councils\u2014for instance, you might have some bodies that are constituted by a number of different organisations. They might be a council-controlled organisation but also have a relationship as a State-owned enterprise. They might be creatures of statute\u2014so, for instance, the Otago Museum that is created by statute and there\u2019s different funding mechanisms that relate to the various different councils in Otago. I\u2019m just aware that there are many of these interesting bodies that serve our communities up and down the country throughout our communities, and they\u2019re very important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is, just simply: what analysis has been undertaken of all of those different groups and why is it that this railway fund committee and one drainage committee makes it specifically into the legislation, and are there other things that should also be in it? I see you\u2019re giving me a look, Madam Chair, so I will sit down and look forward to the rest of the contributions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225eae4590f45e9e2a5c2ffd59172dc91a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister has just indicated that he wants to give a brief answer before we\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022b3260b06df0d781cc71364fc9e9276d3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b3260b06df0d781cc71364fc9e9276d3\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (17:12)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for the questions and acknowledge the valedictories that are about to commence very soon. In regards to the committees noted by the member that are exempt, they are historical statutory committees with mandatory non-elected members, created through local government reorganisations and formally established in secondary legislation. The aspects in regards to those are considered different, and on that basis they are exempt.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002239d25c677ab0775b2318bfa40b4b5c16\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, in accordance with the Business Committee determination that valedictories will begin at 5.15 p.m., this committee is suspended and will resume at 7 p.m. Once Mr Speaker is here, we will start with the\u2014here he is\u2014valedictories.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc8f88e55101a772e6c30669e8c83edd\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Members, I\u2019ll indicate now that at the conclusion of the valedictory statements, the House will suspend for the dinner break and resume in committee at 7 o\u2019clock. Can we have the real Andrew Bayly stand up. No? In that case, to make his valedictory statement to the House, I call on Andrew Bayly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00222d0ca003321285c7fcd2f29fb9b8a923\u0022\u003EValedictory Statements\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c6e596037281e7266e6cac2e786aaacb\u0022\u003EHon Andrew Bayly\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227b3ebe24438640afbed0da464f9b88bc\u0022 data-id=\u0022e9d1ecb603cdff4c3efff4ccf1d4810e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227b3ebe24438640afbed0da464f9b88bc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e9d1ecb603cdff4c3efff4ccf1d4810e\u0022\u003EHon ANDREW BAYLY (National\u2014Port Waikato) (17:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, colleagues, family, and friends, and all of you who have come tonight to make sure that I actually leave this place. I note that valedictory speeches normally begin with the departing MP droning on about themselves\u2014don\u2019t worry, that will come later, but I want to begin with seven wonderful women: Barbara Knowles, Lynne Richardson, Jane Hancock, Judith Tucker, Sally Sumner, Trish Wanden, and Sally Reid. Between them, they have given more than 80 years of service. These are the people in all of our electorate and parliamentary offices who quietly and sensitively handle thousands of requests for help without seeking recognition; they simply see it as their job. You are kind and caring people. You make people feel that they\u2019ve been heard. I love you for it and thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELike everyone who\u2019s never done it, I assumed I would be good at politics. That\u2019s one of politics\u2019 little traps. Whatever I thought I knew, the people of Hunua and Port Waikato soon corrected. They did not care where I sat in caucus; they cared only whether I turned up, listened, and actually waited for the answer. Sometimes my constituents were confused why I turned up at all. One such instance occurred on a Sunday morning in the remote settlement of Glen Murray. As I sped past, I saw 30 cars outside a hall. Now, no self-respecting MP can resist such an audience. I stopped. The front door was unlocked, and the key was in it\u2014isn\u2019t that classic New Zealand? I went inside, heard muffled sounds, and opened a second door. Inside were 30 women all in a position I could not contemplate. There are moments when your training takes over; this was not one of them. I mumbled something like, \u201CI think my wife does something like this\u201D and just got the hell out of there. Behind me came shrieks of laughter and then, \u201CWas that the local MP?\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut electorate work is not just about the good times. People often come to an MP because something has gone wrong\u2014sometimes, something terribly wrong. Nothing affected me more deeply than the suicides during COVID. The Auckland boundary did not simply divide my electorate on a map; it divided families and communities. People who lived only a few kilometres apart suddenly found themselves on the opposite sides of it. One family had a son living nearby who was struggling with serious mental health issues. They believed the restrictions meant they could not visit him. After three days trying to contact him, they emailed me. I said, \u201CPlease get in the car, just go to him now.\u201D They found that he had taken his life three days earlier. We then had to help bury their son under COVID restrictions. At the very moment they most needed people around them, the rules kept these people apart. As we all know in this House, there are things in politics we celebrate, there are things that we defend, and then there are things that we always carry. I have carried that ever since. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAfter the 2020 election, Judith Collins appointed me treasurer and placed me third in our team. She told me she believed that I was the person best qualified for the role. Judith, you saw something in me, you backed me, and I will never forget it. The new role let me focus on the economic consequences of COVID\u2014particularly business owners wondering whether they would survive. I knew what it was like to lie awake at 3 o\u2019clock in the morning wondering how we were going to pay our 150 employees. Wages are not an accounting line; they are groceries, rent, mortgages, and those little things like school shoes. I spoke in this House on behalf of business owners who were watching years of their work slip away through no fault of their own. They feared for their staff, their families, and everything they had built. I believed the Government was moving too slowly. At the end of that speech, I finished with three words: \u201CI am ashamed.\u201D The video went viral because people living through it finally thought that someone understood.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBecoming a Minister was a great honour. I had waited nine long years. I wish to thank the Prime Minister for making me New Zealand\u2019s first Minister of manufacturing: an industry vital to our economy but too often overlooked. Across my portfolios, my purpose was to make New Zealand a better place to build and run a business and to give New Zealanders greater control over their financial future. I knew the pride of employing someone new. I also knew the fear of signing a personal guarantee and putting everything that you built\u2014including the family home\u2014on the line.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe advanced open banking, completed the first major insurance law reform in 30\u00A0years, simplified legislation, and began the first serious review of New Zealand\u2019s competition settings in decades. We also negotiated agreements with banks and telecommunications companies regarding financial scams. In respect of ACC, I commissioned two major reviews, including how its $50 billion fund might be better managed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the biggest reforms I wanted to achieve was an overhaul of the Companies Act, which affects every business and director in New Zealand. A year before the 2023 election, I asked Roger Wallis of Simpson Grierson to begin redrafting it to modernise, simplify, and digitise the law. Roger did much of this work on a pro bono basis. A lawyer working for nothing is sufficiently rare that I thought it needed to be recorded in \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E. Roger, you truly broke the mould.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother priority was getting more New Zealand capital into New Zealand businesses. About $35 million a day currently goes into KiwiSaver. In 25 years\u2019 time, New Zealand KiwiSaver balances are likely to be worth $1 trillion. Too little of that is invested in great New Zealand businesses and manufacturers. I wish to acknowledge Lloyd Kavanagh from Minter Ellison, who hosted many of my discussions with KiwiSaver providers and other industry participants.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETwo other changes mattered to me. The first was requiring Government agencies to pay their bills within 10 working days. It is vital that smaller entities are paid regularly and quickly by their bigger customers. The deliberate strategy of publishing their actual payment times every six months was a great incentive to bring about this improvement. Using the Government as a precedent, I think that the requirement should now be extended to cover councils and large corporates. Its real value will become apparent during the next financial crisis, when small businesses are paid first\u2014not last.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second change was financial literacy. As a business owner, I saw employees struggle with basic financial decisions. Poor financial literacy is both an educational issue and a society issue. Before the 2023 election, I met organisations delivering financial literacy programmes. Immediately after the election, I raised the possibility of a nationwide delivery of these programmes in schools with the Hon Erica Stanford. She agreed immediately. Erica, I want to thank you for your leadership in now making financial literacy part of the curriculum.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESome of my work was completed. Some remains unfinished. Some will take years before its full benefit is realised. But together, it was a programme shaped by one belief: that people willing to risk their money, employ New Zealanders, and build something in New Zealand deserve a fair chance to succeed. None of this was achieved alone. To my advisers and ministerial staff, thank you for your hard work. I want to acknowledge Leonard, Jack, Paul, Grace, Sam, Jasmine, Kathleen, Andy, and the two Wills and two Bills, among others. I am proud of what we achieved together.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMinisterial office was one of the greatest privileges of my life. Losing it was one of the most brutal experiences of my life. It began with a six-minute meeting with three of my advisers. During a brief discussion, I placed my hand on the upper arm of one of my male advisers and said, \u201CWe can do this.\u201D Then I left and thought no more about it. The next night, I was told a serious allegation had been made. I could not believe it. Later, on a flight, I told Tina, my wife, that I may have to resign. She did not say anything. She simply turned away from me, towards the window, and began to cry. Tina does not cry easily. That was when I understood this was no longer just about a ministerial job. It was hurting the person I loved most.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENext morning, I flew back to Wellington to meet the complainant. When I landed, I was told he was unavailable but the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) wanted to question me. DIA said that all three people present at the meeting had corroborated the allegation. That was critical. I might contest one account or maybe two, but if all three corroborated a serious allegation, I could not remain a Minister. It was on that premise that I took the decision to resign.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat premise was false. Just before I announced my resignation, I again asked to meet the complainant. I wanted to apologise directly for my conduct and for making him feel uncomfortable. During that conversation, he told me that he had not made a complaint and would not have done so. The next day, the second witness described the meeting as \u201Ca storm in a teacup\u201D. Three months later, Public Service Commissioner Sir Brian Roche confirmed in writing that the ACC chief executive had initiated the investigation. He also wrote, and I quote, \u201CDIA has confirmed that no formal complaint was, or has been, made about Mr Bayly\u2019s conduct.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMinisters must be accountable. I have always believed that. As a Minister, I should not have put my staff in a position where they felt uncomfortable. For that, I sincerely apologise. Accountability must, however, rest on facts and a fair process. Mine did not. I leave others to decide how and why it failed. I put this on the record because it is part of my parliamentary story but not the whole story.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat this horrible episode did reveal was the kindness shown by some people. Soon after the matter was first raised, my adviser Grace Ridley-Smith rang me from Nelson. She was in the middle of her honeymoon. She did not ring merely to ask how I was. She rang to say that she was coming. Grace cut short her honeymoon\u2014left her new husband to finish the honeymoon alone\u2014and flew to Auckland to stay with my wife and me while we tried to understand what had happened and what we might do next. Who does a thing like that? Who does a thing like that? Well, Grace did. Grace, what you did was an extraordinary act of loyalty and love. Tina and I will never forget it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen Sally Reid rang. Sally had worked for me for six years before retiring two years earlier. She did not ring to offer advice. She rang to announce that she was coming back. No discussion, no interview. She had decided that I needed protecting, so she came out of retirement. Sally has also taken on another difficult assignment: teaching me French. \u003Cspan lang=\u0022fr\u0022\u003EMerci de toujours prendre soin de moi. Tu es peut-\u00EAtre petite, mais tu as un c\u0153ur de lionne.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen I felt abandoned by the system, Grace and Sally did not move away from me; they moved towards me. I had lost office. I had not lost them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou may not have realised it, but after my resignation, I went into a very dark place. To those in this House and the few journalists who stopped and asked how I was, I thank you from the bottom of my heart. It helped me find a way back. I would also like to make a special mention of my year group, who are around me today, who supported me during that process. To start to put events in order, I began writing a book. Hopefully, some of you might buy it when it\u2019s published!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also returned to my work on Antarctica. In 2019, I\u2019d helped organise the first Antarctic Parliamentarians\u2019 Assembly in London. MPs from 20 countries came together to discuss how to protect a continent that is a place of peace and dedicated to science. I decided that the next assembly should be held in New Zealand. The Rt Hon Winston Peters backed the project from the outset and generously provided foreign affairs staff to help host it. Winston, I am greatly, very grateful for your unwavering support. Following the successful assembly, I was appointed chair of the steering committee and tasked with organising the next gathering, likely in Norway in 2027. I\u2019ve also finalised the constitution for the organisation, giving it an enduring structure, with parliamentarians meeting every two years. Helping to establish this permanent, international forum is something I hope will form part of my legacy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA valedictory should not only look back; it should also look forward. So I want to finish with New Zealand\u2019s biggest financial issue: superannuation. It represents a long-term promise to all New Zealanders. However, a promise is only as good as we can afford to keep it. Late last month, Leonard Hong and Emmanuel Jo and I published a paper in the Asia-based \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInternational Review of Public Administration\u003C/span\u003E on preserving universal superannuation. Treasury measures the cost against GDP. Government\u2019s don\u2019t pay superannuation out of GDP; they pay it out of taxation. Our analysis shows that, by 2065, superannuation, health, and education will consume almost 80 cents of every tax dollar, leaving only 21 cents for every other portfolio, every other Government activity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe propose a gradual increase in the age of eligibility by one month every year starting in 2029, reflecting the improvement in life expectancy and avoiding abrupt policy changes. We also propose linking increases in superannuation to inflation rather than wage growth, with a review every five years to ensure the pension remains fair and adequate. Finally, we recommend that those unable to continue working because of poor health or because of physically demanding occupations should be able to draw their pension earlier. Other countries provide this option; New Zealand should too. Future Parliaments will have to address this issue. If we don\u2019t deal with it soon, a change will have to occur\u2014probably not in the next financial crisis, but probably the one after that. That\u2019s when the change will be brutal, and there will be a major lurch in policy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, as we all know here, Parliament consumes time. If you\u2019re not careful, it consumes all of it. Before politics, I knew I\u2019d worked too much while our little boys were growing up. I could not recover those years, but I could still create something special for each\u2014not a holiday, but a journey with a purpose. So, I made a plan. When each son turned 20, we would go on an adventure of his choosing. James and I dragged sledges to the North Pole; Dan and I crossed Jordan on camels following the routes of Lawrence of Arabia; and George and I lived with the Dukhas, the last of the reindeer herders in Mongolia in the mountains next to Russia. We came home with more than photographs; we came home with lasting memories and having seen each other in different ways. To my three boys, it has been a privilege sharing remote campsites and watching you grow into wonderful men. To my parliamentary colleagues, can I suggest, there is always another meeting, but some appointments with your children must be made before the opportunity disappears. I do admit, however, that our version of a family holiday was a little extreme!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, to my wife, Tina. There\u2019s something I need to say to you publicly: politics was my choice. The death threat that named you and our boys was not something that you chose. I remember ringing you at work. It was already dark. As I told you what had been written, I heard your voice begin to tremble. I\u2019m deeply sorry that my public life brought that into yours. You did not choose it, you did not deserve it, and for that, I will always be sorry. For 12 years you\u2019ve had space. You\u2019ve run the house, made decisions, and you even know where everything is\u2014unlike me. Now, I\u2019m going to be there every day\u2014with time and ideas. You seem to have identified this as a significant risk. I\u2019m sure that I will have some proposals for reform. However, I suspect none will survive consultation! I\u2019m proud of the offices I\u2019ve held. I\u2019m proud of the work I did. But that is not what matters most. What matters is who is still beside you when the title has gone. Tina was there before Parliament, she was there through it, and she will be there when I walk out of this Chamber tonight.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo the people of Hunua and Port Waikato, thank you for trusting me. To my supporters, electorate volunteers, and National Party, thank you for your loyalty and friendship. To my staff, thank you for making me better than I was. To colleagues across the House, thank you for what you taught me. For the wonderful parliamentary staff, I enjoyed our quiet conversations. And to my family and friends above, thank you for coming, for staying, and for catching me when I fell.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI came here wanting to make a difference. I know not how history will judge what I did. I know only that I gave it everything I had. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EApplause\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb2f8f02f511ddfa8f59424d0b009cd1\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think there\u2019s going to be a bit of a changeover in the gallery, so we\u2019ve got about five minutes before the people here for Maureen Pugh\u2019s valedictory take their seats in the gallery. We\u2019ll try and leave most of the congratulations to Andrew until the conclusion of the next speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c1e237e52e539b276d2762a8c0a1c94f\u0022\u003EMaureen Pugh\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd7fbef0395c3f13b1cb9408b4581b3e\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank members for their patience while we had the gallery change over. Just to reiterate, when the speech from Maureen is concluded, the House will be suspended for the dinner break. It\u2019s now my pleasure to call on Maureen Pugh to deliver her valedictory speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022 data-id=\u0022a40d587798bf96a9f8d1404ceac25927\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a40d587798bf96a9f8d1404ceac25927\u0022\u003EMAUREEN PUGH (National\u2014West Coast-Tasman) (17:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. It is a profound privilege to stand in this House\u2014oh, God! Harden up. It is a profound privilege to stand in this House today to deliver my final address. In fact, it has been a privilege every time I have walked into this place. No matter how often I\u2019ve crossed its threshold, I\u2019ve never lost sight of what an extraordinary honour it is to represent New Zealanders in our Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETwenty-eight years ago, I was first elected to the Westland District Council, where I worked for 15 years\u2014nine years as mayor. Local government gets a bad rap sometimes, Mr Watts, but I always found that being on the coal face of community was a great place to work. My thanks to Diane Maitland for being the greatest executive assistant and for your 43 years of service so far. Eleven years ago, I stood here as a brand new list MP to give my maiden speech, arriving 14 months after my classmates of 2014. I joked back then about starting off the bench. I promised my team I wouldn\u2019t drop the ball, score an own goal, or give away a penalty. Looking back over the last four terms, from the 51\u003Csup\u003Est\u003C/sup\u003E to the 54\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E Parliaments, I almost always kept that promise, though there were definitely a few times the referee\u2019s whistle blew.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThinking back to that day when I looked up into the gallery and saw all those wonderful people who had supported me, I think today of those who are not here to be with me as I retire\u2014my beautiful daughter Haley, my amazing husband John, and my dear old dad Trev. I\u2019ll start my valedictory with acknowledgement of those who have supported me to get here and to stay here, and who did the best to make me look good along the way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy family, of course, have been incredible. You\u2019re likely to wish I was back at work when I start to annoy you all once I\u2019m fully retired! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve been blessed with great staff over the years, and the current ones I say goodbye to now. Tracy, Rob, Emma, Charlie, Cheryl, John, and Carolyn, I hope you know how much I appreciated everything you have done for me. We\u2019ve helped a lot of people over the years, and we\u2019ve had a great deal of fun along the way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy classmates of 2014, thank you for being my confidants, my friends, through good times and bad. Having our regular debriefs has kept us connected and sane. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA huge thankyou to the staff in Parliament, from everyone from Bryce, who keeps us fed; the security team that keep us safe; and the travel team who got me everywhere I needed to be. I have a particularly soft spot for our House team. Our select committee clerks, they\u2019ve been extraordinary, making sense of the diverse and sometimes rambling conversations we have about the business in front of us and turning it into professional reports. A massive acknowledgment to our Speakers\u2019 team, especially Suze, Pav, Kellie, and, of course, recently retired Roland, who makes sure the people in the Chair are always well prepared as much as that\u2019s possible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ERepresenting the West Coast - Tasman electorate as their MP has been the absolute honour of my career. People often ask me how I manage to keep smiling after long and sometimes emotional days of select committee hearings or a two-day commute back to the electorate. I tell them it\u2019s simple: when you represent the most beautiful part of New Zealand, you have a lot to smile about, especially because it\u2019s filled with some of the best miners, farmers, and growers New Zealand has to offer. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENo one gets to this place alone. To the National Party leadership, Sylvia; my regional chair, Dean; and my tireless electorate teams over the years, especially my current chair, Jo, thank you for the part you and our supporters have played. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENo MP is an island, and I\u2019ve had the unique privilege of serving under seven very different National Party leaders. I entered this place inspired by Sir John Key and his infectious high energy belief in New Zealand\u2019s prosperity. When the baton passed to Sir Bill English, we traded that corporate optimism for deep public policy and serious social investment, a legacy that is thriving. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen came seasons of change. I served alongside Todd Muller, a man with a wonderful, authentic heart. There was a short period of a few days where the Hon Dr Shane Reti was in charge. Then I navigated the Opposition trenches beside my very good friend Judith Collins. Judith\u2019s wisdom and political nous was incredible. However, being forgotten and left on a deserted island in the scorching sun with no hat and no water tested our friendship\u2014a story for another day, Mr Speaker!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am wrapping up my career in Government under a current Prime Minister, Christopher Luxon. His relentless focus on efficiency, delivery, productivity, and outcomes means New Zealand will be in good hands for many years as he \u201CFixes the basics and builds the future of New Zealand.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is one leader I haven\u2019t mentioned, and this leads me to my reflections on the media. My relationship with the media has been quite ordinary, my local paper being the notable exception\u2014thanks, Paul. Here\u2019s a great example: even when I put out a short media release at the beginning of this year to announce my retirement, some lazy journo must have done a google search and picked up that the biggest story I was involved in was about a not very nice comment made about me. So next time you want to reference that incident, how about telling the whole story? That comment was made by a man who had never even had one conversation with me, had never been in my office, nor me in his. And here\u2019s how it ended: he lost his job and I got promoted. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy work in this House has always been about taking the fight from the regions straight to Wellington. When Cyclone Ita hit us in 2014, along with my very good friend the Hon Dr Nick Smith, we championed the recovery of fallen trees on conservation land, a temporary piece of legislation. Years later, I turned that into the Adverse Weather-affected Timber Recovery on Conservation Lands Bill 2020\u2014still in the biscuit tin. And I followed that up with the freedom camping amendment bill 2021. Now, as we know, members\u2019 bills are incredibly tough to pass from Opposition, and neither made it past the first reading, but they did what I hoped they would do. They got this Parliament to listen to the West Coast and Tasman and have helped to put us on the political radar, where we have stayed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve spent a decade in the engine room of select committees, covering everything from commerce and education to law and order, but most of my years focused on social services. It is here that I got to witness the difference in approaches to how we support our most vulnerable Kiwis. I don\u2019t consider myself a victim of anything, so it goes against who I am to make victims of our most vulnerable people. When people are taught to rely on the State, they become victims of the State. To me, it\u2019s like the story of throwing a man a fish and you feed him for a day but teach him to fish and he feeds himself for life. The more we teach our young people, the more they learn, and the more independence and empowerment they build for themselves. If we just hand someone a solution, we are keeping them dependent, but when we teach them how to solve it themselves, we set them up for life. That\u2019s what we owe our youth. Every time we teach them a new skill, we aren\u2019t just giving them knowledge; we are handing them the keys to their own freedom. Education is that key. So when an emergency safety net becomes a lifelong ceiling, we have failed the very people we promised to protect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFreedom is one of those words we use often, but freedom isn\u2019t simply the absence of barriers. Freedom comes from being capable. A person who can read, write, work, solve problems, and contribute is truly free. That is why education matters. That is why skills matter. That is why personal responsibility matters. The greatest thing we can do for someone is not make them dependent on us but help them become independent of us. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt would be remiss of me not to mention mining. My great-grandfather came to this country to work in a West Coast coalmine, my grandfather was a coalminer, and my dad worked on the steam trains shifting coal east. It\u2019s in my DNA. So it makes my blood boil, as quickly as the kettle boils on my coal range, when people want to shut our communities and industries down without understanding the consequences for those families, businesses, and communities who rely on them. As hard as it may be, we will look past the disruption of protests and stay focused on getting the job done. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo here\u2019s my message to protestors: targeting the supply chain is a completely broken strategy. It\u2019s lazy, and it\u2019s easy to fire at an immobile bull\u2019s eye like a worksite and its community. Shutting down local production does not eliminate the world\u2019s need for these materials. Until idealistic activists shift their focus from trying to choke supply to reducing actual consumer demand, their efforts are only tokenism. Maybe they could lead a reduction in demand themselves by giving up the very devices and modern products they use\u2014all those things that are made from mined materials. But I\u2019m quite sure they will never do that. And therein lies the hypocrisy. But perhaps their ultimate mission is to do their own mining, by mining and storing the email addresses from all the petitions they use to build their database.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs part of my role here, I got to go overseas a few times for various reasons\u2014to Australia, Britain, South Africa, and Japan. More recently, I was part of a cross-party delegation to Taiwan, an incredibly positive experience. Thank you, Jo-Anne.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn this my final Parliament, my circle closes as an Assistant Speaker. Sitting in that big chair gives you a completely different view of this room. Trying to maintain my neutral poker face while keeping order during a rowdy committee of the whole House is one of the hardest tasks in here. Sitting in that chair also teaches you a great deal about human nature. In fact, it\u2019s even taught me a bit about physics. You see, light travels faster than sound, which is why some people appear incredibly bright until you hear them speak. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve been taught many lessons, mainly about people, especially those we are here to serve. I\u2019ve learnt that the moment public service becomes self-service we lose our way. The best people I\u2019ve met in politics are those who never forgot that they were here to serve others not themselves. Politics can be a brutal business. Elections are won and lost. Opportunities appear and disappear. Critics appear from everywhere. And occasionally you become tomorrow\u2019s headline for all the wrong reasons. But resilience is a choice. Every set back, whether it is here or in our personal lives, gives us two options: become bitter or become better. I\u2019ve certainly strived to get better.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen I gave my maiden speech, I wore this piece of jewellery that was inspired by the incredible honeybee. For me, that represented showing up every single day as a positive, loyal, hard-working representative for the people in West Coast-Tasman and my National Party team. I\u2019m pretty sure I achieved that. As I prepare to step out of Parliament as member No. 1,422 and woman member No. 131, I leave with a very full heart, knowing that if I\u2019m facing another midnight sitting, it\u2019s because I\u2019m surrounded by friends and family, and likely with a beer in hand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo West Coast-Tasman, thank you for placing your trust in me. To my colleagues and friends, thank you for the journey, and, to my family, thank you for sharing me with this place for longer than any of us ever expected. My time as a member of Parliament may be ending, but my love for the West Coast of New Zealand never will. Go well all you wonderful people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThank you, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EApplause\u003C/span\u003E] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 6.03 p.m. to 7.00 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d2fa731442f7ac65557eed1f317a79dc\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00221588ed6436f56a8c46efc6b03fa91dd9\u0022\u003ELocal Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022df6588eda55254677cd22079abc639a1\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002258\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f5e4cb9e271545403eb6dd0ebc6830c0\u0022\u003EPart 2 Miscellaneous provisions, and Schedules 1 and 2 (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002220da6ecc9ee34124c179bf1a0822fe5b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The House is resumed. Members, when we suspended for the valedictory statements and the dinner break, we were considering the Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill, and we were debating Part 2. Part 2 is the debate on clauses 23 to 30, \u201CMiscellaneous provisions\u201D, and Schedules 1 and 2. The question is that Part 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u0022a322fe13a6b39822239a910854cb217e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a322fe13a6b39822239a910854cb217e\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (19:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Kia orana, Mr Chair. Thank you. I want to ask the Minister some questions about clause 25. These are related to the suggestion that there would be a standard approach, in particular a standard approach to a code of conduct. I mean, I don\u2019t think anyone would disagree that there absolutely needs to be a code of conduct for local authorities. I guess the issue is around a standard one and what that might look like.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other one that relates to the standardisation is more specifically around the standing orders. I want to really focus on this aspect. The Minister will be aware that this is a proposed amendment to Schedule 7, specifically new clause 15A, inserted by clause 25(3B). The Minister may be aware that I do have an Amendment Paper, obviously in my name, that\u2019s related to this. It\u2019s Amendment Paper No. 653, and hopefully the Minister has had time, because it\u2019s been sitting there for a wee while.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess my concern that I\u2019d be keen for the Minister to respond to is that in many circumstances, standing orders, and some that have been prepared by Local Government New Zealand, for example, I accept they are adopted by a number of councils, but there are some that actually don\u2019t do that; they have their own bespoke form of standing orders. Where there is a circumstance or a situation where, for example, a standardised set might limit the ability for members of the public to go and share their views, raise issues\u2014I think about a number of councils where, for example, their standing orders set aside a public comment component as a particular standing order that sets aside a committee meeting for 30 minutes. I mean, I\u2019m familiar with the Palmerston North ones. That\u2019s what happens there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s a particular decision that the council from my constituency has a bespoke set of standing orders. They don\u2019t rely on the ones from Local Government New Zealand. They\u2019ve been developed over quite some time. They seem to be standing orders that work for that local community. I guess the concern about standardising things is that you might have arrangements or provisions, for example, to allow for public participation at the start of a committee meeting or at the start of a council meeting or a public forum\u2014they all have lots of different names. How is the Minister going to ensure that there are those aspects of a standing order approach that still allow for community feedback and community engagement? I think on the one hand you\u2019re wanting to potentially ensure that there\u2019s some consistency across the country, but where that consistency is disadvantageous alongside some existing standing orders\u2014I\u2019d be keen to get a response from the Minister around how that could be encouraged or allowed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00221df6bc12f335381a27ec70f62ea1ec73\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221df6bc12f335381a27ec70f62ea1ec73\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (19:04)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for the question in regards to standing orders, and the points raised by the member are absolutely legitimate. What has occurred is that a process has been undertaken, including consultation, to prepare and put in place standing orders that are standardised across the country. The point I think the member was raising is: is there a mechanism ongoing where if changes or modifications to enhance or improve those or potentially deal with an issue that comes up subsequently\u2014is that available? The answer is yes. The mechanism, while not formalised, allows the secretary to be able to take on board those points. The standing orders will also look to be periodically reviewed as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EFrom the intent of this, this is making sure that the standing orders are fit for purpose and are continually reviewed and updated on a periodic basis. As and where, potentially, if there are issues identified that need to be strengthened or enhanced, then there is absolutely no prohibition around that\u2014actually, quite the opposite. As we do in this place, improvement of standing orders is just part and parcel of business as usual.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022 data-id=\u0022b70b908ad915dadacd4382b672ae78b6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b70b908ad915dadacd4382b672ae78b6\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN (Green) (19:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. My question is also on the code of conduct, and I certainly agree with my colleague Tangi Utikere on some of the matters, particularly participation, that should be included. I agree about what are offences and what are the penalties that might be quite sensible to standardise across local authorities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy concern is about remote participation and how the rules for that vary currently across councils. The issue is about whether it\u2019s pretty much discretionary as long as you give notice or whether it\u2019s only if you\u2019re ill. Again, they differ, but it seems to me that the rules for\u2014let\u2019s take an urban, relatively concentrated council like Hutt City. Frankly, there\u2019s not many reasons why somebody shouldn\u2019t be able to get physically to a meeting. You take the South Wairarapa and the vulnerability of the bridges, or Tararua, which has got hundreds of kilometres of rural roads and also potentially poor connectivity. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI looked into this a little bit. Queenstown requires, if you\u2019re going to be part of the quorum, that you actually have to have your camera on at all times. Marlborough says, \u201COur connectivity\u201D\u2014or at least it used to\u2014\u201Cmight not be adequate.\u201D, and as long as you were present and could hear and be heard, that counted. These seem to me genuine differences between councils. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe last part, Minister, was that there are differences in connectivity, so Queenstown requires, for remote access, that you must be on camera all the time. It doesn\u2019t say what your background might be, but, you know, that\u2019s something. But Marlborough has not got such good connectivity, or it didn\u2019t have, perhaps, at the time they wrote their standing orders, and they allow you to be present and count towards the quorum and count your vote if you just can be heard and hear. I just think there are some variations in not perhaps every part of the standing orders, but there are some real areas that we ought to be able to allow different councils some discretion on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002239789cdba3303b6c088ea1295028b338\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002239789cdba3303b6c088ea1295028b338\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (19:08)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I thank the member for the question, and I can provide assurance to the member that the way in which the standing orders are drafted in regards to remote participation actually are at the discretion of the respective councils to put in place the policies and procedures and mechanisms that are applicable for that particular council. On the points that the member is making around geographical variation, etc., that is the way in which the standing orders are. It isn\u2019t one standardised mechanism for remote participation at a national level; it is at the discretion of each council. That should cover that point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u002201c59d68c46e79d14a7ac6b622f63960\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002201c59d68c46e79d14a7ac6b622f63960\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (19:09)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. A few different questions and reminding the Minister that just before those valedictories\u2014lovely as they were, as I predicted\u2014he answered one of my questions but did not answer the other question, which was about the many different things that the Local Government Act already specifies can only be done by the full council. If you\u2019re doing a motion on your rates, that has to be done by the full council. The question there relates to, well, why are we so worried about voting rights that have already been delegated when the bigger issues and those most important things already have to be by the elected councillors?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThen second to that, and related, the Minister has been saying in many of his answers that, you know, this is all to do with democracy. Therefore, I would infer that he\u2019s saying that this is a constitutional bill; that this is important for our constitutional arrangements, as democracy applies to local government. So my second question in this contribution is why, then, are we doing this, effectively, through all-stages urgency? It\u2019s come in as an amendment in the committee stage\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223c1cbdc5b55669809db378fbec88f0b\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: Just a little one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221dc80749f3b44f82fff8c60bff134dc4\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, someone\u2019s saying it\u2019s a little amendment. I think if we\u2019re talking about our constitutional arrangements, then size does not matter, Mr Ryan Hamilton\u2014maybe it does. But this is an important amendment. The select committee has not had a chance to look at it, nor has anyone been able to look at any submissions. Surely, if it is as important as the Minister says it is, then it should go through a robust democratic process here, and it\u2019s not doing that. We only saw this Amendment Paper as we walked into our caucus meetings on Tuesday morning. Today, it is Wednesday. Nobody else has spent much time looking at this. We heard from the Hon Willie Jackson that Tau Henare has been texting him about how outrageous it is. Apart from that, that is where we are with the analysis. People are going, \u201CWhat the\u2014?\u201D This appears terrible, and it is terrible. I would very much like to hear the Minister justify this terrible process whereby nobody is involved apart from a few of us here asking questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, I do have some other questions, as well. One is going back\u2014so I\u2019m now on the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 755, and I\u2019m at clause 25. This is the same clause that I was talking about before that refers to the railway fund and the drainage committee, and the Minister answered and said that they had very specific arrangements. I would like to know if the Minister could comment on how robust the analysis was\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022157b5e186329570b49fdee3f0ef7bb99\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: What page are you on in Amendment Paper 755?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f07bea7df992c00f77c0995b3fa51ce\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Page 5. The question there was how robust was that analysis that only the railway fund and the drainage committee need to be specifically listed, rather than, say, the T\u016Bhara Otago Museum or any other number of entities that exist around the country?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMy next question there is that these new clauses refer quite often to any Treaty settlement and things made under other pieces of legislation. Now, at the moment, the Resource Management Act (RMA) is still the law of the land in terms of resource management. This Government brought it back and have not yet completed their RMA reforms, and even when they do complete their RMA reforms, most of it won\u2019t commence until about 2030. One of the things in the Resource Management Act that sometimes relates to Treaty settlements, although not always, are mana whakahono \u0101 rohe, and they also relate to this other legislation. I\u2019m wondering how this legislation\u2014this amendment that we\u2019ve had since yesterday\u2014relates to mana whakahono \u0101 rohe, and, whilst the Government\u2019s other amendments and different pieces of legislation are happening, is there any interaction that will happen as a result of this legislation to those mana whakahono \u0101 rohe given these references to Treaty settlements and other enactments? Thank you, Mr Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022 data-id=\u002298524e2f1ee9429d78bea3b405c743d6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002298524e2f1ee9429d78bea3b405c743d6\u0022\u003ELEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE (Labour\u2014M\u0101ngere) (19:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, Mr Chair. Thank you. I refer to the provision that we are on\u2014clause 25(14). Minister, you did have a question before the dinner break with respect to this provision. I do have an Amendment Paper. What I wanted to ask the Minister, and I can\u2019t recall exactly your clear statement that you made, with respect to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab1a1b8e41cf564bd4d0eee84f59b9cb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Can you tell us the Amendment Paper\u2014the time stamp?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223fd7c9e91f92f92587c5b40bb8331c0\u0022\u003ELEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, the Amendment Paper\u2014all I\u2019ve got in front of me is, \u201CThe proposed amendment is clause 25(14)\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022912b0f42d32bafa552e2152e914d6bd5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, OK. So it\u2019s 15 September, 4.46, right?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a94eccc96da7d01df0f4e32f942c881d\u0022\u003ELEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE\u003C/span\u003E: It was 15 September, 4.46.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aff3cc8bf2de28c217340d1ca76a3415\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Yep, cool.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002263efa1bb3c2ebd73d10734e830cfc6ee\u0022\u003ELEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Apologies for the late reference. Minister, what I wanted to understand was, we\u2019ve heard a lot of evidence that you\u2019ve provided, and also with information from the officials, but what is the understanding or what is the advice that you\u2019ve been provided in terms of the clause that will replace the two with the five years for chief executive officers? I wanted to understand what the considerations were of extending to five years and, also, the analysis that has been provided, because you have spoken with respect to going back in terms of democracy and going back to the local government basics in terms of policy intent. It would be helpful to understand, because I have put a provision forward in there to replace the five years with four, because you\u2019re doubling up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESo what I want to understand, Minister, is what is the analysis behind going from two years to five years, but also the different considerations, because that is not just a double term; it extends the CEO responsibility in the second term. It would be helpful to understand the thinking but, also, the decision making behind that specific provision. Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eff05e5ba6de431bdb397aec5a026d0e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: I encourage members not to use \u201Cyou\u201D and \u201Cyour\u201D and bring the Chair into the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00229de77f4fcdf595ab5faab7907f362e8a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229de77f4fcdf595ab5faab7907f362e8a\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (19:16)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member Lemauga Lydia Sosene for the question in regards to her Amendment Paper, which is in relation to the time period of the term of the chief executive, which is currently appointed for a first term of five years and the second term for up to two years. The bill proposes that the second term length will increase to five years, taking the maximum combined duration of the first and second terms to 10 years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question was around analysis that was undertaken by officials in regards to that change, particularly in regards to the frequency and the costs related, and actually links to the feedback in regards to an Amendment Paper that was noted by one of the other members this evening that we did not progress on the reasons that the cost-effectiveness aspect was considered to outweigh the benefit in regards to the change. So that\u2019s in regards to that amendment. We won\u2019t be progressing with that proposal. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere were questions before, also, in regards to delegations in the context of delegations from the governing body of a local council to subcommittees. There are certain aspects that can\u2019t be delegated. However, there are some elements that can, including, for example, the allocation and decisions around the allocation of a particular grant. In that instance\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d65f276315a5fe90f63d61c6fc9a634\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: Is that the problem?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002246050f6ef129728fbdd7f6fc61c15b1a\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014there is an issue\u2014I\u2019m just giving you an example, which is one of the questions that I was asked in regards to that, and the clarification and the certainty provided that only democratically elected individuals are able to vote in regards to that ensures that there is consistency across the piece.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022 data-id=\u00220b62f4db8c57741fde01dcc731f8231b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220b62f4db8c57741fde01dcc731f8231b\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (19:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, thank you. I\u2019m just going to go back to the question that I asked prior to the valedictory statements. Minister, you responded to my Amendment Paper 664 and then you also responded to Amendment Paper 665, even though I haven\u2019t actually spoken to that, so I\u2019ll speak to that in a moment. But just on Amendment Paper 664, the response you just gave us was about the term of a chief executive, and you talked about the analysis by officials. Now\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002277809d8b6bac130974c0bed1a424baad\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Try not to use the \u201Cyou\u201D and the \u201Cyour\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d7b5bfcd57521435120e992e21895ce\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, sorry, my apologies. \u201CYour\u201D is different\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b8cf2fa3f91c9baef9abc6651145a94a\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CThe Minister\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002290bbe7dcf56bce3b62ef73162287319d\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CMinister\u201D. \u201CMinister\u201D, \u201Cyou\u201D\u2014no: the Minister talked about the analysis by officials. Now, I was on the Governance and Administration Committee that considered this bill and asked exactly questions around that, and we didn\u2019t really get any clear steer as to why that decision was made. I specifically was doing it in the context, as I said earlier, of the Public Service Amendment Bill, which was done at exactly the same time. The answer that you gave us\u2014sorry, the answer that the Minister\u2014I can\u2019t avoid using the word \u201Cyou\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aa786dae9c00bb753c469c40beb240bb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Well done. Appreciate the effort.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299c16ee57c23e629df01785834013364\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER\u003C/span\u003E: The answer that the Minister gave us was that it was an issue of cost, but what we\u2019ve then got is that we are concerned about the cost to local government of saying that the chief executive can only be appointed for five years, but at the same time\u2014and, literally, it was the same time\u2014we had a piece of legislation saying, \u201CWe are not concerned about the cost of reappointment in the public sector to a taxpayer.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is the logical inconsistency which is the challenge here, and that is what I would really appreciate. Look, I get the bit about saying, \u201CYeah, we want to reduce costs because we want to make sure that we don\u2019t have to keep going to the market in terms of chief executives.\u201D, although there are some costs to that in the sense that the chief executive then has a greater and greater power in relation to the democratically elected members. That\u2019s an issue which instead is really, really important and yet is being undermined here, but that issue applies to ratepayers but not to taxpayers. It\u2019s the logical inconsistency that I find challenging. It has been challenging, and I\u2019ve raised that in this House several times over the last, well, six, seven, eight months, and I have yet to see a logical answer as to why that logical inconsistency is something that the Government supports. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second one is Amendment Paper 665. You just talked about the issue around my Amendment Paper 665. You talked about the issue of delegating. There are certain aspects that can\u2019t be delegated. There\u2019s a list in the schedule in the Local Government Act. It says that the council cannot delegate the making of rates, by-laws, borrowing monies, disposing of assets other than in the long-term plan (LTP), adopting the LTP annual plan or annual report, appointing the chief executive officer, LTP policies, etc., and remuneration and employment policies. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe amendment that I\u2019ve got there, which you responded to and said, \u201CNo, we\u2019re not going to do that.\u201D, is an amendment which says that it\u2019s the power to adopt a strategy, a policy, or a management plan under the Reserves Act 1977 or a district plan, a district plan change, or variation to district plan change. Those things are really, really important pieces of policy. They are critical. Collectively, they are the most important things that councils do, and yet councils can choose to delegate them to a body. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve got these amendments talking about unelected members and unelected members not voting. You\u2019re dealing with that, but you\u2019ve still got unelected members around a table who have influence on those things. Those are some of the most critical things that councils do, and you\u2019re saying it\u2019s fine to delegate them. All this amendment was saying is, actually, just like we do in Parliament, there should be a process of saying that you have your first reading, effectively\u2014your first process. The committee makes some decisions around that, and then it gets kicked up to council, and the council have a second think about it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOtherwise, what will happen with some of these things is you will end up with them literally turning up, as we\u2019ve had with amendments\u2014we\u2019ve had the complaint here about amendments turning up. You\u2019ll have it turning up a couple of days in advance of a council committee meeting. The council committee meeting will have delegated authority to approve it, to go out to consultation, or to go out and actually finalise it. That could be a district plan. Those things are really, really, really important, and yet for some reason, we think it\u2019s OK that the council itself doesn\u2019t even have to have a view on them. I would suggest to you, from 30 years of experience, that that is not a good way of doing things and we should be thinking about that a different way. That amendment is very, very simple. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second part of that one is the issue around avoiding doubt. This is because I\u2019ve got to say some councils\u2014and I have one council not too far from here playing silly buggers with that. It basically said that because we have delegated the power to recommend a long-term plan to the council, we cannot override that: \u201CWe, the council, which theoretically is the sovereign body, cannot override that decision.\u201D That is a nonsense, and that is that council which was playing games with the law. That should not be happening, and that\u2019s why the second bit is in there as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo the Minister of Local Government, with respect, I ask you to think about that one again. It really simply is just extending the list of the things that council cannot delegate final approval of\u2014things like district plans, management plans, key policies. Those things are important, and they should have the dignity of going to a council, not merely being dealt with at a committee level.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022047ebe3c2f79f1d0e7b170d9d76062bb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022047ebe3c2f79f1d0e7b170d9d76062bb\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (19:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, on a similar vein\u2014and I\u2019ve got a few contributions to make, but on the contribution from former Mayor Andy Foster, I think it was a very good point that he is making about what can and can\u2019t be delegated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister of Local Government, in reply to my question, talked about the fact that the legislation already says that some things cannot be delegated and it is the elected members that are making those decisions. He said that grants can be delegated. Is that why we\u2019re here? Are we here because of the grants being delegated? What are our banned words? Did somebody give a grant for wellbeing, or did they give a grant for equity or maybe, horror of horrors, a circular economy project? These are words I know this Government hates. It has spent so much time trying to delete them from everywhere. But I want to offer the Minister some help. I\u2019m very happy to prepare an amendment here, if he wants me to do so, to say that the grants decisions cannot be delegated. If that is the issue, we could fix that\u2014not a problem. That\u2019s one thing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second one goes back to this wider issue of the constitutional importance that the Minister has been saying relates to democracy in local government. I will ask him if he can tell us his theory of localism. I say this because I watched the Minister closely when he was in Opposition. We would speak at some similar conferences, and he had a lot to say about localism and the importance of localism and how his new Government was going to end centralisation. I\u2019m very interested in his theory of localism and how that applies to this legislation and how it is that local people are going to be making more decisions as a result of his work. That\u2019s my second question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy third question relates to these codes of conduct. If we look at the bill as reported back from the Governance and Administration Committee, on page 10\u2014so clause 25, \u201CSchedule 7 amended\u201D. I\u2019m interested here in the codes of conduct. It says that the following persons must comply with the standard code of conduct and then it lists some people. Then if you turn the page, so on page 12 at new sections 36B and 40, there are these words: \u201Cmust comply\u201D. Each member of each local authority board must comply with the standard code of conduct. Then that\u2019s repeated at new section 40. I\u2019m interested in the language here that you must comply. I know Celia Wade-Brown started to mention this in her contribution, but I don\u2019t think she asked the question that I\u2019m going to ask. That is: what happens when a member does not comply with those codes of conduct? What are the consequences? Does this legislation change the current situation where you can have some reviews and people can say, \u201CWe\u2019re displeased.\u201D Is there any change in this legislation around non-compliance with codes of conduct? If not, can the Minister justify why they are even a thing, let alone having a standard code of conduct? Thank you, Mr Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00229ebefb69d437872570e14635d66c276e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229ebefb69d437872570e14635d66c276e\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (19:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, members, for those questions. I\u2019ll run through my feedback in regards to those in order. In regards to the amendment proposed verbally in regards to grants, no, we won\u2019t be progressing with that. I did answer the question in regards to localism previously this evening and gave quite a comprehensive response in regards to that, so I don\u2019t wish to repeat myself in that area.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe feedback in regards to Andy Foster on what I think is a fair and reasonable point that when we look at the broader Local Government Act, there are number of areas of opportunity for improvement\u2014we would both absolutely agree with that. The view and my view is that in similar areas such as taxation where we do regular reviews of the legislation on more of a regular cadence, the Local Government Act is one of those areas which I think we should continue to look to review and enhance. I look forward to doing so constructively in the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u002271e5fb253ad25b2b9c4823f7d29fe3bc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002271e5fb253ad25b2b9c4823f7d29fe3bc\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (19:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I just have a couple of questions to ask, and it\u2019s quite important to get some clarification around this, because obviously this amendment that I\u2019m going to be talking to\u2014Amendment Paper 755\u2014has just dropped recently. Obviously, there are a lot of changes and it\u2019s important that we understand the impact of these changes. One of them is obviously\u2014and we\u2019ve just heard about the delegations of funding grants to committees, etc. Also, at many times at councils, staff get delegated minor funding decisions. Obviously staff aren\u2019t elected members, but the elected members have made that decision\u2014democratically\u2014to pass on these delegations to staff. My question is: will staff be able to continue to make these delegated decisions around minor grants that they\u2019ve had for many, many years, or will that be gone as well?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI have a question, and I asked this earlier but I never got an answer, so I think it\u2019s really important to ask this again. It\u2019s in new subclause (12B) in Schedule 3, new section 31A(4). It\u2019s obviously where it\u2019s basically excluding the \u201Cmember of the board established under Part 7 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act\u201D, etc. My question I asked earlier is: even though they have been singled out, are they still able to apply for the exemption like many other joint committees that have\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fef43ac3dae07900b45257f5cd2dfb97\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Could you let us know whereabouts you are? You talk about Amendment Paper 755, right?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c11bebace144ab175fca617026abf82\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: Amendment Paper 755\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6ff0a84919f80835d81f413e46c750e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Which page?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d5619459ec3aabf35c29704d69029b3\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: This is page 7.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220db50a20c26ab2e570825329e8a33c7e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Page 7, all right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad7228d2837390b6caae326946a895f8\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s the new clause 31A(4). It\u2019s obviously in reference to the removal of the joint committee, and the question is: even though they\u2019ve been singled out, do they have the ability to apply for the exemption that has been mentioned earlier on in this bill? I think that\u2019s really important, because I still didn\u2019t quite get the answer why this has been singled out. Why has the Houkura board been singled out as actually not being able to continue in their current form with non-elected members voting? I\u2019m just struggling to understand why, and it would be good to get an answer from the Minister about why this group has been singled out in the way it has. We haven\u2019t quite heard a good reason for that, but what I\u2019d really like to know is: can they apply for that exemption?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other question I\u2019d like to ask the Minister: will appointed members of reserve management committees convened and supported by councils but established under the Reserves Act 1977 be captured by the non-voting proposal? Currently, if we look around Banks Peninsula, there are 15 of these types of committees. I think it\u2019s really important to understand and get some clarity around whether these committees\u2014which obviously have non-elected members on them\u2014will actually be able to continue as they are, or will they also be affected by the non-voting proposal?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are just three questions that I put in front of the Minister. One is around minor delegations to staff, whether they are now going to have to stop. The other question was around whether the Houkura board can apply for an exemption, and actually also why were they singled out considering the significant amount of joint committees\u2014or committees as well\u2014that have non-voting members on them? Lastly around the reserve management committees that were established under the Reserves Act 1997. Thank you, Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00227a3a396d2134fe783358879b17025458\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227a3a396d2134fe783358879b17025458\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (19:34)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member Mike Davidson for those questions. I\u2019ll also come back to the Hon Rachel Brooking\u2019s questions around code of conduct and \u201Cmust comply\u201D. The question\u2019s relating to what the consequences are in regards to that. The consequences in regards to non-compliance and penalties are included within the broader Local Government Act. One of the consequences, for example, is that the individual can be removed or the removal of a committee member. I think it is fair to say that the penalties are an area that the Government has identified as part of a future work programme around looking at strengthening that. But within the time available within this term, that\u2019s not going to be possible. But it\u2019s definitely an area of future policy consideration and I\u2019m happy to work constructively with the member in regards to her ideas in that area if she wishes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to the reserves\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4f43837b6932cb3ac76508bad73a7e3\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: Always! Always!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022352eebf96425e7806956a48416ab61fb\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, I appreciate that. It feels like our relationship is starting to warm a little bit more from before the dinner break.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221885e1441bff3fd7d57e3fdc8bbf1432\u0022\u003ETom Rutherford\u003C/span\u003E: Get on with it!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b1fbcbbe5468477d11eb4f52ef9c156\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ve got love on all sides here. The Reserves Act 1977 not captured\u2014just in regards to the question before.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDelegation to staff also was a question: that is not impacted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENo committees in particular have been singled out. I raised this and noted this before the dinner break in regards to consistency of the application of the inability for non-elected members to be able to vote. That is a consistency point. It isn\u2019t a case of any particular sub-committee over another. The reality in regards to the question around exemptions: the exemptions mechanism does apply in that context, and that would be for the discretion of the Minister of Local Government to consider that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u002279ca3ad5243ef7ee25fd4cbef4b88436\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002279ca3ad5243ef7ee25fd4cbef4b88436\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (19:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I thank the Minister of Local Government for his response around the standardisation of standing orders and also for the code of conduct. I think it\u2019s important to make that distinction, because the standardised approach to standing orders, while I still might not agree, none the less will be something given over to councils, and the expectation is they would just roll that out, whereas the standardised approach to codes of conduct, I do think the think piece\u2014perhaps\u2014around the consequences is a really important one. I know the Minister talked about the consequence being potential removal from committees. I think everyone can look to Dunedin City Council and see that they are working through a process\u2014or have been for quite some time with one particular elected member\u2014to the point where many would think that it\u2019s just farcical, some of the stuff that\u2019s going on down there. I infer from the Minister\u2019s response that there\u2019s nothing in the legislation that would allow for consequence\u2014for example, removal from office\u2014as opposed to\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EMinister shakes head\u003C/span\u003E] Thank you to the Minister for confirming that. But that might be something that\u2019s on the horizon, perhaps, moving forward for the Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to ask the Minister about Amendment Paper 654, which I haven\u2019t spoken to yet. This is an issue that relates to access to information, and I think one of the changes that has been made in this particular bill\u2014I will say there are a couple of things that I\u2019m OK with, but overwhelmingly not so. But one is this issue as to who makes final decisions around access to information that\u2019s held by the local council. I do think it\u2019s a positive step in the right direction to ensure that those final decisions are taken by the council, as opposed to the chief executive, particularly when it concerns access to information by elected members. Now, the Minister will know\u2014because I did float this in the second reading\u2014that this was an issue that has been raised by submitters throughout this process, and the bill that has been reported back hasn\u2019t addressed this. I understand Dr Dean Knight had raised this as a particular concern with the committee, and I do think it\u2019s a fair one and I\u2019m interested to sort of understand from the Minister whether he would entertain correcting what is perhaps a little bit of an oversight there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBy ensuring that the governing body is able to make the decision about access to information that\u2019s held, rather than the chief executive, there is the possibility that an unintended outcome or consequence has now arisen, because it removes the ability for an elected member who might be unhappy with the decision that has been taken by the governing body around access to information. It removes their ability to actually complain to the Ombudsman, because the decision has been made, effectively, by the territorial authority itself\u2014not by delegation but by the authority itself. It is important that the decisions around access to information do have proper motive. We all know that, just like this place, councils can be politically charged. If there are decisions that have been taken which are on a numbers kind of basis as to who has the most votes, that doesn\u2019t necessarily lend itself to a fair or proper consideration around whether the information should be withheld or the extent of it being released.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Amendment Paper 654 in my name seeks to insert a new clause 26A(4) which would basically allow for elected members to still go through the process of engaging with the Ombudsman. It\u2019s not to say that the Ombudsman would necessarily agree, but it gives them that avenue, rather than having to go through an expensive judicial review process, which is the only way that the decision around access to information could sought to be addressed by an elected member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do think that the Minister, I hope, is aware of this issue, and I\u2019m just interested as to whether he sees that what may have been an oversight can be corrected to ensure that there\u2019s a fair process here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002298250fbb13cfaf676973393caaab632a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002298250fbb13cfaf676973393caaab632a\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (19:40)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for Amendment Paper (AP) 654. We will not be proceeding with this amendment, and I\u2019ll explain the reasons why.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is not Government policy. My Amendment Paper 755 will actually delete the clauses that this AP 654 will rely on. Therefore, I expect subsequently that the Clerks will probably rule it out of order because of that interrelationship between the two sections.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, in addition to that, the Ombudsman has indicated that they would not support this proposal on the basis that the proposal raises constitutional issues about the Ombudsman having a role in overriding a decision of a democratically elected council.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022 data-id=\u0022156a68344d0c47e5f0cdda3a9abead1c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022156a68344d0c47e5f0cdda3a9abead1c\u0022\u003ETIM COSTLEY (National\u2014\u014Ctaki) (19:41)\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\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u002246a905dd1b20ac9cf4baf874832bfca2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002246a905dd1b20ac9cf4baf874832bfca2\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (19:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I know my friend Tangi Utikere will have another question on that exchange on the amendments in Amendment Paper (AP) 755. Of course, the amendments are new and have not been to a select committee. I\u2019m looking at Amendment Paper 755 and this new section 260A, inserted by new clause 21A, which we can see on page 3, which is that the \u201COrder in Council may specify exemptions in relation to non-elected member provisions\u201D. My questions about this are not policy-related at all; they are just about the wording here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe wording is very open. What this is saying is that an Order in Council\u2014that is, secondary legislation\u2014can be made to specify an exemption for any class or type of specified committee\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bcfcf0b4da7a3e878bfc34208593df22\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: What page is that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224341d7116130dddc15cddb3035cf15df\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Page 3 of AP 755\u2014any class of non-elected member of a particular specified committee. So this is very wide and it can be made indefinitely and with or without conditions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENormally, a clause like this\u2014that is, an empowering clause for exemptions to be made by a Minister so it doesn\u2019t have to go through this House\u2014would have some sort of overarching principle or criteria or guardrails for justification, a test that would have to be met before the Minister decided to invoke this Order in Council. I can\u2019t see any of that here; it might be somewhere else in the legislation\u2014only, at new section 260A(4), \u201CThe Minister must not recommend the making of an order under subsection (1) unless they are satisfied that the exception is necessary or desirable.\u201D That is a very wide\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022853700de194105354db27d3e3b8b1f9d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: I didn\u2019t want to interrupt the member\u2019s flow, but that section is in Part 1. If you could make it link to the terms of this discussion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e6697602dfcdab6e1d5232df4344f25\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. Well, of course, because these are exemptions that come through in Part 2. The issue is how the exemptions in Part 2 can be made, basically, by the Minister deciding without any criteria, and if the Minister thinks that there are criteria somewhere within the legislation. If somehow it would go back to the purpose statement or somewhere else in the legislation or somewhere in this new framework that is inserted by Amendment Paper 755, how that would work?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s obviously very difficult for us to see this, remembering, of course, that this is an amendment that has come in after the select committee. The whole paper has come in after the select committee, and normally, changes such as this would go to a select committee and they\u2019d be sent off to the Regulations Review Committee\u2014I\u2019m looking at the clerk who used to be involved in that at some point when I was\u2014and the Regulations Review Committee would, of course, say, \u201CWhat are the criteria for making this decision? Where are they?\u201D If the Minister could point to where those criteria are, that would be very useful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u0022b290eb179a3d856c5f6b51397787b4b2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b290eb179a3d856c5f6b51397787b4b2\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (19:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I thank the Minister for pointing out his reference in his Amendment Paper 755. This is one of the things where we don\u2019t have a lot of time to address things that land late.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to get some clarity around that, because, as I understand, the Minister\u2019s response is that, effectively, subclauses (2) through to (4) of new section 259 is to be removed. The ability for access by elected members to information held by the local authority would exist but\u2014is the Minister saying that it would in line with processes established by the authority or by the council itself? That raises still the question around the ability for an elected member who still may be unhappy with whatever those council internal processes might be around decisions taken to release information, to not release information, or to limit the scope and scale of release.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDoes this change still enable an elected member to seek any other avenue apart from a judicial review over a decision to access the information? I think the Minister\u2019s response was, \u201CWell, no, the role of the Ombudsman should not be to interfere with a decision of a democratically elected council.\u201D The point of difference, of course, is that often some of those decisions around access can be political and if it\u2019s left with the chief executive, I\u2019m still not clear around whether this actually adequately mitigates the concern about an elected member not being able to utilise a particular avenue to address concerns around the inability to release information to be accessed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022 data-id=\u00224039f20a59adf39a77a599cd52ab4f37\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224039f20a59adf39a77a599cd52ab4f37\u0022\u003ETOM RUTHERFORD (National\u2014Bay of Plenty) (19:47)\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\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u00221c9a13ac04bc728d620624be7e1781df\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221c9a13ac04bc728d620624be7e1781df\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (19:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. It would be helpful to get a response from the Minister if that is possible. I see he\u2019s taking some advice, so that might be possible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to move on to clause 32B, which has not been referenced yet. This is around the expenditure on consultants and contractors. What we see in this bill is the introduction of a requirement for councils to effectively\u2014well, they already do an annual report, but to include certain things as part of that annual report process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 32B on page 14 talks about the annual report needs to include a report on all operating and capital expenditure. I mean, we had a question earlier in the evening or in the day around the difference in terms of facilities\u2014we didn\u2019t actually get an answer around that, but I think that was in Part 1\u2014on consultants and contractors.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI find this really, really interesting. What is the whole basis on which the Government wants to include this information specifically? The annual report includes a whole pile of information, from how much remuneration decision makers receive right through to different particular quantum or focus on the activities or groups of activities that exist there. This is coming from\u2014I mean, the track record of a Government that, when we look at transport, for example, where the Government spends on consultants and contractors is such that their Roads of National Significance is so out of whack that there\u2019s a significant financial fiscal hole. I do find it rather strange that the Government are wanting to have a focus on consultants and contractors, yet, in other parts of their own operations, they don\u2019t seem to be so willing to have a bit of spotlight or sunlight in that particular space.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m assuming from this, Minister, that the annual report, which has a whole pile of information\u2014you are expecting a level of detail around the contractor spend and consultant spend. What evidence is there? What is driving this? I mean, I know we talk about cost effective and all of those sorts of things and a requirement around infrastructure focus, public service, regulatory functions\u2014all of those sorts of things. But why do we suddenly have an inclusion consultants and contractors given this Government\u2019s terrible track record in that space?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u00227efb4271ec10e2124bec1ee14d55d303\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227efb4271ec10e2124bec1ee14d55d303\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (19:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I just have a question around Schedule 2, new section 60, \u201CLocal governance statements\u201D, new subsection (2) where it talks about \u201CA local authority need does not need to comply with section 40(1) (as amended by the amendment Act) within 6 months after the 2025 general election of members of the local authority but must instead comply with that section within 6 months after the commencement date.\u201D Now, obviously, when this was originally done, this was introduced to the House in July 2025, and it\u2019s clearly taken a quite a while to get to this point. We\u2019re a year into a council term. By the time this gets put into place, you\u2019re well past halfway through a council term, and there\u2019s a lot of money that the councils are going to have to spend when they redo their local governance statements to comply with this new Act. It just seems like, if we\u2019re trying to curb council spending, that we shouldn\u2019t actually be increasing costs on council.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have an amendment, and my colleague Celia Wade-Brown has an amendment just to fix this up just slightly just to bring it up to date so, therefore, we\u2019re not focused on an election that has been and gone last year in 2025. It seems a little bit absurd to have an Act that talks about a past date. It just doesn\u2019t make sense. This amendment, which is time stamped 16 September 2026 9.09.18 in the name of Celia Wade-Brown recommends to replace new section 62 with \u201Ca local authority does not need to comply with section 41 (as amended by the amendment Act) until following the 2028 election of members of the local authority\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI know, Minister, that you obviously, throughout this committee of the whole House stage haven\u2019t accepted any of our amendments, which is a shame, because a lot of the amendments we\u2019ve been trying to do are actually to improve this bill. We don\u2019t support the bill, but we still try and make some improvements in there\u2014especially if we realise there are some issues that have been created, and especially how old this bill actually is from when it was first introduced. This is a pretty straightforward amendment. It will save councils money and just put the actual time for them to do this work after the next 2028 election. I\u2019d like to get the Minister\u2019s thoughts on whether he\u2019d accept that amendment, which would actually push out a bit of that time and save some money. It\u2019s quite common sense, I think, to do that, and it will let the councils do their governance statements after the next election.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00223eddc777a170affe12495e1f963a8073\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223eddc777a170affe12495e1f963a8073\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (19:53)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll just answer those three questions. The amendment, to the member\u2014and I do appreciate his very helpful ideas in regards to improvements of the bill. However, in this case, it\u2019s not going to be consistent with Government priorities. Again, we seem to have a theme there. But, anyway, criteria\u2014we had a question before around criteria for the Minister around exceptions. I\u2019d refer the member to Amendment Paper 755, particularly clauses 260A(4). It refers there, in terms of the wording of the criteria, to \u201CNecessary or desirable.\u201D Official advice to us is that that terminology is consistent with other aspects of legislation. In order to add more context to that, subsequent to and subject to this bill passing, the Minister of Local Government will be writing to all councils to outline, clearly, expectations in regards to that. That will provide additional context around the expectation of the criteria as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThere was another question in regards to consultants and contractors. The mandatory reporting is to drive transparency and comparability across the sector. As members will be aware, you can already request\u2014and councils are often burdened by a significant amount of requests\u2014this through the official information request process. This mechanism, in effect, will standardise that reporting across all councils and mean that it is freely available, and, therefore, it will reduce the need for individuals to request it on a council-by-council basis.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022103de8fe585881a831b82def6b9e4674\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022103de8fe585881a831b82def6b9e4674\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (19:55)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Picking up on the Minister of Local Government\u2019s answer to one of my questions about criteria, he said that the vague words were the normal statutory guidance. I would disagree, but he\u2019s then said that the Minister will write to local government and that will set out expectations. I think what the Minister is telling me is that this primary legislation\u2014what will become an Act\u2014is going to say, \u201CMinister, you are empowered to make regulations, secondary legislation, with very vague criteria, but, in fact, you are going to retrofit that by writing, in a non-statutory process, to councils.\u201D How does that help? I don\u2019t think it helps at all when we are here in the Chamber, trying to understand what those guard rails are in our primary legislation that goes to our secondary legislation, which is also legislation. I do wonder, then, about the Minister\u2019s complete flip-flop on localism, because what he is saying is, \u201CI, the Minister, central government in Wellington, am going to tell you, all councils, what my expectations are. I\u2019m not even going to bother to put it in the Amendment Paper that I\u2019ve tabled the Tuesday before the day that we\u2019re starting to debate this legislation in Parliament.\u201D That is woeful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister has an opportunity, now, to make an amendment that actually includes some criteria for that secondary legislation in the primary legislation. He could do that right now, and I would appeal to him to do so, or at least put on the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E what he thinks those criteria might be. But that doesn\u2019t fix the problem, because this legislation doesn\u2019t fix any problems, it seems.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGoing further in Amendment Paper 755 on to page 8, new clause 66A, \u201CNon-elected members\u201D, this is: \u201C(1) The specified clauses do not apply until 6 months after the commencement date.\u201D My question is around these timings and the \u201C6 months after the commencement date\u201D\u2014we\u2019re not yet at the commencement provisions, but, presumably, that\u2019s at least six months away. Does the Minister anticipate that there will be some regulations that go to the exemptions in the specific clauses before that six-month period? When he says that he is going to write to local government, is that part of a process to determine what the exemptions should be? Is that the reason for the six-month period, or is the six-month period there for more logistical reasons around the fact that people\u2014I don\u2019t know, they might be getting paid, they might not be getting paid, agendas might have already been set out, there might be delegated decisions being made already, and they need to have time to finish off those decisions. So why is the six-month time frame there? Is it because of these logistical type matters that I\u2019ve just raised, or does it relate to the exceptions, or is it for some entirely different, other reason that he\u2019d like to tell us about?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002240deac9fb8250cf386d44f45adf0ca68\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002240deac9fb8250cf386d44f45adf0ca68\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (19:58)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I thank the member Rachel Brooking for the question. The six-month period is to provide time for councils to transition to the new law that will be put in place and that we are discussing this evening.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u00226152fae46d41d0547ef757b6c7564794\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226152fae46d41d0547ef757b6c7564794\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (19:58)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. This will be a very short question because I\u2019m still keen to get a response from the Minister about the access to information held by a local authority. He has pointed me to Amendment Paper 755, but my understanding of that is that the provisions, from what they were, seem to be watered down and rolled back. He\u2019s referenced the fact that this is around the structure of internal processes to consider the nature of information that would be available to decision makers. That, in essence, leaves a lot of that responsibility with the chief executive, even directly or by delegation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlready, actually, in this Chamber today, I think it was Mr Foster who cited the fact that one of the Government\u2019s own members has a bill that\u2019s currently in front of a select committee that seeks to strengthen the role that the governing body, effectively, has over the work that the chief executive would do. Why is that? Because for far too long in this country, there have been examples where chief executives have gone down a particular route and have made decisions that are at complete odds with the governing body, and yet that\u2019s still what is permitted. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI know that\u2019s a separate piece of legislation. But I am still none the wiser around whether or not what the Minister is proposing is a further weakening of or an eroding of the provisions that were there, whereas what we were seeking to get from the Minister was a strengthening of the capacity for elected members to be able to head down a pathway to address concerns around a lack of access to information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022 data-id=\u00226ebfbec1eb1df747e71ebd6544f6ca60\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226ebfbec1eb1df747e71ebd6544f6ca60\u0022\u003ETOM RUTHERFORD (National\u2014Bay of Plenty) (20:00)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002371\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de30985020d70b4146e3d7e2305f7bf9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to Amendment Paper 755 amending clause 25(12A) and (12B) relating to the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002378\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment to the amendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222249174b8a5815a605d709744a48784a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to Amendment Paper 755 amending clause 25(12A) and (12B) relating to the \u014Ct\u0101karo Avon River Corridor Regeneration Committee be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002385\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment to the amendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f0766781fdcc7bcd92d7d2e59ff133b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to Amendment Paper 755 amending clause 25(12B) to delete new section 31A(4) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002392\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment to the amendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ff2cc25795e2c10f4d76d64f8b9d937\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Amendment Paper 565 amending Part 2 set out on Amendment Paper 755 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments to the amendments be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments to the amendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022877dbd766e889dea65af87302d6902fd\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Part 2 set out on Amendment Paper 565 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002293420ffeceb87bb1142b1039da1ee595\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tangi Utikere\u2019s amendment to clause 25 set out on Amendment Paper 653 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002413\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002209a35e5e06b333655105b908ee291cf8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tangi Utikere\u2019s amendment to clause 25(9) set out on Amendment Paper 654 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002420\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228576017d72f082f526506742b9668ecc\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Andy Foster\u2019s amendment inserting clause 25(12A) and (12B) set out on Amendment Paper 665 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002427\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 63\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; New Zealand First 8; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 59\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204c45cbb3411df2ade4f33840d86162f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Andy Foster\u2019s amendment replacing clause 25(14) set out on Amendment Paper 664 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002434\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 63\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; New Zealand First\u00A08; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 59\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217aa33927bb1c4ac8d29865d917e355c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Lemauga Lydia Sosene\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 25(14) is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Part 2 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225dd107d1cee59cb9c9ee219ee501773f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: We come now to Schedule 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 1 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235ea3f4cf33835a375c474333d3bb58f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s tabled amendments to Amendment Paper 803 amending Schedule 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments to the amendments be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments to the amendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022404c025d138ee04c42ee0ca4ab1c168c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Rachel Brooking\u2019s tabled amendment to Amendment Paper 803 amending Schedule 2 clause 71(1) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment to the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment to the amendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212f65c1e82f0493d12d710641dc8417c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Amendment Paper 565 amending Schedule 2 set out on Amendment Papers 755 and 803 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments, as amended, to the amendments be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments, as amended, to the amendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b74fe5e00c6364b6384ab98fbf9ddb72\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Schedule 2 set out on Amendment Paper 565 as amended be agreed to. Have I done that one? No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002297986ca6c5d0715519eb2f9fdbd4450a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Tangi Utikere\u2019s amendments to Schedule 2 set out on Amendment Paper 653 are out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Andy Foster\u2019s amendment to Schedule 2 deleting new clause 62A of Schedule 1AA set out on Amendment Paper 664 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002484\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 63\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; New Zealand First\u00A08; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 59\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224a07eebdebfe2c898d031f18d29be6e2\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Celia Wade-Brown\u2019s tabled amendment to Schedule 2 replacing new clause 60(2) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002491\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 2 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a4fb1b82b5b4b436071912eb51f310d2\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022396e1d07a0758b788e787a956c8981c1\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c26cb99612cf95fbb1fcc85e00a383d5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: We now come to clauses 1 to 3. This is the debate on clauses 1 to 3\u2014title, commencement, and principal Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u002264fdea115bf005c75b204e6b1b3ff2c9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002264fdea115bf005c75b204e6b1b3ff2c9\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (20:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. The interesting thing is that the title clause should really talk about what this bill seeks to deliver, and the one that\u2019s proposed at the moment\u2014although it might be commonly known because it\u2019s been on the Order Paper for quite some time since this bill was actually reported back in November of last year\u2014talks about system improvements. My question for the Minister is: why does the bill have a name that does something completely the opposite in terms of the direction?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, it may have been a focus on system improvements perhaps, prior to the late landing of these Amendment Papers that have now littered the Table of the Parliament, but when we look at the content of these Amendment Papers\u2014for example, the removal of voting rights from democratically elected councils, who determine what that skill set base should be\u2014when it talks about the desire of councils to focus on a whole range of other stuff that this Government would like them to, where it goes against the grain of localism, which, again, this Government seemed to campaign into office around, why is it that there is no Amendment Paper in the Minister\u2019s name seeking to amend the name of this bill to truly reflect what it seeks to deliver? That\u2019s the first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOften, we hear this a lot in this House, don\u2019t we\u2014that the label should be what\u2019s on the tin; when you open it up, you should know exactly what you\u2019ll get. How on earth can you get, from \u201C(System Improvements)\u201D from what has been contained in this particular bill? There could be a whole range of different suggestions: the \u201C(Anti-democratic)\u201D, the \u201C(Anti-localism)\u201D bill, perhaps. My colleague the Hon Rachel Brooking asked the Minister whether he was keen for her to prepare an Amendment Paper around the provision of grants or thereabouts. We on this side of the Chamber are very willing, at very late and short notice, I guess\u2014take a leaf out of the Government\u2019s book in terms of when they land their Amendment Papers\u2014to assist with a particular title that is going to truly and accurately reflect that. I\u2019ll leave that there. I\u2019ll come back to the commencement and the like in due course.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00229154721ecade0f080efec50b82051a24\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229154721ecade0f080efec50b82051a24\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (20:22)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I am going to start, then, with the commencement, because most of the Act comes into force on the day after Royal assent\u2014presumably that is soon\u2014but then there\u2019s a \u201CHowever\u201D, in clause 2, about section 26(2), (3), and (5). I think those are references to what\u2019s in Schedule 10, but it would be useful for the Minister of Local Government to clarify what it is that comes into force at a later date, and why. What is the rationale for those aspects coming in at a later date? That is my first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, if the Minister can also clarify that the fast-track amendments in his Amendment Paper\u2014they come into force on the day after Royal assent, because I don\u2019t think they\u2019re in that \u201CHowever\u201D clause. That means that, for any fast-track applications that could be in the substantive decision phase\u2014as long as there have not been draft conditions or a draft decision\u2014if we\u2019re at the time that is the day after Royal assent, these provisions will apply to those fast tracks, and the councils will have six months to do a development contribution for them once the fast track is approved, if it is approved. Those are my questions around the commencement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, moving back up to clause 1. We are on clause 1, which is page 3 of the bill as reported back from the select committee. As my colleague Tangi Utikere was saying, he had some suggested different names for it, because we do have this as the Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill. Tangi Utikere was referring to localism and getting rid of localism, but I would put to the Minister that a better word, rather than being anti localism, is just \u201Ccentralisation\u201D. In fact, it could be the \u201CLocal Government (Centralisation) Amendment Bill\u201D. I think that\u2019s one thing that would work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, these Amendment Papers are also significantly changing the bill as well. The bill that went through the select committee is now in a very different form from what we will have before us when, one day, all these amendments are put into the bill. Normally, that would be for the third reading, but I don\u2019t think that\u2019s going to happen, because I think we\u2019re going to go straight on to the third reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Amendment Papers have identified this problem that was identified by submitters in 2024 when the Fast-track Approvals Bill was at the Environment Committee. The Government didn\u2019t listen then. The Government has been warned all year that there is a significant problem for councils, who are not able to impose development contributions on these fast-tracks out of sequence. This amendment is supposedly fixing that problem, but we know it is not fixing the problem for Delmore, it is not fixing the problem for Sunfield, it is not fixing the problem for the donors of the National Party, so it\u2019s not fixing anything. Another more appropriate title, I think, would be the \u201CLocal Government (Not Fixing a Well-signalled Problem and a Complete Failure Again) Amendment Bill\u201D. That\u2019s one more suggestion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETangi Utikere referred to my discussion with the Minister, because another major change\u2014that again has come after the select committee process; that has come in as a separate Amendment Paper\u2014is the changes to non-elected members and the delegations and any voting rights that any of them might have, even if they are established under statute. The Minister told us, \u201COh, well, sometimes decision making on grants can be delegated.\u201D We could fix that, but he has not done that, so it could be the \u201CLocal Government (Really No System Has Been Improved At All) Amendment Bill\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother would be about something this bill had been doing when it went to select committee, and for the whole time this Government has been talking about it, and that is to get rid of that terrible word that this Government is so scared of\u2014because they do everything against it\u2014and that is \u201Cwellbeing\u201D. It could be that this bill is the \u201CLocal Government (Removing the Banned Term \u2018Wellbeing\u2019) Amendment Bill\u201D. I think that is the most fitting title.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u002218e894009359b4eafb795116a37bc266\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002218e894009359b4eafb795116a37bc266\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (20:27)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. The Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill\u2014I think that name is completely wrong. It is not fitting for this bill, a bill that is trying to remove the wellbeings that local government has been doing for some time. You get a National Government and they remove the wellbeings, but local government continues to look after the wellbeing of the people they represent, because, actually, it\u2019s a really important role of councils. Once again, we have a National Government removing the wellbeings. They\u2019re not just removing the wellbeings; they\u2019re also prescribing what councils need to focus on. By doing that, they\u2019re pretty much telling councils what they should not focus on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf you are a ratepayer and you value heritage, tough luck; this Government does not think councils should be involved with heritage. If you value art galleries, you\u2019re out of luck; this Government does not think councils should focus on art galleries. If you believe councils should work in economic development\u2014bring in some All Blacks tests, raise GST revenue for this Government\u2014tough luck; this Government does not think councils should focus on economic development. Climate adaptation? Tough luck. It\u2019s not one of the prescribed core services of councils. Public spaces and places? Sorry, ratepayer, you\u2019re out of luck; this Government does not believe councils should prioritise public spaces and places. Environmental protection enhancement? Nope. Housing? If you\u2019re a ratepayer who believes that councils should look at after housing, tough luck; this Government does not believe councils have a role in that space. Community support and funding? Once again, tough luck. Even though our volunteers contribute so much\u2014for every dollar that\u2019s invested by a council, they return at least $8\u2014unfortunately, when you look at this Government\u2019s prescribed list of core services, that is not included.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we\u2019re seeing is roads, reticulation, rubbish, and rates\u2014the four \u201CR\u201Ds. We\u2019re going back to the 1980s. This Government does not care about community; they care about the past. And this is why I have an amendment that is time stamped 16\u00A0September\u00A02026, 9.09.02. I know the Minister of Local Government\u2014who\u2019s previously been sitting in the chair\u2014has said no to every single Amendment Paper; I think he will like this one and I think he should consider it. Also, Andy Foster, I hope New Zealand First consider this, because we\u2019ve supported you and this is a good one. My amendment is to remove \u201CSystem Improvement\u201D, and put in \u201C(Building the Past)\u201D, because this is what this Government is doing. They are building the past; they\u2019re not improving anything; they are going backwards. This is a bill that, when passed, will just see councils go backwards, and communities will suffer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is just one of three amendments that the Greens have put forward for the title of this bill, which should not be called \u201CSystem Improvements\u201D, so that one is \u201CBuilding the Past\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other amendment in the name of Francisco Hernandez is time stamped 16\u00A0September\u00A02026, 9.09.03, and this one I think is also very clear with how this Government act around local government, and the role that they like to play. This one is also a simple one where we remove \u201CSystem Improvements\u201D and it\u2019s simply called the \u201CLocal Government (Do as You\u2019re Told) Amendment Bill\u201D, because this is what we\u2019ve seen from this Government. A National Government that campaigned on localism suddenly get into power and all they do is \u201CYou do as you\u2019re told local government. Do as you\u2019re told. We know best; you do not. Even though we don\u2019t have experience in the local government sector, we\u2019ll tell you how to act and what to do, and what is important for your communities that have elected you.\u201D That\u2019s right. This Government do not care about local government, and that is why that amendment in the name of Francisco Hernandez is called \u201CDo as You Are Told\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA third amendment that we have tabled as well\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETime expired\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022c52acd6a9c04db1977ea63b15b2ac848\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c52acd6a9c04db1977ea63b15b2ac848\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (20:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Apologies to my colleague Mike Davidson in full flight. I did want to take a brief call around these preliminary clauses, and I had a couple of suggestions which I think are really helpful, and I think the Minister should consider. The first thing I want to talk about is the issue of commencement. I\u2019m struggling to think if I\u2019ve seen a bill that has so many different Amendment Papers from the Government: four different amendments, one tabled so recently that it doesn\u2019t even have a number, it is just referred to by the time it was tabled. That is quite unusual, and I have to say that for people who want to look at this bill and actually understand what it looks like, it\u2019s almost impossible to piece it all together. You have to kind of look at it very carefully, you have to look at the new clauses and go through and amend them all. And it\u2019s so different that I think it deserves to come in at a later stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason I say that is because I believe that it would benefit from some additional scrutiny that it hasn\u2019t been able to have. The Amendment Papers haven\u2019t been able to have a post-legislative scrutiny. I know that\u2019s been talked about quite a bit as a concept, and that\u2019s mainly because we\u2019ve had so many bills go through in urgency under this Government. Now, this is slightly different from many of those other cases in the sense that this did have a select committee stage. In fact, it was so long ago that it was when I was chair of\u2014well, at least part of it was when I was chair of the Governance and Administration Committee. I have to say I don\u2019t recognise this bill now. It is so different, it\u2019s almost totally, totally different. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I do think something to consider that would be beneficial for people looking at this bill\u2014and let\u2019s not pretend that these Amendment Papers have been introduced without impact. The last amendment, I appreciate, has mainly got little\u2014I think there\u2019s hyphens and there\u2019s capitalisation, and those type of things I think we can we can live with; although sometimes those things can have a big impact as well, but they\u2019re not the major things. But Amendment Paper 755 specifically that gets rid of the rights of people to vote when their democratically elected councils\u2014local bodies\u2014have decided that they should be able to vote is very, very concerning. The fact that it has turned around such a long history, especially in relation to Auckland Council, which is my council\u2014it\u2019s extremely disturbing to see that. I think a way of remedying this\u2014and so this is a helpful suggestion of a way of getting around potentially quite a big political problem for the Minister\u2014is to add in to the commencement an additional subclause, (5), to say that all of these particular sections will come into force either on Royal assent or at a date set aside in Order in Council, apart from the changes that are implemented by Amendment Papers 755, 803, 565, and\u2014it is regrettable that that we don\u2019t have a better, more formal term\u2014additionally, the last tabled amendment, which was tabled on 16\u00A0September, 11.37\u00A0a.m. this very morning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do think that is a helpful suggestion, and I think that that would give the opportunity for scrutiny to be put towards those particular Amendment Papers. And then either that could come into place after a period of time\u2014say, I would suggest a year\u2014then if there were any issues\u2014which there may be issues, because we\u2019ve had a bill tabled for a year in this case, and only this morning we\u2019ve had a tabled amendment fixing up a few changes. The likelihood of there being errors in this bill because of the four different amendments that have been put forward is extremely high. It would be beneficial if those particular changes had a bit more time. It would mean that it could be remitted back to the committee of the whole House, I believe, and then it could be brought in with those changes fixed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e0b820027e8b3569b42e8e153eab4fe\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re getting pretty close to it, but I will take one from Mr Utikere.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u002250cff53163b1df70bd25d7beb63576ed\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002250cff53163b1df70bd25d7beb63576ed\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (20:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Well, there we have it: the former chair of the Governance and Administration Committee doesn\u2019t even recognise the bill because there\u2019s been so much time and so much change. That\u2019s, of course, what you get when this bill was reported back in November of last year. It is a very apt observation, because the bill has been changed quite significantly without select committee input.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to make my comments strictly related to clause 2, and to ask the Minister of Local Government\u2014who hasn\u2019t responded to questions around the titles, or taken up the offers of some assistance in that space, or indeed the commencement. But it is extremely rare to have a Minister who had his first set of Amendment Papers that were published earlier in the year\u2014there was a lot of conversation about what was coming\u2014and then just yesterday morning, the most recent\u2014well, not the most recent; the penultimate most recent amendment was landed, which identified a few things. And then again, today, this morning, while this very committee was working its way through the relevant parts of this bill, yet another tabled amendment\u2014as my colleague Camilla Belich says\u2014so late in the piece that it doesn\u2019t even have a descriptor or an identifier. Three sets of amendments in the Minister\u2019s name. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, surely, Minister, that must give some weight to the suggestion that the commencement provisions perhaps actually can last a little bit of time. When we\u2019re thinking about the nature of what is going to come into force, what is the rush in terms of the day after Royal assent? Many of these particular provisions relate to a number of things that are yet to get under way. If we think about the nature of the standardised code of conduct process, when we think about the nature of some non-bespoke but standardised Standing Orders, they are not going to be stood up the day after Royal assent. So there really is no rush to give effect to many of these provisions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf there is a rush to give effect to those provisions, then I\u2019d be keen for the Minister to identify which particular provisions he is hanging on for an earlier commencement date under clause 2(1). It is clear, as has been indicated by colleagues, that there are other provisions that come in in a default of 2030 for clause 26(2), (3), and (5). If the regulation-making powers are not called into effect, then, essentially, the default is just under four years away. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question for the Minister is why is it that there is a\u2014well, we\u2019ll call it a willingness, but a desire to, basically, have this come in on the day after Royal assent, given that he himself has had to table a number of Amendment Papers to correct what are clearly some very sloppy approaches to Government decision-making in this House. I know we\u2019re getting used to urgency, and it seems to be the new norm and modus operandi, but is there any willingness on the part of the Minister to look at amending the commencement provisions in order to reflect what is a track record of shoddiness?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022 data-id=\u00227236fd26cc3eda89b71e2e1bbc97714b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227236fd26cc3eda89b71e2e1bbc97714b\u0022\u003ETOM RUTHERFORD (National\u2014Bay of Plenty) (20:41)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0010923afa1b155ebb4a8bb610ce6bf\u0022\u003EMike Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022becc3975269726a7a0e083ab65a7fc40\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: I want to hear something significant.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u0022a27e3c504874ba10d86cab21c80f6296\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a27e3c504874ba10d86cab21c80f6296\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (20:41)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s always significant, Mr Chair\u2014always significant\u2014and, hopefully, I can last the time with this one. I want to continue with the amendments that my colleagues and I have put forward because I actually think this is really important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have seen a number of amendments that have been dropped late in the piece from the Minister of Local Government on this bill, and so it\u2019s really important that we do interrogate it. That also includes the title of this bill, which is the Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill, and we\u2019ve clearly worked out that that\u2019s just not the case. Therefore, when we looked just recently at what is happening with these Amendment Papers, we\u2019ve seen more and more concern that it\u2019s gone beyond just the trying to prescribe exactly what councils do, but it\u2019s actually then removing some of the democratic rights that they should be afforded when they are voted in by their local communities. I\u2019m referring to the Amendment Paper that would remove non-elected members off committees, joint committees, and subcommittees. They\u2019d remove their voting rights and their ability to make up a quorum. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister has talked about how this is about democracy, but I just continue to think he forgets that the democracy is actually the local election where people elect the councillors and the community boards, and then, as part of that localism and democracy, those elected members can determine who sits on those committees to actually make decisions. Obviously, those decisions they\u2019d make have been delegated down, and they cannot strike rates and other things that are substantial. Those decisions can only be made by elected members in a council decision, and so it\u2019s actually a really good way of how democracy works to get better decisions for the local community. If local communities did not like that, then every three years, the local communities have the ability to not elect those councillors\u2014they can kick them out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we\u2019re seeing from this bill and from what the Minister is trying to put forward from not just the original bill but then the amendments, is that he\u2019s trying to actually suppress localism. Clearly, a party that campaigned and talked about how important localism is has gone into Government and has totally forgotten what they spoke about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis amendment in the name of Celia Wade-Brown which is time-stamped 16 September 2026, at 9.09.08, is, once again, a simple amendment, but a good one. I think it\u2019s right on the money, where we we are going to replace \u201C(System improvements)\u201D in the title and put in \u201C(Suppression of Localism)\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI know, Minister, that you have said no to all the amendments that we\u2019ve put forward so far. I actually think this one\u2019s pretty good, and it would be great if you considered this one, along with the other ones we\u2019ve put in, for the title. They\u2019re all pretty spot on the money for what this bill is actually trying to achieve. I think it\u2019s a little bit disingenuous to say that it\u2019s system improvements when it\u2019s clearly not, and so I would love the Minister\u2019s opinions on these amendments that were put forward by the Green Party on the title. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002209a9e0ddcd6341e8a20426318dc0e6c3\u0022 data-id=\u0022aa2d206068b2a550a4698d288eaaf07b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a9e0ddcd6341e8a20426318dc0e6c3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aa2d206068b2a550a4698d288eaaf07b\u0022\u003EHon MELISSA LEE (National) (20:45)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002542\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c967b847001b90f2c71d11c8a72210a5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 is out of order as merely being an attempt to criticise the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFrancisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 is out of order as merely being an attempt to criticise the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECelia Wade-Brown\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 is out of order as merely being an attempt to criticise the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002551\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat clause \u003C/span\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003E2 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat clause 3 \u003C/span\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ebe agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill to be reported with amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022029259ff60956168ca98f390f7203c0d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, the committee has considered the Local Government (System Improvements) 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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f84062a7e8b2e8ca161de2829586196c\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill is set down for third reading immediately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ff89b389eb34c5098716e6fdcd930463\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00221cdc59f7d4704ae72f0cdc7cab954d19\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221cdc59f7d4704ae72f0cdc7cab954d19\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Local Government) (20:49)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill be now read a third time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAs I said recently when we were discussing\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7acffd6105697afeef6552d8cee57b0\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a question: does the Minister have a legislative statement, or no?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224860cf3bd6d159f3bcdc9f034e0a6531\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b11bf140407b5f0f297c055febec4df8\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: OK. Thank you. Carry on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b6994d78401389845a50cbed16ea9cc9\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: As I said recently when we were discussing the rates capping bill, this Government is focused on easing the cost of living pressures and getting councils back to basics. Across the country, households are grappling with rising costs. A significant contributor to that pressure has been the steady increase in council rates. For many families, rates are amongst the largest bills that they face each year. Capping those rates is and has been part of the solution, but communities have also been clear that when councils focus on the basics, manage their finances responsibly, and deliver value for money\u2014when councils don\u2019t get this right, that undermines confidence in local government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealanders deserve a local government system that is disciplined, transparent, and focused on delivering essential services. This bill delivers that while helping ease the cost of living pressures. Councils will need to prioritise the delivery of good quality, cost-effective local infrastructure and public services. We are putting this in law to strengthen the alignment between decision-making, financial management, and community expectations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill refocuses the purpose of local government on delivering good quality, cost-effective local infrastructure and public services. It reinstates councils\u2019 core services and introduces a new financial management principle requiring councils to consider these responsibilities when making financial decisions. That will help with public understanding. It also improves information sharing requirements so that elected members have what they need to make informed decisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis bill improves democratic accountability in councils by reserving voting on council committees for elected members. Only those that have been elected by their communities should be responsible for decisions because they can be held accountable by their communities through the electoral process. Councils can still choose to appoint non-elected members to their committees to benefit from specialist expertise and community perspective, however these roles will not have voting rights nor count towards quorum of meetings. Councils will have six months to make any changes to ensure that their committee arrangements are compliant with the new requirements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are some exceptions to this policy. Where non-elected members are required under legislation other than Local Government Act 2002, they will continue to be able to vote. The bill also includes a pathway to grant exceptions under limited circumstances. Where it is necessary or desirable that non-elected members will be able to vote on council committees, councils will be able to request an exemption from the voting and quorum restrictions. I will release more information about this pathway shortly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill provides regulatory relief by removing outdated or unnecessary requirements that have added cost without delivering additional value. It also makes a number of minor and technical fixes to improve the legislation, such as ensuring consistency in water reporting requirements for councils and broadening elected members\u2019 entitlement to council information. Finally, changes to the bill were made at the committee stage so that councils have the tools that they need to recover infrastructure costs from fast track developments and lower the risk that ratepayers will need to pick up the cost.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELocal government holds real value for New Zealanders but council services need to delivered through a mechanism that delivers value for money. These reforms give councils the tools, the clarity, the direction that they need to focus on the basics and to operate more effectively, responsibly, and transparently. I want to acknowledge the Governance and Administration Committee for its thorough and constructive consideration of the bill. I also want to thank the submitters for their contributions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, I want to acknowledge local government. I know that you have been waiting for this bill to be passed. I wish to thank you for your patience. Your job now is to deliver for your communities. I commend the Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022287c81f90e9676683a4ed09271690d70\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u0022079223238c2d8e3aaf08316cc56d3dbb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022079223238c2d8e3aaf08316cc56d3dbb\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (20:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It was interesting listening to the Minister of Local Government indicate to local government as a sector that he thanks them for their patience. This is not a bill that the local government sector has been waiting for. It is not a bill that they actually want. When the Minister, in his contribution this evening, talks about local government holding value, the actions contained in this bill and the last-minute actions of this Government in terms of the amendments that have been progressed without the opportunity of going through a select committee indicate that, actually, this is a Government that\u2019s more about words rather than actions and the suggestion that there is value in local government as a sector is something far removed from this bill that we see in front of us tonight.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a Government\u2014and it\u2019s been said many times today in this House\u2014that was elected on this sense of localism. This is a Government that constantly spouts off about localism. This is a Government that has no idea what localism actually is about and what it actually means, and, of course, we get that from a Government with Christopher Luxon, who is out of touch. The focus on \u201Ccore business\u201D, in practice, is going to do nothing more than gut the liveliness of communities all around our country. Let\u2019s not kid ourselves: this is yet another example of a power grab by this Government and an attempt to centralise all of the control here in Wellington\u2014yet another example of simply undermining localism, undermining local democracy, and undermining local government as a sector.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI and others have been rather perturbed, really, by the late nature of many of these amendments that are now in this bill. There has been no select committee process, so while the Minister thanks the Governance and Administration Committee\u2014a committee that reported this bill back in November of last year\u2014this bill contains so many aspects that are not just detrimental to councils and to communities, but actually the committee itself had no opportunity to examine, had no opportunity to receive advice, had no opportunity to consider the specific submissions as to what was being proposed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe know why that is: because we know that if the Government actually had the guts to put this through a select committee process, they would hear, loud and clear, from the community about aspects like removing voting rights from non-elected members\u2014what that would actually mean for communities all around the country. They would rather steamroll these changes through urgency without actually fronting up to the community, eyeballing them to understand what the concerns are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019re not just talking about the removal of M\u0101ori knowledge considerations through council-controlled organisations for directors; it goes much stronger than that and it hits at the heart of localism and local democracy, the opportunity that councils have to establish really strong relationships with communities of interest, with M\u0101ori, with iwi, with rural communities, with youth sectors, with those in areas of audit and risk who have a particular skill set that we know makes a huge difference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is, yet again, a Government that has forced local government as a sector to focus on a number of things that, actually, they\u2019ve had to deflect what it is that they have been focusing on themselves. This is a bill that, at its heart, will remove the four wellbeings. This is a Government that is afraid of wellbeing. They are afraid of the word \u201Cwellbeing\u201D. When it is uttered in this House, the shivers go up their spines because they know, actually, that wellbeing means many things to many communities. Why is it that they are prepared to strip away a focus on wellbeing at the heart of communities through their councils and the decision-making process? Why is it that they are so afraid of that? This is a bill that would seek to strip away social considerations, cultural considerations, economic considerations, and, of course, environmental considerations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose four wellbeings have for quite some time been an opportunity for councils to chart a particular course, focusing on their local community needs. This is a Government that tonight will gut all that from communities and say that they want to focus on cost-effectiveness. Now, cost-effectiveness is all right, but you can still have a focus on wellbeing and deliver for communities in those areas: social, cultural, economic, and environmental concerns. They can go hand in hand, but this is a Government that does not want to look at that. In fact, they want to narrow the focus. They\u2019re saying, \u201CLet\u2019s focus on infrastructure. Let\u2019s focus on the regulatory functions. Let\u2019s focus on public services.\u201D Those things are important, but they are not the be-all and end-all of what brings vibrancy to communities all around Aotearoa New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to touch on the concerns around the stripping away of voting rights for non-elected members. Earlier today, I shared with this House the contents of an email, around the fact that these have been provisions that have lasted here in this country for more than 100 or 125 years. Yet, this is a Government that tonight wants to strip that away from local communities, and yet again they talk about localism, but they don\u2019t understand what that is about. We have already heard from Mayor Wayne Brown in Auckland. He said: \u201CHow dare you!\u201D to the Government\u2014how dare the Government want to head down this path of yet again telling them what to do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, we know that Mayor Wayne Brown is saying to Government, \u201CYou want to do this? Then the likelihood is high of withdrawing from the Auckland City deal.\u201D This is something that the Government wants to celebrate and acknowledge, but, actually, it\u2019s all about what is in it for the Government rather than what is in it for communities and what is in it for the people of Auckland and other parts of the country. I really do think that what we are seeing demonstrated by this particular Government when it comes to the responsibility and the involvement of iwi M\u0101ori and others in terms of decision-making opportunities is that the Government would prefer that they\u2019re only at the table to give the karakia and then leave.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is fundamentally what this Government is sending as a very strong signal to communities all around New Zealand: that they don\u2019t value partnership and that they don\u2019t value the opportunity to work alongside iwi M\u0101ori and others. They only want them there when it\u2019s convenient for them and for their purposes, and if they\u2019re going to be sitting at the table, this National Government will say, \u201CWell, if you\u2019re going to sit there, that\u2019s fine. You can maybe have a little bit of k\u014Drero, but beyond that, oh no, no vote for you.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, that can be extended to include all those decisions that are taken in the finance, audit, and risk space. The number of councils that have particular skill sets that are represented and often chair those committees is numerous. Why? Because local councils acknowledge that there is a particular skill set that is needed to assist them in making good decisions for their communities and ensuring that there is an independent set of eyes over decision-making capacity and opportunities that this Government wants to strip away because they are afraid of what that means for local communities and local councils all around the country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis Government has not given a single example of something that has gone wrong as the genesis or reason as to why this change is so desperately needed\u2014because it is not. It is a change that is not needed. It is a change, a set of changes, that has not been called for by the local government sector, yet they don\u2019t seem to have any evidence as to what has gone wrong and why this change is absolutely necessary. This is yet another \u201Creckon\u201D from the National Government about what they think needs to happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, there has been a lot of conversation about the shoddiness of these changes, the fact that the Minister has had to come to this Parliament and has had to have three Amendment Papers seeking to correct change after change after change. Yet they don\u2019t seem to be open to acknowledging the fact that this is a set of changes that is not called for by the local government sector. This is a bill that is\u2014obviously\u2014being rushed through urgency today but has not been well thought through. It has not had adequate scrutiny. Actually, it has not had a basic, base level of scrutiny through the select committee process that we all rely on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI can accept it if there are some changes I don\u2019t agree with if they have gone through the select committee process. The overwhelming nature of concern about this bill in front of this Parliament is something quite different. I think this Government should hang its head in shame tonight. It is sending a very strong message to local government that is not about localism and is not about democracy, and this is a sad day for this Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u002218a32183a1c1309f5650fda1d19a4142\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002218a32183a1c1309f5650fda1d19a4142\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (21:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of the Green Party to speak against this bill, this terrible bill for local government and local communities. Once again, I find myself in this House debating a bill that is anti-democratic and completely contrary to the localism promise that the National Party made last election. Not only does it take away the ability for democratically elected councils across the country to support the wellbeing of their communities and organise their governance in a way most appropriate for their communities but also the Minister has completely skipped the select committee process for one of the changes that will impact communities the most. He skipped public scrutiny, skipped transparency, and skipped consultation with councils and iwi. I could hear Mayor Wayne\u2019s Brown reaction from here in Wellington!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt has been very clear from the start that this Government does not give a damn about local government. When we look at this bill, we see that what they did straight away was remove the four wellbeings\u2014social, cultural, economic, and environmental\u2014with absolutely no evidence to back that decision. They just removed it because this Government does not believe in councils looking after the wellbeing of their communities. It\u2019s been absolutely shocking to see what has happened throughout the passage of this bill. This Government decided that councils do not have the ability to look after the communities that have elected them, so they tell the councils, \u201CWe are going to tell you what your communities want from you.\u201D So, suddenly, they create a list of core services that must be prioritised, and that list means that a lot of things are going to be left untouched by councils, who are shortly also going to be faced with a rates cap.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECommunities elect their councils to make decisions on their behalf. Communities respect councils for the decisions they make, and if they don\u2019t like it, they vote them out. It is the councils that are elected that make these decisions around things like housing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022440a125e85954bae9f5d470b7551e4f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc0ef4252b2e8939682db6771da0a9c7\u0022\u003ECameron Luxton\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s the point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022343510afd6d6a15f12fc34e39ad35f1e\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: Take a call and make it last more than a minute. There are things like housing that are no longer a priority for councils\u2014things like art galleries, economic development, climate adaptation, public spaces and places, environmental protection and enhancement, and community funding and support. They\u2019re all not prioritised by this Government, who is focused just on roads, reticulation, rubbish, and an attempt to drive down rates when they refuse to acknowledge that, actually, what was pushing rates up was the result of inflation, insurance, and interest. Councils do not want to increase rates\u2014they do whatever they can to keep them as low as possible\u2014but they have to ensure that the services provided are actually there for the community.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat happens when councils keep rates extremely low, which has happened in the past? Those services eventually break, those pipes burst, and the councils get blamed for not fixing them because they didn\u2019t increase rates. All we hear from this Government is, \u201CDo as you\u2019re told, local government; you\u2019re no good.\u201D This Government is trying to hide their failings by blaming local government, and what we have just seen recently in an Amendment Paper that was on the Table just the other day, from the Minister, was the removal of voting rights for non-elected members on the councils\u2014something that\u2019s been happening for generations. Councils have been putting non-elected members on committees for generations because it actually strengthens local decision-making. It makes it better for communities and for ratepayers to have people with the expertise sitting on these committees to ensure that councils, who end up having the final decision, actually make decisions with the best information available.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut what happened? We had a councillor from the Far North complain that there were too many M\u0101ori on a committee and she wrote a letter down to the Minister of Local Government, and suddenly we\u2019re getting a change to this bill. One councillor across the country\u2014one councillor across the country wrote a letter\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254d735e445746b74411742b16b9c37ff\u0022\u003ESteve Abel\u003C/span\u003E: ACT councillor.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a483eabf876972556d43b670dfd2e700\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: An ACT councillor wrote a letter to the Minister, and next minute we\u2019re seeing non-elected members removed from committees. No more voting for non-elected members. They can\u2019t make up the quorum. Why? Because one ACT councillor didn\u2019t like M\u0101ori being on a committee. Quite frankly, this is disgusting. If it looks like a duck, if it swims like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, it is a duck. This decision is political racism at its worst. There is no way to get around what this decision is. It is based on racism, where this Government does not like M\u0101ori to have decision-making ability on council committees. It is absolutely disgusting and this Government should hang its head for what they are doing right now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOnce again, with this decision, with this amendment, there is absolutely no evidence at all that there\u2019s any adverse effects for ratepayers by having non-elected members on council committees\u2014none at all. In fact, I would say that, actually, councils and the ratepayers would be the ones that benefit the most from having these people with expertise on the committees that they have. But, unfortunately, what we have once again is a Government that does not listen to council. I was shocked\u2014I was absolutely shocked\u2014to hear the Minister say that local government holds real value for New Zealanders. What a joke. Have you not seen what he is doing with this bill? He does not care about local government. He does not care, because this bill clearly shows what he thinks of local government, what he thinks of localism, and what he thinks about democracy. This Minister clearly has no clue about democracy\u2014absolutely no clue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECommunities elect their councillors every three years. That is a democracy, and then those elected councillors have the ability to create committees that actually then have decisions delegated to them. How is that not an example of local democracy? But we have a Government\u2014a failing Government\u2014that has no clue. This Government has no clue about local government\u2014absolutely no clue. It\u2019s very clear when they\u2019re doing this type of bill and skipping through some of the really most important aspects of a bill\u2019s passage\u2014which is actually the select committee process, engaging with important stakeholders and letting the community have a say\u2014the reason why they did that is because the people know this is a stupid decision. To remove the ability of non-elected members on council committees to actually vote is just stupid.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is because this Government have no clue about what local government actually does and how it works, because all they want to do is just criticise them. They don\u2019t actually want to work with them. They want to stand above them and tell them how things work and how things should be. Maybe they should spend some time with them and understand exactly the role that local government plays and how important they are for their community to make sure that we get the best outcomes. I ask again, what happened to the promise the National Party made to increase localism last election? They promised to reset the relationship between local and central government, but they\u2019ve completely broken it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc39b9a1a562b383371e89a2d67578f3\u0022\u003ESteve Abel\u003C/span\u003E: Reneged.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af8aaf463b6a057ee2555c14bb7e79f9\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: They promised enduring regional and city deals but reneged on the first one within months of signing it. They promised Local Water Done Well and councils in control, but they\u2019re already stepping in because they don\u2019t like how it\u2019s being done. What is the purpose of government, both local and central, if it is not to look after the wellbeing of its people, to build communities to ensure they have a thriving environment to live in, to ensure their cultural identity and practices are actively upheld, and to support them in times of need? This National-led Government are clearly not up to the task, but those who know their communities best let them get on with their job.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022440a125e85954bae9f5d470b7551e4f3\u0022 data-id=\u0022a61b6b5581692ba2c96c84fbba246bb9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022440a125e85954bae9f5d470b7551e4f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a61b6b5581692ba2c96c84fbba246bb9\u0022\u003ECAMERON LUXTON (ACT) (21:15)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I\u2019m glad to have a chance to rise and speak on this bill after I was baited into taking a call, as the last contributor said. I mean, it had the resemblance of a man yelling at clouds, but let\u2019s try and talk about some stuff on the ground. The four wellbeings are being replaced with something quite sensible, and it\u2019s having local government focus on the things that can only be provided locally: cost-effective and good quality local infrastructure, local services, and regulation that has to be done locally, and many people have experience with that. I for one have experienced that in building consenting authorities. They like to focus on delivering that regulatory service well and cost-effectively. I think having that focus for local government is a good idea. It\u2019s reinstating the specific roles that local government must have regard to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, it was quite interesting. We\u2019ve had the last two contributions talk about democracy manifest in a way, and I had an experience in the Chamber earlier during the committee of the whole House stage that I didn\u2019t think would be repeated, but it was in the last two contributions, and that was an elected member of the House getting up in the House of Representatives and saying things like, \u201CPeople should be able to vote without anybody having the ability to kick them out or put them back in.\u201D It was actually quite unbelievable listening to MPs in this House claiming that having people make decisions on behalf of the ratepayers\u2014and, you can only assume, taxpayers after those contributions\u2014but aren\u2019t actually accountable to those very ratepayers and taxpayers\u2014truly unbelievable, but we heard it from the last two.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe absolute scenes when somebody in this House who is an elected member, who I\u2019m not going to name because I like him, gets up and says, \u201CWhat has gone wrong?\u201D What has gone wrong is that this idea of democracy, where the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Edemos\u003C/span\u003E has its contribution to the body politic so that we can make decisions, is undermined by the very people who we entrust with our vote and appointing people, whether it\u2019s a youth council in Hastings, whether it\u2019s an iwi rep in Tauranga\u2014I mean, I could only imagine the absolute scenes on that side of the House if, in some part of this country, there was a council that had elected, I don\u2019t know, the head of some kind of business association to sit on a council and make decisions. Imagine if there was a representative of our supermarkets voting; imagine if Federated Farmers had voting rights on committees. What would the other side of the House say? It would be outrageous, and I tell you what, we are putting an end to it. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022 data-id=\u0022e935805242d77f3d92c20d5368e28352\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e935805242d77f3d92c20d5368e28352\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (21:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, thank you. I\u2019m rising on behalf of New Zealand First, and also as a member of the Governance and Administration Committee, which considered this bill about a year ago. It\u2019s taken a long time to get here, so it\u2019s actually great that it\u2019s got here. I would also make the point that, in the meantime, we\u2019ve had another piece of legislation, which is the rates-capping bill, and you might actually think that it might have been quite good to put the two of those together, because they do talk to each other a lot. In fact, at the moment, this one went through the Governance and Administration Committee and the rates-capping bill is proposed to go through the Finance and Expenditure Committee, so they\u2019re going through different committees in different Parliaments, when they could have been together, which might have been a good idea.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s been a lot of big changes in local government. We\u2019ve gone through, in this Parliament, the Local Water Done Well; we\u2019ve got the systems bill; we\u2019ve got, as I said, the rates-capping bill; and then we\u2019ve got all the structural reform which is being proposed, which has, I have to say, got councillors somewhat in a spin, but some of them are making some good progress on it. I would say\u2014and we heard some comments from the Opposition about the changes which are being made to local government\u2014this is something that, sadly, local government has been all too familiar with for a very long period of time. I can remember that, when I was the mayor, we had Government change the Resource Management Act on us twice; once with two days\u2019 notice, and it would change the face of all the cities across the country\u2014that was the three-by-three stuff\u2014and we got two days to make submissions. It was very perfunctory. That was what the last Government did to us. This is something that local government is, sadly, very, very familiar with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, of course, we had three waters. Remember that? This was, \u201CCouncils, you can choose to be part of three waters\u201D, and then you could say\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] They\u2019re all arguing with each other.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214f068c8658b26fb09895f427fb6927f\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have to say, they are not interjecting on you, they\u2019re interjecting on your colleagues who are also interjecting on them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221fde144158580d59fbebd9e200eb61a3\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CYou could choose to be part of three waters\u201D, and then it was, \u201COh, you could choose not to be part of three waters\u201D\u2014the opting out\u2014and then it was, \u201CYou damn well will be part of this whether you like it or not.\u201D That was the approach which was taken by the last Government. I think there\u2019s some \u201Cpot calling the kettle black\u201D on some of these things, and local government has had these issues facing it for probably decades, sadly. Of course, in that situation, we had local government then saying, \u201CGosh, you\u2019re taking away resource management, you\u2019re taking away water. What\u2019s left? Please can you do some work on what the future for local government is.\u201D Of course, that was the afterthought, not the forethought, which it should have been\u2014it was the afterthought\u2014so let\u2019s not throw stones too much on this particular thing, of who\u2019s beating local government up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe overall direction of all these reforms, if you look at them all, is about aiming to tackle rates increases, because rates are compulsory; they\u2019re unavoidable for property owners. With that compulsion should come some responsibilities for councils to act responsibly, because they are taking money compulsorily out of people\u2019s pockets. The Taxpayers\u2019 Union did some analysis\u2014and you might say, \u201COh, it\u2019s the Taxpayers\u2019 Union, so don\u2019t worry about it.\u201D But the numbers are the numbers. The average in the last three years, of rates increases, was 34.4 percent. Inflation in that time was 13.7 percent. Of course, it\u2019s a bit lower now, under this Government, but 34.4 percent is clearly utterly unsustainable, and it\u2019s made rates, actually, a very large component of inflation. That has to change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s what all this legislation is really trying to do: it\u2019s trying to say, \u201CWe\u2019ve got to get some control.\u201D We talk about the cost of living crisis; this is part of it. We\u2019ve got to get some control of it. People can look at any number of different projects that local government undertakes and pick their most hated one, their most wasteful-looking one\u2014you know, you could have a $500,000-plus bike rack; we\u2019ve got one round the corner up here. You could have a $2.5 million loo with all the whistles on it. Jamie was telling me about trying to find $3,000 per bus shelter to get bus shelters around Blenheim, and they come up with a $300,000 one, which they could have done a hundred bus shelters for. I mean, that\u2019s the kind of nutty thing you sometimes do. You\u2019ve got to have some discipline, because that is money compulsorily taken away from ratepayers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things in the committee of the whole House was that we had some discussion about the fact that it\u2019s not just about driving down to the lowest possible cost. There were some questions around cost-effectiveness: you\u2019ve got to look at that in terms of the previous words that have to be read, which are \u201Cgood quality\u201D. Sometimes, good quality doesn\u2019t mean the lowest possible price, and the Minister said quite clearly that it\u2019s not always going to be the cheapest; it\u2019s got to be the best value for money. That\u2019s really, really important, because it\u2019s not about driving things down to the bottom level.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s obviously lots of things which have been raised, but a lot of this bill is about core services. Defining core services has always been very, very difficult. I can remember, going back to Rodney Hide\u2019s day\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022826f60dec1ab89fb35c4780ebc16aead\u0022\u003ECelia Wade-Brown\u003C/span\u003E: Oh!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5a518db693351638e176b0d9a585264\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and I can see Celia Wade-Brown is going, \u201COh my gosh!\u201D\u2014and he said that you\u2019ve got to focus only on core services, whatever those might be. And about a day later, what we all got asked was how much money we were putting into the Rugby World Cup. They lost the argument straight away, because if you think the Rugby World Cup was a core service, then what else was not a core service? And, actually, when we started having that conversation in this Parliament, we had exactly the same thing: core services. Almost the next day, there was Wayne Brown and Melissa Lee, as Minister for Culture and Heritage, I think it was, at the time saying, \u201CWell, we\u2019re supporting a flower show in Auckland.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAgain, with core services, it is very challenging, but at least this bill is trying to be a little bit less defined about that, and it is saying there are a range of different things there which are core services. It\u2019s not saying you can only do core services; it\u2019s saying they are the first things you do and then you can do other things as well. I think that is a much more mature and much more sensible proposition. It does just say that you\u2019ve got to have particular regard to those core services, not that you can do only them, and not that you can\u2019t do the other non-core services, because that would have been a real issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe issue which concerns New Zealand First, and which also is really concerning to councils, is this tension between the rates cap and maintaining core services, because, if you screw the cap down too much, you\u2019re not going to be able to maintain those assets. That has been a fundamental issue for local government, but also for central government, for a long, long time. We know there\u2019s been long-term under-investment in assets and asset renewals right across the board. The Audit Office: we\u2019ve had them in front of the Governance and Administration Committee as well, and they reported a 25\u00A0percent under-investment in water infrastructure across the board, not just in Wellington, where we have all the highlighted pipes breaking, but everywhere.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ecef0cb4483788d547ecd1d76f97c744\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: Well, you\u2019ve got a story to tell there. You should hang your head in shame, Andy Foster. Moa Point\u2014your fault.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aac3fc1e00c5f56f4fd08fc0c852cbb7\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER\u003C/span\u003E: They said there had been a 25\u00A0percent under-investment for decades, and yet that wasn\u2019t really called out. Central government, Mr Duncan Webb, is every bit as bad, if not worse. That\u2019s why Minister Bishop is talking about legislating to require Government agencies\u2014and I\u2019m thinking of Health and Education, and so on, who half the time don\u2019t even know what assets they\u2019ve got\u2014to undertake proper asset management. We have to do this sort of thing. There\u2019s a real tension between core services and rates capping, and we need to make sure we can thread that needle. We need greater discipline right across the board. I think some councils are kind of acting as if there\u2019s no limit to the amount of money that they can require from ratepayers, and that is a problem. We must not have a blank cheque. There must be the ability for us, and this is what this bill is doing, to say, \u201CNo, you can\u2019t do that. You can\u2019t do that, because ratepayers can\u2019t afford it.\u201D\u201434.4\u00A0percent is completely unsustainable, and, looking forward, they might be lower than that, but they\u2019re still way, way, way above inflation rates.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust to finish off with a couple of other things: the decisions that Government itself makes are going to make a difference as well. For example, the New Zealand Transport Agency, in the last couple of weeks, has talked about changing the funding assistance rates. Now, that is the amount of money that they give to councils across the board to maintain roads, and all those sorts of things. They\u2019re proposing to reduce the funding assistance rates for some of the smaller councils. That will go straight on to those councils\u2019 rate lines. In terms of what Government does, those unfunded band-aids\u2014they are the thing that Government says they\u2019re going to give no money for but are going to demand that councils do something about\u2014are things that councils hate. We\u2019ve got to be very, very thoughtful about those things as we are combining these issues of rates caps and core services, because Government can make a lot of difference there. There is plenty of fat in the system; I know that\u2019s the case. You could do a lot in terms of organisations\u2019 overheads, and removing regional councils is undoubtedly going to save money, but Government also needs to play its part in that area.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, I just wanted to finish off by just saying thank you to the House for the support of New Zealand First\u2019s amendments. First of all, it will lift the importance and status of full councils as opposed to their subordinate committees. In terms of some of the discussions we\u2019ve had around representation, full council can only have elected members on it. So that\u2019s an issue there. Also, it brings the local government chief executive officer (CEO) appointment term into line with what Parliament agreed less than four months ago for central government. Four months ago, we said, for central government, five years for chief executives, and no right of renewal\u2014you\u2019ve got to go to the market. We were proposing, originally, for local government to go to five years plus two. We were proposing in the legislation before it got amended\u2014thank you, guys\u2014five plus five; they\u2019re now aligned, which is a logical consistency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne last thing on the powers of CEOs, which I didn\u2019t mention in the committee of the whole House but I think it did get alluded to, is that also shows why it\u2019s so important to have that balance of power sorted out, and that, at length, covers the ability for elected members to actually get the information from CEOs, who sometimes block that, to do their job properly. Thank you again for the support for the amendments, and I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe4d8a73d5068cb6ef9e6713379b4c77\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: This call is a split call\u2014Oriini Kaipara.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022 data-id=\u0022412df3e487b3afb36935ed6805d75efd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022412df3e487b3afb36935ed6805d75efd\u0022\u003EORIINI KAIPARA (Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori\u2014T\u0101maki Makaurau) (21:27)\u003C/span\u003E: This bill arrived into this House masked with a tidy little label of \u201Csystem improvements\u201D, but tonight that mask has slipped. This bill doesn\u2019t improve local democracy; it narrows it and it centralises it. Through an amendment, introduced after the public submissions process had ended, it deliberately removes M\u0101ori from the decision-making table. The Government decided that members of Houkura, the independent M\u0101ori statutory board in T\u0101maki-makau-rau, may attend Auckland Council committees, may speak, may advise, may carry the history and knowledge of mana whenua into the room, but they may not vote.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn other words, M\u0101ori can have a voice, provided that voice carries no power. That is a clear breach of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. That is a flagrant assault on tino rangatiratanga guaranteed to M\u0101ori under Te Tiriti. Houkura was not invented as a political favour; it was established in legislation because the Auckland super-city arrangements failed to provide guaranteed M\u0101ori representation. Its role is to promote the cultural, economic, environmental, and social wellbeing of M\u0101ori and to help Auckland Council act consistently with its statutory responsibilities to M\u0101ori.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMana whenua, m\u0101t\u0101waka, and taurahere representatives bring those interests and m\u0101tauranga of the iwi and hap\u016B of T\u0101maki-makau-rau into council decisions. For Ng\u0101ti Wh\u0101tua \u014Crakei, for Te Kawerau \u0101 Maki, for Te \u0100kitai Waiohua, for Ng\u0101ti P\u0101oa, and the other mana whenua of my rohe, local government decisions aren\u2019t abstract administrative exercises; they concern their whenua, they concern their wai, their moana, their maunga, their w\u0101hi tapu, their taonga, and their responsibilities as kaitiaki.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Government says Houkura may continue to provide advice. Mana whenua have been giving advice to the Crown for generations. The problem isn\u2019t that M\u0101ori have lacked advice. The problem\u2014and let me be very clear on this\u2014is that successive Governments have refused to share power. Even the Government\u2019s own regulatory impact statement couldn\u2019t justify this change. Officials said the Minister\u2019s preferred option carried greater costs than benefits. They admitted they had limited evidence. They admitted there had been no proper consultation with councils, iwi, or M\u0101ori. They warned that iwi and hap\u016B appointments would be pushed towards advisory roles rather than shared decision-making. Then the Government drove the amendment through under urgency anyway, and that is bloody shocking. That is democratic erasure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESubmitters also rejected the bill\u2019s wider attack on the purpose of local government. Auckland Council identified provisions that were inconsistent with Auckland\u2019s existing governance legislation. Local Government New Zealand said there was no clear evidence that the four wellbeings caused rates to rise. Officials themselves acknowledged that a wellbeing-based purpose had not added costs to the sector, yet this bill removes social, economic, environmental, and cultural wellbeing from the statutory purpose of local government. Those four wellbeings are not luxuries. A library isn\u2019t a luxury. A community centre isn\u2019t a luxury. Climate resilience isn\u2019t a luxury. Protecting our taiao isn\u2019t a luxury. Supporting wh\u0101nau before they reach crisis isn\u2019t a luxury. The Government talks about core services as though communities can be reduced to pipes, roads, rubbish, and balance sheets, but a city isn\u2019t just the infrastructure beneath our feet; it\u2019s the people who live above it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYes, some committee stage amendments are sensible\u2014councils should be able to recover infrastructure costs created by fast-track developments; ratepayers should not subsidise private development; councillors should have reasonable access to the information they need\u2014but a few practical changes can\u2019t rescue the central purpose of this bill: this legislation takes authority away from local communities, away from M\u0101ori. It replaces locally determined standing orders with Crown-designed rules. It removes wellbeing while pretending to address rates. We call it\u2014Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori calls this bill\u2014what it is: watering down M\u0101ori decision-making, because M\u0101ori decision-making makes this Government uncomfortable. Well, guess what, 7 November is coming. M\u0101ori m\u0101, get on the roll, register to vote, and vote them out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022 data-id=\u0022c9679b6be1b37e2fdca2cd15b6739121\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c9679b6be1b37e2fdca2cd15b6739121\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN (Green) (21:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise on the third reading of the \u201CLocal Government (Suppressing Localism) Amendment Bill\u201D\u2014oh no, that wasn\u2019t quite the right name, was it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill has forgotten Te Tiriti. I\u2019d like to acknowledge previous speakers Oriini Kaipara, Tangi Utikere, and our own Mike Davidson for pointing that out in great detail. I am going to focus on some different matters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe removal of the four wellbeings is, really, performative nonsense, because, as the Minister of Local Government said during the committee of the whole House, councils are still allowed to do everything. So it hasn\u2019t really achieved the purpose that was put forward. I do agree from time to time with my colleague who is just about to depart from the Chamber, Andy Foster\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aedf10dc4465dad7ee76c7cfc08c1efa\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re not allowed to refer to someone being in or out of the Chamber, but you are able to refer to your colleague.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eea8e8af09ca92dbc76b820658d91991\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014my colleague Andy Foster\u2014who did point out that we\u2019ve had core services, we\u2019ve had the four wellbeings in and out, and, actually, I\u2019m not sure anyone in the public would have noticed any difference as to what the councils did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet\u2019s look at why the costs, why the rates, have had to go up. Let\u2019s look at some very basic costs\u2014not a little bit of paint for a rainbow crossing, which seems to enrage some people. Let\u2019s look at diesel. Prices rose 71 percent in the year to the June 2026 quarter. Diesel is a huge cost for councils. New Plymouth District Council\u2019s fuel bill was $111,000, compared to $77,000 for the same month the year before, which is a 42.5\u00A0percent increase. How are we going to keep that to CPI? Electricity has gone up year on year. Whanganui District Council had budgeted a $600,000 electricity increase for 2026-27\u2014that\u2019s not just the base; that\u2019s the increase\u2014and was told that the re-priced contract was a further $1 million. And insurance has been the most persistent pressure. Let\u2019s not point to little individual items; let\u2019s look at the systemic drivers of rates increases. What has this Government done? They\u2019ve blamed local government but they haven\u2019t done the investment in electrifying New Zealand, in distributed energy generation, and in improving the fleet, which actually would have made a real difference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis Government doesn\u2019t seem to care about consultation, and perhaps it\u2019s because, when we have the Budget, it\u2019s all super-secret till it\u2019s suddenly released. Well, that\u2019s not how it\u2019s done in local government; you put out a draft, you listen, you go round the community, and you make some changes. I think, really, there\u2019s a lot more to be learnt than blaming them. I also want to point out that, as a percentage of GDP, that top line is taxes. I think that taxes are a good way for paying for collective benefit. The bottom line almost disappears in comparison. That\u2019s the rates line since the 19\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E century, which we seem to be going back to, in some ways. Who is going benefit from cutting services? People who won\u2019t care about higher entry fees for public swimming pools have probably got their own. Who\u2019s going to benefit from the rates cap? The people with a multimillion-dollar mansion or an expensive second home. It\u2019s not going to be the entry-level homeowners.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to say one thing: if you look at the Taituar\u0101 and the Local Government New Zealand awards, you will see the fantastic things that councils around the country are doing as well as keeping the streetlights on, the footpaths safe, the building inspectors making sure the Green Parrot food is safe to eat and doing all of the other food inspections that they do. I think it\u2019s time that we gave three cheers for local government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022 data-id=\u00226d7764fef037cdbf0a03877bf7f1befe\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226d7764fef037cdbf0a03877bf7f1befe\u0022\u003ETIM COSTLEY (National\u2014\u014Ctaki) (21:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Here we are, we\u2019ve heard from a former mayor in the Opposition, a former councillor\u2014a current community board member. How is no one talking about that? He\u2019s getting paid to be a community board member and an MP.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223456c08ca732d17b75fd102adf7ddd28\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think you should stick to the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b6d6fb83db2c04219d0f4d2fa88c4e6\u0022\u003ETIM COSTLEY\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I am sticking to the bill, because he\u2019s standing there defending them, talking about voting rights. He\u2019s got two votes. The dirty little secret over that side, the reason they don\u2019t like this, is because it forces councils to prioritise. It forces them to live within their means, to stick to the essentials.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWe know what Labour and the Greens would do in Government. They would spend, spend, spend. They can\u2019t live within a budget. They want to tax more, they want higher rates, because they are not willing to make the tough decisions that this bill delivers for our community and makes them prioritise on the basics like roads, like essential infrastructure and essential services. That\u2019s why I support this bill and commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022e41babfd2d3bc04b9c6f135b12e583ff\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e41babfd2d3bc04b9c6f135b12e583ff\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (21:38)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair\u2014Madam Speaker, sorry. We\u2019re out of the committee stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226ec177df3b1198a69e927b2b1bca3675\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s all right. We\u2019ve been in the Chair a little bit today!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022865cc109b3b235130eb18fee226bc88e\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re into the third reading speeches, and almost at the end of those.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWhen I popped out briefly before, just at the end of the committee stage, when there was some voting happening, I bumped into a guest of one of the valedictory speakers. She had been sitting in the Chamber when we were in the committee stage, and she said to me, \u201CI didn\u2019t quite understand what you were talking about. What were you asking about?\u201D I said, \u201CWell, we were doing detailed questions in the committee stage.\u201D I suggested to her that perhaps she would want to come into the House for the third reading stage. Just in case she has, I am going to go through the history of this bill and where we are today, because the bill today is quite different from the bill that we had on Monday\u2014and it\u2019s only Wednesday today\u2014so there is a bit of history there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b610d30c0dca5252f71c57a3360748bb\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s still Tuesday in here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c07d4a6a247d827f286e94500dd4b3fd\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s still Tuesday in here; indeed, Madam Speaker. I was, at the turn of the millennium, lucky to work for the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment when the select committee\u2014the Environment and Local Government Committee, as it was then\u2014was working on the Local Government Act 2002, as it came to be known.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, that is where the wellbeings came from. There was this general power that was included, and also wellbeings, but not only the wellbeings; a whole lot of requirements for how councils, all sorts of councils, if they\u2019re unitary or territorial or regional, have to plan for their finances, how they have to justify their spending, how they have to plan for long-term things, how they can get development contributions, all the different constraints around rates\u2014although that\u2019s in the rates Act, some of it comes into the Local Government Act. So to say what that member who just sat down, Tim Costley, said, \u201COh, without these changes, those councils, they just won\u2019t live within their means.\u201D, that is an affront to the legislation that has been in place for a long time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis bill, as far as I can tell from the very few questions that were answered from the Minister of Local Government to me, doesn\u2019t make that much difference in terms of the actual requirements. Yes, it\u2019s getting rid of the wellbeings. National Governments seem to like getting rid of wellbeings; it\u2019s happened before. There\u2019s a little graph here in the regulatory impact statement that shows when there weren\u2019t wellbeings and when there were wellbeings. Ministers wanted to say that there was a causal relationship between the inclusion of wellbeings or not, and it does not seem to be there. Of course, when those wellbeings came out last time, what did happen was a flurry of legal advice, because, of course, then not only did councils have to justify all of their spending through all the different processes that already exist but they also had to say, \u201COh, well, with this change to wellbeings and with core services, does that change what we\u2019re doing or not?\u201D So, you know, who knows if this is going to make any tangible change other than putting up the legal fees? That\u2019s not good for ratepayers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo we\u2019ve got rid of the wellbeings. That\u2019s what this bill does, as it went through the Governance and Administration Committee. It also talks about core services and the purpose of local government being restricted to infrastructure, public services, and performance of regulatory functions. None of those terms are defined, so they could be very wide, and they are different words\u2014but, like, slightly different\u2014from the core service words. Again, most of the differences between what a core service is\u2014and those terms are defined with reference to other legislation\u2014and what the purpose provisions are were not expanded on by the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe also have in this bill, as it went to select committee, some other changes around codes of conduct and when the Minister can make regulations, and interfere, really. Some centralisation was also happening in the bill as it went to select committee. Now, people did make submissions on that, and thank you to those people who did. At some point, I\u2019m not quite sure when it happened, the Minister put in a large Amendment Paper in the form of a rewrite of the bill. The bill itself is not very big, and I should say, of course, this is amending that Act that we\u2019ve had since 2002 that I watched the select committee work on when I was working for the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. Now, we had those big changes, and most of them didn\u2019t seem hugely consequential in terms of policy changes, but then what happened yesterday in real time was that the Minister dropped two substantive Amendment Papers with very big policy changes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of those Amendment Papers was about fixing a problem, a problem that we\u2019ve known about since 2024 when the Fast-track Approvals Bill, as it was, was before the Environment Committee, and we at that select committee had local government people come and tell us, \u201CThere seems to be a gap with the development contributions.\u201D Let me explain the gap to you, because what councils do is when they are having a development contributions policy\u2014so this is a policy that exists because of the rationale of growth paying for growth. If you are a new development, then you should pay for your fair share of the infrastructure that\u2019s required to enable that new development. So councils do this through development contributions policies. They\u2019re very technical and complicated, and I have to say they were the least fun thing to work on when I was in practice, but that\u2019s what they are. Now, councils will go, \u201CWell, we know we\u2019ve got our resource management plans that say where development can go; it\u2019s zoned residential or it\u2019s zoned so that it will in the future be residential.\u201D\u2014something like that. But areas that are zoned rural, where we\u2019re not ever expecting any residential development, we won\u2019t have development contributions policies applying to those areas of land. Why would we go through this process when there\u2019s not going to be development there?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, what\u2019s happened with the fast track is that the fast track just ignores all those planning instruments and comes in over the top of it all. So we\u2019re left with a situation where we have huge now consented developments at both Delmore and at Sunfield\u2014so 3,000 houses here; 1,000 houses there\u2014and my understanding is, for some of those projects, that there\u2019s not an ability for those councils to impose development contributions because those policies do not exist, for the reasons outlined. So that amendment, Amendment Paper 803, is trying to deal with that problem.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, it only deals with fast-track applications that have not yet had some sort of determination. So those big projects where we know the developers are donors to the Government parties, they will not be affected by this change. So the Government says, \u201COh, we\u2019re going to fix something and we\u2019re going to do it in urgency, and it\u2019s OK to use urgency because we\u2019re going to fix something, and oh, oh, oh\u2014even though we should\u2019ve known about it and listened to those submitters in 2004. Oh, but it\u2019s not going to cost those developers who are our donors any money\u2014no, no, no.\u201D So who is it going to cost? It\u2019s going to cost the ratepayers. So I put up an amendment; it would\u2019ve fixed it, and this Government voted it down. That is shameful, and consistent with everything else that they do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut then\u2014and I know the next Labour speaker will speak about this as well\u2014there was another Amendment Paper, and this Amendment Paper says, on the one hand, we\u2019re trying to do a constitutional change to local government so that only elected members can ever have a vote on any sort of decision, even though there\u2019s all sorts of abilities for delegation and everything else. That was just dropped on Tuesday as well. I know in Auckland, with the Auckland long piece of statute in terms of the amalgamation that went in there, that they have this independent M\u0101ori statutory board, and that appears to be working, but it is finely balanced. Everything is finely balanced, and this Government is recklessly coming in and changing it all in urgency with a committee right at the last minute with no ability to talk to anyone. This is not how you make legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022673069789fe74d02ac517109c173ccbd\u0022 data-id=\u0022176de5c792ba065a471c5151f9727cef\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022673069789fe74d02ac517109c173ccbd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022176de5c792ba065a471c5151f9727cef\u0022\u003EHon Dr SHANE RETI (National\u2014Whang\u0101rei) (21:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise to support this bill. I stand as a M\u0101ori MP with an electoral mandate from 20,843 Whang\u0101rei people. I also stand with electoral accountability to every single one of them. In my view, this is how it is, this is how it should be, and I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ebd1904e129b297198ea7641a6bff34\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: This is a split call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022 data-id=\u00220098c3cd1400658c1fdd6611c3226a8a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220098c3cd1400658c1fdd6611c3226a8a\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON (Labour) (21:49)\u003C/span\u003E: That was a sad speech from a very good member\u2014not as good as his valedictory speech, but\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e1b84e5315fc4038bee236311c2b7e13\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I\u2019m hoping yours isn\u2019t going to be a sad speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a78db744e684bce116154d7f2391998c\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, mine will be much better\u2014much better. I want to wish that member all the very best in his retirement, but that was a sad way to go out, because tonight that member and this National Party are in breach of the Auckland Deal\u2014they\u2019re in breach of the Auckland Deal. I\u2019ll read the Auckland Deal to you\u2014I\u2019ll read you one clause: \u201CThe parties agree to work together in a manner that promotes openness, respect, and [an] alignment of priorities, and to maintain regular engagement at political and official levels to support the objectives of this Deal.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMayor Wayne Brown\u2014you would have read today\u2014said, \u201CStuff this lot.\u201D He said that you\u2019re in breach of the deal\u2014that\u2019s what he said. You\u2019re in breach of the deal\u2014they broke the deal. This is a good mayor, who said that the partnership and the relationship with M\u0101ori is meaningful, and that\u2019s why he needs good people like Shane Reti to change his view, because Shane Reti\u2019s predecessor, John Key, was a supporter of the relationship and partnership with M\u0101ori, which this Government is breaching tonight. It\u2019s a disgrace what\u2019s happening. As Tangi Utikere said over here, do you just want M\u0101oris to do the mihis and do the karakias, and you want to shut them up?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have messages from Tau Henare, a former National Party MP\u2014shame on him for that, but never mind. Tau Henare and David Taipari, the chair of Auckland Council\u2019s Independent M\u0101ori Statutory Board, who\u2019ve all said things work\u2014they work because M\u0101ori have input in Auckland. They\u2019re not just your mihi men; they\u2019re not just your karakia men. They\u2019re there because the stupid ACT Party set the Auckland M\u0101ori Statutory Board up. This member over here knows that. Rodney Hide reluctantly set the M\u0101ori Statutory Board up in 2009-10. Why did he do that? Well, because he didn\u2019t want to go along with the very good recommendation from the royal commission that M\u0101ori seats should have been installed\u2014M\u0101ori seats should have been installed\u2014in Auckland. No, Rodney thought, \u201COh, no, I just can\u2019t have too many M\u0101oris on this board. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ERather than take the legal recommendation, he goes and sets up the M\u0101ori statutory board, where our people get an opportunity in terms of running Auckland and are able to talk and able to make recommendations. This is such a sad night. I was looking to my mates up there on the Statutory Board, and I\u2019ve given them a hard time. Actually, I took them to court, for a little while, but that\u2019s another story. They didn\u2019t get everything right, but the principle of looking after iwi has been brilliant in terms of what David Taipari and Tau Henare are doing. The partnership is strong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe led h\u012Bkoi for M\u0101ori representation in Auckland. I led the South Auckland h\u012Bkoi in 2009; John Tamihere led the West Auckland h\u012Bkoi. We marched into Auckland City\u2014tens of thousands of us\u2014for M\u0101ori representation. That\u2019s what this Statutory Board represents. It represents M\u0101ori hopes and aspirations. They don\u2019t just want to be karakia and mihi people. The Government are cutting this out tonight. It is a shocking state of affairs that they would cut the relationship and partnership without any consultation. The M\u0101ori Statutory Board asked to meet with this lot, but they\u2019re too busy. They\u2019re too busy\u2014it\u2019s shameful\u2014shutting down community rights, M\u0101ori rights, women\u2019s rights, and looking after their rich mates. That\u2019s what they\u2019re doing\u2014that\u2019s what you\u2019re doing every week. They\u2019re too busy\u2014too busy\u2014to meet with people who are hurting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we\u2019ve got tonight\u2014and we\u2019ve got a few more of these things coming. They\u2019re out to breach the people\u2019s rights in this country, and the effect of that is what\u2019s happening with the Statutory Board in Auckland. I\u2019m really disappointed, because the board has done some really good work. I want to mihi to David Taupari and Tau Henare and all of them, and maybe they\u2019ll get it fully right and give urban people the opportunity to choose their representatives when we get this up and rolling again after we kick this lot out on 7\u00A0November. I think you\u2019re supporting me, Madam Speaker. I see you nodding your head there\u2014thank you very much for the support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reality is that this is another attack on community rights, M\u0101ori rights, and proper democratic rights, which the ACT Party doesn\u2019t understand. Kia ora.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b4bb4c4828385cc941e9b3e53a4c22d1\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just for clarity, don\u2019t bring the Speaker into the debate, but I was nodding just to let you know that I was understanding what you were saying.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022 data-id=\u00229c05ad749a3d98fb0769d39bf484dbae\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229c05ad749a3d98fb0769d39bf484dbae\u0022\u003ESAM UFFINDELL (National\u2014Tauranga) (21:54)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s good to rise on this, and it\u2019s good to support a bill which refocuses the purpose of local government. It needs to be cost-effective and it needs to deliver on the key services that the ratepayers need. We know a lot of people out there\u2014we hear it in Tauranga\u2014have concerns about the continued increase in their rates and probably not getting the services that they want. This Government is focused on recalibrating that. We want value for ratepayers. We want to uphold the basic, fundamental democratic principles of one person, one vote, and that is what we are doing despite the crocodile tears we\u2019ve heard from across the other side of the House. This is an excellent bill; I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022 data-id=\u0022642befc07a30aa7b66e3829b6d48bb43\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022642befc07a30aa7b66e3829b6d48bb43\u0022\u003ELEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE (Labour\u2014M\u0101ngere) (21:55)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I\u2019m really privileged to be the last speaker on this side of the House for Labour. It\u2019s a real privilege to be able to stand up and say that that Government has got it completely wrong. It is a despicable bill, and it takes out localism from our local people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s a really important bill to be able to put across our views on, and we\u2019ve heard from all of the Labour speakers on this side of the House, and our colleagues over here, as to why localism is important. I\u2019ve sat in here since this morning and listened to all the various arguments in terms of the Minister of Local Government\u2019s decisions that he has made. I\u2019ve asked for explanation on a couple of provisions and listened quite intently to the Minister\u2019s explanations as to why he is driving these changes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHe\u2019s talked about reducing the cost of rates\u2014and that\u2019s really important, because we face real cost of living pressures. I\u2019ve heard also different arguments across the House as to what, when you leave out the four wellbeings, that means to local communities. I\u2019ve listened to arguments about the Independent M\u0101ori Statutory Board (IMSB) and the importance of having M\u0101ori in terms of their decision making. I asked the Minister a question, and the Minister explained that the IMSB members in Auckland Council will still be able to provide a viewpoint or to provide some considerations, but they will not get a vote. That is completely wrong. It is not right that they are being left out of a democratic process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe fundamental changes that have been introduced today in this bill, in the third reading, are completely, completely wrong. That side doesn\u2019t understand community outcomes, doesn\u2019t understand community wellbeing, doesn\u2019t understand why we need community voices in a process that is supposed to be including the voices of our community in terms of wellbeing. It cannot be controlled from Wellington; Wellington only knows half of the story. Wellington does not understand the importance of wellbeing. It is really important for this House to understand that all the members that oppose the bill have got it right. We understand our communities. Yes, cost of living pressures and the increase in rates is on everybody\u2019s mind. We understand that. However, when you make fundamental changes for a local community\u2014and in particular the voices of those who are supposed to vote\u2014that is a grab from where? That is a grab from Wellington, and it\u2019s not correct.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn my time, I wanted to focus on a few things that this bill brings across and that are not correct. I want it recorded that, on this side of the House, we continue to argue for New Zealanders who need to have the four wellbeings included. The voices of our community\u2014they understand the outcomes. Of course, elected members need to have consultation\u2014proper consultation\u2014with their communities, because those communities understand what it\u2019s like to elect members in a council setting. They understand that there\u2019s legislation and policy, but they also understand the costs that come with extras, or the nice-to-haves, in a local community.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would have to say that libraries and parks and community assets in the library are needed for families across Aotearoa, because that is the essence of local councils\u2014to hear local voices, local elected members. How is it right that a Minister can stand in this House and say that he has made a decision that affects the legislation that people abide by in local communities, and when you have a democratic right taken away\u2014taken away from our M\u0101ori, our iwi, our hap\u016B\u2014that is not right. The bill shrinks the role of local government to things such as pipes and roads and rubbish and ignores the wider needs of our communities. It sets up too much power from central government over local priorities through new regulatory powers. It\u2019s centralised control from Wellington, which does not understand the essence of localism And the reason why I say localism is because all of us were elected from our local communities. We\u2019ve got to go back to our local communities and explain that this Government made the decision to leave them out of that decision-making process by the changes that have been introduced in this bill. That is not correct. From a viewpoint of a person that works in our community\u2014I\u2019m from the community; I represent the views of our community\u2014but also agree with what our members on this side of the House have put forward, it is an absolute travesty that centralism is now roughshodding over localism.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe core services that the Minister spoke about today in the House, that is important in local communities. Local councils have to make those decisions. We\u2019ve heard members from this side of the House specifically talk about our mayor and the Independent M\u0101ori Statutory Board members, and just the contact from our local people who are absolutely aghast at the changes that this will effect on our local communities. It paves the way for introduction of rates capping, which is encouraging councils to balance their books to make sure that they go back to core business. We don\u2019t disagree with that, but it\u2019s the methodology and what is now in legislation that local councils have to abide by, because if they don\u2019t, they will hear from central government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo it is important, but I want to remind members of this House that we go back to our communities, and if we haven\u2019t interpreted localism, and if we haven\u2019t supported localism, then why are we here and how are we going to effect those relationships\u2014a continued, enduring relationship\u2014with local councils?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is really important, in removing the wellbeings in what has been proposed in those provisions today\u2014it\u2019s really important that our local communities, you know, they\u2019re going to the ballot box and they\u2019re hearing what we\u2019re talking about and what we\u2019re debating over in this House. It is important that you as a member of Parliament are able to say, \u201CWell, in the House tonight, the Government of the day chose to support provisions and a new amendment bill\u201D, which then is going to be input in the Local Government Act 2002.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe stand here, we debate hand on heart what we believe in terms of our caucuses and then we stand to state what our communities are telling us. I want to emphasise why the four wellbeings are so important: the social, the cultural, the economic wellbeings, and there is a fourth one which has just escaped my mind at the moment. But it is important for us to be able to go back and explain to our communities that those four wellbeings have been taken aside, that the Government of the day has focused on the core business services of councils. We are very concerned at the increase in rates and what communities want in their discussions with their locally elected members. But it is not where central government really pushes its agenda, without hearing and understanding the considerations tonight in terms of speaking with our communities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s really important because when we go back, when we return to our communities next week, we have to then explain what happened with these local government systems improvements\u2014it is not an improvement, it\u2019s the opposite. And so when we go back to our communities\u2014and I\u2019ve heard colleagues from across the House talking about why this legislation is important: it\u2019s important for us as members of Parliament, hand on heart, to explain that these changes are back to basics, it\u2019s back to not including the community outcomes, community aspiration, and that is not a good thing. That is not a good thing for any Government and the relationship it has with councils.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy colleagues have elaborated on many of the provisions, but also our reasons why we oppose this amendment bill. We oppose it because we want to support our local councils in their decision making and their opportunities to be in those councils, to talk about the wellbeing of their communities, because that is really important. That is why we\u2019re down here arguing that central government cannot control the councils, the local councils, because why? We don\u2019t have time and we don\u2019t fully understand what our local communities go through, and they have a very good relationship. I do not commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002209a9e0ddcd6341e8a20426318dc0e6c3\u0022 data-id=\u0022d8cef6f75420f62b996f214498ff7942\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a9e0ddcd6341e8a20426318dc0e6c3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d8cef6f75420f62b996f214498ff7942\u0022\u003EHon MELISSA LEE (National) (22:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I won\u2019t take too much time on this. As the last speaker, I just want to say a couple of things. Refocusing the purpose of local government is a good thing. When I listen to the debates on that side of the House, they seem to think that status quo is something that they support. And status quo actually means that councils are not focused on their core business. Rates have been going up and we\u2019ve had the largest increase in 20 years, and it\u2019s actually set for a 15 percent increase. That is something that that member and all of the Opposition will have to explain to their constituents. All of the things that they\u2019re talking about increases rates and expenditure for councils, and they are not focusing on their core business. This is what we support. And that actually means it\u2019s like extra taxes for those communities that you pretend that you represent. I commend this great bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill be now read a third time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f956122791bb078a1875e769bab71fbb\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I declare the House in committee for further consideration of the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022df035c5be1c6a10d0039b6c757831233\u0022\u003EOranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00228f8c9ca39239c47670fc2e47eba08b27\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002708\u0022\u003EDebate resumed from 1 September.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022593ae8122180d066976d5f60a2ee1ee8\u0022\u003EPart 1 Substantive amendments to principal Act (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a413071f93830ba9505b3f6341dc2b1\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the House is in committee for further consideration of the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill. When we last considered the bill, we were debating Part 1. Part 1 is the debate on clauses 4 to 40, \u201CSubstantive amendments to principal Act\u201D. For members\u2019 information, there has been about two hours and 45 minutes\u2019 worth of debate on this part so far, focusing on Subpart 1. There\u2019s still scope for members to debate that subpart, particularly around new sections 320R to 320RB, inserted by clause 4. However, I\u2019ll advise members that other provisions inserted by clause 4, namely new sections 320A to 320Q, have been reasonably well traversed and we are close to moving on to the remaining subparts of this part. Once again, the question is that Part 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u0022aaa2f44963712849c729fbce1e70d143\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aaa2f44963712849c729fbce1e70d143\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (22:08)\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003ET\u0113n\u0101 koe e te Heamana.\u003C/span\u003E Thank you, Mr Chair. I do just want to ask the Minister to answer the questions that I had asked her when we were last debating this committee stage, and that was particularly around the situation where we have seen in the military-style academy pilot 2.0 that two rangatahi voluntarily withdrew from the in-residence component of the programme. Now, my understanding and my reading of the legislation, and I may not be understanding it correctly, is I understand that rangatahi will no longer be able to voluntarily withdraw from the military-style academy. Now, I understand in the situation regarding these two rangatahi that assaults had occurred.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI had questions for the Minister about that particular situation that gave rise to young people seeking to withdraw from the in-residence component of the military-style academy 2.0. I want the Minister to point me to where in this proposed legislation there is the ability for young people who may have experienced assaults in the in-residence component of a military-style academy to be able to withdraw themselves from the military-style academy, to withdraw themselves from a space of abuse, whether that is rangatahi on rangatahi or whether that is rangatahi and kaimahi\u2014staff members. In those sorts of situations, can the Minister point me to where in the legislation a young person is going to be able to withdraw from a military-style academy, or is it the fact that there is no ability for them to seek to remove themselves from the residence in which they are experiencing abuse, like assaults, like those that I have described, which I understand did occur in this latest 2.0 military-style academy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would just like to get answers from the Minister on those questions that I have asked previously, and then, once I have those, I might have further questions from her answers. Then I will move on to the next letter in new section 320, as you have directed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022d8ab20f2839a8a0ff93e8dddf0f86ca0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d8ab20f2839a8a0ff93e8dddf0f86ca0\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (22:11)\u003C/span\u003E: The answer to the question of whether a young person can withdraw: these young people are actually on custodial sentences, so it\u2019s not up to us to make the decision around custodial sentences. They won\u2019t be able to opt out. Only a Youth Court can cancel the military-style academy order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u002209639779dc5e9946924759f829ba6cf2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002209639779dc5e9946924759f829ba6cf2\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (22:12)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Can the Minister for Children please point out to me where in the legislation a young person is able to initiate that and get that before a court to make a decision on their circumstances, in situations where they may have been subjected to abuse and assault, as we have seen with two participants in the current military-style academy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022f208fce419dc33cee6ace04f272ff7b5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f208fce419dc33cee6ace04f272ff7b5\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (22:12)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and obviously my colleague Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s comments are pretty apposite, given recent news that there has been abuse in military-style academies, including walking the line, where young people have been abused by their peers under the observation of kaimahi, which is a hugely troubling factor.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to return, though, if I may, to the tabled amendments we have. They\u2019ve been very carefully gone through, and the last amendment we considered was one that was noted as lodged on 5 August at 7.05.33; so I\u2019ll return to the next one, which is time-stamped 7.05.34. As is my wont, I\u2019m a bit more focused on some of the technical aspects than my colleague Willow-Jean Prime. This paper suggests that subsection (6) of new section 320O will be removed. One of the concerns I have is that I think it\u2019s really easy to make these sweeping reforms and have a whole lot of rules which are convenient without paying too much attention to exactly how they work in terms of human rights. The former Chief Children\u2019s Commissioner would be a huge advocate for making sure that the rights of children in situations like with these youth offender orders also comply with basic human rights.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe difficulty I have is that we\u2019ve got a young serious offender declaration which has expired under new section 320O, but it can be extended on the basis that there are other matters which are pending. Now, this actually cuts across a presumption\u2014essentially, a presumption of innocence\u2014because, putting bail aside and so on, you wouldn\u2019t keep someone incarcerated or you wouldn\u2019t keep someone under orders simply because they have charges pending, and neither should you keep a young person under a particular framework of supervision, and what have you, simply because there are other matters which are pending that have not been proven.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn the amendment that has been proposed by Willow-Jean Prime, it suggests there that that clause should simply be deleted and that there\u2019s no real argument for a young serious offender order to remain in force after its expiry, before the necessary essential proofs or admissions have occurred to show that it is warranted to stay in force. It\u2019s important, of course, because you\u2019ve got a young serious offender order which has run its course. They are, as they should be\u2014I mean, we don\u2019t agree with them in principle\u2014time limited; they are time bound. So it\u2019s run its course, it\u2019s come to its end, and then there is an allegation that the young person has engaged in troubling conduct again, but it hasn\u2019t been proved, and yet there are these quite serious orders which are significant constraints on the liberties of the young person, and, essentially, they\u2019re being extended not on the basis of admitted conduct or proven conduct but on charged conduct. Therefore, it\u2019s quite right that the amendment suggests that new section 320O(6) be deleted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMinister, we\u2019ve spent some time debating various amendments, and I hope that you will have a reasoned and rational thing to say rather than standing up and simply saying, \u201CI\u2019ve looked at this. The Act says this. We\u2019re not going to do it.\u201D, because the whole idea of the committee stage is that we have an interchange, an argument as a committee, where we have a discussion rather than me seeking to persuade you and you simply standing up and saying no. I\u2019m very hopeful that, in the last part of this committee stage, you\u2019ll be able to give some really good arguments as to the position you\u2019ll take on that tabled amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022c94f5041ed050e98a3677208a843e831\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c94f5041ed050e98a3677208a843e831\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (22:17)\u003C/span\u003E: I do not support your amendment. The bill already provides, in new section 320O(6), that a young person is not treated as a serious offender if the declaration has expired while awaiting the hearing for an extension. In addition, all specific young serious offender orders will be suspended for this period. Therefore, the amendment is not necessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u00227c06cf2b348283310ea39adc24485ca4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227c06cf2b348283310ea39adc24485ca4\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (22:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, thank you. Would the Minister for Children like to answer my questions, as well? No? Hmm, interesting. I do expect the Minister to give me the answer for the situation where young people have been abused or are being assaulted in the military-style academy. I want her to point to where in the legislation a young person is able to get out of that situation. Can they apply for it? Can the chief executive apply for it? Who is looking out for this young person, or are they just stuck in this place of abuse?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have seen reports in the media recently about yet more instances of harm occurring in youth justice facilities. A concern that many have is that these facilities are the very places that this type of harm occurred in the past. The Minister has said that it isn\u2019t occurring now, and yet it is occurring now and could occur again in the future. My concern is about how a young person takes themselves out of that situation. In the royal commission of inquiry into abuse in  State care, many of those people said that they would run away from the harm and abuse that was occurring in boys\u2019 homes and care and protection homes and military boot camps, simply to be returned back to where that abuse was occurring.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMinister, this is not a hypothetical situation that I\u2019m putting to you; it is a real situation. It has occurred historically, and there are very real concerns that it will occur again. It has also occurred in this latest military-style academy 2.0. I do want an answer to that section of those questions. I do not want the Minister to continue ignoring that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00223950a4bc91266223713e2063d6781994\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223950a4bc91266223713e2063d6781994\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (22:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Maybe if that member showed a little bit of respect, she\u2019d get a respectful answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a53840211993312ad8ad9dcc1f0f5167\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: Is that your answer?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022914c46fc46474ae35134dd66f44d654c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: No, no, wait\u2014I want people to have those discussions, but they will go through the Chair. I don\u2019t want interchanges between members in the Chamber, or even between the Minister and members. So if questions are going to be asked, you\u2019re going to do them through me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u002259cb0794a46682d3cf7e1b3bac924780\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002259cb0794a46682d3cf7e1b3bac924780\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (22:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I don\u2019t understand what was disrespectful at all about the very reasonable questions that I have been asking the Minister. So could the Minister please answer those questions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u00227c2859f1ea296c5dc73fcccb7bc6a1eb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227c2859f1ea296c5dc73fcccb7bc6a1eb\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (22:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. My questions are related to new section 320P, \u201CTerm of YSO declaration may be reduced\u201D, in clause 4.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbf7366f4515485e7dafa6cfff4ee851\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: What was that section again, sorry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c242fc95c50087a83d253e1c89cfca73\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: New section 320P, which we haven\u2019t canvassed yet. My questions are specifically around when that application can be made, and this new section talks about being able to make an application to reduce that. However, one of the questions I have for the Minister is about how she and her officials determine that only one occasion would be permitted to reduce that declaration. Is that something that\u2019s consistent across other pieces of legislation or other declarations that might exist within the criminal justice system, and did she or her officials consider extending that one occasion beyond that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just think that one occasion is quite restrictive. If something goes wrong during that application, if information has not been able to be sought in a timely manner or if changes happen with that young person\u2019s lawyer or legal team or support team around them and something leads to them making mistakes on that application, it just concerns me quite a bit that they\u2019ve only got that one occasion to get that right. I\u2019m really keen to understand what the rationale of the Minister and her officials is to be providing for only that one occasion. Also, I\u2019d like to know why there are potentially those discrepancies between one occasion after the young serious offender (YSO) declaration has been in force for 12 months, then 18 months, and then 12 months on one further occasion. I\u2019m keen to understand that rationale a little bit more.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EStaying on new section 320P, I want to go down to subsection (4), which talks about an application being made and needing to be served on all of the people specified in subsection (1), as well as the Commissioner of Police. I\u2019m just interested to understand it. That feels a little bit heavy-handed, and I\u2019m keen to understand whether that is something that the police have capacity to oversee and be able to respond to those requests for reducing that time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other  question I have is related to subsection (6) of that new section, which states that \u201CThe court may grant an application and make an order reducing the term of a YSO declaration if the court is satisfied that\u2014\u201D, and it goes on. I\u2019m really interested in this point around there being a low risk that the offender will reoffend, and I\u2019m interested in the criteria and what kinds of examples might be provided to show that a young person  may not reoffend. What kind of criteria could the court take into account as an indication that there is a low risk that the young person will reoffend?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other part of it is just below that, at subsection (6)(b), which says, \u201Cthe YSO declaration is not required to promote the offender\u2019s compliance with orders made by the court.\u201D I\u2019m interested to know how in the first place the YSO declaration promotes compliance with orders made by the court, because when we were hearing submissions on this bill, quite a few of the law groups\u2014whether that\u2019s the Law Society or the law associations\u2014made the point that the YSO declaration in and of itself doesn\u2019t provide any kind of effective legal or administrative advantages within the legal system. So I\u2019m keen to understand how it is that that declaration would promote compliance with those orders, and also what could be the hypothetical situation in which a YSO declaration isn\u2019t required to promote compliance with those orders made by the court?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00228fbeb1145f20ac7b84576764cb4e153f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228fbeb1145f20ac7b84576764cb4e153f\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (22:25)\u003C/span\u003E: I will just wait for some information to come my way to answer, because there\u2019s quite a bit in those questions. But in regard to whether a young person can apply to cancel the military-style academy (MSA) order, a young person is able to apply to the Youth Court for the MSA order to be cancelled on compassionate grounds only, and this is clearly provided for in new section 320ZC in clause 40 of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u0022dd927c151ba22514cdc717aa95e05296\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dd927c151ba22514cdc717aa95e05296\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (22:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Can the Minister please give us an example of what those compassionate grounds are, and would that extend to situations like what we have seen in the military-style academy 2.0?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u0022c859a05a69ad4353b9b2e68c8c1957dd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c859a05a69ad4353b9b2e68c8c1957dd\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (22:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I just want to ask about the decision to allow an application to be made by a lawyer. This is in new section 320P in clause 4, and the repeated use\u2014this is an alternative to others making application.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI can understand a young serious offender having that right and I can understand a parent and a guardian having that right because they have a different interest but they have a caregiving role, and they\u2019d be doing upon their own behalf, and I can even understand it being the chief executive. But a lawyer has a special role in our system of representing the position of their client, and in this situation they seem to be acting independently of that client. There\u2019s no wording to suggest that they\u2019re doing that on instruction from the young serious offender. It doesn\u2019t look like it follows a model from the Family Court of a best-interest type of arrangement where you\u2019ve got something like the counsel for the children who are actually acting in a role that is a hybrid and does take into account wishes and interests, and it is a more paternalistic role. This looks like it\u2019s a straight-out criminal representative, and that doesn\u2019t look the same to me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I appreciate that in the Youth Court we have developed roles for lawyers that are quite different, but I think it\u2019s really, really important that we understand what that role is here and where the safeguards are around that position of a lawyer being in that role and how that is developed. Does this relate to other safeguards that are built into the law? Is it assuming a role for the lawyer which might not actually be safeguarded in that way and should be by way of an amendment to the law? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m very interested in this because it does put the young offender into an unusual position with regard to their lawyer in terms of the type of vulnerability they\u2019ve got to the lawyer themselves. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022332946aeb31c8a01dd6f2c163fd1f3de\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022332946aeb31c8a01dd6f2c163fd1f3de\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (22:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just on the subject of compassionate grounds, which the Minister mentioned before, I wanted to ask a couple of questions around new section 320Q, \u201CDischarge of YSO declaration\u201D, in clause 4. I note that in subsection (2) of this particular section, it says that the only grounds are compassionate grounds, including those in that particular list, which means that, potentially, I\u2019m guessing that a Youth Court is able to exercise a level of discretion to include other potential ones. But can I just check that in terms of those kinds of cases \u2014let\u2019s say, with subsection (2)(b), where \u201Cthe offender is seriously ill and unlikely to recover:\u201D\u2014would a serious illness potentially include both physical illness as well as mental illness? Would that be a likely possibility? That is my first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI want to ask the Minister for, I guess, clarifications around new subsections (3) and\u00A0(4) of this, because the wording is a little bit unusual. You have an application, which the four listed groups in new subsection (1) are able to make. That application then must be served on the chief executive\u2014like as in served to the chief executive\u2014who is receiving the application. Is that how to interpret \u201Con the chief executive\u201D? Then, in new subsection\u00A0(4), it says that \u201Cany person who is specified in subsection (1)(b), (c), or (d)\u201D\u2014so, essentially, anyone who is not the YSO themselves\u2014\u201Cmust be served by the person on\u2014(a) all the other persons specified in subsection (1);\u201D. Does that mean that the application must be then distributed to the other four, I guess, groups or possible people that are listed in section 320Q(1) and also the Commissioner of Police? I just want to get some clarification of what exactly the process pathway is for that in terms of who needs to be given that application.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u002230b57eb6885de580f7924adca9220871\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002230b57eb6885de580f7924adca9220871\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (22:31)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ve still got further information coming for Tamatha Paul. Just in regards to when a new section\u00A0320P application can be made, the application can be made twice after 12 months and then after 18 months.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u00228f4423b35a0c8f97471ac90ba827c26e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228f4423b35a0c8f97471ac90ba827c26e\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (22:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Now, I don\u2019t want to delay unduly the debate on this. I just want to note that there are some tabled amendments that the Minister hasn\u2019t addressed, and I\u2019m pretty sure she\u2019ll have some notes on it. One was in respect of\u20147.05.35 was when it was time stamped\u2014new section 320O(8). It\u2019s a suggestion that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022471719c34daf874723c9c07ac0f85287\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Can you repeat the timestamp again?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002210f6a7adbe4b2f8c39a649b9bc2c0df5\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s 7.05.35 in the bundle of I think it\u2019s Labour Party lodged tabled amendments. The amendment suggests that there should be a requirement that it be established that there is no less restrictive or less intrusive orders or steps that are sufficient when an extension of a young serious offender order is required.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other one was for new section 320P(6), and that relates to reducing the term of a young serious offender order. The suggestion there is that a new subsection be inserted, which, essentially, says that where the grounds for the young serious offender order evaporate, then the young serious offender order should be discharged or limited. For example, it could be that the young serious offender order was put in place because they didn\u2019t have enough wh\u0101nau support or didn\u2019t have good accommodation. If we can sort that out, then perhaps we should discharge that young serious offender order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI did want to observe that the Minister still hasn\u2019t answered the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s questions. She stood up and said, \u201CWell, if you give me respectful questions, I\u2019ll give you respectful answers.\u201D The suggestion is that we should be in some way timid or cowering when we are asking questions of the Minister. I\u2019ve got to say that when we are seeking to protect the rights of children in respect of young serious offender orders and boot camps, we will not be timid. We will not sit and politely ask questions of the Minister when we\u2019re seeking to protect the rights of children. I would have expected a Minister of the Crown to be able to stand up to challenging questions from MPs who are seeking to test the authenticity, the validity, and the workability of something like young serious offender orders and boot camps. I would suggest to the Minister that she might want to kind of buckle in and be prepared for some hard questions that are put to her in challenging ways, because we will be fierce advocates for children in this House. I\u2019m surprised and disappointed that a Minister of the Crown wants questions to be put to her in some kind of respectful and timid manner, because we simply won\u2019t do it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis brings me to my next tabled amendment\u2014not my tabled amendment, the excellent Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment\u2014which is actually about the grounds on which an order may be made discharging. It\u2019s actually quite problematic discharging young\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1670528f293c27f76898bf80352b589\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Which number is it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242c1e82b692d92382042250f94782e88\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s 7.05\u2014I think it might be a 37, but someone\u2019s handwriting is a bit dodgy. It\u2019s about new section 320Q. If I might get the indulgence of the Chair just to finish this tabled amendment, the current rules are really restrictive. For example, you can get it discharged if you\u2019re unlikely to recover from a serious illness, but, basically, you have to be terminally ill. But, obviously, if you\u2019ve got, say, glandular fever or a curable cancer\u2014leukaemia\u2014that might take two years to treat and recover from, that doesn\u2019t fit within the current rules. Or, as Lawrence Xu-Nan pointed out, you might have a serious mental health issue, anxiety, or depression that requires careful treatment but that is clearly recoverable. Now, under the current framework, this doesn\u2019t seem to be addressed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMr Chair, my time has run out. Can I have another\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230894e5c1b28e70361c41b593f6d1d41\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, yeah.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229e03969f95b99381fe1115d5d91fe24c\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: This is actually quite an important point that the current framework narrows the compassionate\u2014and this is quite important, because the court can only do what the statute permits it to do. The other thing that doesn\u2019t exist, and my proposal is that it should exist, is any other reason that the court considers is appropriate. Now, you might want to temper that with any other extraordinary reason or some other kind of word that makes it clear that it can\u2019t be just some everyday occurrence, but we can\u2019t imagine the series of events that might lead to a young serious offender order being entirely inappropriate in all the circumstances.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe danger is that we make a young serious offender order and that there is no appropriate discretion in the hands of the court to say, \u201CWell, no one would have dreamt that this could have happened, and, therefore, we will discharge the order so that you can deal with some pretty horrible stuff that\u2019s going on in your family\u2014you know, your mum dying; you know, you having leukaemia.\u201D The list of things that could happen that aren\u2019t accounted for is endless. I\u2019d be interested in the Minister\u2019s comments, particularly on that point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u002265cab4470380fb326e0dbf1f53640063\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002265cab4470380fb326e0dbf1f53640063\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (22:38)\u003C/span\u003E: In regards to tabled amendment 7.05.37 date stamped 5 August, in regard to new section 320Q, I have previously already responded to this amendment and have given my reasons why I don\u2019t support that amendment\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db5d6fa28973ae4737a1a2980e8aab55\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: Can you tell us those again?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022016198ed7d422350661e115e19e31ad5\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR\u003C/span\u003E:\u2014and I\u2019m not going to go into all that detail all over again, because I\u2019ve already responded to that amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228cfd85376c4bee281a878aa16cea1183\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229fe98c665ddd5ec572d2409611727de0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister\u2019s still taking a call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222847b7aa4e5654dc82bcea9aa1e9bd1a\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR\u003C/span\u003E: When it comes to 7.05.35 in regards to new section\u00A0320O(8), I don\u2019t support this amendment. The Oranga Tamariki Act already requires the Youth Court to be guided by the youth justice principles when exercising its powers under the Act. This expressly includes that sanctions imposed on a young person should take the least restrictive form appropriate in the circumstances. Therefore, the amendment is unnecessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to Tamatha Paul\u2014what is low-risk offending for new section\u00A0320P?\u2014this is actually for the court to determine based on the range of factors specific to the individual and based on reports provided to the court to support that application. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002297d79fc2a5034676cd54042f9abe92f3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002297d79fc2a5034676cd54042f9abe92f3\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (22:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m going move on just a little bit to new section 320Q(6), but I will keep this quite short because I know others have questions as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen the court may grant an application and discharge the young serious offender (YSO) declaration, I know that that\u2019s satisfied in terms of the grounds, but what happens if the court determines there is a sufficient alternative to what we see under new subsection\u00A0(6)(b)?  Will the YSO need to make a separate application or will the Youth Court simply determine that \u201CLook, we\u2019re not going to discharge this, but we\u2019re going to use one of the alternatives\u2014for example, reducing the term of the order, because we think that is the most appropriate.\u201D Or if we look at what is stated here in subclause (8), the court will then discharge a particular YSO declaration but then make alternative conditions as a result of that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess I just wanted to check: I\u2019m seeking some clarifications from the Minister for Children on whether, if the Youth Court found that an alternative is appropriate, would a separate application need to be made?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022d8f0d3e46f26001d8cd6611aaf50dd44\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d8f0d3e46f26001d8cd6611aaf50dd44\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (22:41)\u003C/span\u003E: My understanding is that if the court discharges the young serious offender order and feels that there\u2019s a considerable appropriate change to that order, the court will be able to do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u0022cfdc2cd7f472d5127aae422dfd4bcb89\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cfdc2cd7f472d5127aae422dfd4bcb89\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (22:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I found that answer to that Amendment Paper with the question from the Hon Dr Duncan Webb quite unhelpful. This has been quite a disjointed committee stage. I know you as chairs are all aware that it has gone across many weeks of half an hour here, 15 minutes here, and so on. I think the Minister for Children could have been a bit more helpful in sharing with us her reasons for not supporting that Amendment Paper, because that might have also helped us get the clarification that we need as we are going through the particular sections here and trying to get clearer understanding about what this actually means in practice. Maybe the Minister might reconsider whether she could be a bit more helpful to the committee, given the circumstances that I just outlined. This has been going on now for almost a month of disjointed committee stage, so she could have been a bit more cooperative and maybe respectful towards us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have questions about new section 320Q(2), inserted by clause 4, under which the Minister, in response to one of my earlier questions, said that they could make an application on compassionate grounds. The clarification I need from the Minister, or the assurance that I\u2019m seeking from the Minister, is that this section and the grounds upon which the courts can consider compassionate grounds\u2014they can consider the discharge of a declaration\u2014isn\u2019t just those in (a), (b), and (c), because it says here: \u201CThe only grounds on which an application may be made under subsection (1) are compassionate grounds, including that (a) the offender has given birth, or is expected to soon give birth, to a child: (b) the offender is seriously ill and unlikely to recover: (c) any parent or guardian of the offender is seriously ill and unlikely to recover.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question to the Minister is: are those the only compassionate grounds upon which a court can discharge a young serious offender declaration? Further to that, I want to know, if it isn\u2019t the case\u2014and I\u2019m just going to put these out and she can deal with it\u2014then why are the words \u201Cbut not limited to\u201D included? I think when it comes to statutory interpretation, we all know that the courts and lawyers will look to what the intent of Parliament was when they introduced this legislation. They will actually look at this \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E, as we debated these sections, because, as the Hon Dr Duncan Webb said, the courts have to follow the law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to point out that we are actually now rushing this through urgency to have it completed in the final days of Parliament. There are only a few sitting days left, and if we don\u2019t get this right\u2014and the Minister has already dismissed an Amendment Paper in here which would give the court any other reasons the court considers an appropriate level of discretion\u2014we potentially have here a section where, in theory, a young person can apply on compassionate grounds to leave, but it wouldn\u2019t cover the situation like I described where two young people subject to assault have applied to leave the in-residence phase of the military-style academy because they\u2019re not pregnant and about to give birth, they\u2019re not seriously ill and unlikely to recover, and it\u2019s not to do with a parent who is seriously ill or unlikely to recover.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan the Minister please give me an assurance that the court has wider grounds to consider compassionate reasons for the discharge of their YSO order, and can she please introduce an Amendment Paper that puts that in there?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00220b6cd3399658abb0cf340d04fb6a6389\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220b6cd3399658abb0cf340d04fb6a6389\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (22:46)\u003C/span\u003E: New section 320Q(2), inserted by clause 4, states, \u201CThe only grounds on which an application may be made under subsection (1) are compassionate grounds,\u201D. Then it says \u201Cincluding that\u201D and lists a few. These just illustrate some of the types and the seriousness that would be included, but I do note that the Youth Court currently has the ability to vary or discharge any order such as supervision with residence orders or any condition such as a curfew that a young person is subjected to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u00229112f11200abeadf261e2b2275f65b5d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229112f11200abeadf261e2b2275f65b5d\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (22:46)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Further to that, I have huge concerns with the way in which this legislation is drafted, because it doesn\u2019t say \u201Cincluding that but not limited to\u201D. Why did it only give three examples of compassionate grounds and not others like mental health, for example, like \u201Chas been subject to harm and physical abuse\u201D? I think it is hugely problematic that this legislation talks about young serious offender (YSO) declarations, not the other orders that you talk about, but these ones, the YSO declaration, and they have to follow the law and the law does not say \u201Cincluding that but not limited to\u201D. Will the Minister correct that section to give effect to what she just said, that actually they could have wider compassionate grounds, but where does it say that in that subsection?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u002295128a446193a79860a7de5182430e60\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002295128a446193a79860a7de5182430e60\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (22:48)\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CBut not limited to\u201D is not required. This has been confirmed to me with legal advice and the Parliamentary Counsel Office.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u0022a18fb4f83e2eeffe1f9ff882fef0a404\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a18fb4f83e2eeffe1f9ff882fef0a404\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (22:48)\u003C/span\u003E: When was that confirmed to the Minister for Children? We are in the committee of the whole House stage and we do not have that advice from them. Are we just to take the Minister\u2019s answer and word in terms of that? I would like to see that advice so that I can be confident, because we do check Parliamentary Counsel Office drafting. We do check legal advice. There\u2019s a number of us who are lawyers here in the committee. I would like to see that and understand that. I am uncomfortable with leaving it as it is, because it doesn\u2019t say that it could actually be other compassionate grounds. I have a tabled amendment that you could easily adopt that would give the courts that discretion, or you could quickly draft your own to give us that clarification and that absolute certainty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002284eceffffed5194a5e18a410a7854f65\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I\u2019m going to take a call from the Hon Dr Duncan Webb, but I was just going to say that the Minister for Children has stated that she is comfortable that she has been given that advice. The members of the House don\u2019t have it, but it\u2019s on the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E, so there\u2019s some assurance there that the Minister has said she has been given the advice and she\u2019s comfortable, so she has answered the question in terms of the fact that she\u2019s comfortable with that space. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022a552aecf460bb8bb83b5b3a253b40183\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a552aecf460bb8bb83b5b3a253b40183\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (22:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. You might want to have that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c65474d7823deba5157fa338affd9c8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, I didn\u2019t hear that\u2014what?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229abdea7c49e15140715290b225f24c7a\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you\u2014the time button.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fcb9cd841cdd3c8e42db695584753cb9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, no, we\u2019ve fixed it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea8dcbe2e5d4b6fe7ff55bbcde1bd02b\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: But it\u2019s all right; your worthy Clerk has managed that there\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e0cc956f5e5f66088dd6ae7b5c875815\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, the Clerk fixed it for us. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002784\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd3521b8b6b43766a8d17eaa4064eaaf\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and so that\u2019s fantastic.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Hon Willow-Jean Prime has raised some real issues around whether the language appropriately captures it. There\u2019s always that risk that by saying that it is including these things, it means, essentially, things like this, and I think our overarching concern is that the threshold is so high that if you\u2019re sick and you\u2019re unlikely to recover, your parents are sick and are unlikely to recover, or you\u2019re about to give birth but you might not be about to\u2014and you might just have a difficult pregnancy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut, anyway. I want to move on a little bit because I appreciate that in the committee of the whole House, we\u2019ve got to step through these sections, and I want to start talking about new section 320R in clause 4. There are two amendments, one in my name and one in Arena Williams\u2019 name, both of which deal with this, and these deal with a situation where the young serious offender order might be set aside. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ffb7e15bfb5a03ff58b5dec385fcf61\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, what\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dab3c8b986c5550a5028f7747a45cef7\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: These are two amendments lodged on 5 August, at 7.05.38 and 7.05.39. My concern is that the drafters of the legislation have not properly apprised themselves of the situation in which a charged or\u2014I know that \u201Cconviction\u201D is not the right language to use in this framework, but an adverse finding in the Youth Court might fall away.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are a number of situations where this might happen, and one, for example\u2014which we see quite often in the ordinary courts, and it might sound strange, but it happens quite a lot\u2014is where someone actually pleads guilty, and then changes their mind. It\u2019s really common with a technical offence, an offence like fraud or even theft, where someone is like \u201CYeah, I did take that.\u201D, they plead guilty, and then their lawyer says, \u201CWell, you did take it, but you had an excuse.\u201D, or where someone doesn\u2019t realise that they had a self-defence defence to an assault charge\u2014you know, they did punch that guy, but the person didn\u2019t realise the legal context in which that happened. Courts will contemplate that. Even though someone has said, \u201CYes, I\u2019m guilty.\u201D, the court will take it into account that they haven\u2019t had good legal advice and they haven\u2019t fully understood the factual and legal context of their actions, and the court will allow them to withdraw their guilty plea and, essentially, start again. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, if you\u2019ve got a young serious offender order on the basis that a charge has been proven or admitted, and all of a sudden that admission falls away because it kind of rests on a faulty foundation, then we need to be able to say that the young serious offender order also needs to fall away. That\u2019s what the first amendment in my name suggests. You can have\u2014yes\u2014a successful appeal, but the court also allows the withdrawal of an admission upon which the basis of the charge is found proven. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen the second amendment is that the charge or the admission, or the fact that it is proven, simply falls away for any other reason, and you might think that that\u2019s a bit loose, but there can be all kinds of other reasons why a charge will fall away. For example, there might be a discovery that there has been misconduct by the prosecuting authority, or\u2014unlikely, but possible\u2014a pardon. If you look at the three-strikes legislation, there is a comprehensive section dealing with someone who is under the three-strikes regime, but a pardon has occurred. It\u2019s entirely possible that a young person could get pardoned in respect of an offence which in this framework has been proven. My real concern is that we\u2019ve got a policy framework which is part child protection and part criminal law, and they\u2019ve focused too much on the child protection and they haven\u2019t actually got the criminal law stuff right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo those are two amendments that are actually quite important and need the Minister for Children\u2019s attention. I\u2019d be interested in her fulsome responses to those. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022c93b1f4e4076048c392e06b30bb7f164\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c93b1f4e4076048c392e06b30bb7f164\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (22:54)\u003C/span\u003E: In regard to the amendment lodged at 7.05.38 on 5 August around new section 320R in clause 4 that is proposing to amend the basis on which a young serious offender declaration is set aside to include the situation where an admission is withdrawn, this amendment does not take into account how the youth jurisdiction currently operates. An appeal is required to revisit the charges. If the appeal is successful, then the young serious offender declaration will be discharged, and the bill provides for that now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regard to the amendment lodged at 7.05.39 on 5 August, the current drafting preserves the important role of the court in setting aside a conviction. Given the exceptional rarity of that and the process requirements of other mechanisms such as pardons, I\u2019ve been assured that the approach in this bill is appropriate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u0022959dd67f7a4491f6bb7aa3f33e619915\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022959dd67f7a4491f6bb7aa3f33e619915\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (22:55)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I am seeking just one final assurance from the Minister for Children on new section 320Q in clause 4, and then I will move right forward to new section 320RA in clause 4. I just want to know, in the Minister\u2019s legal advice and Parliamentary Counsel Office advice and in her opinion, would a rangatahi experiencing assault and harm in the military-style academy meet the grounds for compassionate leave to have their young serious offender declaration discharged?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00224cba2ab20d8a43017eb20aaae9357906\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224cba2ab20d8a43017eb20aaae9357906\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (22:56)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not my place to rule on a hypothetical and give legal advice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u002284829e6b42f7b851bbba33b3c3131e5b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002284829e6b42f7b851bbba33b3c3131e5b\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (22:56)\u003C/span\u003E: This is not actually a hypothetical situation\u2014we have two young people. I have an Official Information Act request that confirms that two assaults occurred in the in-residence phase of the military-style academy 2.0. It\u2019s a very real situation, and that\u2019s why I have been asking questions about how a young person in that situation could take themselves out of that programme. So it\u2019s not a hypothetical, Minister, but a real.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022635c43b533dbfd5dcdac2f63d25d4b32\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022635c43b533dbfd5dcdac2f63d25d4b32\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (22:57)\u003C/span\u003E: I have stated many times that it would be a court decision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022effd1af20139ce2ccc1802e32b4cc3ce\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll take a call from the Hon Willow-Jean Prime, but the Minister has made it very clear that it is not her role to make that decision. You\u2019ve just indicated that you\u2019re moving on to the next piece\u2014thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u002242186e89f454a7898f812bc13eef4fbb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002242186e89f454a7898f812bc13eef4fbb\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (22:57)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. I will move on, but I just want to note on the record\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224fbeccbfe3db141bd4ccd11cb40593c9\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: No, the move-on orders are next!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256b6f28d3f8d916d40969c8a6ccfd618\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014move-on orders are next\u2014that I am extremely uncomfortable with the lack of guidance and clarity in the law, and that an assurance given captured by the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E is now going to have to be attached to the bill when it passes, or gets the authority from the Governor-General to say that it might also include some of these other situations that we didn\u2019t feel we needed to outline in the legislation, including real, live examples of what has happened in the Government\u2019s pilot programme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMoving on, reluctantly, to new section 320RA in clause 4, this section is about further offending by a young person subject to a young serious offender declaration. We know that in the first military-style academy, in the in-community phase, eight out of the nine young people who remained in the programme reoffended. I want to know how this section applies to real-life examples\u2014not hypotheticals, because we know and we\u2019ve had that confirmed, even though it took a long time to get that confirmation, that that reoffending happened. So how does new section 320RA apply to these young people who are in the in-community phase of the military-style academy? That was a pilot; this is going to be a law, and so what does it now mean? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would also note that it\u2019s going to be in-residence for longer, and the length of the term of this military-style academy in law is going to be longer. It is potentially up to, I think, something like almost three years in total, which is what could happen here. Given that we know that eight out of nine of the young people from the first military-style academy reoffended, what does that mean in terms of this section? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan the Minister also talk to the second military-style academy, where, I understand, a young person who is now in-community has been involved in two aggravated robberies, potentially? How does this section apply to these young people\u2014and, in this case, in the 2.0 military-style academy\u2014when where further offending is occurring?  What happens if those charges are upheld and they are convicted; how does this section apply to them? Will they go back into residence? Will they get some other type of order? If it\u2019s serious in nature, if it\u2019s before the District Court, what happens? Can you please give us the interactions with real-life examples.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00225397140a0226ab61c03205f4f77f7d8c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225397140a0226ab61c03205f4f77f7d8c\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:00)\u003C/span\u003E: It would all depend on the scenario and what crime was committed, and it would be up to a court to decide what they were going to ever convict that person of. You can\u2019t just have a scenario and make me decide what\u2019s going to happen to them. It would be up to a court, it would be up to the evidence that\u2019s produced to the court, and then it would be up to the courts to decide whether either they get discharged from that and end up in Corrections, depending on the crime, or whether they end up back in youth justice. It\u2019s all up to the courts to decide.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u0022d97bcd35cee7fd8a1c7dc3cbf18643cc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d97bcd35cee7fd8a1c7dc3cbf18643cc\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (23:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I know we jumped from new section 320Q forward to 320R, but I just wanted to go back briefly to 320R because that is a really important part and I did hear Dr Duncan Webb covering this really well. So I just had a really simple question on this part, around what happens to that young person if their declaration ends up being quashed via an appeal, and all the material around pardons. My question is, and please do let me know if this is out of scope to belong in a bill, but could that young person\u2014if they were wrongfully declared a young serious offender (YSO) and their convictions are later taken away, for whatever reason\u2014could they be eligible for any forms of compensation, or would that potentially sit in another piece of legislation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EDid the Minister consider that, just given, you know, we\u2019ve talked a lot about how weighty the YSO declaration is and how that\u2019s a label that people will carry for a really long time, and it comes with probably a lot of stigma as well? They might miss out on opportunities for employment or education or other opportunities that they might not get because they carried a wrongful YSO declaration. So, yeah, just a simple question before we move past new section 320R altogether, as to whether that could be considered within this bill or whether that might fall elsewhere.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aee4891fbbc644ff608ebc633438fa49\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll take a question from Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan. The Minister\u2019s just taking some advice on your question, Ms Paul.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00228ed00b81b1de46ecd851ba2a6647c0ea\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228ed00b81b1de46ecd851ba2a6647c0ea\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (23:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Cool. Just checking if the Minister has the response? OK\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bdddf8db0871335045f9f2bcfca26308\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: No, the Minister has just indicated that she will respond.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022c90010b7912eb86cb9d71bd729cc4491\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c90010b7912eb86cb9d71bd729cc4491\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:03)\u003C/span\u003E: So in practice, yes, they would have the ability to apply for compensation, but it would be outside of this bill. It would be done in a different process. But what I would also say is that whilst I appreciate what you\u2019re saying around the stigma of a young serious offender (YSO), and that that could take away their ability to be taken more seriously in jobs and opportunities\u2014that\u2019s the whole point of the YSO. We\u2019re actually putting opportunities in front of them; wrapping around care and services around their wh\u0101nau, their siblings, and those around them, and putting mentors in front of them so that we can give them better opportunities when they transition back out into the community. Whilst I understand that a serious youth offender declaration may have that stigma, some of the crimes they\u2019ve committed have already given them their stigma. But going through the YSO, with that support around them, may actually give them better opportunities going out into the community.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022f0a324283d50f90c1c83f2af42f14d5d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f0a324283d50f90c1c83f2af42f14d5d\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (23:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Can I just get a clarification from the Minister? Thank you, Minister, for that response, but I think the question is in the circumstance of wrongful conviction, if there are any records around that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to check, in terms of new section 320RA, but I want to focus on the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 662. There are two questions I have when it comes to 320RA, and I guess the first question is in terms of Amendment Paper 662, both in terms of 320RA and 320RB, because the changes are the same. In the newly introduced (2A) of 320RA and (2A) of 320RB, it gives an exemption against section 285(5)(a) of the Oranga Tamariki Act. My understanding is that that is where they put a certain level of restrictions around some of the cumulative effect when it comes to having a non-YSO response immediately following a YSO response. So I just wanted to check: because of how that (2A) is now being phrased, does that mean that now you can have that cumulative effect in the sense that you have a YSO, and then afterwards followed immediately by a non-YSO response for 320RA, if my reading is correct in terms of the Amendment Paper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy second question is around 320RA(6), the replaced paragraph(c) in Amendment Paper 662. The current paragraph (c) says that the response, particularly with the non-YSO response that is correct\u2014ah, just checking in terms of lines 12 to 15; ah, yeah, the YSO response. So in the\u2014sorry, I just got to the right section, because there are two provisions with \u201Cc\u201D in that section and I just found the right line number. So it is the replacement to page 21, lines 12 to 15, in terms of the definition of a YSO response in the Amendment Paper 662.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan I just clarify that the only change, then, is to include the supervision order under section 311(5)? I think, because I was looking at the non-YSO response, it may not actually be applicable in this sense, because I thought that that extended that period to 18 months, but it doesn\u2019t. So can I just confirm with the Minister: is there anything else that\u2019s changed from the Amendment Paper other than the inclusion of section 311(5)?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00222eff9e12f58752a806a9748c6dfc2d75\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002817\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222eff9e12f58752a806a9748c6dfc2d75\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Just in regards to the Amendment Paper that you were speaking to in the very beginning of your question, that Amendment Paper was just to ensure that the changes that were made in select committee could work as intended. The change was important because it ensures that the Youth Court has access to consistent sentencing lengths for all young people, regardless of when their declaration expires. So it was basically to make sure that the changes made in select committee work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3dd5b4d951bf408192c3913e50b7d24\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: Are consistent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224fd0db5db5e29771684185ba57815f31\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e9201c1525fe31ae2a94c35b572a2861\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m going to take a call from the Hon Dr Duncan Webb, and I\u2019m going to signal that there\u2019s still more to go in Part 1. This is the substantive part of the bill. But I also noticed that, with the calls we\u2019ve had so far, we\u2019re getting pretty close to moving on to Subpart 2. So are there just any final clarifications\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u002223fd34a7bdd06785b991b8e9c2314128\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002223fd34a7bdd06785b991b8e9c2314128\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (23:08)\u003C/span\u003E: No, no\u2014well, thank you. Can I firstly say, if I may, Madam Chair, thank you for that guidance. But one of the most important parts of this bill, that we haven\u2019t touched on yet, is actually the young\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a88e36cee01563435f8866dc834cbde\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: So I think if the member had let me finish, I was just going to say: are there any important issues just prior to Subpart 2 before we move on to Subpart 2?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1ac81091da3dbca6b2d0ef47648beb1\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: We haven\u2019t really stepped through the military-style academies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e650e900291f032dac5ba61cc4332957\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yep. So if that\u2019s important, let\u2019s move there now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca5ba1af2ec889ad007c732e39e07c7b\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. So I propose, now, for my colleagues and I to look at military-style academies and to ask some questions around that, which is at the second-half of Part 1. In fact, the first amendment touched on military-style academies\u2014date-stamped 7.05.50. The Minister, in an earlier response to the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s question about whether someone who\u2019s been subject to assault can choose to leave, pointed out that \u201CNo, they can\u2019t. They are stuck there by order of the court.\u201D That brings me to this point, because one of the concerns I have with Oranga Tamariki, which has its own framework, is it sits outside of what\u2019s essentially the Corrections framework\u2014and don\u2019t get me wrong, I don\u2019t think they should all be lumped in together, but\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002826\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0310f6ad628354992d0d072aa5a3c85\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: No, but ACT do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa7682eacc44cbac48bad92acf4a742b\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha! But the corrections framework has minimum standards under the Mandela rules, which are in terms of exercise, phone calls, cell size, and all things like that. The first amendment that I want to refer to, which is the amendment of Willow-Jean Prime, sets out that a military-style academy programme\u2014which is incarceration, and I think that\u2019s the first thing. Let\u2019s front up: these young people are being incarcerated in military-style academies, and so the first thing is that it should be treated as a place of detention for the Oversight of Oranga Tamariki System Act 2022, which is a reporting framework.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s not immediately clear on the legislation as I see it, and so the first thing is to say, OK, this is like any other place of detention under the Oranga Tamariki Act but also that it\u2019s subject to inspections by the Chief Ombudsman, consistent with New Zealand\u2019s obligations under the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture. This is the ability of the Ombudsman to inspect any place of detention. This is not in a technical sense and not in some kind of tick-box sense, but to come in and say that \u201CThis place of detention is inhumane and amounts to unreasonable detention, or is in breach of the torture protocol for the following reasons.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do have concerns that where you\u2019ve got a young serious offender military academy which requires them to engage in military-style exercises, which is a kind of forced activity, this crosses the line. I would like to see this come under the oversight of the Ombudsman so that they can say\u2014I mean, I don\u2019t even know what the Minister expects, and further amendments explore this. But if they\u2019re doing 15-mile forced marches, I want to know: is that OK? Who\u2019s the right person to ask that question? It\u2019s the Ombudsman. Are they doing combat training, or are they doing karate or combat\u2014is that appropriate? I want to know. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m not an expert in this area, but the Ombudsman and the Ombudsman team are. As a member of the Justice Committee, I\u2019ve had reports from the Ombudsman on various places of detention, and he has taken a very careful approach to this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe absolutely need a supervisor, particularly when this is now a place of detention. It is involuntary\u2014they can\u2019t walk out if they don\u2019t like it\u2014and so we need someone to say, \u201CIs it OK what\u2019s going on there?\u201D, particularly because it\u2019s young people. That\u2019s my amendment that was time-stamped at 7.05.50, and if the Minister says that we don\u2019t need that amendment for whatever reason, I\u2019d like to know, in particular, what the protections are for this compulsory detention to make sure that young people aren\u2019t subject to harm and aren\u2019t subject to conditions which are inhumane and which, were they in a prison, would be illegal under the Corrections Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u002214221e042a2ca11dbaf2196ebfd4d41b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002214221e042a2ca11dbaf2196ebfd4d41b\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:13)\u003C/span\u003E: The military-style academy is currently run within a youth justice facility, and so it is subject to the same oversight under the Oversight of Oranga Tamariki System Act 2022, which means we have grievance panels, Ombudsmen, the Independent Children\u2019s Monitor, the Children\u2019s Commissioner, and VOYCE - Whakarongo Mai who are able to go in and advocate for these young people. They have the same oversight because it is run within the youth justice facility and it is an in-residence programme. The bill also provides for offsite components delivered by qualifying providers, which will be subject to individual monitoring and oversight through consequential amendments to the Oversight of Oranga Tamariki System Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b805b0ce3c8a8d4f7ff62ef4d73cfef6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve made it clear I\u2019m not taking closures at this stage, but I just want to make it clear. When I talked about moving on to to Subpart 2, the member Duncan Webb has moved on to Subpart 4 and the Greens have indicated that they still have some queries around Subparts 2 and 3. However, I\u2019m happy to take any questions on Subpart 4 now, and then do Subparts 2 and 3, rather than going backwards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002834\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d39d2fbc4ee2d28b8563e1b772e83cd\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right, you like to do everything in order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002835\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ebaa5c5614a55da4b188f82d5cad996\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I do\u2014otherwise it plays with my mind. I just think if we clear up the section on military-style academies, and then I\u2019m quite happy to indulge the Greens by actually going back to where they thought we were up to, right? That\u2019s where you thought we were up to, and so are there any further questions on the military-style academies in Subpart 4?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002205fc8945da86189ac0454f7c9a451033\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, there\u2019s heaps, but I think that they span over the ones they want to cover and the ones that we were in, and so I don\u2019t think we\u2019ll get mixed up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d49840d3d9e1aab5846e1a18abc0a69b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: OK, so let\u2019s go to the Greens and we\u2019ll do Subparts 2 and 3 and your questions, and then we can come back.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u002299f17ceb502b012ba89e4dd4d2eeda83\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002299f17ceb502b012ba89e4dd4d2eeda83\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (23:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Awesome! Thank you, Madam Chair. Moving to clause 6, we\u2019re super-interested in the \u201CArrest of young serious offender in breach of bail condition\u201D. My question is specifically about a tabled amendment that I have tabled, and that one is from 6 August 2026 at 11.50.08, and that amendment is, basically, about inserting a new part that says, \u201CThis section does not apply if a young serious offender is under the age of 17 and is arrested without a parent or guardian present.\u201D In clause 6, it lays out the provisions by which that young person can be arrested, but the important part, we think, in that new section is the bit around being able to arrest without a warrant. We\u2019re quite keen to interrogate the process of arresting that young person, but particularly this bit around \u201Cwithout a warrant\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo speak to the tabled amendment and how it applies to that clause, basically there were concerns raised by submitters throughout the select committee process around young people essentially interacting with police without an appropriate parent or guardian present. This was something that was noted by VOYCE - Whakarongo Mai, which is quite important. They\u2019re the advocacy group for care experienced young people and they have a lot of experience when it comes to young people interacting with the criminal justice system in any type of way. I\u2019m really keen to know if the Minister might consider that, and also wanted to clarify where that comes from, as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002840\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the places where that comes from is particularly from the joint inquiry between the Independent Police Conduct Authority and the Privacy Commissioner when they found that there were tens of thousands of photos of young M\u0101ori kids being taken by police officers. The reason that that is relevant to this bill is because what it exposed was not only a lack of operational understanding along the front line of what privacy principles exist for all civilians including children, but also it highlighted that so many of those kids that were apprehended by police\u2014and these, by the way, were kids who were not committing any crime. Some of those kids were simply walking down the street, and some of the police officers even commented that those kids looked out of place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002841\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I\u2019m trying to highlight here is that there is a track record of police interacting with young people and there not always being very good oversight of what powers those police have and, actually\u2014probably more importantly\u2014what powers those young people have. In the situations where those young people were apprehended, they didn\u2019t know that they could actually not consent to their photograph being taken and for them having to interact with that police officer. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002842\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is the intention behind the amendment that I\u2019ve brought, which was time-stamped at 11.50.08 on 6 August. It\u2019s just trying to require the presence of a parent or guardian in a situation where the police are involved, just to make sure that whatever is being communicated to that young person is heard by somebody else who might be able to\u2014because if that young person is being arrested without a warrant, tension will be high.  They\u2019re not necessarily going to understand everything that the police officer is saying to them. Again, they might not know their rights, and the police officers might not know their obligations. That\u2019s why we\u2019re recommending that there be an adult present, just to add a third person who can make sure that what happens is observed and that, if there are any discrepancies between rights and laws and obligations, those can be clarified later on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002843\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe really just want to diminish the risk that comes with taking action against the young person without a warrant, which is required. The reason we have warrants is to make sure that people\u2019s rights are upheld and they\u2019re not subject to any breaches of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, which we\u2019ll go into next. I\u2019m keen to know if the Minister might entertain that tabled amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u002216408d2838150fece3adccebd488642f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002844\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002216408d2838150fece3adccebd488642f\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Look, it\u2019s essential, in my opinion, that police are able to respond quickly to breaches of bail. The presence of a parent or guardian does not change the fact that bail conditions have been breached and need to be responded to. I absolutely understand the need for support for young people, and the expectation is that support will be contacted straight away and that support will be brought to that young person.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022804d04946f59111e6e976ba9fc56d87d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002845\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022804d04946f59111e6e976ba9fc56d87d\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (23:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for that response, Minister. I just want to follow from my colleague Tamatha Paul around clause 6. One of the things we\u2019re seeing here is around this idea of \u201Creasonable grounds\u201D. I also had a look at section 35 of the Bail Act, and I know we had that long discussion previously around compassionate grounds, and there were some examples that were given. I can\u2019t see any examples in this piece of legislation or the Bail Act. Can I check with the Minister for Children on what are some of the examples for reasonable grounds, or whether this is simply also an understood term that the police\u2014or a constable, in this case\u2014have been using?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002846\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWe do have a tabled amendment in my colleague Tamatha Paul\u2019s name, at 16.40.02, around the deletion of clause 6(1)(a)\u2014 the new section 214AAA(1)(a). The main aspect of this particular part is around the warrantless arrest. Previously, in other circumstances, when we\u2019ve been engaging with the Minister and the Associate Minister of Justice, we\u2019ve been told that warrants are actually really easy to obtain. That\u2019s what we\u2019ve been told. I want to check with the Minister, more broadly, what is the rationale behind arrest without a warrant? Then, following on from what my colleague said, when you are arresting someone, you are also supposed to be able to read out their rights and obligations. Is that the same thing when we\u2019re looking at arrest without a warrant as well? I\u2019ll ask those questions for clause 6, but I\u2019m going to move on to a subsequent section.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022ddcb08e34195a633cf3200d1c90daaef\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002847\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ddcb08e34195a633cf3200d1c90daaef\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:23)\u003C/span\u003E: In response to that tabled amendment on clause 6, in regards to the amendment to remove warrantless arrest powers for breach of bail conditions, as I said before, it\u2019s essential that police are able to respond quickly to breaches of bail conditions. Having to wait for three breaches, as is now the case, is unreasonable. These are some of the most serious offences and persistent offenders. As I\u2019ve said, the bill, including the powers referred to here, underwent the vetting process for compliance with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and was found to be consistent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u0022d0a80f28095934fc65aa388d83b734af\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002848\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d0a80f28095934fc65aa388d83b734af\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (23:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Those were our question on clause 6, so we\u2019re going to move to clause 15 now, which is about family group conferences (FGCs). Clause 15 obviously talks about how a young person who is declared as a young serious offender (YSO) and who is charged with an assault while they are subject to a YSO declaration does not require another family group conference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002849\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy questions are mainly around the family group conference and whether the Minister for Children considered the detrimental impact on family group conferences and the FGCs\u2019 place within the youth criminal justice system when removing that requirement. The reason for that\u2014and this was a point really well made, again, in the submissions by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists and also by the Paediatric Society of New Zealand. These are people who, obviously, understand the way that young people\u2019s brains develop, and all that. The reason for this is: why would you remove the ability to access an FGC when family group conferences are potentially the most innovative part of our youth criminal justice system?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002850\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThroughout those submissions, there were some really great ones. The Law Society talked about how a family group conference is one of the biggest cornerstones of our youth justice system. Also, Kick Back, a group who deal with and support young people, particularly homeless young people on Karangahape Road in Auckland, talked about how family group conferences are a world-leading mechanism within our justice system as well. Around the world, family group conferences are held up as this really important mechanism to reduce recidivism, and also to avoid a criminal pathway altogether in a situation where a young person is being part of an FGC for the first time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002851\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn this situation, that young person has already got the YSO declaration, and they\u2019ve committed another offence, and this bit, clause 15, takes out the requirement for an FGC. Why are we taking out a family group conference when there is plenty of evidence that a family group conference does reduce recidivism and does present a pathway forward that isn\u2019t criminal, but that same evidence does not exist for military-style boot camps\u2014not in New Zealand, not anywhere in the world? Did the Minister consider the detrimental impact that would have on that mechanism, which is so important and key to our youth justice system?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022ec5c473a21301b2f582e4e9efd2c8f2d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002852\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ec5c473a21301b2f582e4e9efd2c8f2d\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:27)\u003C/span\u003E: I see that the member has tabled an amendment in regards to this\u2014it\u2019s 11.50.09 on 6 August. I had read that amendment, and I\u2019m aware of that amendment; as soon as you started speaking to this, I kind of went and had a look at what my thoughts were in this space. Look, all young people who are declared a young serious offender (YSO) would have had at least one family group conference (FGC)\u2014so that does happen\u2014and they would have had FGCs in the past for previous court appearance, because, for each court appearance, another FGC is required.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002853\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe issue with that, in regards to the serious youth offender legislation, is that there is a safety plan put in place specifically around the YSO and what supports are going to be in place for this young person. We want to get those supports in place as quickly as possible. If there\u2019s a hiccup and reoffending, we don\u2019t want to have to sit on our hands and not respond because we\u2019re waiting for another FGC to redo the plan all over again. Removing the requirement for another FGC in limited circumstances where there\u2019s reoffending allows us to respond more quickly and put those support networks back in place a lot more quickly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002854\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would note that the Youth Court still retains the discretion, if they feel that another FGC is necessary or desirable, under amended section 281B of the Act. They still have that discretion, and that will not be affected.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022f3c3a26320bafebfa5c53b05b98d64d8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002855\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f3c3a26320bafebfa5c53b05b98d64d8\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (23:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I know that my colleague may have a question on another clause, but I do want to touch on a couple of things in clause 19. This is mainly to do with sentencing, noting that my colleague Tamatha Paul may have additional questions around family group conferences. I specifically want to focus on clause 19, amending section 284(2), and new subsection (1AB).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy colleague Tamatha Paul has an amendment for 18 August 2026, time stamped 16.40.06, and this is the deletion of new subsection (1AB), inserted by clause 19. Now, I understand the rationale around new subsection (1AB)(e) around live streaming or posting on social media, etc., but I want to check one of the framings, and I want to test something with the Minister for Children.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002857\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart of this says, \u201Cwith no justification in the public interest,\u201D. This is something that we have heard previously in submissions on other things from, for example, the Council for Civil Liberties. Would something like this be captured if it\u2019s for the purpose of a protest or for a strike action, etc.? We\u2019re looking at a school strike for the climate; would that be captured, and would that be considered in the public interest? That, again, does tie into when we\u2019re looking at the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and the freedom of expression and the freedom of movement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002858\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAgain, like I said, I understand where the rationale for some of these is coming from. That\u2019s the first thing I want to test, even though the tabled amendment by my colleague Tamatha Paul is, I think, is an important one. This whole section is responding to a particular context that probably, in the current situation, isn\u2019t as prevalent as it once was, so do we need to specify that as a particular factor to consider when sentencing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002859\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFurther on from this, I want to check with the Minister: what if the young persons themselves were not the ones who live streamed or posted but they were featured in that and it was live streamed by someone else who may not have committed particular offending? How would that be considered in the sentencing part? Those are my two questions on new subsection (1AB)(e). I do have additional questions as well around this part, which is, if we\u2019re looking at the sentencing\u2014oh, actually, if it\u2019s OK, I\u2019ll get the Minister\u2019s response and I\u2019ll come back.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00224655cd4f6265b9eb55c1217198de1cfc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002860\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224655cd4f6265b9eb55c1217198de1cfc\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I appreciate it. When it comes to the tabled amendment 16.40.06, 18 August, that\u2019s a proposal to delete a section which requires the court to take into account, at sentencing, where a young person has live streamed or posted offending online. I think, whilst I appreciate you speaking about things like protests and other areas, this is live streaming offending which they have been charged for which would reach the criminal level of a 10-year sentence, because that\u2019s what a young serious offender (YSO) is. It\u2019s when a young person has committed two crimes that would have got a sentence of 10 years or more. What they are live streaming is actually pretty serious offending, so it wouldn\u2019t be a protest or anything like that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00223826689d0ca8beb05c9a66ba2fef0348\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002861\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223826689d0ca8beb05c9a66ba2fef0348\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (23:33)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s really helpful. I\u2019m just signalling to you, Madam Chair, if I\u2019m able to have this back and forth with the Minister for Children, I\u2019ve got two things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002862\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229da5a065a955d540887298f107086ca9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002863\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224165ee21656408dc4cb946b8aa39f357\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Minister. That\u2019s really helpful. The next block of questions I\u2019ve got is around, if we compare it to the Sentencing Act, some of the mitigating factors. What I\u2019m not seeing here, but it potentially would be taken into consideration, would be things like what happens if a young person pleaded guilty. It\u2019s not captured in this particular section. What happens if a young person has limited involvement in the offence on the young person\u2019s part, and also things around remorse shown by the young person? I\u2019m kind of paraphrasing some of the other things we do see in the mitigating factors. I want to check with the Minister if any of those would also be considered as a part of this. If that\u2019s OK, I now have one more.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022d09d3f6c2d225d12c7bf20c0e30d43ea\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002864\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d09d3f6c2d225d12c7bf20c0e30d43ea\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:34)\u003C/span\u003E: I was just double-checking I was correct, but normal court processes apply when it comes to those things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022478051e45c5ebeaec5b8600e2c15ca41\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002865\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022478051e45c5ebeaec5b8600e2c15ca41\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (23:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you for that. This is great. The third and final group of questions I\u2019ve got is around the tabled amendments by my colleague Tamatha Paul, and these are date stamped to, I believe, 1 September2026\u201411.20.01 and 11.20.02. Again, this is to do with other things that are considered, and these are potentially not part of a normal court order of mitigating factors by the Sentencing Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002866\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI do want to check if the Minister for Children would consider adding additional, I guess, mitigating factors and requirements around the disabilities of a young person, which also, I would hope in this case, not just simply be physical disabilities but also look at fetal alcohol syndrome disorder, etc.; as well as the tabled amendment 11.20.02, which is around the relevant national and international evidence relating to, or responding to, youth offending, as to what is the best way to ensure that a young person is able to have the best possibilities at rehabilitation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022c8c6767a76f9a333418f52ea544a746d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002867\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c8c6767a76f9a333418f52ea544a746d\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and I do appreciate that question. I think that\u2019s a really important question. Section 5 of the Oranga Tamariki Act always applies when it comes to anything that the courts are taking into account. Section 5 reaffirms child wellbeing as central to decision-making, including any disabilities the young person may have. Section 284 already requires the court to take that into account, and the personal characteristics of a young person, so far as those matters are relevant to the offence and any response by the court.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u00227c34e8ec12bc507e34f0e1a3f957c63c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002868\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227c34e8ec12bc507e34f0e1a3f957c63c\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (23:36)\u003C/span\u003E: This clause 19 is quite important, because this is ultimately about serving the sentence to that young person\u2014so this is really important. We know it\u2019s important, too, because there have been so many changes throughout this term of Parliament to what judges can and can\u2019t take into account in terms of aggravating and mitigating factors. I\u2019m quite keen to have a deep dive into this. I have some quite basic questions on this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002869\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn terms of the seriousness of the offending, could the Minister for Children or her officials let us know what determines that seriousness and how we can identify where that sits? I wanted to ask about new subsection (1AB)(c), inserted by clause 19, which is about the interests of the victim. Sorry, did that not make sense, Minister? Do you want me to repeat that or to slow down?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002870\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225c4075439693c12ba1912cd007693bdb\u0022\u003EHon Karen Chhour\u003C/span\u003E: No, just the seriousness of the offending\u2014in what regards? To the YSO?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002871\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229006a8723b5f189270db5dd1e5a05758\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: This is when a young person is being sentenced, so looking at clause 19, \u201CFactors to be taken into account on sentencing\u201D, at new subsection (1AB)(a). That was the first point, just around the seriousness of the offending\u2014so just asking the Minister how you consider that seriousness and what the kinds of parameters are for that. I think that might be probably quite a simple answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002872\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn new subsection (1AB)(c)\u2014that\u2019s about the interests of the victim\u2014I\u2019m really keen to understand what those interests could be. I have some ideas of what it might be, but I\u2019m just quite keen to draw that out for our understanding. I guess the part of these factors that really stood out to myself and to submitters is, again, the live stream part, and I\u2019m really interested in the submission by Cooper Legal, where they actually said that it was disproportionately punitive to add that live streaming element as an aggravating factor and that it might not be consistent, perhaps, across the adult criminal system. If the Minister could respond in terms of what rationalises or justifies having a disproportionately punitive factor within these sentencing factors. As some other submitters made clear, live streaming on the internet and social media, as the Minister knows, is that young people and others film everything these days.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002873\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think the more important point, actually, is around the myth of deterrence and the fact that these young people, and even grown adults, have no idea what the law is. Most people, unless you\u2019re a lawyer or are involved in some way, have no idea what might aggravate or mitigate when it comes to sentencing or when it comes that crime and what factors might be taken into account. I just think there\u2019s no way that a young person would know that live streaming a crime would aggravate their sentence or bump up that sentence or make it more intense, so I\u2019m keen to understand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002874\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESome of the submitters who talked about this particular clause did question whether these factors were consistent with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which requires children, as I know the Minister knows, to be treated in a manner consistent with their age. I\u2019m really thinking about young offenders who will be captured as part of this piece of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002875\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ll leave it there, but clause 19 is quite meaty and could have some quite big impacts on those young people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022c0b2acd5fd60152127e1f260264efd88\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002876\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c0b2acd5fd60152127e1f260264efd88\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. In regards to the amendment around live streaming, I do understand where you\u2019re coming from, but where I\u2019m coming from is that when you are sharing offending online, including live streaming it, often it can glorify it, it can lead to copycat offending, and it can act as a perverse incentive for further offending. Not only that but also what are the rights of the victims that often are being recorded? Often, the victims of the crime that\u2019s happening to them\u2014that is recorded. What about their right not to be live streamed? What about their privacy? What about the harm and hurt that\u2019s been caused to them also? I\u2019m pretty sure most young people would understand when they are committing a serious crime that, actually, live streaming it is not the right thing to be doing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002877\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bfa42a3c71db67a8bbbee8e10eedb320\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll take a question from Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan. I\u2019m quite keen, because it has had a select committee, to start winding up as much as possible Subparts 2 and 3 so we can come back to Subpart 4 on the military-style academies. I\u2019m just looking for some last-minute, quick-fire questions of the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002878\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0110aed35102bdff69e7a605e46fc94\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: On Subpart 2, or Subparts 2 and 3?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002879\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022070af33123f8cf650e20ab28191be9d8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Subparts 2 and 3.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022e545eb7fdaa1e3505a171eb6efeb5658\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002880\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e545eb7fdaa1e3505a171eb6efeb5658\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:42)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve just got one more answer to one of the questions if you would like it. Sorry\u2014my apologies. In regards to determining the seriousness, the advice I got was that the sentence length is what\u2019s taken into account for determining the seriousness.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002204af3915a68791bf6c996b54a98971a6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002881\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002204af3915a68791bf6c996b54a98971a6\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (23:42)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do want to move on to clauses 21 and 22, which are around electronic monitoring, now. Just a quick couple of questions for the Minister for Children\u2014two on clause 21\u2014the first one being I note that when imposing a curfew condition, it says \u201Cthe curfew duration\u201D but it doesn\u2019t actually state the length of that duration. I do want to endorse our support for the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s amendment, and this is 5 August, 7.04.45, which does include a particular\u2014oh, no, hold on, am I looking at the right one? Sorry, I meant 7.05.44, which does require them to remain at the curfew address for a total period not exceeding 12 hours in a 24-hour period, so just putting a limit on that\u2014unless there is a built-in curfew period already, or a maximum curfew period already. We just want to support that particular amendment, which is 5 August 2026, 7.05.44. Those are my first two questions on clause 21.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002882\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI do want to move on to clause 22, because I think when it comes to electronic monitoring\u2014and I\u2019m looking specifically at section 296K(5), which is around how the information is being kept, which is \u201Cno longer than is required for the purposes\u201D. Now, my colleague Tamatha Paul has already spoken around how the police may potentially capture certain information as well, and where certain information can be held indefinitely for future use. I do want to know what is meant by no \u201Clonger than is required\u201D in this case. I want to just also endorse the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s amendment at 7.05.46, which does give a specific time frame of how long that is going to be able to capture\u2014so the 21 days being the limit or threshold around that. I want to check with the Minister on how the Minister feels about that amendment or limit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9b27172f21a79975bfb7fadbda1d041\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002883\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9b27172f21a79975bfb7fadbda1d041\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:45)\u003C/span\u003E: In response to the amendments from 7.05.44, 5 August\u2014we were asking around the time limits and maximums\u2014the minimum is 2 hours per day; maximum is 84 hours per week. In regards to the amendment, the bill is consistent with existing provisions in the Oranga Tamariki Act that place a weekly limit of 84 hours on daily curfew periods. Further, young people are able to seek or engage in employment and attend educational training and other rehabilitative or reintegrative activities or programmes with the approval of the chief executive during the daily curfew period.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u0022837c751e5def433dc7cf996d0d66dc1a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002884\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022837c751e5def433dc7cf996d0d66dc1a\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (23:46)\u003C/span\u003E: I know you want to move on to the next\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002885\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022353d8d21b219b637b38bcb88d15ea26a\u0022\u003EHon Karen Chhour\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, there was just one more\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002886\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bfadf5fdddc7c9ca83044a99732dfc6b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, sorry, there\u2019s another thing from the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u002245d35bf447ce077da363b825cce9c098\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002887\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002245d35bf447ce077da363b825cce9c098\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:46)\u003C/span\u003E: There was just one more amendment. It was 7.05.46, 5 August. It proposes to insert a time limit on the period for which electronically collected information can be held. Any information collected under this section must be securely deleted after 21 days\u2014that\u2019s the amendment. Yep. The provisions make it very clear that electronically collected information can only be used for specific lawful purposes and must not be kept any longer than necessary already.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u002249df7cf3b2238ba0c791cc46b7f16f5f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002249df7cf3b2238ba0c791cc46b7f16f5f\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (23:46)\u003C/span\u003E: I think we\u2019ve only got a couple of things left in this Subpart. But just to close off the electronic monitoring part on our side, I wanted to ask the Minister whether she might consider my amendment, which is dated 1 September 2026, 11.20.03 a.m., which is related to clause 25, which is all the electronic monitoring provisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason I was keen to hear about the Minister\u2019s thoughts on this is because we\u2019re keen to delete the word \u201Curgent\u201D, because we kind of still want these young people to have some level of agency. Obviously, you can give them a curfew and the courts can set their own conditions, but what I guess we\u2019re trying to encapsulate in this amendment is that when you\u2019re dealing with young people, there is a real risk of lifetime institutionalisation, where these young people\u2019s brains\u2014and perhaps the Minister has met people like this, where they have spent their time growing up in State care or a lot of time in a youth justice residence, and they go on to prison, and it does lead to a kind of mental institutionalisation where every single thing in that person\u2019s life needs to be compartmentalised and ordered, and they get really used to living a really strict, regimented lifestyle. I don\u2019t know if that\u2019s the outcome that we want for our young people\u2014particularly if we believe that they can turn their lives around and not offend, and if we accept that these are kids, and they do have the potential to change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002890\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe last question on that clause 25 in terms of the electronic monitoring is whether she might consider deleting the word \u201Curgent\u201D so they have a little bit more agency with still some restrictions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u002211fc273106bf06d85ea26f1d176d1d66\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002891\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002211fc273106bf06d85ea26f1d176d1d66\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, if it was any other circumstance apart from a young serious offender, I would absolutely agree with the member, but where the court has required compliance with a curfew to be electronically monitored, it\u2019s not taken lightly. It is because the risk of non-compliance or reoffending by that young person is high. As such, I consider that requiring the young person to seek approval for attending non-urgent medical appointments during curfew period is highly appropriate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002892\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002233d98dbd777dc03d00c91e1aca08462b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m just going to take a call from Lawrence Xu-Nan, because we are finishing Subparts 2 and 3. As I explained before, my brain is compartmentalised.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022a7016c43fa6c0e3c546815aad61a485f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a7016c43fa6c0e3c546815aad61a485f\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (23:49)\u003C/span\u003E: This is why I\u2019m kind of, like, moving quite a bit further along in Subparts 2 and 3\u2014so that way we can get the Hon Dr Duncan Webb to ask about Subpart 4, which I know he\u2019s been itching to ask for a little while.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002894\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5e514cc0f00ecdb402e27ca0782fb9b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and I know you\u2019re very good at asking very quick, concise questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002895\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231b9469fb93c0e470005ab5409aae1de\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, so moving on to clause 34, which is towards the end of Subpart 2, I want to check with the Minister, when we\u2019re looking at the placement of young serious offenders (YSO) in the care of an approved person, whether in this case the Minister would consider\u2014and again, I know I should also endorse the Hon Willow-Jean Prime, who has some excellent and really comprehensive tabled amendments. This is 5\u00A0August, timestamped 7.05.47, which is around how chief executive services and cultural services are able to make that application\u2014having regards to certain criteria. I want to check with the Minister if that\u2019s something the Minister would consider. I\u2019m happy to move on unless the Minister has a response for that already.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002896\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d7c3e3a1ebb649802200be1dab4c95b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Keep going, and then the Minister will respond to them at the end.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002897\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ec1782d67692f27fb6d5d5ae4f734d7\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Cool\u2014great. I actually want to move on to Subpart 3, clause 37, but I want to specifically focus, at this stage, on new section 296FB(1). This is the top of page 42 of the bill. I just want to check with the Minister in terms of the wording. This is when a YSO, without reasonable excuse, fails to comply, and what a constable would be able to do. I want to check with the Minister how we should interpret, or how a constable should interpret, what \u201Csatisfactory\u201D means in that context.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002898\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAlso, it says a constable \u201Cmay\u201D. I\u2019m guessing, in that case, even though a YSO may have failed to comply satisfactorily with a special specified condition, a constable may be able to have a conversation with the YSO without having to go immediately to Youth Court for an application. Would that be an accurate interpretation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u00224acdebe7cd9df33546d38c9b38054ca0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002899\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224acdebe7cd9df33546d38c9b38054ca0\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (23:52)\u003C/span\u003E: All right, I think this might be our last little bit for Subpart 3, but I can\u2019t wait for Subpart 4. This is about clause\u00A027, which is, basically, all around\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002900\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3b7343ac1f8b456866b6f28b7395758\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: Clause 37?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002901\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002292011805aee27b31d4c9cfff680b8de5\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: Oh no, you jumped to clause 37, but I was at clause 25. I\u2019m now moving to clause 27, but then we can move to Subpart 4.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002902\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThis is an important one because this is around the supervision with a residence order, and this clause is quite important because it removes the eligibility for early release from a supervision with a residence order. I wondered if the Minister for Children might consider my amendment, which is dated 1 September 2026, 11.20.04 a.m. This one basically recognises that the possibility of early release from that supervision with residence order could be a carrot that a person might want to use to incentivise good behaviour or the improvement of that young person. I just wanted to ask the Minister whether she might consider deleting that bit that is highlighted in the amendment, which I won\u2019t read out because it\u2019ll be very boring, and just whether the Minister understands that that can be used as a carrot for good behaviour, and whether it\u2019s worth removing that eligibility altogether.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022952251a82ace91726912faa3fe2dc992\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002903\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022952251a82ace91726912faa3fe2dc992\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (23:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to that, many of these young people have been within youth justice residences many times and have been given that carrot and it didn\u2019t work, and now they are back under serious youth offending and the Youth Court considers that they are likely to reoffend and that previous interventions have been unsuccessful. Changing behaviour takes time. This is us doing something different, and it means we need longer and stronger interventions to reduce the risk of reoffending, and stronger interventions hold them to account for their offending.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002904\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EJust remember, once again, these are not small crimes; this is serious, persistent offending which, if found guilty, has a sentencing of 10 years or more. These are not light crimes; these are pretty major crimes, and this young serious offender programme is to give them a lifeline and a shot not to end up in Corrections. I note that being in the youth justice residence for a longer period will mean that they will receive that additional support, including rehabilitation support, all while they are residents. The more we can do, the better.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002905\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022019cff07286e5a2eea5cf3051e0183e4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the time has come for me to leave the Chair. The committee is suspended and will resume at 9 a.m., when we will begin discussing Subpart 4.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002906\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 11.55 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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002907\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a3fb4d65319d5a9c54e5a8c88a7cf92a\u0022\u003EUrgency\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002908\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00228b42491301323dcc34fc4f36922a2876\u0022\u003EThursday, 17 September 2026\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002909\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022bbdc44bc1e138bec391c0bb03b7361cf\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a76a430e96addd60269f39af84032c4b\u0022\u003EOranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002911\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c48299054560c65d1c571a2f71d98437\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002912\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002913\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u002287ebf062cdc2cd7d1f808b19bc455447\u0022\u003EPart 1 Substantive amendments to principal Act (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002914\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a7f1687ed9f4ca166e71a4ca8b8b2edb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: M\u014Drena e te Whare. Good morning, members. When we suspended last night, we were considering the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill, and we were debating Part 1. This is the debate on clauses 4 to 40, \u201CSubstantive amendments to principal Act\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EFor members\u2019 information, there has been significant debate on this part so far, focusing on Subparts 1 to 3. I now invite members to take calls on Subpart 4, relating to military-style academy orders. Once again, the question is that Part 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022e161843a1266cf9f1dff32ecca549183\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002916\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e161843a1266cf9f1dff32ecca549183\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (09:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just before we start, I know that military-style academies is a topic that people want to hear about, and I want to be able to answer questions, but I just want to reiterate that I didn\u2019t come to this place to do more harm to kids who have already been through enough. Instead, I am doing everything I can\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002917\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a90156e7f82a6461eca3875e6458acf4\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not working.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002918\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ccd544b9b4eec851b813153096ecd24\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR\u003C/span\u003E: Hold on. Can you just be respectful?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002919\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296b2db71c73095d0244a48d21fbeaed5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Just let the Minister make her contribution, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002920\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b832d3042a1d06a012203d5a77834e1c\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m doing everything I can to give them the opportunity to turn their lives around and to be the best versions of themselves. There are young people\u2019s lives here\u2014who have put themselves forward to be part of the pilot programmes. That took courage, to try to do something different to change their behaviours, but I just want to reiterate that we must protect these young people from the pressure of public scrutiny by maintaining their privacy. Therefore, I will not be commenting today on any individual circumstances. I\u2019ve made this clear in the past, and I am just making it clear again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u002276e73913abf9eb91ed5e6e1a45c28576\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002921\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002276e73913abf9eb91ed5e6e1a45c28576\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (09:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I think it\u2019s important that we do now turn to the boot camps, or the military-style academies. I thank the Minister for Children for her opening comments. We can get the personal factors from Radio New Zealand, rather from her, it appears.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002922\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the overarching themes that comes out of this is that I don\u2019t actually understand what \u201Cmilitary-style academies\u201D means. Whilst I\u2019ve got a whole lot of tabled amendments that are prompts for debate, I would like to introduce this part by saying that we aren\u2019t clear what the military aspect is. Oranga Tamariki already has the ability to detain young people in secure facilities and already has the ability to provide intensive social support, and the other supports that these young people need, so I am very keen to understand why legislation is needed to give additional powers and what the military aspect of it is. I\u2019d be interested to see the Minister\u2019s response to that. We do have concerns. Defence is an important part of the New Zealand Government, but it is an institution that is fundamentally based on the use of force. That is what defence and the military is. Why you would want to take that kaupapa and put it into a young person\u2019s corrective training, we are yet to understand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002923\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWith that introduction, I will turn to the tabled amendments, and, basically, we\u2019re just going through the Labour bundle consecutively. I am looking at the second one on this Subpart\u00A04, in the name of Willow-Jean Prime. It\u2019s about the\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002924\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226113fecb782c48ab7c6257dda3b314a8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Have you got the time stamp?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002265503b8cbb62a7e7b231e5ee9e34cc2f\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s 7.05.53.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002926\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002247565e58fa1f90ae0f7a5f5c72bbeb78\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s just so that we can find it; that\u2019s all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002927\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1b37fecd98f791f5953519a5c1d44ea\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s really about the basis upon which people enter the military-style academies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002928\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI accept that the Minister has said this is compulsory\u2014you can\u2019t choose to get in; you can\u2019t choose to get out\u2014but, in terms of dealing with young people, one of the underlying principles is that you should always take the views of that young person into account when making a decision in respect of that young person. That doesn\u2019t mean you have to do what they ask, but it does strike me that it\u2019s quite a gap, when the judicial officer is considering whether to make an order of this nature, that there is no obligation to check in with that young person and say, \u201CThere\u2019s a whole lot of orders I can make. One that I am thinking of is a military-style academy, and I\u2019m leaning in favour of it, because I think that it might have some real benefits for you, but I\u2019d like to talk to you about that. What do you think?\u201D The proposal in this tabled amendment is to say that the Youth Court must have regard to the views of the young person, including the young person\u2019s willingness or unwillingness to take part in that programme.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002929\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, if a young person just rails against it and, for whatever reason, says, \u201CThe military-style academy is not for me. I will not cooperate\u201D, you could put them in there anyway, but the chances of it being effective are relatively low. It also opens the door for the court to\u2014\u201Cnegotiate\u201D is probably the wrong word\u2014be a bit more persuasive than coercive and say, \u201CLook, this is an option. We\u2019d like to engage you and explain to you what it might mean, so that you can indicate your preference or strength of feeling about it.\u201D That\u2019s the first amendment, and it\u2019s a principled amendment because it engages with a fundamental principle of the rights of the child, which is that the views of the child should be taken into account, given the age of the child and their ability to engage, in questions concerning their own future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u002231fddaad7c85296b52b954d3a24dca3e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002930\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002231fddaad7c85296b52b954d3a24dca3e\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (09:07)\u003C/span\u003E: In regards to tabled amendment 7.05.53, 5 August, I won\u2019t be supporting this, because, like all custodial orders, they\u2019re not dependent on a young person\u2019s willingness to participate in them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u00221c3a4cbae5484927b95c0f5067a27f4a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002931\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221c3a4cbae5484927b95c0f5067a27f4a\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (09:07)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s really interesting that that is the Minister for Children\u2019s position when you look at the review that was done of the Government\u2019s pilot and the point of the pilot was supposed to be about determining whether these work and whether this is something that the Government should be continuing with and putting into law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002932\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things we know about, say, the Limited Service Volunteer (LSV) programme\u2014which I know the Government was keen on and which has influenced how they have come up with these military-style academies\u2014one of the key factors of that, is the fact that the \u201CV\u201D in that is \u201Cvoluntary\u201D. This isn\u2019t going to be voluntary. The Minister just talked about the pilots 1.0 and 2.0 being voluntary and these young people volunteering themselves into it, but, in the case of the second military-style academy, two of them voluntarily withdrew themselves from that programme, as well. Now the Minister is saying that she doesn\u2019t believe there should be any ability for it to be voluntary, yet that is one of the key things that we learnt through all of this in the past.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002933\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I think is important here, when we look at the military-style academy orders\u2014and I am talking to new section 320S, which is around the duration of the military-style academy order\u2014something else that came out of the review on the first pilot programme, and possibly one of the important lessons that the Government should be taking from it, was how important it is to have a stable cohort. I want to know from the Minister how this legislation provides for a stable cohort.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002934\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn fact, in the royal commission\u2019s inquiry into abuse in State care, one of the things we learnt from that is, with new people constantly coming in and entering youth justice facilities and programmes like this, unfortunately, there is a thing that happens in terms of determining hierarchy and compliance amongst the young people, which led to all sorts of terrible abuse: initiations, those that are trying to assert themselves\u2014terrible abuse occurred in that. That is one of the issues of having people coming and going at any time that the court may sentence them to it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey also have an opportunity here around whether it\u2019s for three months or not more than 12 months. We know in the pilot programme it was three months; we know in MSA 2.0 it was a longer in-residence phase. Given the findings of that review of the first pilot about the importance of a stable cohort, can the Minister talk to new section 320S and how that is going to work practically if there is any young person who qualifies for this order, the judge is considering it and makes that\u2014will they be put on hold until there is enough of a cohort to run a programme, or will they be just coming and going according to different time frames and lengths of sentences and so on? What does that do to the stability of a cohort?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022c6e99362f79d13a5516ba9a4952d99ba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002936\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c6e99362f79d13a5516ba9a4952d99ba\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (09:11)\u003C/span\u003E: In answer to the Hon Duncan Webb\u2019s questions around what is a military-style academy and what are military-style activities, the military-style activities make up one part of the academy programme. They\u2019re not defined in the bill. In the design stage for the military-style academy pilot, Oranga Tamariki consulted with the New Zealand Defence Force and other Government agencies and community to inform itself on appropriate activities. The Limited Service Volunteer programme was used as an example of a youth orientated programme with military-style activities including marching, forming up, outdoor exercise such as confidence courses. The activities are defined by structure, routine, and overall physical and mental wellbeing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002937\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn answer to Willow-Jean around stable cohorts, the bill provides sufficient flexibility operationally to manage different types and sizes of cohorts, and those would be operational decisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022ecc2bdd4e22b1d6d224c6517207f5638\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002938\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ecc2bdd4e22b1d6d224c6517207f5638\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (09:13)\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, thank you, Mr Chair. Look, thank you for the reply in respect of what is military about military-style academies. The interesting thing about that response in terms of structured routines and what have you is that there\u2019s nothing military about it. It could\u2019ve equally been an outdoor education centre or any other framing, and for that reason I want to skip ahead one amendment to an amendment which is stamped 7.05.55, because I think if you\u2019re going to call something a military-style academy, it\u2019s going to give it a military flavour, right, and I don\u2019t just mean, you know, wearing camo pants. I want to suggest that we should be very clear that there are aspects of the military that are not part of this framework, and given the reports that there was recently an incident where a young person was beaten by walking the line when they left one of these pilots, that kind of violent overtone is something we want to avoid.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002939\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo in Dan Rosewarne\u2019s amendment\u2014a man who knows a lot about military style\u2014his amendment sets out what exactly military-style activities are and what they aren\u2019t, and I think it\u2019s what they aren\u2019t that\u2019s really important. Structured military-style activities: the suggestion has been structured, non-combat activities designed to promote discipline, teamwork, physical fitness, and personal development and can include activities such as physical training, outdoor education, and structured routines. But this is the important point, right: if you go to a military-style academy, I would half expect them to be like one of these young military academies in the United States where they do, for example, weapons drills, right, or do the parade ground holding dummy weapons.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002940\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESubclause (3) says, \u201Cdoes not include the use of any weapon\u201D, so we don\u2019t have them training how to use swords or Japanese kendo sticks or anything like that. That is a military-style thing, but we don\u2019t want it. It doesn\u2019t include any form of combat training, including martial arts, weapons training, or simulated combat. We don\u2019t want these kids learning karate or judo, because that\u2019s actually teaching them how to fight, and we want to do the opposite: we want to teach them how to not fight. That\u2019s another thing that really should be precluded, and we should preclude any activity that includes violence or the simulation of violence. I find it strange that you\u2019re going to have a military-style academy that has no kind of defence-style training. Now, I don\u2019t want to see that, but it\u2019s not really military.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002941\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet\u2019s make it clear that when someone\u2019s being asked to run one of these military-style academies, they don\u2019t give dummy rifles and say, \u201COK, on to the parade ground. We\u2019re going to teach you how to salute with your rifles.\u201D or \u201CCome on, get into the gym. I\u2019m going to teach you how to do boxing.\u201D or \u201CI\u2019m going to teach you how to do unarmed combat.\u201D, which is a classic military-style thing you do. Now, if it\u2019s \u201CI want to take you on a hike and show you how to light a fire from scratch and be self-sufficient.\u201D, I can see what you\u2019re trying to achieve, but let\u2019s be very clear that this has no aspect of the force and violence which necessarily underpins what our Defence Force does. That is the backstop of defence: force is actually what defence is about. Let\u2019s make sure that teaching young people how to use force is not part of a military-style academy, and it\u2019s in fact the opposite: it\u2019s teaching them how to avoid the use of force, how to solve problems in a way that doesn\u2019t include physical confrontation and violence. That\u2019s a really deep and fundamental concern, and I think that that amendment\u2019s one that\u2019s well worthy of serious consideration by the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u002232a0726a6d13aa895f396ece81f00f3d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002942\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002232a0726a6d13aa895f396ece81f00f3d\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (09:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Just in response, there is absolutely no intention that young people are given access to weapons or combat training The purpose and requirements of the military-style academy programme are already clearly set out in new section 320S, and I note that there are already existing laws relating to access and use of firearms and weapons that would apply.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022d4bc120b56c026557e1544b5a6a18dfb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d4bc120b56c026557e1544b5a6a18dfb\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (09:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I also have a series of questions for the Minister for new section 330S. I want to start by 330S(1)(b), and this is also similar to the kind of question I have for new section 320T, which is that the young serious\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002944\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eed7b2fda782935dd4536150ff49c6ca\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Did you say 320S or 330S?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002945\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219839f93be153b1ec268292d3b0258b7\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: 320S, yes\u2014new section 320S(1)(b), so this is page 44, line 34 I\u2019m looking at. I just want to check, with the \u201Cserious offender in the custody of the chief executive\u201D\u2014I do want to know the extent of what custody potentially means. Does it also mean, for example, taking over the legal guardianship? I\u2019m seeing, for example, 320T talks about the day-to-day care, but, for example, let\u2019s say, you know, in an event where a child needs to be going to the hospital, is the chief executive in that position considered the next of kin? You know, are they able to make certain life or death decisions around the child because the child is in the chief executive\u2019s custody? I do want to kind of check whether custody\u2014does custody have the same connotations as legal guardianship, that being my first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002946\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think the question around the definition for military-style academy programme\u2014so this is new subsection (5); paragraphs (b) and (c) are the two I want to check with the Minister for Children.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002947\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe talked a little bit about disability before. We also know that there are a lot of disabilities that are undiagnosed, etc., as young people are going through this\u2014fetal alcohol spectrum disorder being a good example. I want to check: before they are undertaking military-style activities or following a tailored programme of learning, is there any requirement for them to also be assessed for neurodivergence or for them to be assessed for certain things to determine what is actually the most appropriate tailored programme for them? Maybe there is an underlying condition they have that means they may not be able to undertake certain forms of activities. I\u2019m hoping that the framing of \u201Cto support their health, learning, and wellbeing\u201D means that there would be some form of diagnosis happening as a part of this tailored programme.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002948\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, with subsection 5(c) of new section 320S, inserted by clause 40, \u201Ctailored programme of learning to further their education, vocational, and training needs\u201D, I want to check who, then, is quality-assuring any sort of educational programme. Who is going to be doing that? Will they receive unit standards as a result? How is, for example, the Ministry of Education and the New Zealand Qualifications Authority involved in some of that training programme\u2014or is it just simply work experience? For those who are doing better, would they potentially be doing anything with the current Curriculum, or is it mainly vocational? I just want to check a few questions with the Minister for Children, and then, depending on the Minister\u2019s response, I may have a few follow-ups.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022e18b3fe82f9c588be22cb5ab435dc351\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002949\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e18b3fe82f9c588be22cb5ab435dc351\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (09:21)\u003C/span\u003E: As far as the tailored programmes for learning and further educational, vocational, and training needs go, that\u2019s standard. Some of them may be in school. Within residence, education is part of the programme. In some residences, we do have a contract with an actual school that comes into the residence, but the contracts for education are done where there are qualified teachers. It could be New Zealand Qualifications Authority level 1, 2, and 3, but it could also be things such as carpentry and things like that. It depends on the young person, and it\u2019ll be tailored around the young person.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002950\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to the support around health and learning, the member may not have been here the past few times that I\u2019ve spoken to this bill, or also in the House at question time, around this. This has been a topic that I\u2019ve answered quite a few times, but I\u2019ll answer it again because I think it is important that you have an understanding. Part of the military-style academy (MSA) was done because this behaviour didn\u2019t start when I became the Minister. These young persons\u2019 behaviours haven\u2019t just happened overnight; it\u2019s happened over a very long time, where, obviously, the supports have not been put in place for these young people and things that we\u2019ve tried in the past haven\u2019t worked.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002951\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are special clinical teams within the MSA that will be assessing the young person and their needs so that we can meet their needs and also make sure that we\u2019re wrapping around them. They will not be asked to do anything that they are either not physically capable of or mentally capable of.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u00227b3b03b2f398c25e6ffbb29e4a57fa2a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002952\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227b3b03b2f398c25e6ffbb29e4a57fa2a\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (09:23)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I do worry that we do not have enough clarity around what the military-style activities actually are. I took the opportunity to go back to some information that was released under the Official Information Act when the programme was being designed, and the Government was looking particularly closely at the Limited Service Volunteer (LSV) programme.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002953\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things that the defence force said in response is that young offenders\u2019 military-style academies are not comparable with the LSV programme for the following reasons. The LSV personnel are adults, and, in this case, we are talking about children. As I said before, it\u2019s a volunteer programme, whereas this will be a sentencing decision. In the LSV, and this is important to the conversation that we\u2019re having, and the issue was raised by Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan, they were dealing with low numbers\u2014that is less than 30 percent\u2014in the cohort with complex needs. But, with the military-style academy, we are actually talking about a 100 percent complex cohort, meaning there are major differences in their needs and also security. The military-style activities that are undertaken in LSV are for a cohort where less than 30 percent have complex needs, but the MSA, in this legislation, is for children\u2014not volunteers into the programme\u2014in a 100 percent complex cohort. Also, the difference is that the LSV is eight weeks, and this is potentially up to 12 weeks of residential detention.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002954\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have listened to the questions and the answers, but what I do not have clarity on is what exactly the military-style activities are, then, that young people will be doing when they are sentenced to a military-style academy order. Have those activities\u2014we\u2019ve had two pilots now\u2014been assessed against the 100 percent complex needs of these cohorts? Now, we know the majority of them are M\u0101ori, the majority of them have suffered trauma, the majority of them have also had identified physical abuse in recent times, and there are significant mental health issues. That is the reason why the defence force basically said you are not comparing like programmes and cohorts here. Can the Minister please tell the House, so we can have in the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E, what exactly are the military-style activities that the young people are undertaking in the military-style academy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022c27c9075c4b0c2139a68126c32213a76\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002955\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c27c9075c4b0c2139a68126c32213a76\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (09:27)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll read it again in case the Hon Willow-Jean Prime didn\u2019t hear it just a few minutes ago. They include marching, forming up, outdoor exercise, such as an outdoor gym, and confidence courses.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u002270ec15cc8e972f3f495820e6a2e3d70c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002956\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002270ec15cc8e972f3f495820e6a2e3d70c\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (09:27)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. The title clauses are far away, but given the Minister for Children\u2019s response then, I think we can just strike out \u201Cmilitary-style\u201D from the title, because there\u2019s nothing military about this, if that\u2019s the case. The fact that we have to call this \u201Cmilitary-style\u201D so that we can\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002957\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a05cb04a6a72e348c692ec0a9c42c0d5\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: Sound tough.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002958\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225cbdc2956eb8d71772b0cd62d580f5fc\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, so we can placate a portion of that Minister\u2019s electorate is a little sad, given that it\u2019s children we\u2019re dealing with. On that point, I want to discuss the tabled amendment in the name of Helen White, which is time stamped 7.05.54.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs I see the legislation, there\u2019s not a lot of guidance to the Youth Court, and I think it\u2019s section 320S(4), inserted by clause 40, which simply says, \u201CThe Youth Court may make a military-style academy order\u201D, without really giving a lot of guidance as to what it should take into account. My colleague Willow-Jean Prime has just pointed out that these young people are, by definition, complex cases and people with extremely high needs. My concern is that, if we don\u2019t give a good amount of guidance to the Youth Court as to the kinds of things they should take into account, we\u2019re going to find people in youth academies who are not well suited. We know that people who find themselves in these situations are often neurodiverse, have fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, are mentally unwell, and can have a whole raft of issues, which, because they haven\u2019t been identified and appropriately addressed, manifest themselves in entirely inappropriate behaviours. That\u2019s what we\u2019re looking at.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002960\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis tabled amendment actually just gives what I think is really appropriate guidance to say, \u201COK, when you are contemplating making this, please take these things into account. Have regard to them.\u201D Whilst the personal circumstances of the young person are kind of a global reference, there are some in there that are really important, such as whether that person has or is suspected of having fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, or whether there is any evidence of neurodiversity, cognitive impairment, or learning disabilities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002961\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs I see it, there\u2019s a good chance that if we get these people with cognitive impairment, this is not the place for them, unless the Minister can assure us otherwise. Perhaps even if that is the case, if it\u2019s perfectly designed for a cohort of people who have this cognitive impairment, or fetal alcohol syndrome, then one cohort can be specifically designed to address that. But what we do need to have is more than just \u201CWell, if a Youth Court judge thinks it\u2019s a good idea, put them in this military-style academy.\u201D We need to put some parameters around that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002962\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd, of course, it\u2019s the matching, right? Once the programme is developed, and it appears that at the moment it is still under development, we can then say, \u201COK, this is the programme that exists, these are the professionals who are on the ground there, these are the services they can deliver, these are the resources they have. Here is a young person, and if they will benefit from the resources available, all well and good. But if, in fact, given their personal circumstances, their health situation and so on, that\u2019s not the best place, and the best place is over there in some other provision of services that Oranga Tamariki is doing, then let\u2019s put them there.\u201D But, at the moment, there\u2019s just no requirement to do that matching exercise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002963\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe tabled amendment in the name of Helen White does exactly that. It says, \u201COK, look at the nature of the child, look at what services can and will be provided. Is this a good thing?\u201D In doing that, I think it will be a real step forward, so I\u2019d appreciate the Minister giving serious attention to that Amendment Paper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00228192bbe07ceb1216da1183ec8220dfe1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002964\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228192bbe07ceb1216da1183ec8220dfe1\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (09:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Just in response to Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s question around what is custody, this is a custodial order, like a standard supervision with residence order. The broader powers, duties, and principles in the Oranga Tamariki Act apply, as they do to any custodial order. It is not legal guardianship.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002965\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn response to the Hon Duncan Webb around the amendment from 7.05.54, the Oranga Tamariki Act already provides for these matters to be put before the Youth Court through the section 334 social worker\u2019s report and section 335 plan, which is provided to support the court\u2019s decision making. The court can undertake further assessments under section 333, if it so chooses. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002966\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d just like to reiterate again, from what we had to what we\u2019re trying to do. I could have continued as Minister for Children, sitting back and doing absolutely nothing, and allowing the system to be exactly how it was when I because children\u2019s Minister. What that looked like was: these young people would commit a crime, they would be put into a youth justice facility, with no rehabilitation, no support, no thought about their welfare, which is why I wish those members standing up today cared as much when they were in Government as they do now about the safety and wellbeing of children. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002967\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat happened was, they\u2019d then be released out into the same environment that they came from, with the previous Government, and Governments before, expecting a different result, until they ended up in Corrections. What this is is a circuit breaker, or a final opportunity for these young people to avoid going to a custodial sentence to Corrections.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002968\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI can\u2019t force them to change, but I can put the opportunities in front of them that they\u2019ve never had before, where they will have specialised services wrapped around them to meet their needs, and to try everything we possibly can to put the tools in their hands so that they don\u2019t end up in Corrections. You know what? I have sat here, and I have listened to some of the questions, and some of the comments around the \u201Cwalk the line\u201D and issues like that. Does that member truly want the public and the people in this House to believe that that happened overnight, since I\u2019ve become children\u2019s Minister? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002969\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESeriously, we heard about green-lighting, we heard about fight clubs that were happening within these youth justice facilities, we had regular occurrences of fight clubs being overseen by staff members, we had regular rooftop incidents that weren\u2019t dealt with, so just be careful that you are not trying to set the impression that these young people\u2019s behaviour happened overnight. Their behaviour is a consequence of years and years and years of the youth justice system being ignored, and their needs not being met.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u00221861cfabd6dd8a4ab61d5246d5fea876\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002970\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221861cfabd6dd8a4ab61d5246d5fea876\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (09:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Interesting tirade by the Minister there, and not particularly relevant to the bill in front of us, but nothing unusual there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002971\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the comments that the Minister did make was that this is incarceration. One of the concerns I have, when you\u2019re going to have this kind of academy that\u2019s not really military-style but it\u2019s an academy where they\u2019re going to have activities, is that it falls below the standards of incarceration, not only that would be required under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, but also the United Nations convention on incarceration more generally, which is generally known as the Mandela Rules.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002972\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe amendment that I\u2019m looking at now, in the name of Helen White, time-stamped at 7.05.56, touches on some of those things. In particular, it\u2019s a very well-established principle that you cannot require an incarcerated person to undertake forced labour, and, in fact, any forced activity is problematic\u2014a route march. If we think about it, it\u2019s like looking at some 1950s movie. If you\u2019ve got children who are required to go on some march, or to march around the parade ground, and they\u2019re forcing them into these activities which are intended, presumably, to make them simply compliant\u2014there\u2019s a number of amendments here, but the one I\u2019m looking at now is to clause 40, new sections 320T, and inserts \u201Cthe chief executive must ensure that no activity required under a military-style\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002973\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b93d5e4661c0fa364211daf8fc44e9a3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Have you got the time-stamp of the amendment?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002974\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226509baabaff2d0b76f3907fea4140d73\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s 7.05.56. I did touch on that, but that\u2019s all right. It proposes two amendments, one in new section 320S, which is the description of military-style academies, and it says that they mustn\u2019t require the young person to undertake any form of forced or compulsory labour, or any work or service that is extracted from the young person under threat of penalty. Of course, that\u2019s the point of forced labour. For example, if it\u2019s roast dinner on Friday night for everyone, but not for you because you didn\u2019t do this activity, that\u2019s forced labour. So we\u2019ve got to be really careful that it\u2019s not just under threat of violence, or something like that. The removal of privileges that they would otherwise get is also forced labour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002975\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, in terms of the participation, obviously it doesn\u2019t include going to your counselling session, or whatever that might be, and also tidying your room, and stuff that would be age-appropriate for that young person. I think we\u2019ve got to be careful, because you wouldn\u2019t necessarily expect a 14- or 15-year-old to peel potatoes for 40 people. In a prison you could, because that\u2019s part of the normal prison framework of preparing food for the prison generally, but I think we\u2019ve got to make sure it\u2019s age-appropriate. I think we\u2019ve got to be careful, so we don\u2019t say, \u201COK, military-style academy means around here you pull your weight. Mop the floor of the gymnasium.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002976\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI can see how it would be an easy step to go there, but that would be really troubling, because it would be requiring them to do work which is forced servitude. There\u2019s actually a fine line, and perhaps this is the point about the military style, because it\u2019s the whole idea that you can order people to do stuff. I get that you can order people to engage in their rehabilitative programmes, but as soon as you start ordering them to do stuff which is, essentially, a kind of labour, we\u2019re getting into troubling territory, and that is kind of what I see as the military-style aspect of it being: \u201CGo and mop out the bathrooms.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002977\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d be interested to know where and how, even if you don\u2019t accept this tabled amendment, operationally you will make sure that there is a clear division between engaging in appropriate activity and not requiring servitude from these young people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00226887e3bea804831819304ff83d201158\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002978\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226887e3bea804831819304ff83d201158\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (09:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, forced or compulsory labour is already unlawful under existing New Zealand law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u002230570bfd9de393ad190d69ffd144ed68\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002979\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002230570bfd9de393ad190d69ffd144ed68\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (09:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Can I just ask the Minister for Children: the list that she read out, which she gave in an earlier answer\u2014is that a particular section in the legislation that you read that out from?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00229f1db66898a456a80ad0b250b7d6ee90\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002980\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229f1db66898a456a80ad0b250b7d6ee90\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (09:40)\u003C/span\u003E: I have spoken to this many times in this House and under questioning, and also on advice that has been given to me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002981\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224642f23b495ec813f67688c8ad2e90bb\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, Mr Chair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002982\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296b0362f4c6533ba2f1b7cc87e4648ef\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR\u003C/span\u003E: It was upon advice that was given to me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u002287486ccc231d53208eeda14922941624\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002983\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002287486ccc231d53208eeda14922941624\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (09:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I just wanted that clarification\u2014that that is not actually outlined in the law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOnce again, we have a situation, because we had this last night when I sought clarification and assurances from the Minister for Children about what sorts of compassionate grounds might apply for somebody wanting to leave the programme. I put some particular scenarios to the Minister, because the section has things that it includes, but it doesn\u2019t say, \u201Cbut is not limited to\u201D. Now we are expected to attach\u2014staple to this bill\u2014the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E so that, when it is before a court, they can read the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E and read the bill, which doesn\u2019t stipulate these things, to understand it. We have a similar situation here with what those activities actually are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002985\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt was a genuine question to the Minister. In which section of the Act is that list provided, so that we can know, in the future, if we hear there are new military-style activities, where that was\u2014we didn\u2019t talk about the possibility of those things in the House. I\u2019m not sure whether the Minister has received further advice on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002986\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226272c2b2317cd7d8e741c6076c023f49\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: I think the Minister is going to respond.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00229245e411118122c7226f6a737a459e0d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002987\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229245e411118122c7226f6a737a459e0d\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (09:42)\u003C/span\u003E: New section 320S(5) is where the elements of the military-style academies are listed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u002259d798902ebb6103a9caa08b6b366ab2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002988\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002259d798902ebb6103a9caa08b6b366ab2\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (09:42)\u003C/span\u003E: I am looking at that, and I can\u2019t see the list that you outlined in there\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002989\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274f59cb6233c9a21154101cf68c459f4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: 320S(5).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002990\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a9371993b781469a040e6b8b313a0ba2\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME\u003C/span\u003E: Is that the list you read when you were responding to my question earlier?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022a87e6cc576fe82658a4956eba4a60ee5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002991\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a87e6cc576fe82658a4956eba4a60ee5\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (09:42)\u003C/span\u003E: The list that I read was from advice that was given to me. You asked where the elements of the military-style academies were listed. I just gave you the section.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u00226885854681c5fd84146e606b8c9bf43e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002992\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226885854681c5fd84146e606b8c9bf43e\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (09:42)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m still not clear, and I am not trifling with the Minister or with the Chair. Maybe you could read that list again and you could point me to subsection (5) so that I can compare that they are exactly worded like that in here, so that we are using the same things. Or is it that that is additional advice, and examples of it, and that it\u2019s not in the legislation and we\u2019re to staple the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E to the legislation? That is a genuine question. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EPause\u003C/span\u003E] I\u2019m not sure whether the Minister just doesn\u2019t want to answer that or whether she needs more time to get that advice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002993\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220eea4dc3c8b3d218c9d9acf86abfc9e9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: We can give it more time. Maybe just move on to something else.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022599e6d95a285e610adedc60390096670\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME\u003C/span\u003E: It is a genuine question. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002995\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am just wanting to pick up on the points that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb was making about our tabled amendments. He has spoken to the voluntary or involuntary labour aspect of it. I have a few concerns about that, because I have heard of situations where young people lose the benefits that they might have in youth justice facilities for behavioural reasons, for not complying with whatever the staff are expecting of them in order to receive those benefits. An example I have heard is that they were going to have their gym entitlements taken away from them. I just wonder if similar approaches and strategies will be used to achieve compliance in these military-style academies (MSA).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002996\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EActually, one of the concerning things I heard about the MSA pilot 1.0 was that when the young people went back into the community, some of the mentors had an understanding\u2014perhaps a misunderstanding\u2014of what the military-style academy and bootcamp was and were strictly trying to enforce wake-up times and coming to programmes, running it in a way that they were bootcamp-ing this thing, and that caused conflict and tension between young people and their mentors. I don\u2019t think it\u2019s clear enough for everybody, whether it\u2019s in-residence or in-community, what \u201Cmilitary-style\u201D actually means. I know the Minister doesn\u2019t like us using the term \u201Cbootcamp\u201D, but for a lot of people, that\u2019s what they think, and then they have these ideas of what it means we are asking young people to do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002997\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is a lot in that for the Minister. I am keen to get that clarification on the earlier point that I asked, and also in terms of these benefits that they get that may be taken away because they are not following orders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00229190d6dc46d0ceacb54be778a83983a2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002998\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229190d6dc46d0ceacb54be778a83983a2\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (09:46)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s called life. As a child, if you behave well, sometimes you get nice things. As a parent, if your child misbehaves, sometimes you take things away from them when they misbehave. As a parent, you get your children to wake up in the morning and get out of bed in the morning and go to school and do the activities that are expected of them. That\u2019s called life.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022488982d364c5a50795e43f1f9af25055\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0002999\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022488982d364c5a50795e43f1f9af25055\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (09:46)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I want to return again to minimum standards of incarceration, and it\u2019s something that, in the Justice Committee, we\u2019ve been very focused on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhilst I haven\u2019t had the opportunity to go through the facility that is being used, I am interested to understand whether these young people will be given the minimum rights that are expected\u2014either by adoption of tabled amendment 7.05.58, which talks about minimum standards. For example, one of the standards that\u2019s well recognised is that a room that\u2019s given\u2014in a prison, it\u2019d be called a \u201Ccell\u201D, but here it\u2019s just a \u201Croom\u201D\u2014should be at least six square metres, and, also, that the rooms should not really be shared. I mean, one of my questions is: is there going to be double-bunking, or does each young person have their own private space?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing is this: does the young person have minimum visiting hours? If you\u2019re incarcerated in a prison, you have a weekly entitlement to visiting hours and you have a daily entitlement to exercise. Minister, these are things that you can\u2019t get taken away because you don\u2019t comply.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002287b24184fae73c2f9742a3027bf773cb\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, but that\u2019s life!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022acc688dbd0fec604c2a11584b4dc2b3e\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: Exactly, Willow-Jean Prime. These are baseline entitlements, and whilst the Minister might say, \u201CYou\u2019re not playing computer games tonight, because I\u2019m going to switch the internet off\u201D\u2014that\u2019s one thing\u2014to say, \u201CYou can\u2019t have exercise today, because you haven\u2019t done what I have asked\u201D is actually a breach of fundamental rights. The other one, of course, is telephone calls. In prison, you get a weekly allowance of telephone calls regardless, and they\u2019re absolute minimum entitlements. Corrections, in fact, often talks about how they desperately try to give over the entitlement but always try to achieve the minimum.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI\u2019m really interested in things like that, in terms of outdoor exercise, telephone calls, visiting rights, and also a room of an appropriate size that is used by only one person. They\u2019re pretty well listed there on the tabled amendment in front of the Minister, so I\u2019d be very interested to understand that. Of course, the appropriate standards are drawn straight out of the United Nations\u2019 standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners. Now, these are not prisoners; these are children, so, in fact, you\u2019d hope that the quality of these rights\u2014visiting, telephone, exercise\u2014would be higher than for adult prisoners. I\u2019m asking: if we pick the lowest possible baseline, the treatment of prisoners under the Mandela rules, will these young people be treated at a minimum as well as incarcerated prisoners under those rules?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022e454ad542c3c0a5fb9e1e44c2d2b4e3f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e454ad542c3c0a5fb9e1e44c2d2b4e3f\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (09:50)\u003C/span\u003E: The residential care regulations and national care standards regulations apply to the young people on the military-style academy order. All young people within a youth justice residence have their own room and space. There is no double bunking. There is none of the issues that that member has just raised. They are not locked inside their room like in a Corrections environment, and they\u2019re actually in an open-plan environment most of the day. They are entitled to support whenever they would like it. They have oversight of the Ombudsman, the Children\u2019s Commissioner, the Independent Children\u2019s Monitor, grievance panels, their lawyers, their parents, and their social worker, so, actually, they have a higher standard of care.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u0022b25586bd928af2517fcec6e0d52f1fd4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b25586bd928af2517fcec6e0d52f1fd4\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (09:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just in response to what the Minister said there in that big long list of things that are supposed to be there to ensure that, I have heard examples of where their ability to access the gym is being threatened to be taken away because they are not complying with whatever it is that the kaimahi are expecting of them in the youth justice facilities. Is that an entitlement or a reward system? The Minister said, \u201CWell, this is life.\u201D These children, the chief executive of Oranga Tamariki is their parent, and their homes are these youth justice facilities, and we have heard a number of cases of where there have been issues with kaimahi in these youth justice facilities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00222c402cdc64f91d379bb835d6baf28413\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222c402cdc64f91d379bb835d6baf28413\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (09:51)\u003C/span\u003E: As I\u2019ve said, these issues with kaimahi within youth justice facilities haven\u2019t happened overnight. There is a lot of work to do to change the culture, and lots of work has happened to professionalise that workforce\u2014work that had never been done before within our youth justice residences. If that member wants to stand up and pretend like that has never happened in the past and that she\u2019s going to come and save them all, I can assure members of the public that when that member was in Government, she didn\u2019t care as much as she cares now. But what I would say is a gym is a privilege. The gym has been set up as an extra activity. It is a privilege to be using it. This is life. There are consequences for young people in every household in this country. If you want to use something that has been given to you as a privilege, then you behave.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u0022ef3bd744ab4e72f03790c93f661bad26\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ef3bd744ab4e72f03790c93f661bad26\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (09:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that was an interesting response from the Minister. When these military-style academies were introduced in the pilot before now being passed into law, questions were put to the Minister about the safety of our youth justice facilities, and she is rightly pointing to issues that have happened in our youth justice facilities both under previous Governments and under this Government. What she said at the time was that she was satisfied and confident that they are now safe\u2014safe to be able to set up a military-style academy, put it into law, and sentence children to these military-style academies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we have seen the entire time is a number of serious incidents in our youth justice facilities. I use Korowai Manaaki as an example where that walk-the-line incident happened that we\u2019ve been talking about recently. But there have been other incidents that have also occurred, including rooftop incidents and other harm caused to young people. I put the questions to the Minister, in Estimates and annual reviews, about her confidence in the management of Korowai Manaaki and our youth justice facilities. Once again, the Minister said that she was absolutely confident in the management. That was before we then had this walk-the-line incident. I\u2019ve asked the Minister about a recent incident I understand happened at Te Maioha, another youth justice facility, where a young person, I understand, had to be taken to hospital after an assault occurred.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister is standing up in the House and saying all of these things, casting things on to me about this. It is my job to ask these questions of the Minister. She gave us assurances that there were no safety issues anymore, that they had been sorted, and that she had absolute confidence in Korowai Manaaki, and yet we have more incidents occurring. I\u2019m not imagining this. This is not a hypothetical situation. We had assaults occurring in the military-style academy 2.0. Two young people have left. So would the Minister, please, speak to those issues?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022674cd894c05a816b6de5aa48c7518b25\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022674cd894c05a816b6de5aa48c7518b25\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (09:55)\u003C/span\u003E: I have never stood in this Chamber and guaranteed that no harm would come to young people. I have actually said on multiple occasions that I cannot guarantee that no harm will ever happen. But what I can guarantee is that we have worked really hard over the last three years since I\u2019ve been in Government to put in place safety mechanisms to make those youth justice facilities the safest they\u2019ve been in a really long time, where we\u2019ve had the first drop in history of a 14\u00A0percent reduction in harm in our residences because we have put professionalisation of the workforce ahead of everything else. I cannot guarantee that nothing is ever going to happen within a youth justice facility. I have never stood in this Chamber and stated that nothing is ever going to happen. I\u2019ve actually said the opposite.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EBut what I will say is that when harm does occur, we will do everything within the law, the power of the law, to hold those people to account and make sure that the culture changes within these spaces. That does not change the fact that these young people have committed serious offences, offences that would give them a sentence of 10 years or more, and we have to take into account the safety of the community and the safety of these young people and make sure we put something in place and try and help them to turn their lives around. Whether they take up their opportunity or not is up to them. I cannot force them to change their behaviours, and if they don\u2019t, unfortunately, what will happen is they will end up in our correction system. But at least I can stand here and say I did everything I possibly could to put things in front of them to stop that from happening. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u002259eb53410dfaadc2ae021ee42c95ffdf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002259eb53410dfaadc2ae021ee42c95ffdf\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (09:57)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, I was really concerned to hear that the Minister thinks it\u2019s OK to take exercise rights away from a young person who\u2019s being detained, because exercise is a privilege. I don\u2019t think it is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022911d5172f39c9d309847478a51dab01f\u0022\u003EHon Karen Chhour\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220fe39f90d3264b254a5c5c5c4857e5bd\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: No, no, sorry, I\u2019ve got the call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e997846277797e890e94b1987b3309ae\u0022\u003EHon Karen Chhour\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Chair. I have never said I\u2019ll take the right of exercise away from young people. They may take the right of a gym away, but that\u2019s not taking their right of exercise away.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ac0981ed5c7bb4036022ec94d8acc579\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Would the Minister sit down please. I don\u2019t think that\u2019s a point of order. I take the Minister\u2019s point, but that\u2019s not a point of order. I will ask the Hon Dr Duncan Webb to continue. However, before we do that, there is engagement happening here. The Minister is addressing issues that are being raised. I understand that the Opposition MPs don\u2019t like the way that the Minister has been addressing those issues, but the point is: they are being addressed. I do want to be able to note that, and also I am taking note that once these issues are being addressed\u2014clearly not to the satisfaction of all members\u2014then we should move on to other issues that members might have that need to be addressed. Let\u2019s continue, the Hon Dr Duncan Webb.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002280d6066e585d1bea3ecb86b7c692542c\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Again, Minister, using a point of order to argue the point as to whether removing the right to a gym is removing the right to exercise, I think, is dancing on the head of a pin there, but I want to move on to the use of violence within these facilities, because\u2014and I can\u2019t understand why\u2014the legislation enables the use of force on these young people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister has time and again pointed out that these young people have been engaged with very serious offending, and some of that will be violent offending and, therefore, there will be instances where it\u2019s necessary to use force. If they\u2019re being disruptive or posing risks to other people, it will be necessary to use force, and that\u2019s touched on in the tabled amendment in the name of Dan Rosewarne at 7.05.59.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is about legislation. The Minister has referred to rules and regulations on a number of occasions, but the framing around the use of force needs to be very careful. Now, in the corrections framework, the Department of Corrections can actually use weapons, right, and a Taser is a really good example. Let\u2019s just remember one thing: Tasers can be lethal. There are recorded instances of people dying by the use of Tasers, and, in fact, in the Corrections Act, they were referred to as non-lethal weapons and that was removed. The name was changed to \u201Cless-lethal\u201D because they\u2019re not intended to kill, obviously. They\u2019re intended to disable, but they\u2019re very dangerous things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe proposed amendment recognises that physical force is authorised, but it says that it doesn\u2019t include any weapon so that the supervisors, or the people who are in charge of these young people\u2014yes, they may have to restrain them and they may have to put them in a room where they are kept safe from themselves and others are kept safe from them. But I just want to make it clear that the use of things like conducted electrical weapons\u2014that is, Tasers\u2014or other devices designed to inflict pain or incapacitate beyond reasonable physical contact\u2014and batons are another example. In times gone by, the use of batons was commonplace. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d be interested to understand from the Minister whether she agrees with the fact that no weapons should be used against these children, or, if she is not of that view and doesn\u2019t want to adopt this amendment, what weapons are used and are permissible, and does she approve of the use of them in these facilities? Given, of course, that for many of these children violence has become a hallmark of their lives, both in the home and outside of home, and it\u2019s kind of now become learnt behaviour, I\u2019d be very interested to understand the Government\u2019s view as to the use of force and, in particular, the use of weapons against the young people who are in these facilities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022fad4fc4c1ddb802fd844248e163e4cd7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fad4fc4c1ddb802fd844248e163e4cd7\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (10:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Just remember that these are young people still under the Oranga Tamariki Act provisions, and no physical restraints are acceptable. I can assure the member that staff do not carry Tasers or batons, and I can assure the public that no staff member will have those items that he has referred to and that safeguards relating to the use of force have been taken into consideration.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe training has been put in place across, not just the military-style academy, but across the youth justice system as a whole to require de-escalation techniques to be learnt. These must be used first in all cases of reasonable use of force, and then also when it is noted that an incident has happened, there must be a health professional check after each use of force. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do not feel that this amendment is necessary, because other laws such as the Arms Act place adequate restrictions on possession of weapons, such as firearms and Tasers. Any use of force by Oranga Tamariki providers must be reasonably necessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u002202c1f4b210146966847b5e2a43cc29f2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002202c1f4b210146966847b5e2a43cc29f2\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (10:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just following up on that, I have got the Oranga Tamariki Act here before me, as well as this amendment, and I\u2019m interested whether the Minister could just explain, because the next amendment in the bundle, which is time-stamped at 7.06.00, actually talks about the recording of the use of force and it sets out some frameworks around that. I do think that legislation is the place for that to be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the Minister seems to have alluded to the fact that use of force is recorded and disclosed, and if that\u2019s the case, I think that\u2019s a good thing and I\u2019d be keen for the Minister to just explain how that happens. I do think, though, that the amendment\u2014which, essentially, says that the chief executive and their delegates are going to have to record uses of force in detail and why it was used, and also annually report that in the annual report of Oranga Tamariki so that we can track how this is going. Now, if in fact the Minister is saying that that happens already, I\u2019d be interested to understand whether that happens already because of an internal practice of Oranga Tamariki, or whether there is a legislative requirement in the Act that somehow I\u2019ve missed\u2014which is, of course, entirely possible as it\u2019s a pretty comprehensive Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess the other thing is whether the recording includes injuries to young people because\u2014you know, I get it: we talk about young people, but that\u2019s not to say that they\u2019re not large people, and they can be pretty difficult to restrain when they\u2019re elevated. I\u2019d be interested to understand whether there\u2019s a legislative or a regulatory framework for reporting already and, if not, whether this amendment would be contemplated, and, in terms of the reporting that does occur, what the extent and detail of that reporting is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022d87d486f0e54b3f8da553ecb3d710de7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d87d486f0e54b3f8da553ecb3d710de7\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (10:06)\u003C/span\u003E: It would be regulations. The bill already provides for safeguards relating to the use of force, and further safeguards will be provided for within the regulations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAcross our youth justice facilities, it is standard practice that if there is any incident where any form of harm has occurred or any injury has occurred, it is recorded and it is followed up by either the nurses or, if need be, other health professionals. From the report, some of the injuries recorded were sunburn, a cut finger, and a slip in a shower. They\u2019re very thorough about what they record because we need to make sure that we are following up if any hurt or harm has happened.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u0022cf0589ce3a67986c14c0f5e4ac4e5443\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cf0589ce3a67986c14c0f5e4ac4e5443\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (10:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just in terms of that, though, Minister, I am worried: how can we be sure that everything is actually being reported? That\u2019s fine if it is being reported, but I have exposed instances where these things haven\u2019t been reported, and there is no record of them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf we go back to the walking-the-line incident at Korowai Manaaki, that happened back in March, I think it was, and it wasn\u2019t actually brought forward until July or August\u2014July, I think it was. It was in late July, maybe, and so it didn\u2019t get reported, it wasn\u2019t accounted for at the time, and the young person wasn\u2019t examined when the incident happened. That was, I understand, caught on CCTV footage, and so this still relies on staff actually reporting when things occur.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, when we look at the military-style academy 2.0, two assaults occurred. Were they reported at the time that they occurred? Were the young people given medical examinations and support at the time that they happened? Was that a use-of-force situation, or are we talking about young people on young people? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think the Hon Dr Duncan Webb asks a good question about this: is that a matter of practice, or is that legislated for? I\u2019m concerned that some of these things are being left to regulations, so we haven\u2019t even had the opportunity to look at what those regulations are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe point I would make about that too, Minister, is that this bill has actually taken a really long time to come through Parliament. Those things could have been drafted in order for us to be talking about what is actually going into the regulations for this. I just put those real-life scenarios to the Minister and I seek some understanding and assurance that what she\u2019s saying, on the one hand, with the reporting and recording versus what\u2019s actually happening in practice isn\u2019t going to be a problem for us with military-style academies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00228c835db621337d7970131912a6ab1e1a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228c835db621337d7970131912a6ab1e1a\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (10:10)\u003C/span\u003E: I just want to be very careful with how I respond to this, because I won\u2019t be speaking to individual employment matters within this space\u2014that\u2019s not fair on the staff or the young people that have been mentioned just before. I did make this statement when I first stood up today\u2014that I wouldn\u2019t be responding to individual matters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn an overall matter, if an issue has been missed or overlooked, and nobody has reported it when that incident happened, my expectation is if somebody raises that issue\u2014whether it be days, weeks, or months after that has happened\u2014that a process is under way, that we listen to whoever has raised that issue, that staff and young people can feel they have the confidence to be listened to, that the process is in place as soon as somebody speaks up and says, \u201CThis happened to me and it may have been a while ago.\u201D, that an investigation does start, that a report does happen, that the person who reported that harm may have come to them is spoken to. We may not be able to examine for physical injuries further along the pathway, but we can still have conversations with them about what had happened and investigate it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENot everything is going to be picked up, and I wish it was, to be honest. Nothing like this should happen. But when it does and when somebody does speak up, my expectation is that investigations happen, employment law is followed, and we do everything that we possibly can to protect the young people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u002246bb0fc38f6c47dc388103e8bb7f6a24\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002246bb0fc38f6c47dc388103e8bb7f6a24\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (10:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I thank the Minister for Children for those answers. I just wonder what more the Minister could do. I appreciate she is not talking to the specific examples that I have given, and I understand her reasons for that, but I want to know what more the Minister could be doing, because we have examples of where it isn\u2019t being reported.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, it is a very serious situation when we\u2019re talking about the use of force. I invite the Minister to talk about what more could perhaps happen, given that we have live examples of it happening in wider youth justice and also in the military-style academies? Obviously, what\u2019s been done to date in terms of resets and training and so on is still resulting in an under-reporting of actual physical assaults and harm that is happening within youth justice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022fab496cbbf842c08695b0143a6d9d699\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fab496cbbf842c08695b0143a6d9d699\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (10:13)\u003C/span\u003E: I understand the concerns. What more can I do? Well, honestly, I have put every single effort I possibly can into professionalising the workforce, which means that there is no escape of saying that they don\u2019t understand their obligations when using force. Before, there were never really any standard operating practices within our youth justice facilities, so staff didn\u2019t really have an understanding of the expectations of their behaviours or the consequences of their behaviours, and there was really no accountability for poor culture within youth justice. By implementing the standard operating practices within our youth justice residences, putting training in place around the use of force provisions, it sets the expectations upon those staff of what is acceptable and not acceptable, but also it allows us a stronger response in our consequences if they do cross the line in their behaviour with our young people. If they do\u2014if their use of force is unacceptable\u2014there is no pleading ignorance, because they have actually had that training, and we can have a heavier hand with the accountability.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226dd686f1a9dc783c8e34503904326694\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Just before I take the next call, and it will be over to the Hon Dr Duncan Webb, I appreciate the engagement from members to date, particularly on this section here, but I do note that Subpart 4 there is quite wide-ranging, so there might be other issues that members might be interested in canvassing. I\u2019ll go to the Hon Dr Duncan Webb. I just also note that the Minister has been addressing questions\u2014I appreciate that it might not be to the satisfaction of members, but I\u2019ll go to the Hon Dr Duncan Webb.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022e23d1486e7d64b7ea77ce9990efca2e5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e23d1486e7d64b7ea77ce9990efca2e5\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (10:15)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, happy to move on. Subpart 4 is globally about, obviously, the military-style academies. I\u2019m happy to move on to another aspect of it, in particular new section 320ZC, inserted by clause 40. This is actually a bit of a mirror section of a section that deals with our young serious offenders. I\u2019m just concerned, because this is an ability to cancel or vary a military-style academy order or plan on compassionate grounds. I\u2019m just, again, concerned that whilst\u2014and it\u2019s new section 320ZC(2), which sets out the grounds upon which an application may be made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s interesting\u2014it\u2019s a strange way to phrase it. It says, \u201CThe only grounds on which an application may be made under subsection (1) are compassionate grounds, including that\u2014\u201D. Firstly, \u201Conly \u2026 compassionate\u201D is a little odd as well. Now, I\u2019m not going to try and imagine grounds which are not compassionate but are still compelling, but I would have thought that there could be grounds which are not compassionate grounds but are nevertheless compelling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen we have this very narrow framing of what a compassionate ground is. There\u2019s a statutory interpretation device\u2014the Latin is noscitur a sociis. That is to say: when you look at the words that are associated with it and you get the flavour of what compassionate means by that set of words. It\u2019s actually a really high threshold. A judge looking at this will say, \u201CWell, OK, it\u2019s not one of the listed things, but is it something similar that meets a threshold that is that high?\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAn \u201Celigible young serious offender \u2026 is expected soon to give birth, to a child\u201D\u2014it might be that the young person has just got pregnant but they\u2019re suffering from terrible morning sickness. Again, a \u201Cyoung serious offender is seriously ill and unlikely to recover;\u201D\u2014they have to be dying, which seems extraordinary. The idea that you\u2019ve got someone who is seriously ill but they\u2019ve got a pathway across six months to recover, but you\u2019re going to keep them in\u2014and, of course, if that\u2019s the situation, it falls squarely within this framing. It\u2019s not a compassionate ground, because the compassionate ground requires that you are unlikely to recover. Seriously, a \u201Cparent or guardian \u2026 is \u2026 ill and unlikely to recover.\u201D, but not their sibling. You could have a loved sister who is ill and you want to be by their bedside, but you can\u2019t, because it says it\u2019s a parent or guardian. That kind of tells you what the family connection needs to be, because if it had meant family member, they would have said \u201Cfamily member\u201D or \u201Cclose family member\u201D or \u201Cextended wh\u0101nau\u201D or something like that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI really think there are problems around the way in which this is framed. That\u2019s why the amendment 7.05.01 sets out\u2014firstly, it lowers the bar on all of those things: they are pregnant, they are seriously ill. But also you really do need a catch-all. I\u2019m surprised\u2014well, perhaps I\u2019m not surprised that these kinds of changes weren\u2019t made earlier, because the Minister doesn\u2019t seem to be interested in them, but any other circumstances where, in the opinion of the court, continuation of the order would be unjust or inappropriate, having regard to the wellbeing of the young person.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s actually a really boring suggestion, because it\u2019s kind of obvious. Yet I can see judges\u2014they\u2019ve got one of two options, right: either declining an order they know they want to grant, or making an order allowing them to leave, but doing so in a way which is stretching the law beyond breaking point. Neither of those are good options. It would be much better if we just drafted a good law here and now that doesn\u2019t put judicial officers in a terrible situation to decide and children stuck in camps in situations where any compassionate person would know they should be sent home.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022cd6c8d847995a28f2ee70d3aaa7835f5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cd6c8d847995a28f2ee70d3aaa7835f5\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (10:20)\u003C/span\u003E: We covered this section extensively last night.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u00221a96c0047596795b0c08c283e3ab8f99\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221a96c0047596795b0c08c283e3ab8f99\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (10:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Maybe the Minister for Children doesn\u2019t understand her own legislation. Section 320Q, inserted by clause 4, is in terms of the young serious offender order; section 320ZC, inserted by clause 40, is actually in terms of the military-style academy order, so it\u2019s a different section.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022f27cfceb738661a8cc3a83ba9363c3e7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f27cfceb738661a8cc3a83ba9363c3e7\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (10:20)\u003C/span\u003E: The compassionate grounds as drafted in section 320ZC, inserted by clause 4, reflect my intention exactly the same as in section 320Q, inserted by clause 4: that the military-style academy order will only be cancelled in very limited circumstances. I covered that yesterday. Compassionate leave, in both instances, should be in very limited circumstances.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u002210aea86febb75353143a72132ac67f9d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002210aea86febb75353143a72132ac67f9d\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (10:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Should we then take that part of the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E where you gave an explanation and assurances about other things that may or not be compassionate and staple it to this section as well? I think that\u2019s what the Minister for Children is saying\u2014because they are actually two different sections.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESorry, Mr Chair, I do want to go back, but it is a new point on the use of force. We\u2019ve talked here, so far, about the use of force in residences. There\u2019s an important provision in here where they\u2019re actually extending the use of force to outside of residences. When you think about the military-style academy programme, we have a component of it in residence, and then we have a component of it in community. Possibly even in residence, they could go out into the community on programmes and overnight stays, for example. What section 320W(1)(b) inserted by clause 40, does is it extends those use-of-force powers that Oranga Tamariki staff currently\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d814229444324d69dee439efab3a7c56\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Section 320-what, sorry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214416c23d534c703e8b5d0c2a338b6f0\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME\u003C/span\u003E: Section 320W(1)(b), which is about extending the use of force, says, \u201Cthe use of such physical force is reasonably necessary to prevent the eligible young serious offender who is subject to the order from being harmed, harming themselves, or harming another: (b) an approved worker of a qualifying provider\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, we had a lot of submissions on this in the Social Services and Community Committee, and we had a lot of conversation about this. The Minister, in her answers to previous contributions and sections, has talked about all of the guidelines, I think she said, being there for staff, as well as the training that they are receiving, but it is envisaged in this legislation that the programmes can take place outside of youth justice facilities and outside of Oranga Tamariki provision, and that it could be whoever these qualifying providers are, and they are going to be given use-of-force powers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe do have to take a moment to reflect on what we learned from the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care, about what happened Te Whakapakari and other boot camps, academies, corrective training, and borstals that existed. Where qualifying providers are going to be given use-of-force powers, what safeguards\u2014and I understand that a lot of this is being left to regulation, and I\u2019ve already noted I have a concern that these are significant things that are happening in this legislation, and so much of it is being left to regulation. We have not had the benefit of actually seeing any of that detailed for us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to ask the Minister what confidence and assurances she can give us that qualifying providers are going to use those use-of-force powers appropriately. How is that going to be monitored? Who is going to oversee that? You only have to look at what happened in Te Whakapakari and other cases like that, where that oversight was not there and terrible, terrible abuse and harm occurred.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9a94104aa834d70a56802ea1f8365ae\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94104aa834d70a56802ea1f8365ae\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (10:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just in regards to that, a lot of the pushback that I\u2019ve been hearing today around the military-style academy is that members maybe don\u2019t necessarily feel that a programme being run behind a youth justice facility is an appropriate environment for these young people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe provisions in clause 40 actually set up the ability for providers to offer a different environment for the military-style academy to be run outside of youth justice residences. I feel it\u2019s entirely appropriate that this is to happen, because part of my focus since I\u2019ve become Minister is actually getting community, hap\u016B, and iwi up and down the country a bigger say and a bigger voice in what happens to young people within their communities. This is something that members on the opposite side of the House have also been asking for, so I\u2019m kind of a little bit confused as to why the member would be against allowing iwi, hap\u016B, and community organisations to step up and actually provide an environment which in those members\u2019 minds is better than behind a youth justice facility, which we can\u2019t do under current law. This will change that and give us the ability to allow other providers to step in and help these young people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EQualifying providers will have an important role in the delivery of these programmes, and that\u2019s why the flexibility of these programmes is so important\u2014to make sure that we can have providers to be able to put together a programme specific to the needs of that young person within their community. They\u2019ll be able to offer a variety of programmes to young people outside of that setting\u2014for example, on marae or within iwi or hap\u016B, and this will enhance the support and experiences available to those young people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EQualifying providers will need to be approved and go through a process to become approved. They will have the same expectations upon them as would the youth justice residence that is running the programme, and they will also have the same oversight. They will have the oversight of the Ombudsman; they will have the oversight of the Independent Children\u2019s Monitor; they\u2019ll have the oversight of their social worker; they\u2019ll have the oversight of their lawyer; they\u2019ll have the oversight of their grievance panels. They will have the same oversight, but a much better environment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u00225b0e9175983760b2a6643e327d28505f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225b0e9175983760b2a6643e327d28505f\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (10:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. To the Minister for Children, my questions were specifically about the extension of the use-of-force powers to those qualifying providers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs she was describing the types of groups that might become one of those qualifying providers\u2014like, for example, iwi, hap\u016B, and they might do this on the marae\u2014I had these thoughts about\u2014is the expectation, in extending the use of force, to qualify that if a young person were trying to abscond from the marae, their M\u0101ori provider would run and tackle them, restrain them, and physically stop them from absconding or leaving? They can\u2019t currently do that, but this is giving them now the ability to do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to understand what the Government is asking these providers to do in the delivery of their military-style academy. I mean, what could possibly go wrong with that? Well, we know what can go wrong with that; we had a whole royal commission into abuse in State care. There is an expectation that they will use reasonable force on young people to stop them from absconding, being harmed, harming themselves, or harming another.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u002258896b2875cb6de7bf4426101d33b4dd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002258896b2875cb6de7bf4426101d33b4dd\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (10:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, because reasonable use of force is to protect a young person from hurting or harming somebody else or hurting or harming themselves. That\u2019s entirely appropriate. This is giving the ability for those organisations to put their hands up to provide a service. They must qualify to provide that service. The same training will be put in place and the same expectations will be in place. No one is forcing a community provider to do this, but this is about opening up opportunities for providers to put their hands up and work in this space.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022a8420ca5b7179d8e33a459946cd0c399\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a8420ca5b7179d8e33a459946cd0c399\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (10:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I\u2019d just note that I do think that there was one aspect of that question that the Minister for Children didn\u2019t address, because the question of use of force to protect the young person or somebody else is a well-established threshold. The bit of the question that didn\u2019t get answered was whether the use of force by a contractor was appropriate where someone was absconding, so if the Minister could address that. I think that was the right question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220436984f93f01af2fae7053f666b05b6\u0022\u003EHon Willow-Jean Prime\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, that\u2019s right, and, I mean, we had one of those in the pilot.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c01505e86b9812f008daca473bfdf21\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: That would be good for the record to understand that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI actually wanted to touch on something that\u2019s a little bit technical, but I think it\u2019s quite important, because there have been instances when people have been incarcerated and they\u2019ve been kept incarcerated for too long, or, worse, I\u2019ve seen situations where they\u2019ve been released early and then gone and been retrieved. This is new section 320ZE, inserted by clause 40, and it\u2019s about when a military-style academy order ceases to have effect. One of the challenges here is that it appears that you get this day called a \u201Crelease day\u201D, and it\u2019s unclear when on that day they\u2019re released. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe amendment, in fact, in my name\u2014this one\u2014time stamped 07.06.02, suggests that you should actually have a time of day where it\u2019s the latest time of day you can release someone. That\u2019s my first point, and I suggest that it be 3 p.m. so that there\u2019s time for that person to arrange transport, because the last thing you want is for this person to be released at 6 o\u2019clock or 9 o\u2019clock at night. That just makes it really clear that \u201Crelease day\u201D means release on or before 3 p.m. I\u2019d be interested in the Minister\u2019s comments on that. It\u2019s partly administrative, but I think it\u2019s important as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other one is this idea of there being non-release days. I just want to make sure I\u2019ve got this right, because you\u2019ve got these non-release days\u2014and I understand what they are: weekends, public holidays, and also the interesting one is a day in the period commencing with 25 December and then up to 15 January, so that\u2019s a period of over three weeks. I think subsection (2) says that you\u2019ve got to release the young person before the non-release days. If the release day would have fallen on 15 January, then you\u2019ve got to release them on 24 December; but if 24 December is a Sunday, then you\u2019ve got to release them on 22 December, which will be a Friday, which means, essentially, that their period in the youth academy is cut short by nearly a month.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I guess my question is: have I got that right, and is that the intention of the legislation? It does strike me as odd that you\u2019ll have judges who will be looking at it thinking, \u201COh, well, we can\u2019t have it expiring on 15 January, so we\u2019ll have it expiring on 16 January.\u201D, and making strange decisions like that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m interested in, firstly, my amendment, which suggests a release time so that we have real clarity around that, and, secondly, just an explanation around these non-release days and the idea that you\u2019ve got this non-release period that could be for almost up to a month.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022e81ace5779e2312c2e76ea20759d26ef\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e81ace5779e2312c2e76ea20759d26ef\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (10:34)\u003C/span\u003E: In regards to non-release days, this is consistent with current supervision with residence orders. This is the way it is currently done, so it aligns with that. In regards to the 07.06.02 amendment, the bill is already clear enough. I\u2019ve been advised as to when the order ceases. This level of specificity is out of step with the way other orders in the Act are currently treated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u002245f151297547b5619b1b7ad4d72c98b7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002245f151297547b5619b1b7ad4d72c98b7\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (10:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I was listening carefully and I don\u2019t believe the Minister for Children answered or addressed the question that we put around the use of force for absconding, because what we have here is, \u201Cfrom being harmed, harming themselves, or harming another:\u201D person.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1f2abda5004c6883945d62a2efbaf90\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Which clause is that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227f92923346f48a553f75500f10e41bf9\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME\u003C/span\u003E: That is new section 320W, inserted by clause 40. I believe the Minister has just got some advice there, so that would be helpful, because I do recall the situation in the first military-style academy pilot where rangatahi, I understand, attended the tangi, sadly, of one of the participants, and one or more of those rangatahi absconded from the tangi. Is that the type of situation the Minister envisages where they will be able to use force to stop those young people absconding outside of a youth justice facility?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u002217356e0410a78817bff6579e6dd70f0c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002217356e0410a78817bff6579e6dd70f0c\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (10:36)\u003C/span\u003E: The use of force to prevent absconding\u2014yes, it does include absconding from, maybe, whatever residence that community provider is using, because they are on orders, so it will include absconding from their programme site.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u002224bc2179ed86020c6f4f609371ce8049\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002224bc2179ed86020c6f4f609371ce8049\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (10:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Minister, for that. That really does concern me that it\u2019s not just about a young person who may be harming themselves or harming somebody else\u2014that\u2019s what the section talks about using force for\u2014but it actually could be somebody who is trying to run away from the programme. Now, we know from the royal commission into abuse in State care that many young people ran away from abuse that was occurring to them only to then be returned back to where that was happening. I worry about the use of force here, and isn\u2019t it more appropriate that that is the police that do that, not potential iwi, hap\u016B, M\u0101ori community third-party providers?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister may have further to say on that, but I will move to another section, which is new section 320ZB, inserted by clause 40, which is, \u201CYouth Court may \u2026 cancel or vary a military-style academy order, or \u2026 plan\u201D if the eligible young serious offender absconds or fails to comply. Now, I think the situation that we had that I just described then is that they might have been in the in-community phase by then, so not in residence. I am also aware of a situation in military-style academy (MSA) 2.0 where reoffending has potentially occurred. Is that the type of situation where this section applies\u2014where they are failing to comply with the military-style academy order?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn the first pilot, we had eight out of nine young people reoffend. I can\u2019t remember what the number is of when that reoffending occurred during the in-community phase and then what has happened since the entire thing has finished. We are in the current in-community phase now of MSA 2.0, so can the Minister explain to me how new section 320ZB applies to a young person when they fail to comply with the military-style academy order and they\u2019re in community? Does that mean they\u2019re going to be brought back into residence, and do they continue on the military-style academy or do they just go back into the youth justice system? How do they get back out into the in-community phase, or does it just end there? We know that reoffending is occurring. These orders are up to three years, I think, in total. They could have them if they\u2019re extended. I just want to understand how this section works with examples that we have actually seen through the pilot and 2.0 version.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u002298d3237864ee5dad2f57c2aa0b99f91b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002298d3237864ee5dad2f57c2aa0b99f91b\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (10:40)\u003C/span\u003E: I can\u2019t speak to decisions that are going to be made on individual cases. It will depend on the scenario, but it will also be a court decision, as to where the courts decide they want that young person to reside.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u0022af44e4979b8f937b3efa0872a84bf5c9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022af44e4979b8f937b3efa0872a84bf5c9\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (10:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. OK, I accept that the Minister for Children can\u2019t talk to those specific scenarios, but it actually doesn\u2019t give me any understanding or clarification of how this section is intended to apply, in terms of the military-style academy orders, where a young person absconds or fails to comply. Could the Minister give us any explanation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u002233d124706161dc7b380bfff837c8722b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002233d124706161dc7b380bfff837c8722b\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (10:40)\u003C/span\u003E: It would be up to the courts to decide.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u00226bb23ff6406c920f23bc820f36ce3c3f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226bb23ff6406c920f23bc820f36ce3c3f\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (10:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I understand that you have canvassed this part quite well, and I know that absconding would have been a big subject matter. I am going to start asking the question but, please, do interrupt me if it\u2019s already been asked. It\u2019s in relation to police chases upon absconding. Is that an area that has been covered yet?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e1a4149afc9d934e196a6cb9fdb06b5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Which clause are you speaking to?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221b4ad591f8fdf26b873f8e1cc5455db9\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: I am actually speaking to my tabled amendment, which is 1 September 2026, 11.20.12 a.m., which deletes clause 63. The purpose of that is to remove the classification of absconding as a criminal offence, but it sort of fits into this section that we\u2019re talking about, around absconding. I wanted to ask the Minister for Children particularly, before we move on from that topic, whether she might consider supporting this tabled amendment, because one of the really big points that submitters made during the select committee process was that young people do not abscond from places that meet all of their needs. This was a point that was repeated over and over again. That is a really important point: asking why.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne other thing I wanted to ask the Minister in relation to absconding in general, in relation to these clauses, is whether the Minister or her officials at Oranga Tamariki had a conversation with Police around how that takes place, in terms of the police following up a young person who is absconding. I understand that, in the past, the police have moved away from police chases, because they have been fatal in some cases. I was trying to look for it before I took the call, but I remember there was an incident a few years ago where a young person actually died\u2014potentially multiple young people died\u2014in a police chase. Those young people were absconding, and that led the police to reassess whether police chases in vehicles where someone is making an offence is\u2014and this was actually in relation to young people who had stolen cars and were in the middle of dangerous and reckless driving. The police decided it was probably better off to not chase, because that can escalate the situation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just wanted to ask the Minister whether she has had some conversations with Police around how they might go about that, particularly if those young people are taking off in a vehicle, and whether she might consider my tabled amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022031a221f375ec016c21698b6b57cd00a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister has indicated that she is prepared to answer this, but it is actually Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022696d97ae2a4dbbfce89308e02d693f84\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022696d97ae2a4dbbfce89308e02d693f84\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (10:43)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m willing to answer the question because it is a fair and reasonable question. In regards to the tabled amendment at 11.20.12 on 1 September, absconding from a custodial sentence is a really serious matter. The purpose of this provision was to bring these cases of absconding into line with situations where children and young people abscond from custody while on remand pending a hearing. These children and young people can be charged with escaping lawful custody, and it is important to be consistent across the whole of the Oranga Tamariki Act. Police will have discretion about whether a young person who is being detained, for example, on a military-style academy order who escapes lawful custody should be prosecuted under the Crimes Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to the way in which police may or may not look for that young person, that is an operational matter for Police. It is not my place, and it\u2019s not within this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022 data-id=\u0022ea5122d935f008072fac5cccc22c6b65\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ea5122d935f008072fac5cccc22c6b65\u0022\u003EMILES ANDERSON (National\u2014Waitaki) (10:44)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003095\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003098\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003099\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002263dd965fd8c9fa366823023594377a78\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Part 1 set out on Amendment Paper 662 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b519061f809a054d1fbb699a72311aa7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment inserting new clause 3A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003104\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003105\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003106\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a4e6600606fe4fb69c373988ad785ca7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to Part 1 replacing \u201CYSO\u201D and \u201Cserious youth offender\u201D in each place be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003111\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003112\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003113\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022801356b337458d10606b5f9817fbe848\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 320A, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003118\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003119\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003120\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261adf6271453feba8c16d1e8332fdc67\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Mariameno Kapa-Kingi\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 replacing definitions in new section 320A is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 replacing paragraph (b) of new section 320A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003126\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 50\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002228c78a3d4d16a9043620b4a5eca7b31d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 320B, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003133\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003134\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003135\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002294d08832be65d47162b2b76c911e487c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Glen Bennett\u2019s tabled amendments to clause 4, new section 320B, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003140\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003141\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003142\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1026ecabe7853f1f28a3c8fb69bf0ca\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 deleting new section 320B(1)(b) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003147\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003148\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003149\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c83a8047e2d609d0cea4822b39b3017\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting paragraph (c) into new section 320B(1) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003154\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003155\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003156\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e0c77c0a94fbdfd2b686775059bcc2d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Arena Williams\u2019 tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 320C, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003161\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003162\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003163\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022812c7d6ec9d8bd34e2c17b4bd86bb7a8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 320C, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003168\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003169\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003170\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226748a8d8c4f21927c46c22a76fcfbeff\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 replacing new section 320C(2) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003175\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003176\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003177\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd75c53309e6acb2a8240b7bba38c2da\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Helen White\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new sections 320C and 320D, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003182\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003183\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003184\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002258e3dff015eb071d2aee274ab9554c5c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 replacing \u201Cconstable\u201D in new section 320E(4) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003189\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003190\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003191\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c8373e18fb69f5c243cd5dbe87e779a0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Arena Williams\u2019 tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 320F, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003196\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003197\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003198\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf8732db301c91dcc4a2fe87acd9e523\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Helen White\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 320H, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003203\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003204\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003205\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ed2238f8e23555f5a03307413ae1ad5b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting paragraph (k) into new section 320I be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003210\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003211\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003212\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022beefda1d746e1c2a6609ba58c30b7f5c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 320I, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003217\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003218\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003219\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cacee2fa7abba50b9d341551e0b598cc\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 320J, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003224\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003225\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003226\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299b5052f95d194077e18fc769974dbc0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 320L, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003231\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003232\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003233\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c007a4da0a66ff0704cd5fd7164ab540\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Helen White\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 320L, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003238\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003239\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003240\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b7b7937c1f9cd49a02f24b45e374be94\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new section 320LA be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003245\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003246\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003247\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022147c56bf20da1d979570286d2acb36a0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new section 320LAA be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003252\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003253\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003254\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022924b585f4a0665a06ee2f9ad4a3eb76d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 320M, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003259\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003260\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003261\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022828e7bf5d20f3a25533ad7aaf2cf5af7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 replacing \u201C2 years\u201D in new section 320M be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003266\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003267\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003268\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f0e33a86ca624353068fa6bc108b517\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 deleting new subsection 320O(6) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003273\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003274\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003275\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223342a3e4efbfc0657ade148661d98354\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new paragraph (c) in new subsection 320O(8) is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting paragraph (d) into new section 320P(2) is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Helen White\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new subsection 320P(6), be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003282\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003283\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003284\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d059dc1f6182c4949315a3c2004ab5bf\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 320Q, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003289\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003290\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003291\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee301a602e8829bfc59019a36a2781ce\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 320R, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003296\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003297\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003298\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022abfcc35dbe50f8ecfa88dd7c68474cc4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Arena Williams\u2019 tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 320R, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003303\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003304\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003305\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222baa90fb65b6b3880335b6dfea6f714c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 6 deleting new section 214AAA(1)(a) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003310\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003311\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003312\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c1d4d95264ef3905a242d83505eb929\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 6 inserting subsection (3) into new section 214AAA be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003317\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003318\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003319\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022452063bb4a390a42170963b603b11d10\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment deleting clause 11 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003324\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003325\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003326\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d09d5762c50cd44659f951c2b6f40038\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment deleting clauses 12 to 16 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003331\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003332\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003333\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235edb7dd348398d02475e5475a91b06e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Arena Williams\u2019 tabled amendment deleting clause 13 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003338\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003339\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003340\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d49650d0c25899a5210d0ba87f34c939\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, Tamatha Paul\u2019s two tabled amendments to clause 15 proposing to delete subclause (1) and subclause (2) lend themselves to being grouped. I\u2019ll put a single question on them unless members indicate they wish to vote differently on a specific amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s two tabled amendments to clause 15 proposing to delete subclause (1) and subclause (2) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003346\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003347\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003348\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255ce33d7276bdf4d3c89cd5eb2269a92\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 15 inserting subsection (3) into new section 247 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003353\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003354\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003355\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e620745425fd0ac63467199975e5863a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 19 deleting new section 284(1AB)(e) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003360\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003361\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003362\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225c176120c3ae376b2b257c3f715d31d3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 19 inserting new section 284(1AB)(f) relating to disabilities be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003367\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003368\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003369\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217e2bf97b074a077c7fa1c84092b7360\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 19 inserting new section 284(1AB)(f) relating to national and international evidence be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003374\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003375\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003376\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260902316fe200240b0ceb1de9b3593d6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendments to clauses 21 and 25 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003381\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003382\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003383\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bc1bf3b1d4213e297a3de43f2d9dc677\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendments to clauses 21 and 25, new sections 296J and 308AA, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003388\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003389\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003390\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022250eeb7f0d59debb769e93a4eb29bb33\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Helen White\u2019s tabled amendments to clauses 21 and 25 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003395\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003396\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003397\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255a4dcb0342a5853ab45f0416be1cc0a\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendments to clauses 22 and 25, new sections 296K and 308AB, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003402\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003403\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003404\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b52a7d134e8dd5b7ba0a34b4224877f2\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendments to clause 25, new section 308AA, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003409\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003410\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003411\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e8349631810ba05abda02c98fb03013\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment deleting clause 27(2) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003416\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003417\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003418\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c9c36ed9d24ab0cbadcff9fa79e66ceb\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 34 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003423\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003424\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003425\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022992673bc04e56e31595aed57a2b88376\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 37 deleting new section 296FF be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003430\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003431\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003432\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296fed5821552c4a746a0fd2e6b15d753\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the  Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to delete Subpart 4 and all references in Part 1 to \u201Cmilitary-style academy order\u201D and \u201Cmilitary-style academy programme\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003437\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003438\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003439\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002225806aa08a45ec742f1200b20c614eb6\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Mariameno Kapa-Kingi\u2019s tabled amendment deleting clause 40 and Subpart 4 of Part 1 is out of order as being the same in substance as a previous amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment deleting clause 40 is out of order as being the same in substance as a previous amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendments to Part 1 to establish an intensive therapeutic rehabilitation programme order be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003446\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003447\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003448\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002210d24f4c6f43d547699252bd2c3372cc\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new section 320S, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003453\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003454\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003455\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226bac9d2df4ab627bcd67207877cb242e\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Helen White\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40 inserting new subsection (4A) in new section 320S be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003460\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003461\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003462\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225447490d2d3f9b373f4d5e14a35968fd\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dan Rosewarne\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new section 320S, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003467\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003468\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003469\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ffeabb7362ffc7a975b0e4d100d2edb0\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new section 320S, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003474\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003475\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003476\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b311c4ff07b89f06108a7dd6c5a95a23\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Helen White\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new sections 320S and 320T, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003481\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003482\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003483\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022521ab08c721e866c89db2be30c2f1057\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40 inserting new section 320SA be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003488\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003489\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003490\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217bb4a78aef42d92e8e4d839ccb31243\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40 deleting new section 320T be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003495\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003496\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003497\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f5aaab96531c7311dc49c1465202a832\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new section 320T, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003502\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002241a29862ce08ae0c8a7fbb7fc4ea2c95\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Helen White\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new section 320T, inserting new paragraph (d) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003509\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216a175b6af97b66e4503caa0fd3f6c2b\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40 deleting new section 320W be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003516\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c77f25b7f3b7b53ae39c906e6c58507b\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Tamatha Paul\u2019s two tabled amendments to clause 40 inserting new section 320W(1)(c) are out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40 inserting paragraphs (c) and (d) into new section 320W(5) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003524\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7faf3575ecb652d7bc8b62863abbf92\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dan Rosewarne\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new section 320W, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003531\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ce25c62574de248e426037e789648fb\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new section 320W, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003538\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002239ca06ba6e12fb4c824f5c1afc33b187\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mariameno Kapa-Kingi\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40 inserting subsection (4BA) into new section 320W be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003545\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd3ae2270cbaf9f811df84f00aeea06a\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mariameno Kapa-Kingi\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40 replacing subsection (5) of new section 320W be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003552\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e4ae336de42ffbb7f453475bc86cc68c\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40 inserting new section 320X(3)(e) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003559\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2852c7263796684c312d8025570d051\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new section 320ZC, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003566\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ceee4f80ca20fedcb6deffb6db93e717\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new section 320ZE, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003573\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a88b20537644e44c3da28c6cdb80e6fe\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Mariameno Kapa-Kingi\u2019s tabled amendment deleting clause 52 paragraph (b) and certain definitions is out of order as not being consistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMariameno Kapa-Kingi\u2019s tabled amendment deleting clauses 53 to 58, clause 62, and references to \u201Cmilitary-style academy orders\u201D is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMariameno Kapa-Kingi\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 54 deleting new paragraph (na) of section 283 is out of order as being the same as a previous amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003582\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022dbd9d21261a07b023e94ca3eb8872489\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cacc9e803f532d9c87c477b69f704d87\u0022\u003EPart 2 Other amendments to principal Act, and the Schedule\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e4f2dccc3fee03315da069d65b148abe\u0022\u003ETEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we now come Part 2. This is the debate on clauses 41 to 63, \u201COther amendments to principal Act\u201D, and 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=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022b329b06a29a932b97662a28f6beb1761\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b329b06a29a932b97662a28f6beb1761\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (11:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Part 2 contains consequential amendments required to support the operation of the new regime, including this young serious offender declaration and the military-style academy order established in Part 1. These amendments are necessary to ensure the new regime integrates effectively within the wider framework of the Oranga Tamariki Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EPart 2 ensures the Youth Court, Police, and Oranga Tamariki can operate the new regime as intended by the bill. They update existing powers, processes, and references so that they appropriately capture young people who are declared a young serious offender, and the military-style academy order, among other changes. Together, the amendments in Part 2 support the implementation of the regime agreed to by the committee of the whole House in Part 1, and they ensure the new regime introduced by this bill can operate coherently within the wider youth justice system, and I commend these provisions to the committee. I\u2019m proposing an amendment to correct two grammatical errors that have been identified in Part 2. This amendment relates to clause 58, Part 2 of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u0022c5642061ae6270f0155af4cbc259c048\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c5642061ae6270f0155af4cbc259c048\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (11:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Sorry, I haven\u2019t had the chance to just jump to those sections, but I did want to talk to two amendments that I have: 07.06.02\u2014actually, it\u2019s in the name of the Hon Dr Duncan Webb, so I might leave that one for him to talk to and I will talk to amendment 7.06.03. That is Part 2, subpart 1, clause 41, which proposes to insert, after clause 41, new clause 41A and new section 4B. It\u2019s in the name of Helen White and it\u2019s about inserting in there consistency with international juvenile justice standards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe did have a bit of conversation about this in earlier sections, because this amendment would require decision makers exercising the powers under the Act to have regard to internationally recognised standards relating to juvenile justice. In New Zealand, we\u2019ve assumed obligations under key international instruments, including the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which emphasises that responses to youth offending must prioritise the best interests of the child, rehabilitation, proportionality, and respect the dignity and rights of young people. These principles are also reflected in complementary international standards, such as the Beijing Rules, and the Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhile these standards inform existing policy in practise, they are not expressly embedded in the statutory framework. This amendment is to strengthen the Act by requiring those exercising powers under it to actively consider these obligations when making decisions affecting children. The provision also reinforces core youth justice principles, including the importance of participation by young people in decisions affecting them, and the central role of family, wh\u0101nau, hap\u016B, iwi, and community in supporting positive outcomes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOverall, this amendment is about enhancing transparency, aligning the legislation more closely with New Zealand\u2019s international commitments, and supports best practise in youth justice systems by ensuring that interventions remain focused on rehabilitation while being a long-term positive development, and not just political slogans and vote-buying.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00223ed32e9e983f1d76229ba483773ee737\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223ed32e9e983f1d76229ba483773ee737\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (11:44)\u003C/span\u003E: In regards to the amendment 07.06.03, 5 August\u2014look, section 5 of the Act already provides a range of protections relating to children\u2019s and young person\u2019s rights, including those in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Disabilities Convention, that must be respected and upheld. Section 208 also sets out principles applying to youth justice, which addresses the matters that are in this amendment bill. The bill is not changing any of those existing sections.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022a4c20a69686e94a9db34bbc7ee63b289\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a4c20a69686e94a9db34bbc7ee63b289\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (11:44)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. The Hon Willow-Jean Prime was going to talk about one of my amendment, but that was actually about the last part, so no need to mention that one. I see the amendment there talked about the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, but I might leave that to Willow-Jean Prime\u2014it is in her name\u2014and turn towards the amendment which has got the timestamp of 07.06.05, 5 August, on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister for Children has repeatedly expressed her desire to do something new. She\u2019s expressed that in a number of different ways, some more strongly and stridently than others, and I think we accept she\u2019s trying to do something new, and the question is whether or not it will work. She has expressed, I think, the fact that, if it\u2019s not working, doing the same thing again and again is the wrong thing to do. That\u2019s why this amendment provides for a review of the initiatives which are created by this legislation, because she is doing some stuff which is\u2014you know, our comments in this committee of the whole House have shown that we think it\u2019s a little heavy-handed, and perhaps I overstepped the mark, but it\u2019s the Government\u2019s view that it\u2019s a good idea, and so it will happen. In light of this, I\u2019m hoping that she\u2019ll agree that a formal and required review\u2014not one that can be kicked down the road, because we know what it\u2019s like when departments get busy, and Oranga Tamariki, of all our agencies, is one of our most busy\u2014allows for that important function of looking backwards and saying, \u201CWell, here\u2019s what we\u2019ve done. Let\u2019s measure, appropriately, whether there has been a change, an improvement, or not; and if it is an improvement, what are those things we can build on and what are the things we should perhaps stop doing?\u201D Do more, stop, go do more, as I think my colleague from the military would say. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s what the amendment does, and I guess it\u2019s recognising that this is a significant shift in the youth justice framework, and that things like military-style academies, whilst they\u2019ve been experimented with before, now have a legislative framework for them. I actually hope that the Minister\u2014not that Minister, I hope, but a Labour Minister\u2014will be able to return to this House and say, \u201CActually we\u2019ve had some good outcomes and here\u2019s how we can do it even better.\u201D But you don\u2019t get that unless you have a thoughtful and required review and, importantly, one that focuses on the wellbeing of the children and young persons that are involved in there; and also whether there\u2019s any concerns, because one of the problems is that you\u2019ll see a graph and you\u2019re like, \u201COh, well, overall, it\u2019s good.\u201D But if we\u2019ve got outliers where there\u2019s been very serious harm, and we\u2019ve seen, as I understand it, in one of the pilots, there was a young person who\u2019s no longer with us. Now, whether there\u2019s a causal link between the death and the pilot, I don\u2019t know, but we need to make sure that the individual costs where young people are seriously harmed, whether mentally or physically, aren\u2019t lost in the graphs of, \u201COverall, we\u2019ve got a better outcome.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it\u2019s important that we have a really careful and thoughtful review, and that it comes back to this House. That\u2019s the other thing, that the report should be tabled here so that it can be considered by Parliament, and preferably by an appropriate select committee that can really have a close look at whether there\u2019s been an improvement or whether, in fact, the opposite has happened. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, none of us can see into the future. We have starkly divergent views about whether or not this is a good idea, but it would be good if we can test which of us is correct in a future Parliament by a clear, comprehensive, and debatable report on whether it\u2019s been effective or not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022a96485c388f41a62b549a5ef6610af54\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a96485c388f41a62b549a5ef6610af54\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (11:49)\u003C/span\u003E: In regards to amendment 07.06.05, 5 August, I\u2019ve been informed that legislating a full review of the Oranga Tamariki Act is unusual and unnecessary. Those reviews can happen at any time at the direction of Ministers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI\u2019d also like to address another tabled amendment\u20147.06.06, 5 August\u2014which is looking at a sunset clause. Look, this bill is intended to be an enduring response to serious persistent youth offending. A sunset clause would undermine that objective, and it also creates uncertainty for the courts, departments, and young people in the youth justice system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u002242275f401b19cbd2311df44779728b33\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002242275f401b19cbd2311df44779728b33\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (11:50)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for highlighting the sunset clause and giving me the opportunity to speak on that, because I haven\u2019t had an opportunity to seek to persuade the Minister that a sunset clause is appropriate. But I\u2019m sure, once she\u2019s carefully listened to my plea, she\u2019ll come around.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess the point is this: it\u2019s not a compulsory sunset clause. If you look at it\u2014perhaps you missed this\u2014it\u2019s actually a sunset clause unless Parliament says \u201CKeep going.\u201D In the proposed section 280B(2), it says subsection (1) does not apply if before the date for that date\u2014five years date\u2014the House of Representatives resolves that those provisions are to continue in force. This kind of provision is not unknown, and, of course, we have confirmation provisions in respect of regulations all the time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut I guess my point is this: from our side, we see these as very significant provisions which are doing something which is both extraordinary and extreme in the sense of having these military-style academies that you don\u2019t like calling \u201Cbootcamps\u201D, but ultimately that\u2019s what they are\u2014these ideas where you have strict military discipline, getting them out of bed, as you said, and marching them around the parade ground, and so on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe think that if you\u2019re going to go ahead with it, let\u2019s give it a safety valve. If you are right, you and your party can come back to this Parliament and say, \u201CLook, we\u2019ve got much better outcomes.\u201D, then Parliament can join and say, \u201COK, we were wrong, and let\u2019s approve, under subsection (2), that these provisions continue in force.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut one of the dangers is that these things don\u2019t work that well. They perhaps are wound back, but, because Parliament is busy, it doesn\u2019t get around to actually amending the law and they kind of languish on the statute book. And then, as time passes, some enthusiastic Minister digs it out again and starts using a broken system, which should have been removed from the statute book. So it\u2019s actually a really good clean way to keep our statute book tidy without having to consume the time of Parliament by going back and having an amendment Act to remove unworkable provisions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI know the Minister is sort of trying to get a twofer out of her last contribution, but I do think it\u2019s important that these amendments, which are serious amendments, are fully traversed and not bundled together and pre-emptively dismissed. I\u2019m sure the Minister didn\u2019t intend to do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022f23192c08e0a9ea9224d3ef5ca0bf6df\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f23192c08e0a9ea9224d3ef5ca0bf6df\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (11:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019ve got a couple of questions to start with under Part 2 for a few clauses, so I\u2019m going to move through these ones.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe first one is clause 42. This is page 53. I want to check with the Minister, when it comes to the idea of allowing a court or person to make or keep a child or young person, in this case\u2014can I check?\u2014is this sort of akin to how the remand system works currently, where a child or young person who\u2019s got allegations of offending will be kept in custody until that is dealt with? If it is similar to the way that we look at the existing remand system, would the Minister know what the current duration is that a child has been kept in those sorts of circumstances.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m going to move on to clause 45 now, and then my final question is on clause 46.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 45\u2014young advocate. Now, under the definition of \u201Cyoung advocate\u201D in the principal Act, it\u2019s a barrister or solicitor, which I would assume could naturally respond anyway. So I wonder what the rationale is behind explicitly mentioning that a youth advocate \u201Cis entitled, with the consent \u2026 to represent the young person\u201D. I\u2019d assume that solicitors and barristers could represent anyone anyway, so I just wanted to check what the rationale is for explicitly mentioning that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy last few questions at this stage are for clause 46. This is also on page 54. It\u2019s good to see that, when it comes to groups 3 to 7 response, there is a requirement for there to be a report from a social worker. But I want to check with the Minister what the rationale is for having group 1 or 2 response on one end, where the report is optional, and then 3 to 7 being required. What\u2019s the threshold? Why is there a change from not being fully required to being fully required between group 2 and 3? When we\u2019re looking at a report, if I\u2019m looking at clause 46\u2014this is section 334(2A); around line 8 of page 55\u2014the court is able to request information from the social worker to be put in some of those reports. Can I just check if that kind of request and the kind of report that we\u2019re looking at is similar to what we are seeing with, for example, a section 27 report and that the court is able to request from the social worker aspects of, I guess, cultural or hereditary or familial, etc., as well, as a part of that report.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to get, I guess, a couple of examples from the Minister on what are the things that the court may possibly have or will be able to request from a social worker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u0022bc986dca702700b12beb259daecf94d1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bc986dca702700b12beb259daecf94d1\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (11:57)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just to continue on the questions that my colleague Lawrence Xu-Nan has asked around clause 46, relating to the report by a social worker, I just had a few more questions relating to that. The first one is: how is \u201Ca social worker\u201D interpreted? Is that Oranga Tamariki\u2019s own social workers, or can these be third-party social workers as well?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess the other big question that I had when I saw this part is it raised alarm bells for me in terms of if these are Oranga Tamariki social workers who are preparing these reports, because there have been kind of ongoing reports throughout the term of the massive workloads that Oranga Tamariki social workers have. And, just citing this RNZ article from 28 February 2025: \u201CFears children will be harmed as Oranga Tamariki staff grapple with overwhelming workloads\u201D. I think this has been well canvassed in the House throughout the term, but there have been a lot of red flags about that workload. Has the Minister or her officials had conversations or considerations towards whether their social workers are able to take on yet another duty or another potential obligation that they might be required to undertake?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also wondered whether there was a time frame on when this report had to be produced, because my colleague Dr Xu-Nan makes a good point in that there could be lots of different factors that this social worker might have to pull into this report, and I can see here under clause 46(2A) that all of this must be dealt with in one report. Is there a time frame around when this report is expected to be provided, and will there be resourcing available for those social workers who have to pull that report together, noting the caseload and capacity constraints but also noting that in some other parts of the legal system there are, or there was, resources available for people to be able to prepare these types of reports to give a fulsome picture to the people making the decision?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I will leave that there for the social worker aspects.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u002295fb3d961806c5213a0c4965da802f36\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002295fb3d961806c5213a0c4965da802f36\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (11:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to speak to my\u2014yes, it is in my name\u2014tabled amendment, 7.06.04. I know that the Government are quite allergic to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. I know later on in the week we\u2019ve got a number of bills that are being introduced to water down and weaken the Te Tiriti o Waitangi principles. I am going to ask the Minister anyway, but I want to know if the Minister would consider inserting a new section 6A into new clause 41B, which puts in there the recognition of Te Tiriti o Waitangi principles.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EOne of the things that really concerns me about this legislation, and why I am so opposed to it, among many reasons, is because we know that tamariki M\u0101ori will be disproportionately impacted by this legislation. A majority of the young people who will be captured by this legislation, we understand from official advice, will be tamariki M\u0101ori. I understand that 80, 90, almost 100 percent of those in the first pilot and in the second programme are tamariki M\u0101ori. More than 80 percent of those whom officials have identified would qualify for this are tamariki M\u0101ori, so I ask the Minister if she would consider supporting this tabled amendment that provides for the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. If the Minister doesn\u2019t agree with that, could she please tell us why she doesn\u2019t think that\u2019s important when we are dealing with predominantly tamariki M\u0101ori?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00223fa2548cd9437acd452c4d70f55be926\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223fa2548cd9437acd452c4d70f55be926\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (12:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Sure. I don\u2019t agree with this amendment, because section 4 of the Act currently already does this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u0022eb3e92c7b023b3895eec695006d1e3e2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022eb3e92c7b023b3895eec695006d1e3e2\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (12:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Can I just check with the Minister for Children, in terms of the bills that are being introduced to make changes to Treaty provisions within legislation, what does that mean in terms of section 4 for the Oranga Tamariki Act?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00227497e86dd79204bc429021a031f3343e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227497e86dd79204bc429021a031f3343e\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (12:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Section 4 of the Act includes providing a practical commitment to the principles of the Treaty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u002280f1bf3199754c2b1de9628c3ac10aff\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002280f1bf3199754c2b1de9628c3ac10aff\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (12:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question was about proposed changes under the Treaty clause review to references to the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi in legislation. The Minister for Children is responsible for this piece of legislation. What do those proposed changes, that clause review, mean in terms of this section? If the Minister is dismissing my amendment on the basis that that\u2019s already provided for but there are actually moves afoot to make changes as part of that Treaty clause review, could the Minister please give me an assurance and the confidence that that is going to continue?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022854d531262c20d7bf38c0646bb74430f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022854d531262c20d7bf38c0646bb74430f\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (12:03)\u003C/span\u003E: There is no plan to change the purpose of the Act, which includes providing a practical commitment to the principles of the Treaty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002245ff64f6d04362d97f2a30867aecc270\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002245ff64f6d04362d97f2a30867aecc270\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (12:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just following on from my questions\u2014hopefully the Minister for Children is getting some advice for both mine and my colleague Tamatha Paul\u2019s questions. I do want to move on a little bit, which is around clauses 47, 48, and 50. For clause 48, section 352 amended, in this case \u201CAppeal by parents or guardians\u201D, can I just check that that is interlinked with clause 47 and the appeal by parents or guardians or other persons would also then need to go to a High Court against the orders that the Youth Court made? Is that the correct assumption there, as we see in clause 47?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy next question\u2014and this is my final question for this little bit before I will move on to Subpart 2 as well. Clause 50, \u201CSection 358 amended (Presence of young person at hearing of appeal)\u201D, I want to check with the Minister: when we\u2019re looking at the Youth Court, the Youth Court sometimes allows for things like prehearings, in the sense that there\u2019s the ability to discuss some protocols and some guidance, particularly based on the need of the young person at that stage. I think both my colleague Tamatha Paul and I have visited the Youth Court in T\u0101maki-makau-rau Auckland, where we have seen some of these dynamics, where it\u2019s putting the wellbeing of the child at the centre if a child has particular needs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to check, if we\u2019re looking at an appeal process as well, would the High Court look at similar protocols as a Youth Court, where there\u2019s the ability to have that kind of prehearing discussions? I can\u2019t remember the technical term for it off the top of my head, but it\u2019s those prehearing discussions with advocates and the judges to be able to set aside some sort of protocols and guidelines of how that High Court or that appeals hearing may take place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00226d78cbb508f29b104fdf19e814ff652f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226d78cbb508f29b104fdf19e814ff652f\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (12:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Just in response to social worker reports: these are done by Oranga Tamariki social workers, just to confirm. This is a normal part of their work. It is not considered that there\u2019ll be a significant increase in their workload, as it\u2019s just their daily work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan a court request a social worker report? Yes, the court can always request reports that they would like.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question around why reports are sometimes required and sometimes not: I guess that would be on a case-by-case basis and considered on the seriousness of what\u2019s happening and what we need from the reports. It\u2019s important to understand that a court can always request a report and information that they want.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u00225b6e78d8fcd5a2b96cf04484ae240686\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225b6e78d8fcd5a2b96cf04484ae240686\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (12:06)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m now going to move to Subpart 2, looking specifically at clause 52 around interpretation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m especially interested in engaging with the Minister for Children on specifically the two terms around approved worker and qualifying provider, because I think those are really, really important\u2014that we get that in the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E and distinguish exactly what that means. One of the big messages and recommendations and lessons from the royal commission of inquiry into abuse in State care was highlighting how the workers in those bootcamps on Aotea Great Barrier Island, but also some of the people who were providing these bootcamps and also programmes within detention centres and borstals\u2014there were a whole lot of red flags before those workers were\u2014there was just no vetting going on. I think it\u2019s really important that we canvass what safeguards are in place around who will actually be delivering these military-style academies and how they\u2019re defined within the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI wanted to ask the Minister, in terms of approved workers, I know that clause 58 refers to the Oranga Tamariki Act under section 447, which is the part that relates to regulations. I went and had a look at that section under the Oranga Tamariki Act and it wasn\u2019t clear to me what the criteria will be for somebody to be approved in the first place. If the Minister could speak to that, that would be incredibly helpful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo be specific about what I\u2019m looking for here, I do refer back to the royal commission inquiry under that chapter that talks about staff and how important it is that there are safeguards and that staff who are working with vulnerable young people are adequately trained, vetted, and supported through their work. One of the things that led to a lot of that abuse was inadequate vetting processes for those staff, but also that they were inadequately trained, among a whole lot of other things. What safeguards are in place that differ now due to this bill which means that staff who are carrying out these military-style academies will be appropriately vetted and trained so that they understand how to work with these young people in all of these complexity?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also wanted to ask for similar clarifications around qualifying providers, because we know that there are a whole lot of different providers out there\u2014third-party providers\u2014who will have a whole lot of power through this bill and will have a whole lot of power to determine the trajectory of a young person\u2019s life. Again, what I\u2019m really looking for is: where are the safeguards in this bill, and if they\u2019re not in here and they\u2019re in the Oranga Tamariki Act, could the Minister for Children speak to those? How will Oranga Tamariki make sure that the people who are carrying out these academies do not have any convictions? How will they make sure that these people are appropriately trained? How will they be monitored in terms of their work to make sure that they\u2019re operating within best practice within youth social work?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u002252b080f05de90e4042d8aa3f0223324f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002252b080f05de90e4042d8aa3f0223324f\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (12:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. This is just in response to a question around appeals, confirming that an appeal by a parent or a guardian or other person in clause 48 is to the High Court, as outlined in amended section 352.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn response to Tamatha Paul, I take this very seriously. The report that she\u2019s referring to is absolutely horrific, and there was a sentence in there where you said, \u201CWhat has changed within this bill to bring safeguards?\u201D I think a lot has changed not just within this bill but over the years to make sure that there are safeguards for our young people and oversight around what happens with our young people. We already have processes in place, working with external providers when they become accredited, and there are certain areas that they will have to meet before they can become an accredited provider, and they are always reviewed\u2014never just set for long periods of time without being reviewed. Many accredited providers have lost their accreditation if they aren\u2019t providing the service in a way that we feel is in a safe manner for young people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe oversight\u2014that is different now to back then. I think about one of the sections of that report that I read that left me absolutely devastated, which was hearing that somebody thought it was a good idea to send young people onto an island in the middle of nowhere, with no form of that young person being able to escape that island, where people had firearms, had convictions, were gang members, and nobody thought to ask the questions. These days, we have vetting processes that are in place through police vets, and also we have strict criteria around who can be working with our young people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart of that process was actually what we\u2019ve been doing over the last two years around professionalising the workforce and making sure that they know what is expected of them, that they know what the consequences are if they cross the line with those expectations, and that, actually, we follow through with those consequences to send a clear message that if you are treating our young people with dignity and respect and giving them everything that they need to live a better life, you\u2019ve got no problems with me, but if you\u2019re hurting or harming our young people, we will come down on you with the full force of the law. That message has been made very clear from me as I\u2019ve gone around the country and spoken to many providers and youth justice facilities face to face.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a2e1e6922c3a545118189b5721f61847\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Just before I take the next question, I\u2019m just going to say that we\u2019ve had a really good session with this Minister, and I want to commend the Minister on how forthcoming she\u2019s been and how good and positive the questioning has been on a tough topic. I think it would be really good if we can just stick to really short, sharp, last few questions now. We\u2019ve got a few votes to do, and, in my view, I really don\u2019t want to see the Minister back in this chair after question time on this piece of legislation if we can avoid it, because\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] No, I do think we\u2019ve had a very good go on this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022b0f8c0ba173146f88526b731910889ba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b0f8c0ba173146f88526b731910889ba\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (12:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I\u2019m just concerned with your suggestion that you\u2019ve got a predetermined schedule as to when you think the Opposition has done its job.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0edd5486a7e8b2a9033d6a44a6c26e8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I say, it\u2019s not about the schedule, Dr Webb. There are a couple of pages left. I\u2019ve had one person stand up to take a call. I was commending Dr Xu-Nan on his short, sharp questions. No one else stood up to take a call just then.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022158f8b24a36b92be655450a968a319b4\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: No, I appreciate that, but you said\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec2e617d4d39686422b60806e692f7b5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The committee has indicated to me that we\u2019re near the end of it. Yes, I know what I said about how I wouldn\u2019t like to see the Minister here after question time. What I\u2019m saying is that we\u2019ve got 45 minutes now, and as the Chair, given everything I\u2019ve seen from the Chair and from watching from afar, I feel like we\u2019ve given this a good go and we\u2019re getting to the end of the section. Thank you. Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022beac7127278b1c8f093a1c0136dbae16\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022beac7127278b1c8f093a1c0136dbae16\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (12:15)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, thank you so much, and thank you for that response, Minister. Can I just ask a few questions around when you\u2019re talking about the review\u2014and I really appreciate the examples that have been given. Can I check if these providers are being reviewed or quality-assured or checked for compliance, if you\u2019re visiting a location, is it a planned visit or is it an unplanned visit? Is there a way for Oranga Tamariki to actively do their own investigation based on material or is it just a response? We\u2019ll start with that one, and I have a few more questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022900ec84859aa627354cecc09e24564f5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022900ec84859aa627354cecc09e24564f5\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (12:15)\u003C/span\u003E: There are many ways that this can happen. There are unannounced visits that happen all the time from compliance teams, from the Independent Children\u2019s Monitor to the Children\u2019s Commissioner to\u2014VOYCE Whakarongo Mai often goes in and speaks to young people. If any concerns are raised, then that will raise a red flag and that will cause us to look more into something.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00226aa25b666c3280181c5f92e1d734e6fc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226aa25b666c3280181c5f92e1d734e6fc\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (12:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. That\u2019s super helpful. I\u2019m going to move on to clause 57, and this is to do with \u201CReport to be accompanied by plan\u201D. I want to check\u2014this is clause 57(3). Two questions around this. Number one is that it does state what kind of details are in there, but how detailed would the Minister for Children expect such a plan to potentially look? Before, we talked about learning programmes, etc. Are we looking at a timetable level of detail, or like syllabus level of detail, or just more broad in terms of the outcomes that they are able to seek in that particular plan? I can ask a question after that, but if the Minister is ready to answer that question?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022555c426855425bb05f8ab01f25cb8780\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Go ahead with your next one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022710ca299b1ac0bf615ae6429dd3d139e\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, I\u2019ll keep going. The next question is around\u2014in new section 335(3), added by clause 57(3), it says the plan needs to accompany a report and is approved by the Youth Court. What\u2019s there in terms of the flexibility or change to that plan? Does the Youth Court need to approve any changes to the plan as well, or is this just a one-off and what you see in the plan is what you get? I want to check in terms of the flexibility and the change to that plan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u00220ced317d6f1955b579eca01b102b0105\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220ced317d6f1955b579eca01b102b0105\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (12:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just in response to that, I just had a little bit of advice given to me around the detail. We don\u2019t want to become so stringent that we don\u2019t allow flexibility for us to create a programme for a young person based on their needs. It\u2019ll be enough information for the court to make a decision in the best interests and wellbeing of that young person, but it won\u2019t be an hour-by-hour, minute by minute detail.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022b6414650df65a185cde611ab9a209709\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b6414650df65a185cde611ab9a209709\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (12:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for that. I\u2019m actually going to move on to Subpart 3, which is \u201COther amendments\u201D\u2014noting that my colleagues may have other questions. I want to focus on\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002269299fa9f05f1d910df4fd03e763928d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Other colleagues don\u2019t appear to have questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c7de165910e47cd34cdf9fd5ae76f5b\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Don\u2019t appear to have any!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c3828f9f0fa3a5404067a6d74dce506\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: So I\u2019m just going to ask the member to wind his questions up quite quickly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002272edc31894451cf6ccec5297ecdd9081\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: OK. This is also in conjunction with the question I had before, and this is to do with clause 62. This is where \u201CChief executive may apply to vary plan\u201D, but then I want to check\u2014if my reading of new section 355A is correct, there\u2019s a plan that\u2019s approved by the Youth Court, but if the chief executive, through conversations, etc., with the young person, with a representative, advocate, etc., sees that the plan needs to be changed, they do need to do that revised plan back to the Youth Court for a separate\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EMinister nods\u003C/span\u003E] OK, I see a nod from the Minister for Children. That\u2019s my question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b064dd56673f4c1cb11c1242823abb92\u0022 data-id=\u0022a53fe1a25697b9c82ca48e843abec33f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b064dd56673f4c1cb11c1242823abb92\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a53fe1a25697b9c82ca48e843abec33f\u0022\u003ELAURA McCLURE (ACT) (12:19)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003660\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a065c1a1c6a14e09adff46609a66cf6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Part 2 set out on Amendment Paper 662 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003667\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ec14d1c6e4350832ba8f359392b04c7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to Part 2 replacing \u201CYSO\u201D and \u201Cyoung serious offender\u201D in each place is ruled out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Helen White\u2019s tabled amendment to insert new clause 41A be agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003675\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c2b4c5ba0f20322e05b3b8741cec330d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to insert new clause 41B be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003682\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278a75ae078ac45ee498676ff019ce70d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is That the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to insert new clause 41C be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003689\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208ac9291e140d1bc3ee8fba64878fc8c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is That the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to insert new clause 42A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003696\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c66a26fcb3e128e6697477f7ce6a4eb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is That the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 46 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003703\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d89a9ffc2ebf96ecf73d7a0f6fd2e409\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 54, new section 283, deleting paragraph (na) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003710\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e67058d70eb0099d3e699b90de6d31f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to delete references to \u201Cmilitary-style academy order\u201D and \u201Cmilitary-style academy programme\u201D in Part 2 is ruled out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendments to new paragraph (na) in clause 54 and replacing references to \u201Cmilitary-style academy order\u201D and \u201Cmilitary-style academy programme\u201D in Part 2 are ruled out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment deleting clause 63 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003719\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Part 2 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ea28e0a3c43898318bf7f4f8be9fb16\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Now for the Schedule. The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendment to the Schedule set out on Amendment Paper 662 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003732\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1c7517204e8e4788c1ff067270a87e1\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s tabled amendment to the Schedule replacing \u201Cyoung serious offender\u201D in each place is ruled out of order as inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003739\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b344c5052d5a1e6a91b34d92a95ba65f\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022872f7f91f185058b3b85f319f14a44ab\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3a891df729fe8c8424ea379157fa684\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to our final debate, clauses 1 to 3, the debate on title, commencement, and principal Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022bcb911d39cb73d876cfa842d8af5f8b8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bcb911d39cb73d876cfa842d8af5f8b8\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (12:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a short question around commencement. Now, we know that the pilot is sort of happening right now, but I\u2019m just wondering, the commencement is the day after Royal assent\u2014is there anything, from a Minister\u2019s perspective, that is in this bill that does actually make changes to what is existing in that pilot programme that actually potentially will take time to implement that won\u2019t be immediately implemented, despite the Royal assent being given the day after?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022a56d5cacbb0e7ae8fe04cd934ae00593\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a56d5cacbb0e7ae8fe04cd934ae00593\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (12:32)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll make sure I\u2019ve understood that correctly, sorry. There\u2019s nothing retrospective. Like, the pilot programme will continue as it is. Nothing will change because of this law change within the pilot programme. Is that kind of what you\u2019re asking?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002218b22db1317c9bea613f352c87692ecb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002218b22db1317c9bea613f352c87692ecb\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (12:32)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is: is there anything in this bill that changes the existing programme that then will require a different way to implement? Probably not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022d2cd6eb4155b49a955b60d3abed75095\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d2cd6eb4155b49a955b60d3abed75095\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (12:32)\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u002228212be8c356d4f632883ee20decff08\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002228212be8c356d4f632883ee20decff08\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (12:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Just another quick question on commencement. One thing I was wondering when this came back for the committee of the whole House stage a month ago was if the Minister for Children could explain why there was such a big lag between the end of the select committee process when the bill was reported back to the House and the second reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226ae9caea183b652a98eac5f111d999ff\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I think that\u2019s more a question for the Leader of the House rather than this Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002291e6f00ae8e32cfdc0fbbf1f6fbc0daa\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: Is it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f8c0eb9d341dd49642f0d8ba2b4ac161\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u002274edeacf6b19a592f3b5bc4431a8db9c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002274edeacf6b19a592f3b5bc4431a8db9c\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (12:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I think in terms of commencement, Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan raises a good point. I\u2019m also curious as to whether the courts\u2014because this will go before the courts. It commences immediately on Royal assent and the judges will be expected to be able to make decisions on this straight away. I\u2019d be interested to know whether there\u2019s been a programme of kind of education for judges and for lawyers as well\u2014youth advocates\u2014who will be expected to stand up in court and be able to argue the merits or otherwise of these young serious offender orders. In fact, there are two Amendment Papers that the Labour Party has put in around commencement. One is to kind of, I think, kick it down the road by six months, which would seem appropriate for those kinds of things, because all of a sudden we have a compulsion. It\u2019s not just about the pilot; it\u2019s about all of the machinery that makes it a compulsory framework.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to talk about the title as well, because \u201Cyoung serious offender\u201D is a real label. I\u2019m just curious as to why we didn\u2019t just call it a\u2014in one of my Amendment Papers, in fact, in my name, we could have called it the \u201Cintensive youth intervention regime\u201D. That would have been a much less confronting title than \u201Cyoung serious offender\u201D. Also by saying, \u201CYou are receiving intensive assistance.\u201D, rather than \u201CYou are a young serious offender.\u201D, you\u2019re not labelling them. You\u2019re saying, \u201CWell, this is what is going on.\u201D, but you\u2019re not saying, \u201CYou\u2019re the worst of the worst.\u201D, which is what \u201Cyoung serious offender\u201D essentially does.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, then there are a few other amendments which I\u2019m looking forward to the votes on, such as perhaps we should just call this the \u201COranga Tamariki (Fast, Tough, and Slightly Less Effective Than the Last Time we Tried This) Amendment Act\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a4389c6e8628df9008470f16add9f2d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I thought the member was on such a serious topic when he mentioned the first title. The first title was a genuine\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] Quiet on the other side, please. I\u2019m just saying that the first title was a genuine opportunity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e5627fdb6be9eedf9194fc5d38407ecf\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: Well, no, it was, but we like to lighten it up. I\u2019m not used to being heckled by the Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022335647477aad5f0d3d0ac5e660b95fe7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: This Chair, apart from working in compartments, actually has a dislike of silly titles.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e282a27bcbb63db09b3d078e7246114\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: Well, no, you can say that, Madam Chair, and\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ba529fb3b1f57dc0d867efc7f580aba\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c4e54302c92fae566d8c4ef505f16897\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014take a call if you want to, but these are making a point, and I get it, but humour in the Chamber is there for a reason. The fact of the matter is that this is boot camps 3.0 now, isn\u2019t it? They\u2019ve been proven, time and again, not to do anything. Whilst I know that that amendment, as with any other amendments I put forward today, is not going to pass this committee, it does make a point. But you\u2019re right. The serious point is this: young serious offender labels are deeply problematic. The fact is that we all agree that intensive intervention is needed. The last Government started some programmes that this Government has continued, but it\u2019s labelling of people as being the trigger rather than their needs being the trigger.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe military-style academies point as well is an important one. We\u2019re calling these military-style academies and yet the Minister for Children has stood up and actually said quite clearly that there\u2019s no combat, there are no weapons, there\u2019s actually nothing military about it, and yet we\u2019ve insisted on calling this a military-style academy, which brings to mind boot camps and the kinds of terrible kind of TV show boot camps that you see. Whereas, in fact, if it was an intensive supervision residence, that\u2019s an entirely different thing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet\u2019s call it what it is. It would have been a lot easier to engage meaningfully and constructively if we had been talking about intensive rehabilitative frameworks, which is what one of the proposed titles actually talks about. The \u201CYouth Justice (Escalation) Amendment Act\u201D is another title. We could have just called it that, rather than saying military-style academies, which is\u2014and I think the Minister knows this\u2014just playing to a section of the community. She\u2019s trying to get the headlines over here, whilst perhaps some of the stuff she\u2019s doing is good work, but calling them \u201Cmilitary-style academies\u201D doesn\u2019t do it, so we should have retitled that as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022c646119466593f4b2941095bc4ea0143\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c646119466593f4b2941095bc4ea0143\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (12:38)\u003C/span\u003E: Just in response to whether we should delay the commencement due to concerns of whether the training has happened, I\u2019ve been advised that the training has happened and everybody is ready to go, so there\u2019s no need to delay the commencement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u00223ee4edd7f05158c9eeab2dde7e23e2bc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223ee4edd7f05158c9eeab2dde7e23e2bc\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (12:38)\u003C/span\u003E: Just on that, that was actually sort of going towards what I was going to ask about in terms of the date of commencement and the date of Royal assent on the bill. The funding that was set aside by the Minister for Children to run the pilots was quite high. I fully believe that those young people are worth every cent. I\u2019m not disputing that, but I just want to ask, since this bill takes effect fairly soon: has the Minister provided for that within her Estimates so that that level of funding will be provided for any new young people who are declared young serious offenders once this bill comes into effect? Yeah, I\u2019m just interested in whether those Estimates are set aside.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u002277f6c4cad76588466fe0f320bbfb5c13\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002277f6c4cad76588466fe0f320bbfb5c13\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (12:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah. The funding is in place and the funding was over a four-year period. That was to include the in-residence and the out-of-residence, and that includes all the clinical support, mentors, and teams. The funding is there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u0022d45d66f4391d09351b6f89d8d0372976\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d45d66f4391d09351b6f89d8d0372976\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (12:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I was going to make a less serious contribution, but I won\u2019t do that\u2014I won\u2019t do that\u2014because I do actually want to just pick up on the point that Tamatha Paul has raised about what has been appropriated for this. Can the Minister for Children just tell me, according to this law once it\u2019s passed, once it gets Royal assent, when will the first formal through-sentencing military-style academy (MSA) be expected to be stood up? My understanding\u2014and the Minister can correct me if I\u2019m wrong or provide further clarification\u2014is it actually going to take some time before any young person qualifies according to this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWhat modelling has been done around the number of young people who are going to be captured in it? The first formal\u2014not voluntary, not further pilot; formal\u2014one under this. Further to that, does the Minister have any intention of running, in the interim, any voluntary style MSAs\u2014like MSA 3.0\u2014while that takes the time to kick in.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022ec0d86c1c4f31461e2e9498fca3b1fb1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ec0d86c1c4f31461e2e9498fca3b1fb1\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (12:41)\u003C/span\u003E: No decisions have been made in regards to whether there will be another voluntary programme. We\u2019re open to all options, but no formal decisions have been made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAs far as when the first one will happen: I don\u2019t have a crystal ball, I don\u2019t know when someone\u2019s going to go out and commit a crime or when a judge is actually going to order this. That will be up to the circumstances of the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022 data-id=\u00221c08d1daf81fdd8c137f24ba3bddccc8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221c08d1daf81fdd8c137f24ba3bddccc8\u0022\u003EKATIE NIMON (National\u2014Napier) (12:41)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003775\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002226dd3de8e74865bcbb142fec72c6aced\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 replacing \u201C(Responding to Serious Youth Offending)\u201D with \u201C(Labelling Young People)\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003782\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003784\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f334f74f91f8732bb0f4538ba5f4e7a6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 replacing \u201C(Responding to Serious Youth Offending)\u201D with \u201C(Coercive Youth Interventions)\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003789\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229e283431e79b48102566c93b565dfc5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 replacing \u201C(Responding to Serious Youth Offending)\u201D with \u201C(Intensive Youth Intervention Regime)\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003796\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022143f45f2ed642a3e7660ff26f880e269\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Glen Bennett\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 replacing \u201C(Responding to Serious Youth Offending)\u201D with \u201C(Youth Justice Escalation)\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003803\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d650f3c2f7167d7ad5d6ff1cbbc90ae6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Glen Bennett\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 replacing \u201C(Responding to Serious Youth Offending)\u201D with \u201C(Punitive Youth Response)\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003810\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a828cd8c0a6c4ca0a9b8a2e167294431\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 replacing \u201C(Responding to Serious Youth Offending)\u201D with \u201C(Restricted Youth Justice Process)\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003817\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227600231b8fb5b6c92638b509dca451b1\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s remaining tabled amendment to clause 1 is ruled out of order as not being an objective description of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d1aea0a5138ca9cfcfc576854624d63\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: What!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002233d6386b4df63b278e941eeeb8a4261d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: You heard me. The question is that Glen Bennett\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 replacing \u201C(Responding to Serious Youth Offending)\u201D with \u201C(Boot Camps Return)\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003826\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220cd0b144356850e8ffa9424611f13eda\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Willie Jackson\u2019s tabled amendments to clause 1 are ruled out of order as not being objective descriptions of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Glen Bennett\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 replacing \u201C(Responding to Serious Youth Offending)\u201D with \u201C(Enhanced Intervention Orders)\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003834\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003835\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003840\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227f5235115162eeee061094170d69b5e1\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Glen Bennett\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 replacing \u201C(Responding to Serious Youth Offending)\u201D with \u201C(Two Strikes)\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003841\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003842\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003843\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003844\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003845\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003846\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003847\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003848\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003849\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003850\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003851\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003852\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003853\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022973084ae3e8bfd077dad6a92a49d846c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Helen White\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003854\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003855\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003857\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003858\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003859\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003860\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002272ad0c7836c2717c7ce3df840e541e51\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003861\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003862\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003863\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003864\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003865\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003866\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003867\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002265d8a6acba189ff4bf6af27c9d893913\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Mariameno Kapa-Kingi\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 2 is out of order as creating an uncertain commencement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003868\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat clause 2 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003869\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003870\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003871\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003872\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003873\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003874\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003875\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003876\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003877\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003878\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003879\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003880\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill to be reported with amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003881\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003882\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a531dc92575459a30685d8e4a72ede73\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, the committee has further considered the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) 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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003883\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the report be adopted\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003884\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003885\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003886\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003887\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003890\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e1467129c62cebe198b2b72979604d1a\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill is set down for third reading immediately. However, it is now time to break for lunch. The House will resume at 2 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003891\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 12.58 p.m. to 2 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003892\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f78b99c4c0982adf546fd0f24cd81df7\u0022\u003EAppointments\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222c6ecf65ee40b74ac4ea21c83511f3f3\u0022\u003EAppointment of Assistant Speakers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003894\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b49138527edd0f58c0b32eadba21d300\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Members, I seek leave for the Hon Jenny Salesa, Tangi Utikere, and Tom Rutherford to be appointed as temporary Assistant Speakers until 11.59 p.m. on Saturday, 19 September 2026, despite Standing Order 29.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003895\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIs there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none. Thank you. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EApplause\u003C/span\u003E] Yeah, well, depending on their performance, they can collect their gold medals later.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003896\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fce6bee9c58fd019a5fd28bc5977af2e\u0022\u003EBusiness of the House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003897\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00226ed0e773eb99b521b4cb94dcae691055\u0022\u003EBusiness Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u002286232235ede3984b6a64b022ef788852\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003898\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002286232235ede3984b6a64b022ef788852\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Leader of the House) (14:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Next week, the House will consider the final stages of the Planning Bill and the Natural Environment Bill, as well as the first readings of the Ng\u0101ti Mutunga o Wharekauri Claims Settlement Bill and the R\u0113kohu Wharekauri Shared Redress Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003899\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe hours of Tuesday will be extended into Wednesday for Government business, and that afternoon, the House will consider the report of the Standing Orders Committee, before adjourning for the final time in the 54\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E Parliament. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u00226e02ef6c37bb5e91f12ec369c8dc2c58\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003900\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226e02ef6c37bb5e91f12ec369c8dc2c58\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (14:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Can I just ask of the Leader of the House whether the modern slavery legislation will be brought into this House\u2014a commitment made by the Government to the Opposition for its support for the India Free Trade Agreement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u0022dad2036f4eb7ac82f8a98ffdc316422c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003901\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dad2036f4eb7ac82f8a98ffdc316422c\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Leader of the House) (14:01)\u003C/span\u003E: We don\u2019t have a members\u2019 day next week.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003902\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002287912ee91a7583d991c43fab77b1a1ff\u0022\u003EPresentation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003903\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00225d2cc17331294304c471317cfa87aea8\u0022\u003EPapers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003904\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a480e0336553941772b88e8ab37b0b39\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I present the Register of Pecuniary\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] Just a moment. None of that cross-House stuff while I\u2019m speaking. I present the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ERegister of Pecuniary and Other Specified Interests of Members of Parliament: Summary of amendments to previous returns and summary of initial returns, 2026\u003C/span\u003E. Those papers are published under the authority of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003905\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe House comes to question time\u2014the first in the name of T\u0101kuta Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003906\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216cb05cefd651ae6bf8dc8671a51f420\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, sir.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003907\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002247a88a22498e4a208a43347635748943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e85471ad97e66e31ff83f5b23c319cd\u0022\u003ET\u0101kuta Ferris\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, t\u0113n\u0101 koe.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003908\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e80a854809c1297c571f6d7784be6a1\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Excuse me. Point of order, the Hon Kieran McAnuty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022 data-id=\u0022d8e384e424dfce5b3594acb41ee56b4e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003909\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d8e384e424dfce5b3594acb41ee56b4e\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY (Labour) (14:02)\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise to the member. A few of our members are struggling to hear you, sir. I don\u2019t know if the mics are working.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb149eeaf5a856701d9b1957fb5e8f2d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah. Look, I struggled to hear the Hon Louise Upston as well. Can our technical people, please, just have a bit of a look at that? I think we could hear T\u0101kuta Ferris, who was fairly, easily audible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003911\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002214a539e70aba101d322d81a7d80c880a\u0022\u003EOral Questions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003912\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ea12c8043a01b9cd8ef774c79398ed97\u0022\u003EJustice\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003913\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022af49ce7f11c57150f6366d2696dc227a\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 1\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002247a88a22498e4a208a43347635748943\u0022 data-id=\u0022d1c4426dddf2d8776c15cca20c3a1072\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003914\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002247a88a22498e4a208a43347635748943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d1c4426dddf2d8776c15cca20c3a1072\u0022\u003ET\u0100KUTA FERRIS (Te Tai Tonga) (14:02)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Justice\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E\u0100e, e te M\u0101ngai, t\u0113n\u0101 koe.\u003C/span\u003E Why has the Government introduced a package of three Treaty provisions bills that requires some public bodies to do \u201Cno more than\u201D take Te Tiriti into account, and repeals other statutory Treaty provisions altogether?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u0022b19d55954b59570b628ef3b8ffc8b52c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b19d55954b59570b628ef3b8ffc8b52c\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (14:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Because we have a commitment in our coalition agreement with New Zealand First, whose leader and deputy leader are leading M\u0101ori figures in this nation, to have a comprehensive review of all legislation that includes references to \u201Cthe principles of the Treaty of Waitangi\u201D, and this is the outcome of that review.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003916\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002247a88a22498e4a208a43347635748943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220e48da3afe3387f657183fc3fac79ee2\u0022\u003ET\u0101kuta Ferris\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree with the late Moana Jackson, one of the country\u2019s foremost constitutional lawyers, who said \u201Ctreaties aren\u2019t meant to be settled, they\u2019re meant to be honoured.\u201D; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003917\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002205d1abbbe1e12f976249910879a20d33\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I agree with the suggestion that the Treaty is to be honoured, and that is what this Government does on behalf of New Zealanders every day. Naturally, there will be debate about how exactly that can be expressed in legislation. Naturally, there will be a debate about what a Treaty signed in 1840 means today, in 2026, in the context of a modern democracy\u2014and those debates carry on. The good news is that we, generally, in this country, carry on those debates in a calm and dignified way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003918\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002247a88a22498e4a208a43347635748943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb4f82f25923d28547667c24918dda7f\u0022\u003ET\u0101kuta Ferris\u003C/span\u003E: Why does he consider \u201Chonouring Te Tiriti o Waitangi\u201D to be too strong of an obligation on the Government?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003919\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002293704695b952b117a36c18852d91bb87\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I think, as I answered before, we are determined to continue to honour the Treaty. What I think the member is referring to is the various formulations that have been used over the last few decades, in relation to the Treaty\u2014sometimes referred to \u201Cthe Treaty\u201D, sometimes \u201CTe Tiriti\u201D; sometimes it\u2019s \u201Chonour\u201D, sometimes \u201Chave regard to\u201D, sometimes \u201Cgive effect to\u201D, sometimes another formulation of words. So part of the exercise was to be clear about what we mean.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003920\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002247a88a22498e4a208a43347635748943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dfc3455745d9e81e1f0996f855d0b4d0\u0022\u003ET\u0101kuta Ferris\u003C/span\u003E: If clarity and consistency are truly the problem, why not make honouring Te Tiriti the consistent standard?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003921\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea6fbb9b195d10b1f2071d578457651a\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, because we\u2019ve worked our way through a process that has led to where we\u2019ve got to in terms of the recommendations: some seven bills where we\u2019re going to repeal the provisions because they aren\u2019t appropriate. There will be another one which amends the weighting \u201Cto take into account\u201D, and then there\u2019s another piece of legislation that standardises a drafting approach towards the Treaty provisions. This is part of a process that we set out in order to provide some greater clarity. Not all the pieces of legislation that refer to the principles were included in it, and some have been dealt with separately, such as the changes to the Resource Management Act; such as the changes to the Department of Conservation legislation as well. So we\u2019ve gone about this in a careful and deliberative manner.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003922\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002247a88a22498e4a208a43347635748943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c5b4082c0fed90d12aa4a25accfe5bb2\u0022\u003ET\u0101kuta Ferris\u003C/span\u003E: Does he believe a referendum on the M\u0101ori seats, ending the Waitangi Tribunal, or downgrading Te Tiriti o Waitangi in legislation to its lowest possible level are good policies to improve the future of Aotearoa, or are they just good for campaign season?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003923\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b470f2a6db13c362b08112fa8ba944f5\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, none of those things are current policies of this Government. Our Government has been focused upon delivering better outcomes for M\u0101ori New Zealanders, like all New Zealanders. It\u2019s why we\u2019re not going to tax them to death like the Opposition will. It\u2019s why we\u2019re focused on restoring law and order in our communities\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003924\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002268fb29d36d95ff39f4b7ac30800d88e6\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, just stick to the answer. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] No, that\u2019s enough\u2014that\u2019s enough.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c594e8a2219b7105c71c02577feff93\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I\u2019m just giving some context, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003926\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002265a7b9fdc4342a1c9c907ca479db7369\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, no\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003927\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225968716f8e698e009eab3b59e3a84605\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s why we\u2019re very proud of our contributions over the last three years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003928\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224fe728eb3e63a22085788748146dc419\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member barely escaped the prospect of leaving the House early yesterday. Making comments like that is not at all helpful, and I\u2019d advise Ministers not to do it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003929\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00221f0baa577a03bb4ccd034f77c69cd583\u0022\u003EFinance\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003930\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002221f4dc1abe853be309641d8aa955357a\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226c562dc86e974914b8878595e580f138\u0022 data-id=\u00226970b0b336abd9b6ad71d43d0485e9b0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003931\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c562dc86e974914b8878595e580f138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226970b0b336abd9b6ad71d43d0485e9b0\u0022\u003ECATHERINE WEDD (National\u2014Tukituki) (14:07)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Finance\u003C/span\u003E: What recent reports has she seen on the economy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u002201630486d83a7268f6783f4a9d940e17\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003932\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002201630486d83a7268f6783f4a9d940e17\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (14:07)\u003C/span\u003E This morning, Stats NZ released the latest GDP figures. These show the economy grew by 0.2 percent in the June quarter of this year, defying expectations. March quarter growth was also revised up to 0.9 percent. These figures demonstrate that over the first half of this year, households and businesses have shown remarkable resilience in the face of the Middle East conflict and the global fuel crisis.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003933\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c562dc86e974914b8878595e580f138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fd56116b079a96d895f1e409eaeb062e\u0022\u003ECatherine Wedd\u003C/span\u003E: Which sectors of the economy performed well?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003934\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a27e1b8d0d02853ca3bdf7313688267f\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, as expected, high fuel prices had an impact on retail trade and transport, but nine of the 15 industries measured by Stats NZ grew in the quarter, with construction particularly strong\u2014up 2.6 percent\u2014and exports of goods and services in the quarter were up 3.3 percent. New Zealand households and businesses have been through a deep and protracted downturn, but GDP growth has now been positive for four quarters in a row. Over the last year, the economy has grown 2.6 percent\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce286dc7bdb41d1be708aedd7af5db21\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: How does it compare to our trading partners?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003936\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d564cea60ebf557d3125dcd3448be64\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014much faster than most of our trading partners.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003937\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022659b38c5cb46dc6864cd569cd969d454\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: New Zealand\u2019s doing worse than everywhere else.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003938\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256b54a08585f7d791d70bc70813a5571\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Megan Woods would do well to know some facts: go to the Stats NZ website; compare our annual growth with Australia, the UK, the US; and see that New Zealand comes out trumps\u2014or 1.9 percent in per capita terms. That compares well to other countries. Economic growth of 2.6 percent in the year to June is stronger, for example, Megan Woods, than growth over the same period in Australia, the UK, the US, Canada, and her friends the EU.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003939\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c562dc86e974914b8878595e580f138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b59eecee74b340d2e9db9d4d8f1e8ab\u0022\u003ECatherine Wedd\u003C/span\u003E: What is the outlook for economic growth?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003940\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274491ed15b742baac5a73eda300343f7\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, this morning\u2019s release was for the June\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003941\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e2dc72e602ca7f54fd9a5489202d346\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: Better if there\u2019s a change of Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003942\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022edac03a7e705894004b38788e1dc1afc\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014quarter of this year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b32247510389793c5fd789d44ad851d2\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, hang on. Listen, excuse me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003944\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c13ecddb8bd8439d3a56247a6d6fa562\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: There\u2019s some verbal diarrhoea that\u2019s broken out over there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003945\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254603b534643ba49abffd987336a900e\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, just stop for a minute. We\u2019ll just\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003946\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022328c97d24ee41f1f214c61394e2ce818\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: Kick her out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003947\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c3492605d04c1f3063eeb4ec3da90f25\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, no, because she\u2019s asked to be kicked out, and I don\u2019t want to do that. It\u2019s not a gift\u2014it\u2019s not a gift\u2014but I would ask the member just to calm down on the interjections.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003948\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e0d87c21414f237720ee93157f7f57f4\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: It would be a gift to the rest of us\u2014and possibly to her party, too, may I mention. This morning\u2019s release was for the June quarter of this year. More recent data indicates that economic growth picked up in the September quarter, which we will soon come to the end of. Looking ahead, Treasury\u2019s forecasts show growth averaging 2.7 percent a year over the next four years. A growing economy, of course, means better prospects for young New Zealanders, more opportunities, more jobs, higher wages. The Treasury forecasts show 220,000 more jobs by 2030 and wages rising faster than inflation. Kiwis will get ahead under this Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003949\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c562dc86e974914b8878595e580f138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fd054e3701cb833a86adc25fdc8c29cb\u0022\u003ECatherine Wedd\u003C/span\u003E: How would an increase in taxes affect economic growth?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003950\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a61d8b5dd5c2ad11c7c207bb6ee1369\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: It would depend, of course, on what taxes were increased and by how much, but, in general, tax increases would be bad for the economy. A big increase in tax would have a particularly profound impact. I\u2019m thinking, for example, of an increase in core Crown revenue to 33 percent of GDP\u2014I don\u2019t know why, but this example keeps popping into my head. It would mean $10 billion more of extra taxes every year, which is the equivalent, members, of over $100 more tax every week for every Kiwi household.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003951\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b748f0ca30b303272fb9d029b3aa368c\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EHow desperate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003952\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022435c0f3dda4c3d555b8a0c9670fd6d24\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Such an increase in taxes, of course\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003953\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002206caa557e41fafccc9bca5f422fb5840\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: Desperate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003954\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002207765321f90c879c114efefca0d9fd52\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014would have a crushing impact on the economy and on jobs, on wages. To the members opposite who yell out, \u201CDesperate.\u201D, you\u2019re the desperate ones who are aiming for 33 percent revenue\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003955\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db8109b935ac98521171afb0303217f4\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s enough.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003956\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222192c1d6acd4b71f0215ddc37351b1fb\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014in your own policy, on your own website\u2014check it out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003957\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ff38e86c2512da86959469d98b5a3d4\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s enough. I don\u2019t want to terminate the question, but it\u2019s close. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] We\u2019ll go to question No. 3, the Hon Carmel Sepuloni, and no one else speaks when the question\u2019s being asked.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003958\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cdf38ce7e0122d0d034e73b9e9ea3e49\u0022\u003EFinance\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ee6c095760da11ba84ef7c09ba8ce20e\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022 data-id=\u0022c804c269e719aca4702fc811164bf68f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003960\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c804c269e719aca4702fc811164bf68f\u0022\u003EHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Deputy Leader\u2014Labour) (14:11)\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=\u0022b6b78eaa96a8decafcd0c1fe39d1a978\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003961\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b6b78eaa96a8decafcd0c1fe39d1a978\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (14:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, yes, in context. I particularly stand by my statement that there are policies being proposed by that member which would see tax rise to 33 percent\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003962\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb330b8bf69b77a0768ee6874ca40645\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003963\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223c5120fd2b88857077d89f3e56b9df8\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014of GDP, the equivalent of $100 more in tax per Kiwi household.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003964\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1c4416164666910d083bf546c7282c1\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, excuse me\u2014thank you. You can answer from a Government perspective, you can answer from opinion, but you can\u2019t attack the Opposition. That\u2019s one of the rules that\u2019s been the rule for as long as the Parliament\u2019s operated; we\u2019ll keep sticking to that rule today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003965\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d43f61e0a0745c192ea2b12757aeb0e9\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: Is New Zealand\u2019s economy on a real per-capita basis larger or smaller than when she took office?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003966\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002271eb2c79de27cf68ee41fa77150b2b1a\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: As the member well knows, the New Zealand economy went through a protracted downturn following a period of excessive spending, excessive inflation, and rapid interest rate rises. The good news is that in the past year, real GDP per capita has picked up considerably as a result of the basics that this Government has been fixing. So while over the three years that we\u2019ve been fixing up the mess left to us by the last lot, real GDP growth has struggled, in the past year it has picked up considerably.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003967\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b500e06d30448a1b244fd9dda0ab9d76\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: Does she stand by her commitment to grow the economy; and if so, why is real GDP per person lower by more than $1,200 since she took office?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003968\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c4ecbf7bdc079c2ba25473f5746d94dd\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I addressed that in the previous answer, and I want to point the member again to the real data: in the past year, in per-person terms, the economy\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003969\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aaef61d5e5a606c30ad4d750fbb19eee\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: Since you took office.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003970\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002262a921b8d2ab225799279ba19c2bacfb\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014has grown 1.9 percent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003971\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022969be12613c8de177a43cf2ddd3c55b3\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, just a minute, sorry\u2014we just can\u2019t keep going on with this absolute barrage. There\u2019s no point in asking questions if you don\u2019t want to hear the answers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003972\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226c943e5b6d22784768ee5b910b95fde8\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: In the last year, we have seen a significant recovery in per-capita growth of 1.9 percent. That, members, reflects the good work of this Government to fix the wreckage left by the last Government and put in place the foundations for strong economic growth.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003973\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a6e2e5566ab4b518b51154180e13c80c\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: Is New Zealand\u2019s GDP growth\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003974\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221b3a88affe8c332f9aa24e17651b4b76\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a moment. Could you start again\u2014just everyone needs to be quiet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003975\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219cea46919da6762f71117a850cc8d8e\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: Is New Zealand\u2019s GDP growth rate lower than almost every country we would compare ourselves to, including Australia, the US, and the UK at 0.4\u00A0percent; the EU at 0.5 percent; Canada at 0.8 percent; and China at 0.9 percent\u2014all of which have been affected by the same international factors as New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003976\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226143781c7a6a10d54e99b6b0698dad29\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, despite the theatrical voice, she hasn\u2019t listened to the answers I have given. I don\u2019t like to be repetitious, but leave me repeat for that member, using numbers, that in the past year, economic growth in New Zealand, at 2.6 percent, is stronger than Australia, the UK, the US, Canada, and the European Union. I\u2019ve said it once, I\u2019ve said it twice\u2014I\u2019ll keep saying it if she keeps asking the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003977\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e070daccb36d836b886feae5f02615e\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: As the cost of living continues to rise, how many Kiwis have received the full $250 a fortnight she promised them?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003978\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a46775b4a1d0c9888c50dd7c946b146\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: It is likely that many have, because that number compromised two numbers. The first was delivering a tax package which would deliver up to $100 a week. That tax package was delivered in full\u2014opposed by those members who didn\u2019t want Kiwis to keep more of their own cash. The second half related to FamilyBoost, and I am advised that thousands of families have now received more than $150 a fortnight in relief as a result of that policy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003979\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc695f1c116c17c4e286d67032e2f3f5\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: When she said yesterday that the Government is currently recruiting 2,300 additional nurses, on top of the current workforce, and that they would be in place by Christmas, was she promising a net increase of 2,300 additional nurses by Christmas 2026?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003980\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002250254e795d41dbd2df94f0953ba6bc8f\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: I do wish to clarify something there, which is that I am advised that Health New Zealand is working hard to fill those roles sooner than the end of the year\u2014all 2,378.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003981\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cdc09f450e024f487855ede7dcacc1a4\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: Why should New Zealanders believe her promise of 2,300 additional new nurses by Christmas, when it has taken her two years to deliver 54?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003982\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cdd71cde0c63b9f69fea05baee43d4f9\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Because, Mr Speaker, she\u2019s gerrymandering the figures again, conveniently excluding the first few months of this Government in which many nurses were hired. Overall, we have grown the number of nurses by hundreds, but that member likes to pick the dates that suit her. That\u2019s not how the real world works.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003983\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002290ebf4fd7a01a1fd7cec1c18a5359a49\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: How can New Zealanders have trust and confidence in her when she promised to grow the economy and shrank it, promised to reduce the cost of living and made it worse, and promised to fund the health system and then hired only 54 new nurses across the country over the course of two years?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b755cf6fb63eef43fb03d6661d6500dc\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: As a consequence of this Government\u2019s responsible economic management, growth in this country has picked up considerably, including growing faster than many of the countries we normally compare ourselves too. Because, under our watch, inflation is much lower than the 7.3 percent it reached under the last Government. And because while New Zealanders have undoubtedly gone through a tough several years, we are now building the foundations in this economy which can give them confidence they can get ahead. And because we are not proposing extraordinary increases to taxation, which would put this economy and New Zealanders\u2019 livelihoods at risk.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003985\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f3e4973df7e374968b90dd72105d9029\u0022\u003EHon Paul Goldsmith\u003C/span\u003E: Does she stand by her statement that the last thing this economy needs is nine new taxes?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003986\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225c6e2e096933048de1f95482b2b7a2df\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: I stand by that statement, and I wish to reassure New Zealanders that if they re-elect a National-led Government, they are guaranteed no new taxes. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003987\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208c00ff64bbdc272cc5a5ba41992aaf1\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, that\u2019s good, so everyone just calm down\u2014calm down. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] We can just wait all afternoon if you like, I\u2019m not too worried. But I think what I\u2019ll now say is Question 4, Lan Pham.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003988\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00224fa3aa8d574576d14cdbf4462c42ef6e\u0022\u003ERMA Reform\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003989\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00220b104900b576e4604bb3915f4eaedc08\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 4\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022 data-id=\u00221818e10ef0987041821d338f0fe3abc0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003990\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221818e10ef0987041821d338f0fe3abc0\u0022\u003ELAN PHAM (Green) (14:18)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister responsible for RMA Reform\u003C/span\u003E: Does he consider the Government has an obligation to future generations to protect the environment and maintain a livable climate under his proposed resource management reforms?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022 data-id=\u00226fb8320c49ddbac6966506d2334e972a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003991\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226fb8320c49ddbac6966506d2334e972a\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP (Minister responsible for RMA Reform) (14:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, within the scope of what the new planning system is designed to do. The Government\u2019s intent is that the Climate Change Response Act is the primary vehicle for reducing emissions, not individual planning decisions. We need a planning system that protects the environment, not by resisting growth but by setting clear rules so growth occurs within limits\u2014that\u2019s what we\u2019re doing. The system supports future generations by taking a long-term approach to growth, infrastructure, and environmental management.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003992\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e9ae466f659243e7dd7bd66452a98f1f\u0022\u003ELan Pham\u003C/span\u003E: How does removing the consideration of the negative effects of emissions support his obligation to future generations to maintain a livable climate, when officials advised that such a change had \u201Ca high risk of unintended consequences and is generally not advisable\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003993\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022741f03edf99fa0bb3dbc042bb135df8b\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I answered that in the primary answer, which is that the Government\u2019s intent is that the Climate Change Response Act is the primary vehicle for reducing emissions, not individual planning decisions. We have allowed the positive impact of things like renewable energy, for example, in terms of carbon reduction to be taken into account, but not the negative ones, because we want individualised planning decisions not to consider those matters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022219d8268c47f06d6488157d864cfd968\u0022\u003ELan Pham\u003C/span\u003E: How do changes to the Natural Environment Bill, that remove direction for development to occur within environmental limits and enables pollution to breach environmental limits, support his obligation to future generations to protect the environment?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003995\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022023d22f8aaf2672aa0a531043349c99c\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s not actually what the bill does. The bill directs the Government to set environmental limits, which is a big step forward on the Resource Management Act (RMA), which doesn\u2019t do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003996\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b88d55eb0b607c0d887b67fa526b4628\u0022\u003ELan Pham\u003C/span\u003E: Why did he say at the Resource Management Law Association Conference that he was \u201Clooking forward to limits starting to bite\u201D in the early 2030s, when his own Amendment Paper made clear that even interim limits won\u2019t bite until the 2040s, a decade of decline later?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003997\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229976b1699f5a5e416a0d41f27b1f224f\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s not accurate\u2014to the second part of the answer, that\u2019s not accurate. To the first part, the whole point of an environmental limits regime is that it does start to have an effect. I think the member would certainly agree with me that part of the problem with the planning system over the last 30 years since the RMA is that limits have not been effective, and we will be putting in place a limits-based regime. There will be quite a bit of debate around what that regime looks like, and the member, I\u2019m sure, will have a view, as will everyone in the economy, and that\u2019s why there\u2019ll be extensive consultation around it. It will be a big step forward for the environment and, indeed, for growth.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003998\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bc4897d6afcb9da1c8e8dd4209c6252b\u0022\u003ELan Pham\u003C/span\u003E: Why should New Zealanders trust that his Government is going to protect the health of their land and water, their drinking-water sources, their oceans, and all of the places they care about and rely on, when the Government appears to have enabled industries who pollute the most to dictate the rules?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0003999\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022566a12b2cbe7450d3bdf6f7409915939\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: People can trust this Government because under this Government, in the last year alone, 1,000 megawatts of renewable energy has been consented. They can trust us because we are the first Government ever to design and build a national flood map so that we can actually work out where our natural hazards are. They can trust this Government because we are the Government that has replaced the RMA, or is about to, with a new regime that puts in place an environmental limits regime, a natural hazards framework, and a national adaptation plan to start to transition our economy to a more renewable one that decarbonises over time. I appreciate that the transition is nowhere near as quick as the Green Party would like, but that\u2019s because they don\u2019t understand that people actually have to live in this economy as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1e2b8da49a6f7227b98bae261db6dc7\u0022\u003ELan Pham\u003C/span\u003E: Has he seen the report by Professor Lisa Marriott and Max Rashbrooke that outlines the concerning influence of vested-interest lobbying in New Zealand, and if so, how does his experience compare with a former public servant who said, \u201CThe lobbying is intense, and the capture is rife.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022644cff9ddbb97ed40424c265a6385ec2\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, it\u2019s a bit hard to work out how that supplementary actually\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002234bf6bb6f65fcb5491f825e09287c3b1\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m happy to answer it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228a34e908fc902f4b0531ff76678cd034\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: You may be, but I\u2019m not necessarily happy to hear it. Do you want to reframe the question? You can\u2019t just bring in something quietly new like that when you\u2019ve got a very clear written question there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d1fb94963698efa157e222f165f14ea\u0022\u003ELan Pham\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree with the public servant whose quote was outlined in a report by Professor Lisa Marriott and Max Rashbrooke in relationship to the development of legislation in Parliament, who said, \u201CThe lobbying is intense, and the capture is rife.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bbc3ff3c82058756c2549e17a849c9ed\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: I haven\u2019t seen the report, but lobbying is not illegal in this country. I have met with the Environmental Defence Society (EDS), who made strong protestations to the Government around our environment laws. I have met with Federated Farmers. I have met with Infrastructure New Zealand. I have met with a range of groups who are affected by our planning system. Lobbying is not illegal, and last time I looked, nor should it be, because guess what? This place makes really important decisions, and, unsurprisingly, people who those decisions impact on want to have a say in what that looks like. Greenpeace have been to see me, EDS have been to see me, Infrastructure New Zealand have been to see me, the Feds have been to see me. I even met with the member and her colleagues, and I look forward to future meetings. Guess what happened in that meeting? The member lobbied me\u2014ooh!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022892fee7c3bac127fff29988427e0eb71\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Look, I realise we\u2019re a couple of days before the Parliament lifts, but the general excitement in here is much too high. You just need to keep the noise down. Do you have another question, Lan Pham?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d57bb67053d3325dafc103ff3ac3b4f0\u0022\u003ELan Pham\u003C/span\u003E: I don\u2019t. Thank you, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002212670598a975b24e007d9d0bad06d099\u0022\u003EHousing\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225bcb2a424b1a3461d32ebd48443eeeaf\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 5\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d282b264c9c242dfd9de3a837f22dff9\u0022\u003ERIMA NAKHLE\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. My question is to the Minister\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222fd8bbfd1b59a661b989547e69591591\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a moment\u2014we\u2019ll just let your own team stop talking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022bcb7fb1cfafe66b4fb5aec92d6ba9d09\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bcb7fb1cfafe66b4fb5aec92d6ba9d09\u0022\u003ERIMA NAKHLE (National\u2014Takanini) (14:25)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Housing\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Government considering removing interest deductibility on residential property?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022 data-id=\u0022b12b32672880373a138432994c093922\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b12b32672880373a138432994c093922\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP (Minister of Housing) (14:25)\u003C/span\u003E: For the eighth time in the last three weeks, no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c3925541dae328a995a2b06063ee22fd\u0022\u003ERima Nakhle\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Government considering introducing a capital gains tax alongside removing interest deductibility on residential property?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f20dead97bb5b08da58c0d69ffd6877\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: No, we are not considering a capital gains tax, and we are not considering removing interest deductibility, and we\u2019re not considering removing them together. That would be a double tax concoction. That is what it would do\u2014a double tax. In 2021, IRD and Treasury warned the Government of the day about overtaxing and double taxation in relation to implementing the removal of interest deductibility when a property could also be taxed on sale\u2014at that time, through the bright-line test.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c3c306ca55f6fcb41cf480f42aa19126\u0022\u003ERima Nakhle\u003C/span\u003E: What reports has he seen on interest deductibility for residential property?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dcd7455ce2f5718be65efc291a368fa3\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: Well, my bedtime reading is very exciting. I\u2019m trawling through what I\u2019ve come to know as \u201Cye olde faithful\u201D, the 2021 regulatory impact statement entitled \u201CLimiting interest deductibility on residential investment property\u201D, which has a lot to say about double tax. In paragraph 52, IRD says that if interest is denied and the property is taxed on sale, then \u201Cthe investment may be overtaxed\u201D. But the real meat, members, is paragraph 107. Treasury notes that \u201CAllowing a deduction for interest payments when the property is taxable on sale will avoid the double taxation of the economic income from residential investment property\u201D, which is another way of saying a capital gains tax plus the removal of interest deductibility constitutes double taxation, because both taxes apply to the same income. It\u2019s not just me who\u2019s concerned about this\u2014IRD and Treasury were worried about this five years ago.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022536263018e9dc29137d3732c949d6e9e\u0022\u003ERima Nakhle\u003C/span\u003E: What else does the report say?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227b5e6e8e6d55ecbc27015e489c390b8f\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: The regulatory impact statement provides a policy suggestion to tackle the risk of double taxation. It says to \u201Callow interest deductions where the property is taxable on sale\u201D, and that\u2019s what the previous Government did. Let me repeat that: when the previous Government decided to remove interest deductibility on residential property in 2021, they had a carve-out to allow interest deductions where the property was taxable on sale at the time of sale. In a world with both a capital gains tax and denial of interest deductibility, you can either lock in double taxation and create unfairness, inefficiency, and disincentives, or do the right thing, avoid implementing a double tax burden, and keep the 2021 carve-out, which means every rental provider gets the interest deduction back at sale anyway. So which is it? Who knows.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00227f0aa6b01557f10b4f4d5d4f6a97d473\u0022\u003EM\u0101ori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002218301a104d9c34e250b9b5ed9035c3e7\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022 data-id=\u002290ea1f662dc7a5aa7cc879694f3b98c0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002290ea1f662dc7a5aa7cc879694f3b98c0\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON (Labour) (14:28)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister for M\u0101ori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EKei te ea \u014Dna whakaaro i te \u0101hua o te hononga i waenga i te M\u0101ori me te Karauna i t\u0113nei Wiki o te Reo M\u0101ori; ki te kore, he aha te take?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EIs he satisfied with the state of the M\u0101ori-Crown relationship this te Wiki o te Reo M\u0101ori; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229d5b13d601794bb282d99453116ad395\u0022 data-id=\u00223724263eb68336faef1469f30147d78b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229d5b13d601794bb282d99453116ad395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223724263eb68336faef1469f30147d78b\u0022\u003EHon TAMA POTAKA (Minister for M\u0101ori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti) (14:28)\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E\u0100na. T\u0113nei mea, te hononga i a M\u0101ori m\u0101 me te Karauna he p\u0113nei tonu me he m\u0101rena: He w\u0101 ka piki, he w\u0101 ka heke. K\u0101ore e kore kei te m\u014Dhio te mema ki t\u0113nei \u0101huatanga, me te mea nei ahakoa ko wai te k\u0101wanatanga, e kore e taea te k\u012B kua tika katoa ng\u0101 mahi a te K\u0101wanatanga i roto i t\u0113r\u0101 hononga.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EHeoi an\u014D i t\u0113nei w\u0101, t\u0113nei Wiki o te Reo M\u0101ori, kua rewa, kua maunu mai te mahere hou a Te Maihi Karauna, kua t\u016Bturu hoki tata ki te rima tekau miriona t\u0101ra ki ng\u0101 mahi p\u0101p\u0101ho reo M\u0101ori e kaing\u0101kautia ana e te mema, \u0101, kua t\u016Bturu hoki te tautoko i a Te Matatini.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EYes. This phenomenon\u2014the relationship between M\u0101ori and the Crown\u2014is similar to a marriage: at times it\u2019s up, at times it\u2019s down. Without doubt, the member is familiar with this situation, and furthermore, regardless of who the Government is, it cannot be said that all actions of the Government are correct within that relationship.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHowever, at this time, this M\u0101ori Language Week, the new Maihi Karauna plan has launched, it has sailed, and almost $50 million dollars has been realised for M\u0101ori language broadcasting that the member enjoys, and the support for Te Matatini has also been realised.\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002263f4b146195fce5e66b635af16bc1726\u0022\u003EHon Willie Jackson\u003C/span\u003E: If the Government can find $30 million to cut from teachers learning te reo M\u0101ori, why can\u2019t it find support for the more than 48,000 M\u0101ori now out of work at a time when wh\u0101nau are struggling to afford kai, rent, and power?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229d5b13d601794bb282d99453116ad395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252fd66d9a72fae2e4e1211c8e4f804a7\u0022\u003EHon TAMA POTAKA\u003C/span\u003E: Many New Zealanders, including many M\u0101ori, are doing it tough, and what they don\u2019t want to see is another nine taxes added on to their weekly bill. But we are working very hard to ensure that there are very clear steps taken to support those who are facing serious deprivation\u2014for example, for those who have been in emergency housing, making sure that we can help transition them to warm, dry, safe homes\u2014and, indeed, the many, many responsibilities and activities that Minister Stanford has been undertaking to ensure a wide variety of improved delivery of reo M\u0101ori and also reo Ingarihi resources into r\u016Bmaki and other schools throughout the country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220392c31a32e88bc8e29b7811a1021689\u0022\u003EHon Erica Stanford\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225421ff71eb50c888862b331dfc810794\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ll go to three here. The Hon Willie Jackson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea1b6a0f51386d2abaa918e7732d6071\u0022\u003EHon Willie Jackson\u003C/span\u003E: To the Minister: does he stand by his statement on Radio Waatea, \u201CI encourage te reo M\u0101ori to be included in all books.\u201D, and if so, why did he support the removal of M\u0101ori words in new \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EReady to Read\u003C/span\u003E books?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229d5b13d601794bb282d99453116ad395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002234db7995dc97dbd00ed2c083f91697ce\u0022\u003EHon TAMA POTAKA\u003C/span\u003E: As we are aware, there are M\u0101ori words that continue to be in all those ready to read books, and I\u2019d encourage the member to read some of them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a5a51261d956285bdb44a6a6effd0e7\u0022\u003EHon Willie Jackson\u003C/span\u003E: What message does introducing three bills to remove Treaty references from legislation in Te Wiki o te Reo M\u0101ori send to M\u0101ori?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229d5b13d601794bb282d99453116ad395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d7efeaf06d31fbdb5809e10768621d69\u0022\u003EHon TAMA POTAKA\u003C/span\u003E: This matter is one that was curated via the coalition agreements, and we are continuing to carry out our agreements, and we stick by our agreements, unlike some other people in this House. What we can also say is this: the responsibility of Kawanatanga is to make sure that we have very clear, understandable, transparent legislation, and at times that needs a review and it will go to the select committee, where the members opposite may have the chance to respond to it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227f48b1f38c84e8ffbcd38ec249011fc2\u0022\u003EHon Erica Stanford\u003C/span\u003E: Can the member confirm that not a single M\u0101ori word was removed out of a single book under the Ministry of Education in our term, and can he confirm that the proper nouns and names that are used in the decodable te reo readers are exactly the same policy that the previous Labour Government had?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229d5b13d601794bb282d99453116ad395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c69fbe1bc5d308776ca5c1562d5fa52f\u0022\u003EHon TAMA POTAKA\u003C/span\u003E: I can absolutely confirm what Minister Stanford has announced, and I can also acknowledge her tremendous mahi to ensure structured literacy and structured numeracy is deployed across all schools, including those where reo M\u0101ori is the main language and medium of education. \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EE mihi ana ki a \u003C/span\u003EMinister Stanford.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f84cc86f3ade4aab4ad2ce080be8f29\u0022\u003EHon Willie Jackson\u003C/span\u003E: What is the Minister\u2019s response to Tainui executive chair Tuku Morgan\u2019s criticism of this Government at the Koroneihana, where he said that M\u0101ori are being killed by this Government and are being treated like second-class citizens?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229d5b13d601794bb282d99453116ad395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225eea169a2891942747a1a87bf1becc2b\u0022\u003EHon TAMA POTAKA\u003C/span\u003E: Minister Goldsmith and I attended the recent Koroneihana of Te Arikinui Ku\u012Bni Nga wai hono i te po, and we were there to acknowledge, honour, and respect the invitation that she sent to us to attend, and we were very fortunate and privileged to be in attendance that day. Yes, there are many comments made on the \u0101tea, but the main kaupapa of that day was to speak to nationhood. Minister Goldsmith and I were very well welcomed and very appreciated for our presence throughout the Koroneihana.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c14fb9f8f72f04195c0ceaef44f74d80\u0022\u003EHon Willie Jackson\u003C/span\u003E: Looking back over the Minister\u2019s term, what does he consider his Government\u2019s greatest achievement for te reo M\u0101ori and Te Tiriti: was it introducing three bills on the first week of Te Wiki o te Reo; was it cutting $30 million from Te Ahu o te Reo M\u0101ori; was it disestablishing the M\u0101ori Health Authority; was it repealing section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022707704f9fbf8ec0b9a0d426743169674\u0022\u003EHon Paul Goldsmith\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c2288d209254ed246cdf051134a1c1d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Hang on, just a moment. We\u2019ve got a point of order. You can start again in a minute.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022635df955d0e460ade8c38bd8a42f5ca4\u0022\u003EHon Paul Goldsmith\u003C/span\u003E: I thought the purpose was to ask a question, not ask a question and answer the question at the same time, which is what he appeared to be doing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231f6117ed84f29d75c658cecff9fb2a9\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, one thing you need to know, and I\u2019m surprised after all your years here you don\u2019t know, is that it\u2019s\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221b9077e2099cea6d5be07723b05ecb88\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229de66cd0e46008356c11508813f4a8b4\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: OK, some people won\u2019t be surprised, but it\u2019s the Speaker who actually makes that determination. Thank you for your intervention; it\u2019s not required. Start again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c654f3565170dce1331d6269797d5616\u0022\u003EHon Willie Jackson\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Looking back over the Minister\u2019s last term, what does he think his greatest achievement was for te reo M\u0101ori and Te Tiriti: is it introducing three bills on the first day of our celebration of Te Wiki o te Reo M\u0101ori, was it cutting $30\u00A0million from Te Ahu o te Reo M\u0101ori, was it disestablishing the M\u0101ori health board, was it repealing 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act, was it increasing the M\u0101ori unemployment rate, was it introducing the Regulatory Standards Bill, or was it introducing the most divisive bill in the last generation, the Treaty principles bill\u2014what was the Minister\u2019s greatest achievement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ae1888ac5579632cab0620d042ac038\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, if the Minister was to take as long as the question we\u2019ve just covered, we\u2019d be here all afternoon, so please make it brief.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229d5b13d601794bb282d99453116ad395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb597c7cd1887dee7a6907f1d2ad5334\u0022\u003EHon TAMA POTAKA\u003C/span\u003E: There are a range of initiatives but, more importantly, outcomes for wh\u0101nau M\u0101ori, tamariki, rangatahi, kaum\u0101tua M\u0101ori that this Government is very, very proud of. Whether or not it\u2019s improving the attendance at schools from 33\u00A0percent of M\u0101ori kids going to school regularly to over 45\u00A0percent, or ensuring that the immunisation rate of two-year-old M\u0101ori children has improved from under 65\u00A0percent to over 72\u00A0percent, or the record amount of investment in marae of any Government in history, or over half a billion dollars into M\u0101ori housing, or improving and increasing the amount of money that is being committed to te reo M\u0101ori broadcasting at the baseline, or the record investment into Te Matatini, or, indeed, improving the state of play for many kids\u2014M\u0101ori kids and New Zealand kids\u2014in emergency housing, I could go on. But what I would say is this: this has all been done without any new taxes on wh\u0101nau M\u0101ori.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022df1f0e20b1f8f3309eb6d0593de3a3d9\u0022\u003EHon Erica Stanford\u003C/span\u003E: Can the member confirm that this Government has invested $15\u00A0million into Te Ataarangi to train teachers to speak te reo M\u0101ori, which is half as much as what was invested before, reaching a very similar number of teachers and taking that extra $15\u00A0million and investing it into other te reo resources, like the p\u0101ngarau maths books?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229d5b13d601794bb282d99453116ad395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222bfce39184a4acb7ed2416e2799975b7\u0022\u003EHon TAMA POTAKA\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and I acknowledge Minister Stanford for her excellent mahi in this regard, and also people like Ruakere Hond, who continue to commit to the teaching of te reo M\u0101ori despite the speculative opinion of members opposite.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e4dd4b3944379c2ab3a2da9db6d0e1e\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I just feel I should just make a general statement, because there are people observing Parliament today and seeing it in a more fractious state than it is usually. It is because we are close to the end of the parliamentary term, but we\u2019ll try and keep it as seemly as possible moving forward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a698260c4b76ba047cf3dbacdf26ee01\u0022\u003EChildren\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022957443c2b04a55637c12abf2e81b22c9\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 7\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b064dd56673f4c1cb11c1242823abb92\u0022 data-id=\u00222a3553b303c52c25b358914bbdcd342a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b064dd56673f4c1cb11c1242823abb92\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222a3553b303c52c25b358914bbdcd342a\u0022\u003ELAURA McCLURE (ACT) (14:37)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister for Children\u003C/span\u003E: What is this Government doing to respond to serious and persistent youth offending?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022f7bb817b6b5033dd4915cdecf23031a2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f7bb817b6b5033dd4915cdecf23031a2\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (14:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. This Government has done a lot to address youth offending, from expanding the fast-track programme, investing in better help for young people with high support needs, to the great work that associate education Minister David Seymour has done to ensure kids are enrolled and actually attending school. The Government also intends to shortly pass the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill. This legislation provides important tools to protect communities, support victims, and improve outcomes for young people. It will enable a stronger and more targeted response to a small group of young people who, despite multiple previous interventions, continue to offend.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b064dd56673f4c1cb11c1242823abb92\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af432690f1c85ce51211262f67ab5259\u0022\u003ELaura McClure\u003C/span\u003E: Why did the Government introduce the Oranga Tamariki\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002294a2c26a8216e32aec7b1a43a9e0bd71\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a minute. Sorry. We don\u2019t speak, as you know, when a question is being asked, so we\u2019ll start that question again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b064dd56673f4c1cb11c1242823abb92\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002215c8a2300fd512b5fcfbbcaf07249f63\u0022\u003ELaura McClure\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Why did the Government introduce the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022731cb2cd875615395d42315adf2cc1c8\u0022\u003ETamatha Paul\u003C/span\u003E: Because they hate kids.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd5d7ed78107f05e1f91807c06005ff5\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR\u003C/span\u003E: I hear that member shouting\u2014well, heckling\u2014across the room that it\u2019s because I hate kids. I can guarantee you that if I hated kids, I wouldn\u2019t have put my hand up to come into this House; I would have stayed home and voted for you. The situation I inherited when I became Minister for Children was not good. Under the previous Government, ram raids were averaging two a day, and too many young people were committing serious crimes and causing significant harm to victims and communities. We have already made huge improvements in youth offending by taking a tough but fair approach that ensures there are consequences for their actions, while, at the same time, making sure young people already in the justice system get the support they need to make better decisions, turn their lives around, and unlock their potential. This legislation is just one part of this Government\u2019s commitment to restoring law and order, ensuring there are fewer victims of serious violent crime, and making our communities safer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b064dd56673f4c1cb11c1242823abb92\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022966a7572301edac9391aca0a853e98a8\u0022\u003ELaura McClure\u003C/span\u003E: What does the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill do?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a702ed637e170ae83727f3f05607bb8f\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR\u003C/span\u003E: This legislation introduces the ability for a Youth Court judge to make a young serious offender declaration. The purpose of the young serious offender declaration is to create a faster, stronger, and more targeted response to serious and persistent offending by unlocking additional powers for police in the Youth Court, such as longer supervision with activity orders, strengthened sentencing and placement considerations, and strengthened monitoring. The legislation also creates a new sentencing response available to the Youth Court for a military-style academy order, which will see eligible young people take part in the programme. This programme will provide structure, address the reasons behind the young people\u2019s offending, involves rehabilitation and therapeutic support, emphasises family and wh\u0101nau engagement, and has a focus on transition planning to provide pathways these young people can choose to take and change their lives around.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b064dd56673f4c1cb11c1242823abb92\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e21d665d9359be8e9866f8ed457b1fcb\u0022\u003ELaura McClure\u003C/span\u003E: What impact will this legislation have on the rates of serious and persistent youth offending?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228184b656445327a0efd2103d41aeaab3\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR\u003C/span\u003E: This Government has focused on reducing serious and persistent youth offending from the very beginning by making a Government target that is reported on quarterly. The latest update shows that this target, which was a 15 percent reduction by 2030, continues to be met and exceeded, with a 26 percent reduction in youth offending as at June 2026. I expect this legislation, with its stronger powers for the Youth Court and police, will contribute to and support this remarkable drop in offending rates we have already seen. Ultimately, this means less victims, safer communities, and better outcomes for young people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c81f3a76160b36e205d6fc3fe8ec6aab\u0022\u003ECommerce and Consumer Affairs\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022defeaa839b0d55b2808464f0ee95a52c\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 8\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u002226be0664d0d33e4aaab25f7d014922c5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002226be0664d0d33e4aaab25f7d014922c5\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (14:41)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs\u003C/span\u003E: Will he \u201Cadvocate for those who are paying too high prices\u201D by introducing law changes to prohibit big companies exploiting New Zealanders by charging excessively high prices?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022cdd09eea4fc7b5024c94b0feaa2da691\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cdd09eea4fc7b5024c94b0feaa2da691\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (14:42)\u003C/span\u003E: Of course, I will continue to advocate for those who are paying too high prices, and of course I think it is wrong for big companies to exploit New Zealanders by charging excessively high prices. However, while banning price gouging is a superficially appealing slogan, it simply wouldn\u2019t work because it does not address the underlying issue driving higher prices: a lack of competition. In fact, if it did work, it would have been done a long time ago. The Australian experience is instructive in that it has no fixed threshold for what constitutes an excessive price. The regulator has to assess the cost of supply, what constitutes a reasonable margin, and the circumstances surrounding each individual product. That likely means hundreds and hundreds of regulatory and legal disputes over what constitutes a reasonable price for individual product, and millions being spent on lawyers and consultants with likely no benefit to consumers. That is a fatally flawed policy and highlights the difference in approach between the Government and the Opposition. We are focused on long-term, durable measures to increase competition and investment, while Labour\u2019s slogans rely on things that will not work. They are not serious ideas. They are not serious people. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002277a1202a5bbb91cfcceabad216c16ea9\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: One person asking a question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a4175ecd35b00b4b926ef673f471e18\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Are the four major Aussie banks that made a combined total profit of $7.22 billion in our market, with a persistent lack of competitive pressures, gouging their Kiwi customers in a way that they wouldn\u2019t get away with in Australia?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273e75597ed19c97ecd1b82631812d1ee\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: There have been extensive market studies and investigations into the lack of competition between the Australian banks. And, in fact, this Government has picked up every single recommendation of how to address the root and underlying causes of those problems, including reducing many of the regulatory barriers from the Reserve Bank, introducing open banking to allow fintechs to compete more vigorously, and growing Kiwibank so that it can be a more robust competitor to those Aussie banks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278c4a7b030b7ddf74de662bca8592a02\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Are the power companies who have increased their residential prices by 20 percent over the last two years under National gouging their customers?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224fe606846d72f20ec1e78472bde9a575\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: It is absolutely the case that we want to see more electricity generation driving down prices for New Zealand electricity consumers. It is also the case that very heavy regulatory restrictions in the Resource Management Act have prevented many power firms from building the wind farms and the solar farms that they have wanted to build. They have instead spent years caught up in court. Our approach of accelerating and fast tracking those projects has led to an absolute flourishing in the building of new electricity generation, and that is already flowing through to lower wholesale prices.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022737f8ec13cdd7e752a7007820a4a1906\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Why does he talk tough with statements like \u201CNew Zealanders pay too much for their groceries\u201D, when he won\u2019t take any tough decisions to help them pay less for groceries?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255338dbb8cbbe9f9875b155c5bb7340a\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Because when I talk tough, I don\u2019t offer lightweight solutions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022936f2ee692c5bcc1da46923c1bcf0a80\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Is\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a4c51656578c6f717fe7c38bb3ad2cd\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Everyone just calm it right down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f5742e6aa69a21ad22278e0482c0fde\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Is all Kiwis can hope for on high food, energy, and petrol prices from this Government just another review, or should there be consequences if a company misuses its market power to gouge Kiwis?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022855f4985ba9f9882e2038b11227f2e75\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: It is the case that if companies misuse their market power and take anti-competitive action, under the Commerce Act, they can already be prosecuted by the Commerce Commission. That member should educate herself by going to the Commerce Commission website and observing the significant number of prosecutions that are progressing through the courts right now where the Commerce Commission is of the view that there have been breaches of the Commerce Act\u2014and that includes cases against supermarkets.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220ecf6c6c27c65a14d4135f79992c073f\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister met with the senior National MP who is publicly describing the plan to split the supermarkets as \u201Cbonkers\u201D, as reported in the media today?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e480ae8772ea0b4a6d024ce557aef9f7\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, no, because that is an unfounded and anonymous allegation. However, I have found official advice that refers to an idea for a wholesale separation in grocery as a completely bad idea. This was official advice provided to the last Government, which said it would not reconsider wholesale separation because it would disrupt efficiency, risk increasing prices, result in an unstable market; incentives for the separated wholesaler and retailer to each expand vertically to gain efficiency of scale; it\u2019s not clear that the wholesaler would be viable or that it could become a monopsony. We gazumped them this week. Next week they\u2019re going to announce another slogan, and it will not deliver for New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253efdb236ccf92e635a5d605f399c996\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. They would have been the most coherent answers that Cameron Brewer has given, and I imagine he would want them attributed to him, so it should be put on the record that those were on his behalf.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230d9acf690f8d4361ef0014862847f26\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that would be nice if it were the rules of the House. Whenever a Minister answers, they are responsible for the answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0f168d34946494e2bc8029bef959074\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Well, he\u2019ll be delighted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220f5f356e5740956279cb7267dcbd1f7b\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, no, no, you\u2019re missing the point. It was the Hon Nicola Willis who was responsible for the answers given today. We established that last week when you asked\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc9e73db318466ac6543ea365c0befad\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: No, but he\u2019s not here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c8989f54b50c80a525adce9e36e3e5fb\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, we did. No, no, hang on\u2014we went through this two weeks ago. Anyway, we\u2019ll go through\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222bb6e45a23d54ef2693053101004d87c\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Speakers\u2019 rulings do make it clear that if a Minister is answering on behalf of, then they need to indicate that. If a Minister is out of the country, then that Minister answering would be the acting Minister. Neither of those things occurred today, so there is a lack of clarity on this basis. Whether it was addressed last week or not, the fact remains that at no point did the Minister indicate that she was answering on behalf of the Minister who was asked the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002262bc7476d5f8ee0d91b527db4026c72e\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s true, but it\u2019s the Government\u2019s decision as to who answers a question, and so the Minister who was answering today is responsible for the answers that were given.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260220db4adecaadc55d96c85782b0689\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, sir. If the Government transferred the question, you would be absolutely right, but in an instance where a Minister is answering on behalf of, the question sheet does not say \u201CMinister of Finance\u201D or, indeed, any other portfolio held by the Hon Nicola Willis. It was addressed to Cameron Brewer. Nicola Willis answered on his behalf. At no point did she indicate that it was on behalf of. This would be a change to the rules, as is clearly outlined in Speakers\u2019 rulings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ae4aa7441a5def0b425f29cb5d139fd\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No\u2014I\u2019m happy to take it offline with you, but if a Minister stands up and gives an answer in the House, whether they\u2019re answering on behalf of another Minister or in their own right, they are responsible for what they say to the House. So that\u2019s very clear.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225909848bf2f96ab7a5d5eda946516aff\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to that, sir, that is true in the case where those comments were then reflected on at a subsequent question time. But for the purpose of being clear as to how the question is being answered, then it needs to be indicated in the answer at the time that it is on behalf of. Otherwise, we have this unusual situation\u2014and you referred to it earlier, if anyone was tuning in to question time that was unfamiliar with it. We have questions that are clearly indicated to the Minister. They were gender specific; it would be very confusing for the public as to what was going on. All that needed to happen, as is outlined clearly in Speakers\u2019 rulings, is the Minister indicates that they are answering on behalf of the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c977e35e00246c1719eece3f3704c9a1\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: OK. Look, rather than going into the back and forwards as we are at the moment, I\u2019d like to take advice on this and come back to you formally, perhaps, after question time. Can we go now to question No. 9\u2014Mike Davidson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00229a00834208a6aacc5659e31c4c325cbe\u0022\u003EInternal Affairs\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d345b6e4375269a48f003d83e055ccb0\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u0022d4ded4090d0b191ba7a02e3df9beb5b5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d4ded4090d0b191ba7a02e3df9beb5b5\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (14:50)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Internal Affairs\u003C/span\u003E: Does she stand by her statement, \u201CI have conditional confidence in Fire and Emergency New Zealand\u2019s Executive. I expect savings I have asked for to be made, and I will continue to monitor the organisation\u2019s delivery against expectations\u201D; if so, why does she retain confidence in Fire and Emergency New Zealand\u2019s executive?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u0022ff004860424e9b8a4dd162f2410fd11c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ff004860424e9b8a4dd162f2410fd11c\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (14:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. It reflected my position at the time the statement was made. However, since then, there has been a serious breach of the no-surprises convention by the chief executive. He withheld information I would expect to be alerted to for a full year. I have made it clear to both the board chair and the chief executive that this conduct is unacceptable. The information that the matter relates to has now been referred to the Serious Fraud Office. As a result, I have no confidence in the chief executive of Fire and Emergency New Zealand. I have communicated that I have no confidence in the chief executive directly to the chief executive and the board chair, and have set out my expectations regarding the board\u2019s responsibility to address these concerns. I will continue to hold Fire and Emergency accountable for meeting the Government\u2019s expectations and delivering the improvements required of the organisation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022955d6ad6d2a3c13a584062ccb5e45e3b\u0022\u003EMike Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: What information was withheld from the Minister?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220b84d13df64da7fdf373f58f0013d575\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, could you repeat that question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b52309dc4c2e9be93061953d546fce23\u0022\u003EMike Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: What information has been withheld from the Minister?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022615e391517e2f28cec5f81186f250206\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN\u003C/span\u003E: Look, I\u2019m not at liberty to say because I don\u2019t want to get in the way of any investigation that has been referred to the Serious Fraud Office.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022922d3b7a63b87e03389214ba7abffa42\u0022\u003EMike Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Minister accept responsibility for the continued decline in confidence in Fire and Emergency New Zealand due to the failure of leadership, fire trucks breaking down, fire stations being closed due to staff shortages, and fractured relationships between firefighters and the Fire and Emergency New Zealand leadership?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af86df1751d8525157baa1d2e842f7af\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN\u003C/span\u003E: No, it is my view that, of course, there have been issues within Fire and Emergency. A lot of these are historic, but there are also ones that have been happening to date. There have been issues across fleet; there have been issues across bargaining and collective arrangements; there have been issues with payroll and the human resources information system. Now I am aware of even more significant issues, which I believe are worse than any of the day-to-day management issues, but I have met with the board chair and I have made my expectations very clear that the board needs to restore my confidence within Fire and Emergency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022893a2fe9c229da5abe310bf3ce4d764e\u0022\u003EMike Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Do firefighters currently have safe working conditions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022959abd75e31f7123fced2f350323b49c\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN\u003C/span\u003E: My understanding is yes. My understanding is that Fire and Emergency does do its best to ensure that firefighters, whether they are professional or volunteer, are supported in the very serious and important work that they do to go out there and help people in their time of need. However, if there are any specific individual concerns that the member would like to raise, I would ask for those to be raised to my office so that we can get correct answers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ef28fa85169de0e0caccf468f0c575a5\u0022\u003EMike Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Is she confident, given her lack of confidence in the chief executive, that communities are not at greater risk?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c253f49a34fc763a615f0dc9215bc361\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN\u003C/span\u003E: I think there are a few things in that question. The communities are at greater risk when the firefighters are striking, that is true, and I would ask that the firefighters stop striking and return to the bargaining table so that there are no hours of any day where we do not have professional firefighters. However, I wouldn\u2019t believe that in general firefighters are at risk.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225afad7db6b0165dd886a6c958033b29c\u0022\u003EMike Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Are communities in Hutt City at greater risk by having their fire station closed since 2021, meaning around 16,200 people who reside in the area are now outside Fire and Emergency New Zealand\u2019s eight-minute response time?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d5595fc19040d17ea4a5b7d1b43ac3ab\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: There are two others there, mate. Go and visit the Hutt.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cfdb2686485a2e92a3edc8134bfd48b7\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Chris Bishop says \u201CGo and visit the Hutt.\u201D I think that\u2019s a great recommendation to the member. However, look, over the next 10 years, we are investing over $700 million into the property of Fire and Emergency. We expect 30 different areas around the country to have that investment in the next financial year. The Hutt itself has not been prioritised by Fire and Emergency in that respect. However, it is also the case that it would be a breach of the law to, as a Minister, expressly suggest where any particular station should go. That is a decision that is for the board and for the chief executive. However, as I\u2019ve expressed, the board has work to do to ensure that they restore my confidence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289b38d57599c96ee46043deb268d2f2d\u0022\u003EMike Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I asked a very clear question, which is were the communities in Hutt City at greater risk by being outside of the eight-minute response window now that the fire station is close, and there are approximately 16,200 people that reside outside of that response time. The question was are they at greater risk? The Minister never addressed that question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d77612d0547c1efc4cc4ccdc9358253c\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I think that possibly the problem is with the question when you said, \u201CAre they at greater risk?\u201D, and then went on to say that the station closed in 2021. It\u2019s a risk that\u2019s existed for, what, five years?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224438e32f5fa874f72321fe23ac2befcd\u0022\u003EMike Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and that\u2019s the question. She did not address that. I can repeat the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b917ef94be66567267cc86433272d64\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, we\u2019ll just see if we\u2019ve got another answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ef4f64df673900a23bafb9b079adb78\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN\u003C/span\u003E: Look, across the country, people are serviced by volunteer and professional stations, and where there are any particular gaps, those are filled by other stations in the area.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002229f3cac5a306032f9c9ca72dff65fdb5\u0022\u003EJustice\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c89982aa58c799b106a1153862a5b71e\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 10\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022c3d48e544a659d47f40ac61c337ba451\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c3d48e544a659d47f40ac61c337ba451\u0022\u003ETOM RUTHERFORD (National\u2014Bay of Plenty) (14:57)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Justice\u003C/span\u003E: What action is the Government taking to deal with disorderly behaviour in public places?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u0022a9d238c47ed6cc5db527030750f6c932\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a9d238c47ed6cc5db527030750f6c932\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (14:57)\u003C/span\u003E: The police will soon be able to issue move-on orders to people who are behaving in a disorderly manner in public places. The legislation is expected to pass its final reading in Parliament tonight or maybe tomorrow morning. The Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Act will provide an additional tool for police to reclaim our town squares and our CBDs and our city streets for the benefit and enjoyment of the people who live there, who work there, and who visit there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a889effc2d6b90c5266b4ac004baf90d\u0022\u003ETom Rutherford\u003C/span\u003E: Who will be subject to a move-on order?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2298095e61925541749910963dc0a9c\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Move-on orders will be issued by police to people who are breaching the peace; obstructing or impeding someone entering a business; displaying disorderly, disruptive, threatening, or intimidating behaviour; rough sleeping; or begging that unreasonably interferes with the use or enjoyment of a public place. Anybody that\u2019s been visiting our town squares and CBDs in recent years has seen a level of disorder that is not acceptable. We, as a Government, are determined to restore law and order in this nation, and this is just one more step that we are taking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1e1220ec6e216baa7be43728e852cc3\u0022\u003ETom Rutherford\u003C/span\u003E: What consequences will people face if issued with a move-on order?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ef4d80680a04bf9cb7c6268b99f1b95\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: A move-on order is, of course, not a criminal sanction\u2014we are not criminalising the behaviour here\u2014but a refusal to follow that move-on order will lead to a fine of up to $1,000 or even imprisonment for up to three months. Of course, the easiest way to avoid that is to follow the instructions of the police officer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c3ea4967bea00d2baab44864f6979cb0\u0022\u003ETom Rutherford\u003C/span\u003E: Why is the Government taking action to deal with disorderly behaviour in public places?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022906895b5e9534fa7cc6f2a43b19be7fc\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Because we believe that New Zealanders going about their business in our CBDs\u2014in contrast to the Green Party, our view is that people should feel safe in our CBDs and in our town squares. We have in mind those people who put their life savings into a retail business, get up at 7 o\u2019clock every morning, try to make a living for themselves and their families, and are confronted with somebody lined up outside the entrance to their store shouting at people, intimidating people, and making it difficult for them to make a living, and that is why we are bringing this change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00223c67ec9862b73527d6a0cd0d82624fda\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 8 to Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f453466b8f24e4240a9ef2333d8c0a6d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I just want to respond to the point of order raised earlier by the Hon Kieran McAnulty. Speaker\u2019s ruling 198/3, which I think he was referring to, does make it clear that where there is to be no change in portfolios and no transfer of a question, a Minister answering on behalf of another Minister needs to make clear to the House if they are answering on behalf of the Minister or as acting Minister. So I\u2019d ask the Hon Nicola Willis just to clarify that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc2bf8685c9b774e662b5a6f97b4f028\u0022\u003EHon Nicola Willis\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225cd9eb294a1e08d0fd397cb8bbbb87c9\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, sorry\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002270e0beb418b640f638c6ac432ad3305a\u0022\u003EHon Nicola Willis\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014acting\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b7ec79ef2cf02f5ae9fd71307744bb5f\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. I think\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224776ef12a2a8f6735aeba80fab790230\u0022\u003EHon Nicola Willis\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I was acting on behalf.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb370f0f9a3304c396077be8bfd632f2\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. The Hon Nicola Willis\u2014oh sorry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022104a27dc249a68832382ea989ab2b63e\u0022\u003EIngrid Leary\u003C/span\u003E: I won\u2019t say what I was going to say, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d66467545a449cad12b1532cee3cff56\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s a good thing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022871aa2afdae2491fa7afbe5ada5cb227\u0022\u003ESeniors\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225443c8aa7087f28e648ec537e06b4968\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 11\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022 data-id=\u0022ce524e23390f48216b2ac7f85194663a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ce524e23390f48216b2ac7f85194663a\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY (Labour\u2014Taieri) (15:00)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister for Seniors\u003C/span\u003E: Does she stand by her statement, \u201Cthose that are on fixed incomes, relying mostly or exclusively on superannuation, are doing it tough\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u0022ffec7c475c675137b32ab5dd763cf8fd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ffec7c475c675137b32ab5dd763cf8fd\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Minister for Seniors) (15:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I stand by that statement, and I also stand by my statement that older New Zealanders make an incredible contribution to our society. While there is a range of Government income support and assistance available, and our seniors are, generally, better-placed financially than other groups, individual circumstances mean people can, sometimes, need extra help. The reality is that someone on a fixed income is hurt by high inflation, especially at the levels that this Government inherited. I can also advise the member, and reassure superannuitants doing it tough, that, on this side of the House, we won\u2019t be committing to reckless spending that fuels rampant inflation and drives up costs, and we won\u2019t be introducing a raft of new taxes to take even more money out of the pockets of older New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c663c5346a74a1331a206292dbe6ec8e\u0022\u003EIngrid Leary\u003C/span\u003E: Why did she personally approve the removal from the Better Later Life seniors\u2019 outcomes framework, indicators that measure housing affordability, material hardship, income adequacy, proportion of income spent on housing, and income after housing costs?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2b076cf62bf12c47d17bb1e455d8508\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: As I replied to the member in a written answer regarding this, in considering how best to monitor outcomes from the updated Better Later Life action plan, the Office for Seniors highlighted that the previous framework, of 60 measures, had limitations, including, previously, not adequately representing the outcomes being sought through the action plan. Given this is a shorter set of indicators that more clearly link to the strategy\u2019s objectives, I think this is a better solution for monitoring delivery. As an example, the Better Later Life strategy focuses on housing choices and options. Measuring satisfaction with housing options more clearly links to the stated aims that come from the previous housing measures. Previous measures are still reported through other surveys in the Office for Seniors, who regularly monitors those.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002244bc52c6918f34435b9187ac14501773\u0022\u003EIngrid Leary\u003C/span\u003E: Why did she personally approve removing \u201Cmaterial hardship\u201D from the framework, when more than 76,000 special needs grants were issued to seniors last year just to meet their basic needs?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261bc3116de8c44b618f455d20ebdfd56\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: As I would highlight before, the Better Later Life action plan and the strategy delivery has been improved, modernised, and simplified to target practical delivery of outcomes that improve the lives of seniors. Therefore, the measures we\u2019ve applied into this report are aligning to ensure we are delivering those outcomes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ecc1393add8b414e27bcdb9627f0e718\u0022\u003EIngrid Leary\u003C/span\u003E: Why did she personally approve removing \u201Cincome after housing costs\u201D from the framework, when the Older Persons Poverty Monitor found 102,000 seniors were living in income poverty after housing costs?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ff316e8ee3bd233590316869435a0e9\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: Again, I will say that we are aligning measures to the Better Later Life action plan. All the measures will continue to be monitored. What we will refer to is that the Ministry of Social Development estimates only around 3\u00A0percent of older people are experiencing material hardship, and an additional 4\u00A0percent are near hardship. These are the measures that will continue to be monitored through the Office for Seniors. Again, this side of the House is ensuring that we are delivering practical outcomes: subsidiary dwellings for 70-square-metre dwellings to make it easier for older people to live; a rates rebates scheme, recipients of over 66,000 SuperGold card holders; delivering a formal ID for free for older New Zealanders to ensure that SuperGold card holders have a form of primary ID\u2014practical delivery by a practical Government improving outcomes, driving down costs, reducing inflation, and improving the lot of everyday New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219d4a8752c328d437cd49bc4eff13414\u0022\u003EIngrid Leary\u003C/span\u003E: How do her new framework indicators, like measuring KiwiSaver participation among adults or job satisfaction among people over 65, show where the seniors are becoming poorer?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204a4e71295bd1884e4afe5ca12bbc77a\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: They absolutely measure the successes of the Better Later Life Action Plan, because the Better Later Life Action Plan is ensuring that we are making sure older New Zealanders\u2019 quality of life improves, that they are participating in their communities, and that they are enjoying a quality of life\u2014in choosing if they want to work, that they are feeling rewarded. The other part that we will recognise is the fact that we\u2019re trying to ensure that our older New Zealanders continue to be connected socially, and things like making our town centres safer to participate in and enjoying our community centres without feeling threated and afraid are a practical step to improve the life of seniors.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0df3ffdfb7f1fce1d6e9a8ceabb9222\u0022\u003EIngrid Leary\u003C/span\u003E: Why did she replace genuine indicators of seniors\u2019 hardship and poverty, from a framework that exists to measure seniors\u2019 hardship and poverty?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f471fea3a002432dc97f35e15ea040ee\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m not sure how many ways I can say this; we have a Better Later Life Action Plan that ensures we deliver actions, and we will measure the best actions, the best measures to ensure we are delivering those actions. The other measures that the member is referring to will continue to be monitored by the Office for Seniors.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002224e2942255df71d6e47961d72d4e307c\u0022\u003ETrade and Investment\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d27be857f3b89ca9ef6f61719ac2c419\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 12\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022 data-id=\u0022258a383b885a224fec69b86981dccb0f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022258a383b885a224fec69b86981dccb0f\u0022\u003ESUZE REDMAYNE (National\u2014Rangit\u012Bkei) (15:07)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister for Trade and Investment\u003C/span\u003E: What progress has been made on the New Zealand - India Free Trade Agreement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022 data-id=\u0022259e234218bc9033db71df0d97fcbe7d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022259e234218bc9033db71df0d97fcbe7d\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY (Minister for Trade and Investment) (15:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Excellent progress. Yesterday, the New Zealand - India Free Trade Agreement (FTA) implementation legislation passed by 93 votes to 29, marking a major milestone for one of New Zealand most significant trade agreements for many decades. The FTA was concluded and negotiated in just nine months of intensive negotiation and was signed just a few months later. The agreement is expected to enter into force later this year. When it does, it will open a new chapter for Kiwi exporters, providing approved access to a market of 1.4 billion people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220f2d3abdc8578b419ae0715f2382150e\u0022\u003ESuze Redmayne\u003C/span\u003E: What benefits will the New Zealand - India Free Trade Agreement deliver for New Zealand exporters?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b7676605c7568288f050a7d13457f8a0\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY\u003C/span\u003E: It will deliver immediate benefits for New Zealand exporters in the world\u2019s fastest growing major economy. From day one, 57 percent of New Zealand exports to India will enter duty-free, rising to 82 percent once the agreement is fully enforced, with many other tariff rates having significant reductions. The agreement secures major gains for agriculture, horticulture, seafood, forestry, manufacturing, dairy, and services, and it delivers tariff-free access for many products, significant reductions for wine, m\u0101nuka honey, apples, and dairy products. The FTA creates new opportunities to earn higher export returns in a market of 1.4 billion people, delivering more jobs and better incomes for New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b1a9105400a51c3b54861f9c1bc7096\u0022\u003ESuze Redmayne\u003C/span\u003E: Which sectors will benefit from this free-trade agreement, and how?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227bfa977a4fb32357b4d6b82dac07bbb8\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY\u003C/span\u003E: The benefits will be felt across New Zealand, from kiwifruit and apple growers to wine producers, foresters, coal exporters, and sheep farmers. The FTA delivers immediate tariff-free access for sheep meat, wool, coal, and more than 95\u00A0percent of forestry exports, while seafood, m\u0101nuka honey, wine, and dairy products receive significant tariff reductions over time. It also includes a most favoured nations protection for wine and services, ensuring New Zealand benefits from future improvements that India grants to other trade partners. Overall, the FTA boosts opportunities for exporters and our regional communities, and it will drive export-led growth in the economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fedea1d74f0d0fd6a93c73a12dd2aba6\u0022\u003ESuze Redmayne\u003C/span\u003E: How will the New Zealand - India Free Trade Agreement support export growth?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228d19240ed9ca4f5597e2bb804e0e32fb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b7e365df25070ae1c2e6af6feb03ba0f\u0022\u003EHon TODD McCLAY\u003C/span\u003E: The FTA will allow Kiwi exporters to grow in the world\u2019s fastest-growing major economy. India is already our ninth-largest trading partner, with just under $4 billion of two-way trade, but it accounts for just 1 percent of our goods exports, highlighting the opportunities for growth. With access to that market of 1.4 billion people, the FTA will help farmers, growers, manufacturers, and service exporters. It will expand sales and it supports the goal committed to by Prime Ministers Luxon and Modi of doubling two-way trade by 2030. This is one of New Zealand\u2019s most significant trade agreements in decades, and I thank every member of this House who voted in favour of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc73ab17a8ae4943aab54d61aa442fbd\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That concludes oral questions. Those who have to leave, please leave quietly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00222bff2dbcf7c4a4341e80e853b87b4f7f\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00220cc60b6fe0d93f3395bdee623ced6acd\u0022\u003ENg\u0101ti Mutunga o Wharekauri Claims Settlement Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00220cc60b6fe0d93f3395bdee623ced6acd\u0022\u003ER\u0113kohu Wharekauri Shared Redress Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002264cbfacca87359b70a8fa683ba4b25e0\u0022\u003EIntroduction\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u0022ccce3c9226ce511028a755fd78f1c36b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ccce3c9226ce511028a755fd78f1c36b\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Leader of the House) (15:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I seek leave for the Ng\u0101ti Mutunga o Wharekauri Claims Settlement Bill and the R\u0113kohu Wharekauri Shared Redress Bill to be introduced and set down for first reading next sitting day, despite Standing Order 293(1).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbfaf64863ab427621b53478091403c5\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b33d104e27c3a657eba91a291616a1d3\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, sir.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022540eba52179c22631a7b6a79fee24d5c\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re on a point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002265e96100edc837cc24dd2399304e4ac2\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: I can\u2019t hear. That\u2019s the problem.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228facb469b3c8edb37525c9a480465e83\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: OK, we might just wait till everyone leaves, and then we\u2019ll do it again. Sorry about that. I was just trying to create a bit of time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226167b8771820109266db0167d6840e72\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I seek leave for the Ng\u0101ti Mutunga o Wharekauri Claims Settlement Bill and the R\u0113kohu Wharekauri Shared Redress Bill to be introduced and set down for first reading next sitting day, despite Standing Order 293(1).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b99fee386b4237ffeca3f8ccc24135ec\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022322459af2289d324e06b1b225cc2dcc6\u0022\u003EOranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00228f1f8c80fbcd28c673a05984a6785425\u0022\u003ELegislative Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022eb12006907fdfce1449ebff9f9c6f398\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022eb12006907fdfce1449ebff9f9c6f398\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (15:11)\u003C/span\u003E: I present a legislative statement on the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223db92f9c772fca0f9adb0b42f85193b0\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f4e0f39c2ffe502a6a1687dbd14f41e4\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022 data-id=\u0022d3aa48baad6c3d402b21c766297e2587\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e13c0cfff1694ee6966ced2df467878f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d3aa48baad6c3d402b21c766297e2587\u0022\u003EHon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children) (15:12)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill be now read a third time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis bill has benefited, gratefully, from people who have put forward their thoughts on this bill through the select committee process, and I just wanted to, before I started out, really thank people who came forward and presented to the select committee. This enabled us to make some changes that strengthened the bill overall.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EToday marks an important step in strengthening New Zealand\u2019s response to serious and persistent youth offending. It brings to a close a thorough parliamentary process aimed at improving our response to a small group of young people whose offending causes serious harm to victims, communities, and themselves.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen I became Minister for Children, I made it clear that the status quo was not good enough. Too many young people were becoming involved in some very violent and serious persistent offending, often causing significant harm to victims and creating fear in our communities, and it was becoming further entrenched in our youth justice system overall. Previous interventions had not worked for this small group of young people, and we needed to do something different, and that\u2019s exactly what this bill does. What I also want to make clear is that my ultimate goal is that no young person actually meets the threshold of becoming a serious youth offender in the future. But this bill is for when, unfortunately, that may happen. This bill strengthens our response to this group of serious persistent youth offenders, and its purpose is to improve public safety, strengthen accountability, and reduce reoffending through timely and more intensive interventions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAt the heart of the legislation is the young serious offender declaration, which enables a stronger and more targeted response to the small group of young people who continue to offend despite previous interventions. The declaration provides the Youth Court with additional tools to intervene earlier and more effectively to reduce the risk of further offending. The new military-style academy order will be the most intensive response available to the Youth Court. The order combines structure, discipline, education, therapeutic support, and transition planning to help eligible young people address the causes of their offending and build more positive futures. This builds on, and locks in, the progress we have made as part of the Government\u2019s wider commitment to reducing serious and persistent child and youth offending by 15 percent by 2030.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m pleased to report that the number of serious youth offenders has reduced by 26 percent since June 2023. These results clearly demonstrate that targeted, decisive action can improve outcomes for our young people and communities. The thing that excites me the most about this bill is it\u2019s not just about the young person. For far too long, we forgot that these young people had to go back to the same environment that put them in this situation in the first place. The part that excites me the most is we are now focusing also on the wh\u0101nau as a whole. The legislation before the House, as I\u2019ve said before, is stronger because of the select committee process, and the Social Services and Community Committee considered the views of submitters and recommended changes that strengthened safeguards, clarified key provisions, and supported the effective implementation of this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EImportantly, we added additional safeguards around the use of force. These changes prioritise de-escalation wherever possible, prohibit the use of mechanical restraints by Oranga Tamariki staff and approved workers, and require that every young person be assessed by a healthcare professional following any use of physical force. The bill was also amended to ensure that the qualifying providers who deliver part of the military-style academy programme are subject to the wider oversight system of the Chief Ombudsman. I\u2019m confident that these changes, alongside other amendments adopted by this House, have strengthened the bill and enhanced its ability to improve public safety and reduce offending. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis Government is committed to continuing to improve public safety and reduce serious youth offending. This bill provides an important tool to protect communities, support victims, and improve outcomes for the most at risk young people in our youth justice system. It recognises that accountability and rehabilitation must go hand in hand. It provides stronger responses to serious offending while also creating greater opportunities for young people to address the causes of their behaviour and build a more positive future for themselves. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EUltimately, this legislation will help create less victims and make our communities safer. It provides a stronger response, while creating greater opportunities, and I am pleased to commend the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u002210aa0c7e19082311d862f84cc4b0ddb4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002210aa0c7e19082311d862f84cc4b0ddb4\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (15:18)\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003ET\u0113n\u0101 koe e te M\u0101ngai o te Whare\u003C/span\u003E. What a joke\u2014what a joke. Look at the other side laughing. The issue is that this is not a laughing matter. What it is, is we have a Government who has refused to listen to the evidence and the experts and have continued to push ahead with their failed boot camp experiment. Today, we are now seeing this being put into law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf we go back to the beginning of this, when this Government came in, what\u2019s really clear to us is they don\u2019t care; this is about politics and rhetoric, a punitive tough-on-crime, tough-on-children approach. I want to quote the Prime Minister when it was put to him that all the evidence shows that military-style academies and boot camps don\u2019t work. What did the Prime Minister say? \u201CWell, I don\u2019t care whether they do or don\u2019t work; I\u2019m going to do it anyway.\u201D That is exactly what has happened.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen this Government pushed ahead with yet another experiment\u2014a pilot. What did we learn from that pilot? That nothing has changed; that the evidence is still the same; that you have an over 80 percent recidivism rate for those who go through boot camps and military-style academies. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd what did we learn from that pilot? That nothing has changed. That the evidence is still the same. That you have an over 80 percent recidivism rate for those who go through boot camps and military-style academies. But what was the purpose of the pilot? This Government introduced the law before the pilot had even been completed. Was it just a tick-box exercise? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis legislation that we have was introduced in November 2024, and here we are, in the final days, the final hours, of this parliamentary term, sitting under urgency, and this Government is rushing through the final stages of this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf we go back to November 2024, what also happened in that month? What we had was this House, Parliament, apologise to the survivors of abuse in State care, including those who were abused in boot camps. An entire chapter in the royal commission\u2019s report was dedicated to boot camps. So this Parliament, on a solemn day, acknowledges what has happened historically; says it\u2019s a dark stain on our history; and, surrounded by survivors in this House, outside, and in other places, apologises. And then, days later, it introduces this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis bill is the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill\u2014or what I call \u201Cthe boot camp bill\u201D. It introduces this bill. The shock and despair of survivors who presented to our select committee\u2014that the Government had just delivered an apology for historic abuse in State care and then introduces legislation replicating the very thing it had just apologised for. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHas this Government learnt nothing from our history? Does this Government just ignore all the evidence and all the experts and continue to push ahead their political agenda?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am shattered\u2014emotionally because this is wrong, and, physically, because we have been fighting this, because it is wrong, for the entire term of this Government. And to no avail. Here we are, in the last days, and this is going to pass its third reading. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister thanked the submitters and made a few tweaks to improve a bad bill. Well, the Minister should have listened carefully, truly understood the submissions that were being made, and chucked out this bill. But she didn\u2019t. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESome of the areas that are so concerning in the bill that we covered in our committee stage were around the unnecessary labelling of these young people as young serious offenders. This is how ridiculous this is. This is all about politics, because it\u2019s very clear that you do not need to have the term \u201Cyoung serious offender\u201D to identify who these young people are. We know if they\u2019re young by their date of birth, and we know if their offence is serious by what they have been charged and convicted of. They don\u2019t need another label put on top of them. The Government was warned about the implications of labelling our young people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we also know is that the pilot programme was a voluntary programme. The Limited Service Volunteer programme, which this was modelled off, is a voluntary programme. Well, this military-style academy is not a voluntary programme. This is a sentencing option. What we know from the pilot\u2014the first version and military-style academies 2.0 (MSA 2.0)\u2014is that young people voluntarily left that programme. How are they going to be able to do that under this sentencing option? It\u2019s going to be very difficult. The Minister couldn\u2019t even tell us what all the compassionate grounds are that might be considered by the court. I\u2019m going to have to attach the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard \u003C/span\u003Eto this bill to give the court some more guidance on it because she wouldn\u2019t accept any of our amendments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHarm is occurring in our youth justice facilities still to this day. When the Minister was challenged about military-style academies, circumstances were put to her around Korowai Manaaki, and she said at the time that things were fixed\u2014that that had all been sorted. But since then, 2024, we have seen numerous issues at Korowai Manaaki. We have also seen them at Te Maioha. There have also been examples in the military-style academy at Te Au rere. I put to the Minister: is she confident in the management of our youth justice facilities\u2014in particular, Korowai Manaaki? She said absolutely. And then we have a \u201Cwalk the line\u201D incident that\u2019s been in the media recently. I\u2019m still waiting for a response to the incident at Te Maioha, which I understand left a young person needing to go to hospital. Two young people were assaulted in the military-style academy. It has been difficult to get any answers and accountability out of this Minister, and instead she just turns and attacks us when we ask these questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother concern is the extension of the use of force\u2014the use of force. These are children. These young people are going to be sentenced to military-style academies. There\u2019s going to be an in-residence component. Then there\u2019s going to be an in-community phase. The legislation proposes that third parties can deliver the military-style academy. Well, we saw what happened when third parties delivered boot camps in the past: horrific abuse. The Minister talks about iwi, hap\u016B, M\u0101ori organisations possibly delivering these military-style academies. I want to know how they feel about being given the ability to use force on our young people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd that brings me to the point: the papers tell us that this will disproportionately impact tamariki M\u0101ori. Almost 100 percent of the participants so far have been M\u0101ori. More than 80 percent of those likely to go into boot camps\u2014military-style academies\u2014are M\u0101ori. I didn\u2019t hear any M\u0101ori asking for the use of force.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo this Government has not listened to the experts. They have not listened to the evidence. They learnt nothing from the royal commission into abuse in State care. They learnt nothing from the pilot programme, which showed eight out of nine of the young people reoffended, and I understand there\u2019s alleged reoffending for the current MSA 2.0. But, again, we cannot get any answers and accountability from this Minister. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe need a Government that follows evidence; not taking us backwards down punitive approaches that are proven to not work. We know that wraparound, long-term, holistic approaches work to heal these children and their wh\u0101nau and get them back into a pathway that sees them contributing meaningfully to their communities. That is what is needed; not enshrining boot camps into legislation. Labour opposes this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u0022a1d8d02403c4445d98fc752bf545cc68\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a1d8d02403c4445d98fc752bf545cc68\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (15:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Back in the 1950s, there was a report that was delivered to every single household in New Zealand called the Mazengarb report. This was a report all about youth delinquency, and it was a report that sensationalised teen crime and teenage pregnancies. It was maybe one of the first instances in New Zealand of a moral panic\u2014a moral panic whipped up about young people who seemingly can\u2019t be brought back under control. But what it actually led to were disastrous outcomes for those young people, which we know so well now that we\u2019ve had the royal commission of inquiry into abuse in State care in front of us. As a result of that moral panic back in the 1950s, kids were picked up off the side of the road and taken into State care and faith-based institutions, where they would endure abuse.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a cycle that has continued in New Zealand and has not been broken, because of politicians and the media whipping up frenzies and moral panics about young people, which inevitably leads to those young people being worse off\u2014being used as a rationale to further abuse and punish some of the most marginalised young people in our country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is no different. The boot camps and this bill are a result of electioneering and campaigning, primarily by the ACT Party but also in the past by the National Party under John Key, who said we needed boot camps for kids he described as \u201Chuman ticking time bombs\u201D. When he tried the boot camps it didn\u2019t work, and then we had Government MPs who are now in Government who went around campaigning in 2023 and said that they wanted to punish these kids\u2014these kids who this bill addresses.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESince then, we\u2019ve seen them go back on the harsh words that they used to describe these kids and to try and put fluffy words around these boot camps\u2014that they\u2019re so-called \u201Ctrauma informed\u201D, the fact that the Children\u2019s Commissioner actually found no evidence of any military components to these military-style academies, which furthers the point that this is about a moral panic. This is a response to a campaign against the most vulnerable young people in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt doesn\u2019t align with what the actual evidence says around youth crime, and that is why it is a moral panic. If you actually look at the data, what you\u2019ll find is that for a long time, youth crime has actually been in decline in this country. But that seems not to matter to the politicians who are happy to win and score points by wanting a system of revenge against these young people, because that is what it\u2019s about. It\u2019s not about rehabilitation; it is about revenge.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s been echoes of that sentiment in this campaign in 2026 as well, when I see the same party\u2014the ACT Party\u2014campaigning on teachers being able to use force against \u201Clittle shits\u201D in their classrooms. That is the contempt that the ACT Party and the Minister for Children have towards children. Karen Chhour should have never been allowed anywhere near this portfolio because she and her party\u2014it\u2019s not even that they don\u2019t care about kids; they hold contempt towards kids. They want to normalise the use of force against children. That is what this bill does. It allows third-party providers and police to use force against children, and they want to expand on that by giving that \u201Cright\u201D to teachers as well. That is contempt against children.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf you are trying to say to children who have been violent or committed an offence that they should not use violence, then why would you turn around and legislate the use of violence back against them? Again, this is where those kids learn to use violence from: from adults who are charged with their care who are then legally allowed to use violence against them to get what they want. This is what that bill does.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis bill is about rangatahi who are traumatised, not just because they were born into circumstances outside of their control; not just because they were born into families with drug use problems; not just because they were born into families who beat them, who touch them, who abuse them; not just because they were born into poor communities; not just because they were born with disabilities that don\u2019t come with any funding to stop them from being excluded from their schools. If you had talked to those rangatahi you would understand what circumstances they were born into, but it\u2019s not just the circumstances they were born into; it was the circumstances that their ancestors experienced and the continuation of intergenerational trauma.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve got some new research here: \u201CNew words for old harms: the myth of trauma-informed boot camps in the New Zealand youth justice system\u201D. What it says: \u201CSimilarly, intergenerational trauma is based on the accumulation of harm but across generations, causing behaviours of defence or adaptation to develop.\u201D Where does that come from? It comes from breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi, M\u0101ori economic exclusion and segregation, and the challenging lifestyle circumstances of many wh\u0101nau and rangatahi, which is why rangatahi M\u0101ori are overrepresented in the cohort who will be victimised by this bill\u2014even further victimised by this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is no evidence that these boot camps are military at all in the first place, but they can\u2019t be \u201Ctrauma-informed\u201D, as the Minister likes to use that word so often. Youth justice residences are rotten. You just heard what the Hon Willow-Jean Prime has said: youth justice residences are kid prisons. There is nothing therapeutic going on in there, and how can we expect young people to engage in any rehabilitation when they are in unsafe environments that do not meet their needs?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn that, this is a bill that legislates and allows for police to use force against young people who escape those unsafe environments. This is something that a submitter said during the submission process which has really sat with me: children do not abscond from places that meet their needs. Moreover, you should not need to use force against a child in any situation, period\u2014period. Never. There is no excuse for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou know what? The people involved in this trial, even before, when we knew that this boot camp was coming, have been concerned about it, and that is why the Cabinet paper about these boot camps was leaked to us\u2014it was leaked long before it even got to this House because people were that fundamentally concerned about what it proposes. Even throughout the pilot, people who came forward\u2014whistleblowers who had to expose how deeply concerned they were about these boot camps. That is not a good sign.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen will this Government learn that tough on crime doesn\u2019t work? Has this Government had a look at the most recent New Zealand Crime and Victims Survey? If the Government\u2019s approach to making sentencing harsher, to increasing policing but not increasing the amount of funding into prevention, and if things like military-style boot camps work, then why are there more M\u0101ori victims of crime under this Government than under the last? Why has there not been any response by this Government to the most recent crime and victims survey? Because tough on crime policies do not work, but they especially do not work for people who have not known anything except toughness. Few people in this House could ever empathise with the lifestyle and circumstances that these kids were born into.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EActually, to talk about people in this House, there are people in this House who made mistakes when they were kids, when they were teenagers. Did they get sent to a military-style boot camp? No, because the reality is the people in this room, including myself\u2014we are privileged. We can afford to get a lawyer. We can afford to make mistakes when we\u2019re young people. We all make mistakes when we\u2019re young people, but these young people do not have the means or the privilege to overcome that in the same way\u2014in the same way that we do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf any of us in this room, if our kids made a mistake, they would not be able to overcome it in the same way that these kids do because nobody is in their corner, except we are in their corner, which is why renew our call to close down youth justice residences altogether; to move towards a community in situ evidence-based approach towards young people; to not sweep aside cornerstones of our youth justice system such as the family group conferences in the way that this bill does. These boot camps will not work and they will be repealed under the new Government in a few months\u2019 time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f0d31505882949b1a768aad60863fba9\u0022 data-id=\u0022b0372507d3bd73de2ef3487a904f88f4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f0d31505882949b1a768aad60863fba9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b0372507d3bd73de2ef3487a904f88f4\u0022\u003EJOSEPH MOONEY (National\u2014Southland) (15:38)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. There\u2019s nothing like listening to speeches from the other side to really underpin the point that they have no life experience, they have never dealt with people who are either offenders or victims. I have worked in this field for over a decade of my life. This policy is to provide a faster, targeted, stronger, and rehabilitative response to serious and persistent offending for 14- to 17-year-olds with two or more proven offences punishable by 10 or more years of imprisonment, and the court must be satisfied the previous interventions have been unsuccessful and the young person is likely to reoffend. It will be the longest and most intensive order available to the youth court and with a strong focus on rehabilitative, therapeutic, and cultural components for each young person. These are very troubled young people who this will be addressing and seeking to help them break the cycle of offending, which will improve their lives and improve the lives of their families and improve the lives of many. I recommend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u0022e2c7f7c3667310d2ffbb23b6cce14796\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e2c7f7c3667310d2ffbb23b6cce14796\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Police) (15:39)\u003C/span\u003E: I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak on the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill. What I would like to do is actually bring some calm back into the conversation. We are not talking about all youth in this bill; we are talking about a group that has largely been given up as too hard to deal with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI applaud the Minister for stepping forward and taking hold of an issue that has been too long left to just let these kids age out, to let them become adults. This is doing better. This is about putting in a wraparound service, and although that side of the House will write off all of the hard-working, dedicated people working in Oranga Tamariki who provide these interventions, this side of the House believes that these are great people who are skilled and capable of delivering a common-sense solution. This is really about taking what is an issue\u2014this small group of people that the system has let go because it\u2019s too hard. This is a bill that says, \u201CWe will not give up on you. We will try things to ensure we break the cycle. We intervene, we protect, we turn things around.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is exactly what this bill is doing. This is not changing the system for all young people. This is not undoing all of the systems in place. This is part of a solution that is turning the system to direct an intervention to those that have previously been given up on, and this is about making sure we don\u2019t give up on any of them. New Zealand First recommends this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002279953b50d1828ee76b409ff2202e9dcd\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Split call\u2014Debbie Ngarewa-Packer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022 data-id=\u0022b5f3f7990cb3a2db41ff9cde82abbbd9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b5f3f7990cb3a2db41ff9cde82abbbd9\u0022\u003EDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Co-Leader\u2014Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori) (15:41)\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003ET\u0113n\u0101 koe e te P\u012Bka\u003C/span\u003E. Just listening to the previous speaker, that could probably ring true if the fact of the matter was that we weren\u2019t talking about a large proportion of rangatahi M\u0101ori, tamariki M\u0101ori, and if we were, in fact, having a Government before us that was wanting to address poverty and was wanting to address homelessness and was wanting to address trauma, address injury, address head injuries, address violence, but we don\u2019t. That is not what this Government is doing. If the Government was truly intent, and this Minister was truly intent, on resolving the issues that we have with our rangatahi who have been sorely let down by the State\u2014let\u2019s talk about how they got into this situation in the first place\u2014we would be replacing boot camps with mana mokopuna intensive intervention, we would be making sure we have early intervention and a dedicated team of social workers, of youth workers, of iwi workers, of education and mental health support, of addiction support, of disability support, of FASD expertise, but we\u2019re not talking like that. What we\u2019re talking about is locking them up, labelling them, giving the mandate to physically restrain them, to touch them, and to do the things that we\u2019ve seen done previously by the State to M\u0101ori children.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWhat we have here is a Minister who has lived experience and is using that lived experience as a displaced M\u0101ori to place utu on M\u0101ori because this Minister does not believe\u2014does not believe\u2014in M\u0101ori support and what M\u0101ori and wh\u0101nau ora and iwi ora and hauora could be doing for these rangatahi. We\u2019re hopelessly sitting here\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223aec6804643da635f5f6249e29b25d23\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, I\u2019m going to stop the member there. I think you need to reflect very carefully on what you\u2019ve just said. It\u2019s not appropriate for members in this House to make those sorts of allegations, one to the other. It never has been. It might be a term that you\u2019re more familiar with than others, but I don\u2019t think you should accuse anyone else of the House of taking utu on someone else.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e006d2cdc34fa19f3a402e6d5e711585\u0022\u003EDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER\u003C/span\u003E: On taking utu on te ao M\u0101ori, or rangatahi M\u0101ori, or utu, the word you don\u2019t like?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c018dfcdf38f51136dc70eda858b9cf8\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: You can\u2019t make that accusation\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f4279084e69d3468694c43f6c3498277\u0022\u003EDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER\u003C/span\u003E: Then we have a Minister that is using lived experience\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1dc70164a6e7b940ead49dcbb762f50\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Are you listening to me or not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240d2e92b8b4f503b72f3e602423f74e0\u0022\u003EDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I\u2019m not using that word.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b33d6d27590463cdcc5c60ca0ba702c5\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: OK.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a4081e10b9606cbed4df4215b04174a\u0022\u003EDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER\u003C/span\u003E: So we have a Minister that is using lived experience to be able to say this is what should work for all M\u0101ori because that Minister was displaced from te ao M\u0101ori. That is not something that has come from this member; that is something that has been shared here, because I used to hold this portfolio three years ago. The serious matter isn\u2019t about the kupu we use; it\u2019s actually about the intent and the intent of this Government in what it intends to do with rangatahi. There is support around there. There is expertise. Five thousand three hundred and forty six people opposed this bill\u20145,346\u2014and only 24 supported it; 5,346 had evidence as M\u0101ori to say what should be done, but that\u2019s not what this Government is doing. It\u2019s ignoring 5,346 submitters and listening to 24.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is the ridiculousness of what we see happening here and applied to M\u0101ori all the time by this Government. I refuse to be marginalised or told that we are being overdramatic about what is happening to rangatahi, because we saw in 2024 those tamariki that were made State wards that were abused by the State and who haven\u2019t had anything properly addressed, and what they lost is dignity from a State that refused to acknowledge them, locking our tamariki and our rangatahi away and leaving them unsafe is the best thing for them to do. Absolutely, we care about our victims. Absolutely, they need to heal. But what is happening to the fact of what this bill isn\u2019t doing? It isn\u2019t addressing how those rangatahi got there in the first place. If the Minister lived on the ground and saw the communities that are impacted by this Government\u2019s decisions, she would see why they\u2019re arriving damaged, harmed, having lived in poverty, having been violently offended and not had any intervention. Instead, what we\u2019re doing is just watching another cycle of the ridiculous behaviour that happens when it becomes too hard and our babies become too hard to heal and fix. The best way to do it is to lock them away.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat happens when we see Korowai Manaaki and those babies that are going into that system. And I was one of them that turned up there four or five years ago and saw them and saw the bullying that went on to them, not just from those who were there but from staff. What happens to the fact that these babies are going to be put into the care of the chief executive of Oranga Tamariki\u2014the same role that, a few people ago, had tried to uplift a baby that was a week old. That place has not been fixed. It\u2019s just been fancified. It\u2019s been polished up, and we all been told that this Minister knows what she\u2019s doing. She doesn\u2019t. Our babies are the sacrificial lambs in this ridiculous, revolting bill, and I really hope that those that are standing in this place that supporting this bill are around in 20 years\u2019 time when they have to do another apology to these rangatahi as adults, because every evidence overseas with indigenous peoples, where these camps have failed them, have had to live through that same experience. Shame on this Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022a5dd840787914504748c212fbc5c7538\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a5dd840787914504748c212fbc5c7538\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (15:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of the Green Party to speak on the third reading of the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill. I think when we\u2019re looking at this bill where there is an introduction\u2014whether through the pilot of the so-called boot camps or the military-style academies that we have seen\u2014the question we should be all asking ourselves is simple: when a child has caused serious harm, what are we trying to achieve? Are we trying to prove that we are tough, or are we trying to make sure that such harms are not being caused again? Are we trying to address the root causes of what led to that offending in the first place?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I appreciate the engagement that we have received on this bill during the committee stage, and we\u2019ve had an incredibly robust discussion. But I think that one of the things that has continued to gnaw on all of us as we are progressing through this process is that the bill that we\u2019re seeing in front of us and the discussions that we had in the committee stage don\u2019t necessarily reflect the reality of what we\u2019re seeing in the trial, the reality of what we\u2019re seeing in the boot camps that has happened before.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn the pilot that we have seen\u2014even the most recent pilot we have seen\u2014we\u2019ve seen that it is not working for our young people. Our young people do not feel like their mana is being upheld. Do you know what\u2019s even more concerning in the current pilot? The fact that every one of them is M\u0101ori; the fact that we\u2019re looking at this disproportionate number of rangatahi M\u0101ori that are going through this system. With everything we are seeing, they are not a deficit of our rangatahi M\u0101ori; they are the deficit of our system that has put them there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAt the same time we\u2019re seeing the introduction of bills like this, we heard this Government give its apology to the royal inquiry into State abuse in care. Through that process, we have heard the harm they have caused to those who were in Te Whakapakari on Aotea. Those survivors have told this Government, and this Government has said to those survivors, \u201CNever again.\u201D But at the same time, we\u2019re seeing the same thing happening again and again. What outcomes are we trying to achieve through this bill? What outcomes are we trying to achieve through such punitive approaches to our young people, approaches that do not uphold their mana and that do not uphold their dignity?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor anything that we have seen in many of our portfolios, particularly when we\u2019re looking at education and when we\u2019re looking at housing, we know that if our young people have a warm, dry, and safe home, what will that mean for them? If they have access to 24/7 mental health support, what would that mean? What would it mean if they have access to rehabilitation and if we have a rational discussion around our drug law reform? What would happen, as we\u2019ve just seen in the Waitangi Tribunal report on Wai\u00A03553, if we have a curriculum that upholds Te Tiriti o Waitangi, as opposed to imported ideological approaches from Australia? What happens if we trust our experts to be able to teach our children on things like m\u0101tauranga M\u0101ori using kaupapa M\u0101ori methods that allow our young people to express as themselves, as opposed to what other people want out of them? The Green Party will not support this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022 data-id=\u0022f267981b12320a7f1018466058be1b89\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f267981b12320a7f1018466058be1b89\u0022\u003EKATIE NIMON (National\u2014Napier) (15:52)\u003C/span\u003E: I am so disappointed at the theatrics from the Opposition, claiming to speak on behalf of children and saying that this is about protecting children. Actually, what about the children, who have died at the hands of other children, that this bill aims to protect, those whose family have lost their loved ones needlessly because we do not have strong enough consequences to prevent them from killing other kids? That is who this bill is for. With that, I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022ee6c701073ab54b9be478513e2678f66\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ee6c701073ab54b9be478513e2678f66\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (15:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is an unfortunate day we\u2019ve got to here, and it\u2019s unfortunate that the Government has waited until the last moment, the dying breaths of this Parliament, to pass this bill. I can\u2019t help but wonder if, in fact, the ACT Party has done this on purpose so that they can go out to their electorate, to the people who like this sort of thing, and say, \u201CWe\u2019ve done it. We\u2019ve got boot camps back.\u201D I do worry about this, because it strikes me that there\u2019s a lot of window dressing. It was an interesting committee of the whole House stage, where we were kind of testing Minister Chhour on what was military about military-style academies. In the bill itself, in new section 320S, inserted by clause 40, it says that the chief executive can have them undertake military-style activities. I was concerned about that, because I didn\u2019t want young people to be doing rifle drills or combat training or anything of that type. The irony is that the Minister stood in the chair just over there and said, \u201CNo, they won\u2019t be doing anything like that. They\u2019ll just be getting out of bed on time and doing things with routine.\u201D The only other thing I can really pin is that in new section 320U, inserted by clause 40, they may be required to wear a uniform or standard issue clothing. The extent of the military aspect of this appears to be, basically, getting up on time and wearing camo pants. That\u2019s why I worry that this is largely window dressing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, a number of the speeches in this House have identified the seriousness of the issue before us, in various ways and from various perspectives. It\u2019s a pity that we\u2019ve got a bill that\u2019s largely window dressing, when the issue that is before us is one of safety of those who are most vulnerable, not only the young people who\u2019ll be put in these military-style academies but also the young people who are part of their wh\u0101nau or their networks and who, as has been pointed out, are on the receiving end of their behaviour\u2014so victims as well. It\u2019s really disappointing that we\u2019ve got this framework that has, essentially, been shoved through despite all objections. I think that if we took a genuinely bipartisan approach to this\u2014one of the most serious issues before us\u2014we would make real progress.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe problem now is that we\u2019ve got this thing called a military-style academy, which has been shown not to be successful in its true military sense, so what we\u2019ve now got is a watered-down version, but it\u2019s still conceptually abhorrent to have something which is dressed up as soldiering, and then we\u2019re told, \u201CThis is how to fix our kids.\u201D We actually know that\u2019s not true. We know it on this side of the House. You know it on that side of the House. We know that appropriate, therapeutic, trauma-informed care with appropriate supports and education and addressing the health and mental health needs of young people is going to get the best outcomes we can for these young people\u2014we know that. So why don\u2019t we work together on that, rather than dressing something up as military-style academies and saying that we\u2019re going to label young people as \u201Cserious young offenders\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI was serious when I said in committee stage, \u201CWhy are we calling it that? Why don\u2019t we just call this an enhanced intervention framework?\u201D If what we really want with the young serious offender order is to have a trigger for the provision of additional measures and resources to address this problem, let\u2019s say that. Let\u2019s say we need enhanced interventions. Let\u2019s not look at a young person who\u2019s been told for many years that they\u2019re worthless and now tell them that they\u2019re the most bad of the worthless, that they\u2019re the most serious of offenders, rather than saying, \u201CWe value you, and we want to give you more attention and more care and address your needs in a more intensive way.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I can understand why there are some members of our community\u2014and I can understand the grief and trauma that they\u2019ve suffered, sometimes at the hands of these young people\u2014who take a different approach. But, here, let\u2019s be grown-ups. Let\u2019s actually look at the problem and say we want it on this side\u2014there is no party in this House that doesn\u2019t want to reduce young serious offending. There is no one in this House who doesn\u2019t want to reduce the number of victims of crimes. We know that young offenders, young people who fall by the wayside, are the ones who later become more serious and senior offenders if we don\u2019t address it now. The costs of not getting this right are not just costs for those young people but are costs for future victims and our wider community.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is disappointing. As I said, again, in the committee of the whole House, we don\u2019t resile from being fierce when we challenge the Minister on why she is going down this track and why she insists on putting these things in place. We\u2019re going to see this framework put into place. We\u2019re going to see the ministry, Oranga Tamariki, subcontract these military-style academies to private and community institutions. We\u2019re going to allow those private institutions, whatever they be, to exercise the powers of the State, including the use of force in, essentially, incarceration. We\u2019ve been there before.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs the Hon Willow-Jean Prime has pointed out on a number of occasions, the pilots haven\u2019t worked. Of course there\u2019s politics around it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut, at the end of the day, the facts are clear. The pilots that have been run have led to a number of incidents, which have made the public record, in the news and what have you. What\u2019s more, the analysis of our officials\u2014of your officials\u2014has said we can\u2019t see that this makes any tangible difference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECompare that to the Circuit Breaker\u2014the Circuit Breaker that we introduced in the last year of the last Labour Government\u2014which you, the Government, to your credit, picked up because it worked. You can now go out to the electorate and claim that the fallen serious offending amongst youth is yours. It\u2019s actually ours, because we worked together on that and we made real progress.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo rather than having this divisive and politicised vehicle, which is using, essentially, memes of boot camps or military academies\u2014rather than having that, so that you can go out to a small part of the electorate who looks to America to see how to do youth justice, to their eternal discredit\u2014we could work together on stuff that will actually stick and make real changes to people\u2019s lives, including young people\u2019s lives.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis will come into force, and the judges, the lawyers, and the social workers\u2014all of those people who work so hard for young people\u2014will try and make it work. It may be that there will be some good that comes of it somewhere, but, at the end of the day, we\u2019ve got a military-style framework which is premised on modelling an institution, the army or the defence force, which is itself a force-based institution. Security is ultimately underpinned by a threat of violence in defence. That\u2019s how it works. And that\u2019s what we\u2019ve got as a model for how we\u2019re going to address youth offending.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis of course will pass this House in the dying breaths of this Parliament, but I hope that when we come to look at how we\u2019re going and what\u2019s going on\u2014and, if we\u2019re in Government, when we look to review this\u2014that we will act cooperatively to say \u201CLet\u2019s do something that works this time which is based on evidence and which will stick and make everybody\u2019s lives better.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022ce4cf82e5574853e2b75a2d742c052b4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ce4cf82e5574853e2b75a2d742c052b4\u0022\u003ERIMA NAKHLE (National\u2014Takanini) (16:02)\u003C/span\u003E: I remember back in 2023, when I was door knocking around Takanini, many people asked me what we are going to do with all the young people that are committing so much crime, which was rampant in Takanini. This addresses the serious, persistent, and repeat youth offending\u2014a big problem in Takanini. I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222562543cebff470f38ee9c3f49bef76a\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: This is a split call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002201f738f244724e5b8da066dba7a6a526\u0022 data-id=\u0022eec46eb9fcf594be5f2112b4995f9cc2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002201f738f244724e5b8da066dba7a6a526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022eec46eb9fcf594be5f2112b4995f9cc2\u0022\u003EDr TRACEY McLELLAN (Labour) (16:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Thank you for the opportunity to add my two cents\u2019 worth, I suppose. I think the contribution from the speaker before me probably sums up how I was going to start my contribution, by echoing some of the words of my colleague the Hon Dr Duncan Webb in kind of characterising this bill not only as window dressing but as a bit of a tick-box exercise. As I said, the previous contributor wrapped it up in a nutshell, really. She wanted to be able to go back to the very people that she had door-knocked who were anxious about crime and say \u201CWe\u2019ve cracked it. We\u2019ve done it. We\u2019ve solved the problem.\u201D And that\u2019s about the level of thought and consideration that has gone into this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s disappointing. I would like to think that, given the problem definition\u2014because the problem of young people committing serious offences is a problem. It\u2019s not only a problem for the people that they offend against; it\u2019s a problem for the trajectory of their own lives. It\u2019s a problem that does require solving. But it\u2019s also a problem that requires people to put their heads together properly, put their egos aside, put those promises that were made on doorsteps aside, put the simple salacious simpering kind of catch phrases and sound bites aside, which can often accompany political discourse, and actually do something that works. I think that that would have been worthwhile. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would like to have thought, given my own personal, somewhat peripheral experience of offending\u2014I hold the corrections portfolio. Before I was a member of this Parliament, I was very interested for a long period of time and had published papers on why people offend and what other types of factors, sometimes beyond their control, can be involved in making one person experience a childhood or a trauma and end up in the criminal justice system, when other people who experience the same traumas or factors don\u2019t end up in the criminal justice sector. It\u2019s incredibly important and it\u2019s incredibly complicated and it deserves a proper response. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would like to think that I would have been able to look past the rhetoric and commend some of the intentionality that is clearly behind this. We had the contribution from the member from New Zealand First, almost endearingly trying to convince us that this was about a wraparound service, that this was about intentions and good intentions and, by golly, if we don\u2019t send kids to a military-style academy, we\u2019ll never break this pattern. But it goes against all of the evidence. None of the evidence shows that this type of facility works. None of the evidence shows that the institutionalisation and the punitive institutionalisation works.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd that might be OK, as my colleague the Hon Dr Duncan Webb said, because I don\u2019t think this is even supposed to necessarily be that. I think this is window dressing. I think it is just an attempt to sound tough. It\u2019s not even that military; it\u2019s cosplaying military, which makes me even more cynical about the fact that actual children\u2014where we\u2019ve got an opportunity to intervene in their lives, to change the trajectory of their lives\u2014those young people, we\u2019re using as props so that the National Party and the ACT Party and the New Zealand First Party can somehow masquerade as being tough on crime.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe know that there\u2019s lots of things that this Government have done that are superficial, but when we\u2019re actually talking about young people\u2019s lives, I don\u2019t think they should be the props\u2014the appropriate props\u2014in the Government being able to deliver, so to speak, on a campaign promise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt doesn\u2019t work. There\u2019s plenty of other things that do work\u2014the Circuit Breaker and all the other fast-track rehabilitation programme mechanisms that could have been. This has also been incredibly expensive. It has cost a huge amount of money to pilot. It doesn\u2019t work. We do not commend this bill to the House. It\u2019s an absolute failure of this Government, and they should actually feel quite ashamed about it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022 data-id=\u0022275ab11889c690544a9ea67507fd6eaf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022275ab11889c690544a9ea67507fd6eaf\u0022\u003EDAN BIDOIS (National\u2014Northcote) (16:08)\u003C/span\u003E: Serious youth offending deserves a serious response, and that is what military-style academies are all about\u2014protecting victims, holding young offenders accountable and giving them an opportunity to change their lives, and that wraparound care. With that, I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022 data-id=\u002222bfc494e205ce2d44a9f38942b6652e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002222bfc494e205ce2d44a9f38942b6652e\u0022\u003ESHANAN HALBERT (Labour) (16:08)\u003C/span\u003E:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m looking through our run sheet for today. In this speech: responding to serious youth offending, or \u201Cthe boot camp bill\u201D. Next up, we\u2019ve got move-on orders. Thereafter, we\u2019ve got references to Te Tiriti o Waitangi. You know, it doesn\u2019t end, and it\u2019s a very sad end to a three-year Parliament, reflective of a Government that doesn\u2019t have the interests of New Zealanders at heart and, secondly to that, actually isn\u2019t creating solutions for Aotearoa New Zealand that respond to the issues that our country faces. None of the three bills that I talk about actually address the problems that they\u2019re making out they\u2019re trying to solve.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI strongly oppose this bill, the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill. If I reflect back a few years, it was a difficult time where we saw young people participating in negative behaviours and criminal activities that affected the lives of others. But that\u2019s exactly why we worked together on initiatives that actually work. I point to those initiatives like Circuit Breaker, where you actually, through evidence and working with experts, create programmes and initiatives that support young people to address the trauma that they have experienced in their life to change their behaviour. You use informed practices to create initiatives that raise awareness of their behaviour, that engage them better in positive activities, that keep them busy, that actually shift them to a pathway where they can participate in quality education and therefore start to set up a meaningful life that is better for them, better for their family, and better for everyone.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut when we talk about \u201Cbetter\u201D, I say to this Government: do better. Do better than the slogans of the tough talk on crime that this bill was always set up to do. This is a bill that talks about military boot camps as a solution to addressing the behaviour of young offenders. It does not work\u2014doesn\u2019t work. There is no evidence ever from anyone that says punitive action against young people engages them in positive behaviour\u2014not a thing. No one has ever said that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhile I respect the military\u2014my eldest brother is a long-serving army man in Wai\u014Duru. He doesn\u2019t even think this is a good idea for young people, because if they\u2019re forced to do something, they\u2019re more than likely to do the opposite\u2014more than likely to do the opposite. Nor does anyone really, in modern-day society, actually believe that putting force upon our young people is a good thing. We left that type of behaviour back in the 1990s. What sort of country is this Government creating with us? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut my point here is we go back to the fundamentals of how we change behaviour when we find young people in circumstances that are not good for them, where they\u2019re at their most vulnerable, and we look to the evidence of how we build a relationship with them. That is a starting point, because that relationship is about trust. From trust, you gain communication with that young person, and from that communication, you\u2019re able to help them step forward to improve their circumstances in life and to enable them to make better choices.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI go back to a recent event that I attended in my home patch in Northcote with a wonderful organisation called De Paul House. At that event, they hosted Judge Tony Fitzgerald as the guest speaker. While he politely said that he frowned upon boot camps as a solution and a way forward for dealing with youth offenders, most of all\u2014and this is my main message in this speech this afternoon\u2014it\u2019s to go back to stuff that works. He points to Ng\u0101 P\u0101harakeke as an initiative that was about changing the experience of the legal system for people that did offend. They saw way better outcomes. They saw way better engagement with the system. They saw less offending as a result, and certainly not perfect\u2014it\u2019s not a one-size-fits-all, suddenly you go through the system, you engage positively, and it changes your behaviour forever. Not a thing\u2014but there is gradual improvement. That\u2019s not what we see from a military practice. It\u2019s not what we see from punitive practices.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reality is the young people, the rangatahi in this programme whakapapa M\u0101ori\u201485 percent, largely. I heard one of the speakers from the National Party say that it\u2019s a really good thing it includes cultural practices. This Government doesn\u2019t even acknowledge cultural practices, because in two bills\u2019 time, we\u2019re removing references to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, which actually does recognise people in this country. It\u2019s all just la-la from that side. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] La-la, blah blah, slogans. Then we have the member from Napier. She\u2019s laughing, giggling\u2014I come from that place\u2014mocking this bill. Take a look around in your own community. I challenge you\u2014I challenge the member of Napier today: is this the best that you can do for the young M\u0101ori in your community?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232c8ba0d70b04029bd8595e804b9f48a\u0022\u003EKatie Nimon\u003C/span\u003E: Look at the newspapers, Shanan, and see about\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221fe807e5e65823d89d24b9ea3d32df5f\u0022\u003ESHANAN HALBERT\u003C/span\u003E: Stop being so defensive.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b873b1e6f1b2ea86c73cb35c336960ab\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: OK, that\u2019s enough.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002267e1a0bb2b37e5142a3c1d21cb69ff73\u0022\u003ESHANAN HALBERT\u003C/span\u003E: This isn\u2019t the best that you can do. Shame on you. Because this isn\u2019t\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226ef7ffaf7220d2781a2da0f0ab750780\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Please don\u2019t bring the Speaker into the debate. That was a bit derogatory. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ac86d9faf0f1330de6a435aed795daf5\u0022\u003ESHANAN HALBERT\u003C/span\u003E: Shame on the member for Napier.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002220df5a1bc6322bce2b508efaa0f303cc\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s better.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002250cdadb769a5880c90304f5bdff41593\u0022\u003ESHANAN HALBERT\u003C/span\u003E: This is exactly why, in only a few days and a few months, I hope to see the end of this Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220fb6b11ec768c4118fe2fbd0726adcfa\u0022\u003ECarl Bates\u003C/span\u003E: You won\u2019t be here for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225365690f0def6b6a8cc3559f92961f65\u0022\u003ESHANAN HALBERT\u003C/span\u003E: Well, you might not be here for it, my friend, by the looks of it. Two can play at that game. But let\u2019s focus actually on the issue. Here\u2019s another member of the National Party from Whanganui actually mocking the realities of a bill that doesn\u2019t have any evidence. It\u2019s not a better solution. Its whakapapa is in the slogans of an election campaign that now they\u2019re trying to deliver on. Actually, the system has better examples, people\u2014better examples. What\u2019s important here is actually: take that message away; that young people matter; that, actually, the initiatives that our justice system or our education system are set to do is to rehabilitate people and to put them on a better pathway from where they\u2019ve come from, because punishments, punitive behaviour, do not change the behaviour. It does not create a better outcome.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002265d9d30aa1fa47ab94c2781934944c01\u0022\u003EHon James Meager\u003C/span\u003E: Tell that to Michael Wood.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff87ed8efb9394b654f203ca6485164b\u0022\u003ESHANAN HALBERT\u003C/span\u003E: There we are again. James Meager mocking the reality of this bill\u2014a Minister. This is a serious, serious matter of a Government that has failed another bunch of young people, spending money on an initiative that does not work. How many people are left in the trial boot camp? Not many. How many have reoffended as a result? A number of them. Compare that to the Circuit Breaker initiative with pastoral care, wraparound support, evidenced decision-making. That is the change that we want to see. New Zealand, get rid of this Government in a few months\u2019 time. Better starts now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022 data-id=\u0022f8b90e92ccda009d34fc9b5efee984d1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f8b90e92ccda009d34fc9b5efee984d1\u0022\u003EDAVID MacLEOD (National\u2014New Plymouth) (16:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I stand to take this last call on this amendment bill before it becomes law. I\u2019m mindful of the fact that the word \u201Crehabilitation\u201D has been used by many people throughout this third reading. I also acknowledge the emotions that have run high because this is a very serious situation and it is about giving young serious offenders who have endeavoured to get themselves back on track through different initiatives and have not succeeded. These amendments strengthen the Oranga Tamariki Act 1989 to provide extra tools, to provide extra opportunities to get them on the right track prior to them entering into adulthood. I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill be now read a third time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00228c46ca847521146a60347e6c107c7b76\u0022\u003ESummary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00229e1773764eb1d6f3c39890dd3aa70d80\u0022\u003ELegislative Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u0022d74db2b16558c6f42002803c46e87138\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d74db2b16558c6f42002803c46e87138\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (16:20)\u003C/span\u003E: I present a legislative statement on the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224d7c3e0128de556fa7bdb9aec6028c5d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00229faefa89d3d0383c30b08fed7373c209\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u002238b0ac430c19f7d60bab05b0c2e343eb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002238b0ac430c19f7d60bab05b0c2e343eb\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (16:21)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMove-on orders are designed to reclaim our streets and town squares for the enjoyment of those who visit, who work, and who live in those town squares. For too long, businesses, residents, and visitors have had to deal with unacceptable levels of disruption. Many are just trying to make a living, but they have to face people camped outside their store day in, day out, intimidating customers and people who choose to work and live in the city. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve got many tools\u2014many tools\u2014to help those who are in need, including access to one of the most generous welfare systems in the world, but we\u2019re lacking tools to deal with those who seek to disrupt. When it comes to the tools to help those in need, in this term alone, we\u2019ve funded 300 additional Housing First homes targeting rough sleepers, we\u2019ve leased private market homes to enable immediate placements, we\u2019ve provided $10 million in additional funding to proven front-line support services, we\u2019ve expanded outreach and wraparound support in major urban cities, we\u2019ve increased transitional housing occupancy and we\u2019re reducing vacancy time, we\u2019ve rebalanced transitional housing to areas of highest demand, we\u2019ve strengthened the discretion of the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) for emergency housing decisions, we\u2019ve implemented benefit redirection where appropriate to support tenancy stability, we\u2019ve deployed an MSD tactical plan to directly engage in housing rough sleepers, and we\u2019ve improved data tracking and placement onto the public housing register. All those things we\u2019ve done to help those who were in need. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, what we don\u2019t have are effective tools to deal with disorderly behaviour, and I want to make one point clear right at the start, because there will be all sorts of nonsense spoken on the other side. Move-on orders do not criminalise homelessness. In reality, move-on orders provide police with an additional tool to deal with people who are displaying disorderly behaviour. Only people who refuse a move-on order will face prosecution. A move-on order is not a criminal charge, and avoiding any criminal charge is the easiest thing in the world\u2014that is to follow the move-on order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPeople are fair-minded in New Zealand. Our culture is one where we seek to help those in need. That doesn\u2019t mean we should accept that our cities and our town squares, particularly our showcase tourist spots, are places of intimidation and dysfunction. This Government has been committed to fixing the basics in law and order and building a future where everyone feels safe to visit, to work, and to live in our central cities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill amends the Summary Offences Act 1981 to provide police with the power to issue move-on orders. The power will allow police to direct a person to leave a public place and not return for up to 24 hours where their behaviour is either disorderly, intimidating, threatening, or disruptive; obstructing access to public spaces or businesses; breaching the peace; or the person is begging or rough sleeping with an intent to continuously occupy a public place. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe power is intended to address lower-level disorder and conduct that falls below the threshold from serious criminal offending. Police will specify the area that a person is to move on from, taking into account the circumstances, and may refer individuals to support services where appropriate. The Government also recognises that public spaces are used for many legitimate purposes. For that reason, move-on orders don\u2019t apply to lawful protest activity, fundraising for charitable or not-for-profit or political purposes, or other specified exempt activities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to acknowledge the work of the Justice Committee for its consideration of the bill. I note the number of submissions received by this committee. The committee made several recommendations to amend the bill. The main changes were raising the age for which a move-on order can be issued to 18 years, responding to many concerns in that area; specifying that the distance a person is required to move on must be reasonable in the circumstances; amending the ground for issuing a move-on order to begging that is considered unreasonable in the circumstances; providing that people who are issued move-on orders for unreasonable begging or rough sleeping can return to the public place while the order is in force, so long as they do not engage in any of the prohibited behaviours in the bill; and amending the penalty for breaching the order for up to three months imprisonment or a maximum $1,000 fine. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, the committee recommended greater transparency by requiring the police to report annually on the use of move-on orders and including a statutory review of the operation of the orders three years after it comes into force. I acknowledge the work of the committee, and so that\u2019s that, but an amendment will replace the reference to unreasonable begging with begging that unreasonably interferes with another person\u2019s use or enjoyment of a public place, providing a clearer and\u2014we think\u2014a more objective standard for the issuing and enforcement of move-on orders as a result, because we want this to be enforceable. A couple of changes were made which we weren\u2019t entirely comfortable with, but overall we think this legislation is still very strong and will make a difference to our town squares. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s a very basic expectation of New Zealanders that they should feel safe and comfortable in our central cities. Now, we might hear from the other side that, well, somehow people shouldn\u2019t feel unsafe and everything is fine, which denies the experiences of many, many people who do not feel safe in our town squares and demand and expect a higher standard. Right now, we\u2019re committed, as I said, to fixing the basics in law and order and building a future where all New Zealanders feel safe in their communities. We\u2019ve spent three years restoring law and order, and people at this election now have a choice between staying strong on law and order or going back to the mess that we were in three years ago.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI put it to you, Madam Speaker, and everybody tuning in to this debate that we\u2019ve made great progress as a country. We now have 37,000 fewer victims of serious violent offending in over 2\u00BD years, we\u2019ve scrapped taxpayer-funded cultural reports, we\u2019ve scrapped the prison reduction target, we\u2019ve given police additional tools to go after gangs, we\u2019ve toughened up our sentencing regime, we\u2019ve brought back three strikes, we\u2019ve brought action against methamphetamine, we\u2019ve reinstated a prisoner voting ban, we\u2019ve been clamping and seizing cars for people who have been evading court fines and reparations, we\u2019ve criminalised stalking, we\u2019ve given that the victims of sexual violence the power to determine whether their attackers receive permanent name suppression, we\u2019ve expanded citizen\u2019s arrest powers for retailers, and we\u2019ve created new offences for coward punches. We\u2019ve done a lot to restore law and order and this last piece of legislation before the House rises to bring in move-on orders will ensure that New Zealand stays strong on law and order. On that basis, I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022894b37bd57315dbcd90ceb495d8a9152\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022db9a5d3f3b20b9ca20158331a1ed624d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022db9a5d3f3b20b9ca20158331a1ed624d\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (16:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This week, I stood outside the steps of Parliament and I received a petition signed by almost 5,000 New Zealanders. It was a petition that was put together by Family for Every Child. I want to acknowledge Rob Thomson and Sophia Parera from Family for Every Child. They had that petition on their website for one week and they got 5,000 submissions\u20145,000 New Zealanders who oppose these move-on orders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister says that this is a law and order issue, but the problems with the move-on order bill are not about law and order; they\u2019re about human beings. They\u2019re about respecting human beings and they\u2019re about the type of society that we are in New Zealand and how we treat other people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to talk about the select committee process. The Minister has mentioned this briefly and I do want to thank the Justice Committee and the chair, Tom Rutherford, for his chairing of this committee. This select committee received over 7,500 submissions. Of them, 98 percent were opposed to move-on orders, and only 1 percent were in support\u2014less than 1 percent, actually, were in support. This is not something that New Zealanders want and the select committee process showed overwhelmingly that New Zealanders rejected move-on orders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe select committee process, though, was probably one of the more profound experiences that I\u2019ve had in this Parliament. Despite the content of this bill, instead of coming to the select committee with anger or with hate, all submitters\u2014almost universally\u2014came graciously to the select committee with a message of hope. At the select committee, we had karakia; we had tears; we had songs; we had music; we had poems; we had wero, justifiably; we did have some anger; we had humility; we had love; and we had support for the most vulnerable in our country. Seeing the way New Zealanders united against this bill in the most human way possible made me extremely proud of our country and made me even more sure that the provisions in this bill do not reflect who we are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe message that we got again and again from submitters was that this bill, especially as it applies to our homeless community, to children\u2014as it was originally introduced; children as young as 14\u2014and as it applies to people who are begging, often because they are hungry, often because they\u2019re living in poverty, is not us; this is not who we are; and we are better than this. It was hugely affirming, and I want to acknowledge each and every person that submitted to the Justice Committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMany times, when you are in a select committee process, there\u2019s frustration because there\u2019s no change or there\u2019s no response or, for whatever reason, the submitters can\u2019t get through to the officials or the officials can\u2019t get through to the MPs or there\u2019s no change, and that was not the experience of this select committee. I feel that\u2014even though I still fully oppose this bill and many of the things within it\u2014there were real positive changes to the bill. The reason that there were such changes is because of the overwhelming credibility, respect, and dignity of those that contributed. I want to thank everyone who contributed, because you have made these changes. You haven\u2019t defeated move-on orders yet, but you certainly have really challenged the structure of how they will be imposed, and many of our most vulnerable will be in a much better position because of the advocacy that you have made to Parliament and the fact that you were able to come and tell your story about how the bill will be impacted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, there are a lot of technical aspects of this bill. Originally, as I said, it applied to children who were under 18. This was something that was never going to work, and it actually shows the problems with the drafting of this bill. My view is that this bill as introduced would never work because of the inconsistency with the Oranga Tamariki Act. That message came through extremely strong in select committee, and I think it\u2019s something to reflect on when we\u2019re drafting bills\u2014that we look for consistency across legislation, especially when it comes to children. We can\u2019t trifle with the well-thought-out policies that have been developed over years, especially when it comes to vulnerable children, that apply to vulnerable children. It is appropriate that the Oranga Tamariki Act is the principal Act. The fact that this Act was in direct contradiction with it made it unworkable, so the right thing happened. We\u2019ve listened to submitters, and this was removed from the bill and now only applies to those over 18.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere was also a very scathing Attorney-General\u2019s opinion on this bill. It found breaches in the original drafting in relation to the provisions in relation to begging and in relation to the freedom of movement. It\u2019s very unusual to see a New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet that finds inconsistency, and this was one that found strongly that there were inconsistencies with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. That gave the select committee a strong mandate to change those provisions. I\u2019m happy that both of those aspects of it have been changed slightly. I do think a better way to deal with the bill would have been removing begging entirely.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have to remember this bill would apply to any of us for whatever reason\u2014you lose your wallet, you lose your way, and you can\u2019t get anywhere without asking for help. The original drafting would have made you covered by this bill and at risk of a move-on order. It just really beggars belief that it was in the original bill at all. It has been improved slightly, but it still, in my view, should be removed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is a big subject area that has not been changed at all as a result of the select committee process, and that is in relation to our homeless or rough-sleeping community. The vast majority of our submitters were submitting on the basis that they did not think that homeless or rough sleepers should be included in move-on orders at all. The silence from the Government in relation to those very, very articulate and well-thought-out arguments about why homeless people should not be in this bill has been deafening. The silence from this Government in relation to the homeless community in this bill has been absolutely deafening, and it is shameful. This is the main issue that remains within this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, we heard a huge amount, and we heard some very emotional testimony, and we did hear from a mother who had lost her daughter. She spoke about this publicly. Her name was Wendy Proffitt, and her daughter\u2019s name was Caitlin McDonald. I think it\u2019s important that that is recorded in the House, because Wendy came to the committee with an incredible amount of courage and bravery to speak to this bill. It was her view\u2014and it\u2019s an honour to be able to bring her words to the House\u2014that she felt that if move-on orders had been in place, it would have meant that her daughter would have had a more difficult life and a more painful life. She did not support move-on orders. Sadly, since we heard that very, very heartfelt testimony from a mother who had lost her child, we have had at least three other homeless people die in New Zealand during our consideration of this bill\u2014three homeless New Zealanders have died while we have been considering this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff148db88b2a54224146db19ccc23aca\u0022\u003ESteve Abel\u003C/span\u003E: Shame.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224420351031cd315696d3ca5f8332a2ba\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: It is shameful. When I looked at some of the statistics around homelessness, it\u2019s really heartbreaking, because hospitalisations\u2014which are not individuals, but they are hospitalisations\u2014have doubled since 2019. Those hospitalisations of homeless people\u2014and I just have to read this, because it was so shocking to me. Seven of those were babies under four and 25 of those were discharged from maternity. This is a crisis in our country, and the Government\u2019s answer to this is to give people who are homeless a move-on order and tell them that because of how they want the city centre to look, they should not be there. This is the wrong answer to what is a crisis in our country. We have to treat this issue with the seriousness and compassion that it deserves. It is a blight on all of us if we do not find a solution for those who are homeless in New Zealand. This is a challenge for all of us, and this bill is going to only make the situation for our homeless community worse. I do not commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u0022be2b959c262476ff6261c8f672884b22\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022be2b959c262476ff6261c8f672884b22\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (16:38)\u003C/span\u003E: I understand we\u2019ve got a long night ahead, picking this bill apart, but there is new information that has emerged since the first reading of this bill in this House. One of the most important ones is around, I think, the premise of this bill, and even listening to the Minister\u2019s speech right now, it\u2019s just so evident how unwilling the Government is to actually take into account\u2014since they love that term\u2014the real facts of the situation. The facts are that public disorder in the last decade in New Zealand has been declining.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother aspect of this bill was actually when the Minister of Justice came to Estimates and talked about the cost of this bill. He said to me, \u201CWhy don\u2019t you go out into your electorate and talk to businesses about what they think about the move-on orders?\u201D That was interesting, because I know the city that I represent and I know that their heart is bigger than this bill. I know that they are smarter than to fall for the rhetoric of this bill. That\u2019s why over 50 local businesses in the CBD in Wellington now display this poster, which says that \u201CThis business supports housing, not handcuffs.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBecause it is reasonable\u2014it is reasonable for people to be concerned about the levels of homelessness in this country, because, according to Community Housing Aotearoa, we are experiencing the highest levels of recorded homelessness in the history of this country. It is reasonable for those businesses and for all people who enjoy this city to want to end homelessness, but what is also clear\u2014what the evidence makes clear and what history, recent and in the last few decades, shows us\u2014is that a criminal response to homelessness does not fix the problem. In fact, it makes it worse and entraps people who have been marginalised into cycles of institutionalisation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen we went through the select committee, there was a lot to pull apart, and there were some really big parts of this bill that absolutely had to change. As the prior speaker, Camilla Belich, canvassed, the age that this bill applied to was potentially one of the biggest, cruellest elements of this bill, which meant that move-on orders could be applied to children as young as 14 to 17 years old. Thankfully, through the wisdom and partnership within the committee, we were able to change that age. That would not have happened were it not for the bravery of the New Zealand Police, and particularly those senior police officers who advised us that even if this became law and applied to 14-year-olds, it would not be used against 14-year-olds\u2014not just because the Oranga Tamariki Act trumps this bill but because morally and consciously, as adults who also have children\u2014those police officers and those constables that will have to serve these orders to kids\u2014they could not stomach having to do that. And I want to thank the Police for their bravery and their courage at speaking out against the ineffectiveness of this bill, because they know that locking up vulnerable people will not end homelessness. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe should ask ourselves why we are experiencing record levels of homelessness, and that has been clearly articulated through homelessness insights briefings, which tell us that the cancellation of building State housing and denying people access to emergency housing are the leading drivers of homelessness.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat this is, essentially, is the Government not being able to stomach the real-life consequences of their own decision making\u2014the decision making to not provide people with the support that they need and the housing that they need, which is far cheaper than locking somebody up. We all know how expensive it is to lock somebody up. It is far more affordable but also humane and more compassionate to actually meet somebody\u2019s need rather than seeing somebody in need and deciding that they belong in a prison cell.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other changes that have been made through the select committee process are that the Police have actually convened an operationalisation group within the Police about how they will implement these move-on orders. Through discussions that myself and my colleague\u2014our co-leader Chl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u2014have had with the Police, we\u2019ve been able to recommend some really good people to sit on that board\u2014people like Judge Tony Fitzgerald, who was one of the submitters to this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to acknowledge him because there\u2019s a really interesting parallel here. In Auckland Central, there was, at the time, high levels of homelessness. There are two types of people in this world. There are the Paul Goldsmiths of this world, who, at that time\u201420 years ago\u2014were campaigning for a bylaw to ban homeless people from the city centre. At the very same time, there were good people, like Judge Tony Fitzgerald, who, alongside a constable from the Auckland police station, decided to create the Court of New Beginnings, which is a specialist court that deals with low-level offending by people who have no accommodation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis just shows the character of different solutions, where you have someone who is committed to punishment and you have someone who is committed to compassion and following the evidence about what works. And that Court of New Beginnings\u2014or Court of Special Circumstances, as it\u2019s called in Wellington, has been phenomenal, because what it addresses is that a criminal justice approach does not reduce homelessness and does not lead to safer outcomes for anybody, and especially not for those people who are experiencing rough sleeping.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to note that one of the biggest growing cohorts of people who are experiencing homelessness are women. But we wouldn\u2019t know that because we don\u2019t actually collect any data that tells us any accurate or helpful information about who is rough sleeping. But if you go and talk to the people who are working on the front line, such as the Auckland City Mission, the Wellington City Mission, Salvation Army, Downtown Community Ministry, Wellington Women\u2019s Homelessness Trust, they will tell you that the number of women\u2014particularly younger and older women, as in women over 65\u2014is increasing. So let\u2019s ask ourselves: why would people choose to want to rough sleep in a city centre? And it\u2019s obvious: because they are choosing a well-lit place that is far safer for them than it is for them to go and sleep under a bridge, than to go and sleep in a car and go and sleep somewhere where there is nobody that can help them if they run into trouble.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut there\u2019s also the practical element that all of the support services are concentrated within central cities. I wonder if the Government ever considered that those people wanted to be close to the organisations that are there to help them as opposed to being out of site because it\u2019s an inconvenience for some.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut, Government, you do not speak for all of the central cities in this country. You definitely do not speak for Wellington Central and the 50-plus business. And we still have a whole long list of businesses\u2014not just in central Wellington; in Newtown as well\u2014who have also been experiencing increased levels of rough sleeping. They do not support this approach. They don\u2019t support you. That\u2019s the capital city of New Zealand. And it\u2019s the same in Auckland Central where we had compelling arguments from organisations like the Karangahape Road Business Association, who outright reject this. So the Government cannot stand up and say that this bill is in the best interests of businesses, because it\u2019s not. And Heart of the City, who I know were a big proponent for this bill, completely fell apart in the weeks after this bill was introduced. This Government and Minister Goldsmith do not speak for the businesses in New Zealand. They certainly don\u2019t speak for the one that we stand in right now either.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to acknowledge the people within select committee who also supported adding elements to this bill that diminish the human rights impact on this bill. We\u2019ve known from the beginning that this bill, in the way that it criminalises begging, is a breach of freedom of speech, and the elements of this bill that criminalise rough sleeping and the movement of people who are rough sleeping is a breach of freedom of movement. So I commend those who tried to find solutions to diminish that impact, because that is important. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EUnfortunately, we have made those changes but that does not go far enough, and we\u2019ll be breaking that down in the committee of the whole House over the rest of today and tomorrow. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we really need is a duty of care, and you have an opportunity\u2014this House has an opportunity over the next few hours to the end of today, till midnight tonight\u2014to genuinely consider whether we might do something bold and pragmatic together to put a duty of care on to the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development so that the people who are impacted by these move-on orders actually get the support that they need. And I would love to hear any argument against a duty of care.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022d8f0ca0dd2d9a295e77db97cad2f4346\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d8f0ca0dd2d9a295e77db97cad2f4346\u0022\u003ETODD STEPHENSON (ACT) (16:48)\u003C/span\u003E: What I know is that three years ago this Government inherited a situation where New Zealanders were very concerned about law and order and safety in their community. The parties here brought their different ideas together, whether it was ACT\u2019s three strikes, New Zealand First with additional police numbers, etc. And we\u2019re very happy to be supporting these move-on orders because, as the Minister said, it\u2019s to do with disruptive and antisocial behaviours, particularly in our business communities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to acknowledge all of the submitters who did come to the select committee. They were dealt with with respect and they were listened to, and, obviously, some of the things they\u2019ve raised have been picked up. ACT did identify four issues that we were concerned with immediately. The age and the amount of the fine\u2014they are being dealt with. And we were concerned about a couple of the aspects related to the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, where trying to outlaw begging actually does impinge on freedom of expression, and, of course, freedom of movement\u2014once you\u2019re moved on, in what circumstances could you come back to the place you\u2019ve been moved on from.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m glad that we were able to secure some agreement around that. Obviously, the Minister has a slightly different way of dealing with unreasonable begging, but still he\u2019s accepted that there needs to be an unreasonable test around begging. So we\u2019re very happy to be commending this to the House, and we look forward to discussing it further in the remaining stages. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225f6c5b1a97f24773a8aaeb3a8e3b0e7b\u0022 data-id=\u00229d22ca23dd6d3df77684160c1bdf5753\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f6c5b1a97f24773a8aaeb3a8e3b0e7b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229d22ca23dd6d3df77684160c1bdf5753\u0022\u003EJAMIE ARBUCKLE (NZ First) (16:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to support the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill. I, like many people in the House tonight\u2014and as being a member on the Justice Committee\u2014found this was a very contentious piece of legislation, and so first I would like to thank those over 7,600 submissions that the select committee did receive. We did hear, as we\u2019ve heard, a number of the submissions. We\u2019ve heard over 178 submissions on this issue. There was a wide range of concerns, and some of those I will touch on, but first we\u2019ve got to go back to the purpose of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe purpose of the bill was around public disorder in our city centres. Every New Zealander should have the right to go into our city centres without fear and without disorder. We should be able to use our public centres, whether we\u2019re young or old or seniors. We should be able to go into those spaces and be able to use them and not be obstructed by certain activities that are happening in those areas. We did hear that there was a lot of fear from some citizens using city centres, and we don\u2019t want that to be part of New Zealand\u2019s culture. Also, around economic harm for our businesses, with the disruption that was happening outside of their shop fronts\u2014a lot of the concern was around the retail shops in hospitality areas, and that\u2019s something that has been picked up in this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe committee, as we\u2019ve heard, has made a number of changes. We did hear from the submitters. We\u2019ve changed the age from, originally, 14 up to 18. We\u2019ve made exceptions to the begging rules around making sure that fund-raising is not classed as begging, and also the term now being used in the legislation is around \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D. The penalty has been changed from $2,000 to $1,000. Importantly, there\u2019s a statutory review in three years\u2019 time, which is going to be really important. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESomething I do want to highlight is the Commissioner of Police\u2019s annual report. That will be annual, and so every year we will get an annual report on this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne thing I do want to say is that in new section 8A in clause 5 of the bill. It\u2019s very clear that \u201CA constable may\u201D, and it says the word they \u201Cmay\u201D issue a move-on order. They\u2019re not going to be policing the streets and moving everybody on. I think that\u2019s the wrong intention, which the Opposition is actually trying to put across in this debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, if we go through some of the legislation, around \u201Cbehaving in a manner that is disorderly, intimidating, or threatening:\u201D, we don\u2019t want to see those types of activities, that type of behaviour, and that type of conduct in our CBDs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust in finishing, the part that I have not heard a lot on is around police discretion. Police have the discretion when they\u2019re in our CBDs with this move-on order. It is a tool in the tool box. It gives police the option to move people on for those behaviours and for that conduct. On that, I will commend this bill to the House. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fce24dd873fd5a8f2afd96e46854b101\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: This is a split call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022 data-id=\u0022c0685a48b4a33d806d4c32b223a13c03\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c0685a48b4a33d806d4c32b223a13c03\u0022\u003EORIINI KAIPARA (Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori\u2014T\u0101maki Makaurau) (16:54)\u003C/span\u003E: There\u2019s no way to start this kauhau without addressing the fact that this winter, three people who were rough sleepers died on the streets of Aotearoa within the space of just one week\u2014three in one week\u2014and on 28 August, just two weeks ago, a homeless man died in the affluent suburb of Epsom, within T\u0101maki-makau-rau, right outside the office of three National MPs, one of whom is the very Minister who brought this monstrosity of a bill back into the House under urgency in the final days of Parliament. He is the same Minister who claims that this bill isn\u2019t about criminalising homelessness\u2014he just said it\u2014but at the same time he delivers a bill that quite clearly targets beggars, rough sleepers, and the most under-supported community in our country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Government claims it\u2019s about public safety, but it is not; it\u2019s about poverty control. It\u2019s about punishing the poorest of us, out of sight, and hiding the ugly truth that has existed on our streets for generations. This bill is about building a path, a pipeline, from poverty to prison\u2014and that\u2019s for children\u2014and then from prison to poverty for the rest of those who are homeless and severely deprived of homes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe proof is in the sequence of events. Poverty triggers an order, an order creates a legal duty, inability or refusal to comply becomes an offence, and the punishment can be either a $1,000 fine or jail time. The bill might not name homelessness as the offence, but it certainly builds the pathway from homelessness to one. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Government was warned again: its own ministry found limited evidence that move-on orders would achieve the Government\u2019s objectives. The ministry preferred the status quo because existing powers already cover disorder. They already cover intimidation, obstruction, and breaches of the peace. So what new conduct does this bill need? Well, it\u2019s written in black and white: begging, rough sleeping, and existing while visibly poor. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of many rangatahi voices written into the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EMore Than a Home\u003C/span\u003E report released by Manaaki Rangatahi last year said, \u201CRangatahi don\u2019t fit in adult systems\u2014remove the red tape. Rangatahi make up a significant proportion of the homeless population across Aotearoa.\u201D The Government heard that truth and wrote more red tape instead; this time carried by a constable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn T\u0101maki-makau-rau, providers tell us that people choose visible, well-lit places because darkness is dangerous. Light, cameras, and foot traffic offer some protection. This bill can push them away from that safety and away from kai, transport, healthcare, and the outreach workers trying to find them. People who are harder to find are harder to help. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor w\u0101hine, the danger is acute. The Coalition to End Women\u2019s Homelessness says that women sleep in cars and on couches, and some return to abusive relationships because it feels safer than the alternative. W\u0101hine M\u0101ori are disproportionately unhoused on our own whenua, and they make up 57,000 of the homeless population. Dr Kathie Irwin puts the intergenerational machinery plainly\u2014and I quote\u2014\u201CYou don\u2019t turn up at 65 as an older M\u0101ori woman with poor economic opportunities by chance. You\u2019ve been trekking there for three or four generations.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EColonisation stripped whenua, fractured whakapapa, suppressed knowledge, and channelled generations of w\u0101hine M\u0101ori towards poverty. Now M\u0101ori are expected to clean up that damage while teaching the Crown again how it caused it. There is no other way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EM\u0101 Te Huruhuru built a kaupapa M\u0101ori youth housing model grounded in the marae and te \u0101o M\u0101ori. The results are not slogans: zero property damage, zero police call-outs, and not one claim on the supported housing fund. That is what M\u0101ori-designed, M\u0101ori-led, and M\u0101ori-delivered investment can do, and that is the type of solutions we need\u2014not this bullcrap. It\u2019s crap, and the many submitters that put in the time and effort to come down to Parliament to introduce their arguments\u2014they\u2019re based on evidence\u2014has been ignored, and that is an absolute shame.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222496ebb1a8f890e1519bfda6d3f9ff37\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll remind the member that we prefer to keep the language parliamentary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022919959e0afac57584de4cc4f6d28dc9a\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, now we do. What about \u201Ccunt\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022 data-id=\u00222214c089ad5a7c2c688bc477ba5d0329\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222214c089ad5a7c2c688bc477ba5d0329\u0022\u003EHon JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green\u2014Rongotai) (16:59)\u003C/span\u003E: In my electorate, Rongotai, we have an incredibly diverse, vibrant community called Newtown. It\u2019s not the city centre, but it\u2019s like\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229435599db73a1477b58161e2c00912ab\u0022\u003EHon Casey Costello\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Madam Speaker. I apologise to the member for interrupting her speech, but as the Speaker gave a direction, the M\u0101ori Party member then used the word\u2014which I will not use\u2014that begins with \u201Cc\u201D, in order to use it as a reflection. The fact that it has been used once in this House does not make it common use. I find it particularly offensive and disrespectful to you, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a96a05b3f5c58da1a94964a8b044f191\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just clarify where that comment was directed?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224df433e4bc593ae49f5b5528326b40b0\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. The member\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022230a6487b2fb04bbacc86d2ad10cda16\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m dealing with a point of order already.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226bd885f4a0361ae941c3101f710273f6\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E: Well, speaking to the point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ed793118be8ba15c3452d11eeaa93ba\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: When I\u2019ve finished with the Hon Casey Costello.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002225ce8a2cadc3c0e8492bbca67eab66ed\u0022\u003EHon Casey Costello\u003C/span\u003E: It was the M\u0101ori Party member to my right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bbc7dd1fbb85a781059a052cc7c901cf\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Directed where?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223faab986091c269a53c7eb156178bf49\u0022\u003EHon Casey Costello\u003C/span\u003E: It was directed at you, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d68d305c9e30d8eff9589ee8d0aacb07\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: OK. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224d3ae1a3ed1bbf3720b79268d9912a59\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, yes, it was me, and three times the word \u201Ccunt\u201D has been used in this House by the Government\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f3dd53131baf2b3a78d951d67050b4a1\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EOh!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221539076b79416060b02f63b0ab7aafce\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014by the Government\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b5e512d8441bf56f54c79451eaae6e92\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s enough. I don\u2019t actually like it\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249e056229617be89f1f3519753dca27d\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014by the Government, and so either\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022130f8e73d1b42e9c42d3bd8a28c03880\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Sit down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e2090e0a4f7190a3dba4b1b730a898a6\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014that word is offensive, or \u201Cbullcrap\u201D is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e46b4cb46b5ba42e232fc9a6e56bf778\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Sit down. And now I personally find that offensive, and I\u2019ll ask the member to leave the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226bbf88ca62f70f1a201aa056f4c22bc0\u0022\u003EHon Willie Jackson\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, point of order, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b012b672ff976c60cac660875b9f927f\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Are you going to now challenge my ruling?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c6cf02f6faf0b12e9bc22fa268381a2c\u0022\u003EHon Willie Jackson\u003C/span\u003E: No, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ad4a48c9c8af572b53a3d954c25c0d33\u0022\u003EWithdrawal from Chamber\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022648dc97ddec90d9905699f0c4f80dd20\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d6f8c5f9e884334454236316535fbfd\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I am not going to entertain a conversation on this. The member will leave the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer withdrew from the Chamber. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022233a42047f2fc0bdc67818376a104c21\u0022\u003EHon Willie Jackson\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Madam Speaker. I don\u2019t wish to challenge your ruling on this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229a781c65aa773a82749500d4a4fcf1e\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s good\u2014it\u2019s a good time to sit down, then.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2d593988d999525307494b9d46915bd\u0022\u003EHon Willie Jackson\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, this term\u2014and I accept, from the New Zealand First member, that you find it offensive\u2014has been used in front of the full House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec74fb1a10edceef67a8ccf33d5fe4aa\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m not arguing that. Sit down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220532e577924e2dc99111b638af65c3a2\u0022\u003EHon Willie Jackson\u003C/span\u003E: The Speaker allowed this to happen\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264dfde3dc16ead7277128830599460ee\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Willie Jackson)\u003C/span\u003E: Sit down now\u2014sit down now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d0b44b416b2a07cf769328e789d381b\u0022\u003EHon Willie Jackson\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and you kick out our member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cf3beb984d3ffa4c26eaec9af56635e7\u0022\u003EHon Willie Jackson\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a1f7420f8abc240ad57383e01efdb1f\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Willie Jackson, leave the Chamber. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] Leave the Chamber now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I will ask Oriini Kaipara to withdraw and apologise\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] Excuse me\u2014excuse me. On my right, just settle down. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] I have asked you, Mr Jackson, to leave the Chamber. Mr Clerk, can you please ask the Serjeant-at-Arms to assist Mr Jackson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHon Willie Jackson withdrew from the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de447f0870210f069ead56da214032a5\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: And I\u2019ll ask Oriini Kaipara to withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223671e92e05730e77add52d936d1c4e8\u0022\u003EOriini Kaipara\u003C/span\u003E: May I ask what for, Madam Speaker?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e3e0898d87dc4f713c39b73419d843b1\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: For the use of that language.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022475836074b75c66779197123afd37f4e\u0022\u003EOriini Kaipara\u003C/span\u003E: What word?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022194cb7e4af08ac622630453529fef879\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I am not going to repeat it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022900d9d6ba9ff10d604c83cb495759627\u0022\u003EOriini Kaipara\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m trying to understand. I did not use the \u201Cc\u201D word, and so I\u2019m not apologising for using a word I did not use.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a7487cd426f1b5a55489dcdf566fee75\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: So was that word used by the other member?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223577106b89f17b1002808bb0a39e16ab\u0022\u003EOriini Kaipara\u003C/span\u003E: I don\u2019t know.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242912846fdf73f6fd04e45f6af62e7f6\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: OK, that\u2019s fine. My apologies to you. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f6e5cfc5be7eb969a086a09290c4a5dc\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022108fefa7a6daf0b62641af1427893d8b\u0022\u003ESummary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b9abeaae924a92aa42f09fcb3486eb89\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004411\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022 data-id=\u0022551ab0702a33ce4a27167b9ba74d741d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022551ab0702a33ce4a27167b9ba74d741d\u0022\u003EHon JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green\u2014Rongotai) (17:02)\u003C/span\u003E: In my electorate of Rongotai, we have a vibrant and diverse area. It\u2019s not a city centre, but it\u2019s a suburb that has a very vibrant heart. It\u2019s called Newtown. I invite all members of this Parliament to go visit Newtown, where you can get some of the best kai in the city. You can see people from all walks of life coexisting with a whole lot of compassion for each other. When this bill that we\u2019re debating right now was first indicated by the Government, there was a huge outcry from my constituents, people across Wellington, lots of people involved in front-line services, and lots of people involved in churches. In fact, I went to a kind of sleep-in protest\u2014a sit-in\u2014that was held at the cathedral just across the way here from Parliament, where people from all different denominations of Christian faiths and probably others were getting together to protest this proposed legislation, because it is not the solution we need. I think this legislation tells us everything New Zealanders need to know about the values of this coalition Government. They are totally lacking in compassion and understanding of the complex issues that lead to the disturbances we see in places like Newtown.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs the local MP, I have brought together a group of stakeholders right across Newtown who are dealing with the fact there is increased homelessness and antisocial behaviour on the streets of Newtown. I have spoken to constituents who say their children, who are in primary school, used to be able to walk on their own to the library in Newtown and no longer feel safe to do so. The answer to this is not police coming and moving people on to a different part of the city. In fact, more likely than not, it will be police moving on people begging or needing help here in Wellington City, and they\u2019ll end up in Newtown, where we\u2019re already seeing the consequences of this coalition Government\u2019s\u2014Luxon\u2019s Government\u2019s\u2014decision to cancel State house builds. There were hundreds of State houses that should have been delivered by now here in Wellington, that were cancelled by this Government, in my electorate. I work all the time with people coming into my shared office with my colleague Tamatha Paul, where we have constituents needing housing, and they\u2019re unable to get it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAt the stakeholder meeting that we pulled together to deal with the increased issues affecting our community in Newtown, someone who works for the City Mission suggested that there had been a solution brought forward in Auckland last year, called immediate-access transitional housing, and that enables the providers, like the City Mission or the Salvation Army, to do the assessment and provide people with immediate-access transitional housing. That could be a solution. Everybody at the meeting was in agreement. At this meeting, we had three city councillors, we had the Salvation Army, the City Mission, the Downtown Community Ministry\u2014right across the board. There were all kinds of big leaders and players and people who are trying to solve real problems in our community, and the local supermarket, who has been probably the most affected, besides the residents of Newtown, by this increase in homelessness, which is a direct result of Luxon Government policies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, since the Minister for Mental Health is in the Chamber, I should say there is insufficient support out there for people struggling with serious mental health difficulties, and this is getting raised by everyone out there, including the police and including people in the health sector. We need public investment in mental health support, addiction support, and housing. That is what we need, not Paul Goldsmith\u2019s lifelong dream of using the police to bully poor people or people who are suffering from the failures of his Government, which clearly he has had on his agenda since he was a city councillor in Auckland City.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe wrote to the Ministers. They wrote back and said, \u201COh, we\u2019ve already done some stuff with the City Mission, and we\u2019re not going to give you the immediate-access transitional housing.\u201D So here we are, with this cruel Government creating problem after problem for the most vulnerable people in our society and then saying they\u2019re going to punish them with fines and prison and threaten them with police. It tells New Zealanders everything we need to know about this elitist Government of the wealthy and sorted who want to punch down on the poor.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022 data-id=\u00221ab4c8d7643db8d0abef98c697b83336\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221ab4c8d7643db8d0abef98c697b83336\u0022\u003ETOM RUTHERFORD (National\u2014Bay of Plenty) (17:07)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m really proud of the work we as a collective Justice Committee did, and I thank Camilla Belich for her earlier remarks, and all members of the committee. There were over 7,000 submitters on the bill. We spent over four days of full oral hearings, hearing from people up and down the country on this piece of legislation. We, as a select committee, engaged and listened to it, and I think we actually made really pragmatic changes to the legislation, which we agreed. I\u2019m really proud of the work we did collaboratively and cohesively as a team working across Parliament. I think that\u2019s the part that most people in the general public may not get the opportunity to see\u2014that we, as members of this Justice Committee, did a fantastic job. I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f988bc72b5e47b8856ba70e41dfbbaf\u0022 data-id=\u0022d5e5190ced5fae884e29ca45750fc04a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f988bc72b5e47b8856ba70e41dfbbaf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d5e5190ced5fae884e29ca45750fc04a\u0022\u003EGEORGIE DANSEY (Labour) (17:08)\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003ET\u0113n\u0101 koe e te M\u0101ngai o te Whare\u003C/span\u003E. Well, it is a sad, sad day in Parliament today under urgency as the Government pushes through another terrible piece of legislation that does not support vulnerable people in Aotearoa New Zealand. I\u2019ve just heard the Government speaking to bills that will create and extend boot camps for young people. After this bill, we\u2019re going to be talking about how the Government is removing references to Te Tiriti o Waitangi out of 18 pieces of legislation. Again and again, pushed through urgency, this Government is making decisions that punch down on our most marginalised communities. This bill today, as many times as the Government would like to say that it doesn\u2019t target homelessness, targets rough sleeping and begging, and the majority of our people who are rough sleeping or begging, believe it or not, are homeless.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are already offences\u2014legislation that creates law against disorderly behaviour, obstruction, and intimidation. Those offences are already illegal in our towns and cities, which leads me to believe that the only change this bill is making is to allow to discriminate and legislate against people who are begging and rough sleeping\u2014aka our very vulnerable homeless people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to make mention of all of the thousands of submissions that were received and processed by the select committee: 98 percent of New Zealanders opposed this bill, yet the bill continues to be rushed through Parliament under urgency\u2014a mihi to those in the House who work in our communities every single day supporting our homeless people and those in need for being in the gallery to hear this bill today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to make a note of the changes that were made in select committee, especially the parts around begging. The law will now refer to begging that unreasonably interferes with the use of enjoyment of a public place. This does not change who ends up being moved on; it is still at the discretion of the police to move people on if they think that the person unreasonably interferes with the use or enjoyment of a public place, which could be rough sleeping in a doorway or begging that might be slightly louder than a police officer would like.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the major issues of this bill is that there is nowhere to move to. We have very limited transitional housing beds nationwide in this country, thanks to the Government reducing the number of transitional homes that we can offer people. The key also is that that immediate transitional housing is housing and beds that are available for homeless people when they need it, if you need a night to stay\u2014a place for you to go. The problem is that there are only 65 beds available for this immediate access, but under the Government, where homelessness continues to grow, that is not enough.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose 65 immediate beds are all based in Auckland. I\u2019m from Hamilton\u2014Kirikiriroa. There are no immediate transitional housing beds there to take in our homeless if they need somewhere to stay. The conversations, the k\u014Drero, and the listening that I\u2019ve been doing in Hamilton over the last three years has spoken to one thing, and that is that homelessness is growing in our cities. There are more and more people needing places to go who do not have a home to live in.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI wanted to talk about particularly the women that are facing homelessness on our streets. There are a very small number of beds in Hamilton, particularly a women\u2019s shelter. So they are not readily available for any woman who may need a place. Being a woman living on the streets brings significant safety risks, and they don\u2019t have anywhere to go, they\u2019re going to choose a place which seems like the most safe for them, and that would most likely be a town centre, a city centre, where there are more people around and where there are lights. Under the move-on orders, a vulnerable woman living on our streets could be pushed into an area that is not well lit, that does not have people around, which puts her at significant danger. Until we have the spaces for these women to go where they are protected, this is just not good enough, and it\u2019s putting their safety at risk.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENo one disputes that we want our city centres to be safe. Every single New Zealander wants enjoyment of public places. There\u2019s nothing to dispute there. But the answer is not legislating against homeless people. The use of our public space is important. It\u2019s incredibly important that our businesses and our workers feel safe, but when you move someone on, where are they going? Well, where they could be going is into the suburbs to sit outside private residences and make residents feel unsafe\u2014or they could be going into the suburbs to sit outside another business, a corner dairy. Is that corner dairy less important than the city centre business? I don\u2019t think it is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat this Government fails to understand is that the root cause of the problem isn\u2019t the fact that these people need to be moved on; the root cause of the issue is that the cost of living in New Zealand continues to grow under Christopher Luxon. The number of people living on our street continues to grow, and they have done nothing\u2014this Government has done nothing\u2014to address the cost of living; it is putting real pressure on our people. When rents, food, and the basics keep going up, more people can end up without a safe place to call home. And this Government\u2019s answer is to give power to police to just move them on to the next space.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I find really interesting about this legislation is nothing in it requires the police to provide any support for the people they are moving on. There is no requirement for them to have social support or housing support; it is just the goodwill of the police officer doing the work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we need in this country is access to safe State housing. This Government has invested nothing in increasing the number of State houses we have. They have taken a lot of credit for the houses the previous Labour Government built, but they have done absolutely nothing to continue to create homes for those in need. They\u2019ve reduced transitional housing and now more people are on our streets. We need access to affordable food so people can actually put food on the table, and we need access to affordable healthcare.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe homeless people in our communities are often struggling with mental health and addiction issues; that\u2019s the state of affairs. There is no requirement for police to ensure these people get the help that they need. In fact, the number of addiction and mental health community services that this country offers continues to decrease.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAdvice against this bill has been substantial. The Ministry of Justice said that there was no evidence that this would actually reduce crime. The Police opposed criminalising rough sleeping and non-aggressive begging. Treasury costs would outweigh the benefits of this cruel law. The Government\u2019s own Attorney-General said that this bill was inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act in terms of freedom of expression and freedom of movement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn my conversations with those in Hamilton, more and more help is desperately required for our people, and this bill goes in the wrong direction to address that. We need access to good housing and good community services for all the people living in New Zealand, and this bill does not do this. This bill is not who we are as a country. We are not a country that sees someone in need and tells them to move on. But that\u2019s what this Government is prioritising\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002239d1bd7ad943d10bf54bb94f6ba47376\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\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=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022 data-id=\u00221cae7c07d229ee93716a16a623b7c408\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221cae7c07d229ee93716a16a623b7c408\u0022\u003ERIMA NAKHLE (National\u2014Takanini) (17:18)\u003C/span\u003E: For all the so-called care the Opposition has for our migrant communities, I wonder if any of them went to our migrant shop owners and managers in South Auckland, like I did, and asked them what they thought about this bill. But, no, they just pontificate all the time. But like Retail NZ as well, they spoke about the retailers that are against this but didn\u2019t speak to one retailer in South Auckland. Our communities in South Auckland, along with me, commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd1f0d22486692512d5ffa1e4e2b2bf8\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: This is a split call. I call Dan Rosewarne.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224ee4471ecdcf4eeda5bd6179167372f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022a9b1707cdf9a4886e09f47098a05afba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224ee4471ecdcf4eeda5bd6179167372f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a9b1707cdf9a4886e09f47098a05afba\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (17:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It\u2019s no surprise that Labour will be opposing this bill. Like most New Zealanders, I want our public spaces to be safe, I want our people to be comfortable walking through our town centres and taking the kids to the park and going shopping and going to work and things like that. But after listening to the evidence, I\u2019m simply not convinced that this bill will achieve what the Government says it will.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOver the course of the select committee process, we heard from thousands of New Zealanders: we heard from lawyers, churches, charities, and homelessness advocates, and also homeless people themselves. A couple of members of the homeless community took the time out to discuss the daily challenges that they face, and that was particularly valuable for our select committee to hear those voices firsthand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhile the submitters came from different backgrounds, there was a common theme running through the evidence, and that was that this bill doesn\u2019t solve homelessness; it actually moves homelessness somewhere else. One of the most powerful submissions, which has already been discussed in the debate today, came from Wendy Proffitt, who shared the story of her daughter Caitlin, and it was a reminder that homelessness is about real people, real families, and real hardship. Her message was simple: before we decide to move people on, we should understand how they got there in the first place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA number of submitters pointed us to overseas experience. We heard evidence from Denver, where similar laws were introduced. And what happened? People weren\u2019t housed. They weren\u2019t helped. They were simply pushed into less visible locations. And as Madison Kilworth pointed out, many ended up sleeping in places where they were more isolated and less safe. The homelessness challenge didn\u2019t disappear; it just became harder to see.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat concern came up again and again throughout the submissions. If someone is sleeping rough in a place where support workers know where to find them and where community groups can regularly check on them, that allows them to feel safe in those well-lit areas of the town. The evidence that we heard was that they often become harder for support services to locate when they\u2019re pushed to the outer edges and less well-lit areas of our townships, and then it\u2019s a lot harder to connect people with housing and healthcare services. And it is not a step forward in many cases, particularly in a lot of our rural communities; it is a step backwards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne question kept coming back to me throughout the hearings\u2014where are these people meant to go? If Parliament is going to give the police the power to tell someone to leave, surely Parliament should have an answer to that question. If someone has no home, no available emergency accommodation, no place to stay with friends or family, and nowhere else to go, what does that move-on order actually achieve? It doesn\u2019t create a house or a safe haven for that vulnerable person. It doesn\u2019t create a bed or a pathway out of homelessness. It simply tells someone to sleep somewhere else tonight and that problem just remains. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA number of submitters spoke about the complex issues that often sit behind homelessness\u2014poverty, mental health issues, addiction, family violence, and trauma throughout their life\u2014and we heard about people facing all those challenges at once. The evidence was overwhelming that fines and enforcement measures don\u2019t address those underlying problems. The reoccurring theme throughout all these submissions is that housing actually addresses homelessness, mental health services address those mental health challenges, and addiction treatment at the forefront is very important. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the submissions that also stood out for me personally was when we were told that most of us can survive one setback, maybe two, maybe three, but when they pile up on top of each other, any one of us can end up homeless relatively quickly, and that\u2019s something we need to remember when people find themselves in this situation. There are a lot of unaddressed challenges, so I don\u2019t commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022297bc572c27f45308dffb067ca3e7915\u0022 data-id=\u002258d92f2711ca71367e86d816e19ea2df\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022297bc572c27f45308dffb067ca3e7915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002258d92f2711ca71367e86d816e19ea2df\u0022\u003EDr HAMISH CAMPBELL (National\u2014Ilam) (17:24)\u003C/span\u003E: I rise in support of the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill. The Government is providing police with the power to issue move-on orders as a tool to deal with disorderly behaviour in public places. It does not make homelessness illegal, as people have been alleging. Police have expertise in assessing whether support is required or not. They do this every day. Therefore I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022edaf07c6cf26d55e983d02a45d1fe425\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022edaf07c6cf26d55e983d02a45d1fe425\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (17:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It\u2019s quite a sad day today, as this Government once again is making life harder for those whose lives are hard already. We\u2019ve heard the story of Caitlin mentioned a number of times, and we sat through many, many submissions, but it\u2019s fair to say that that one was one of the most touching and troubling submissions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen Caitlin\u2019s mum, Wendy Proffitt, finished her submission, I went outside and spoke to her. She gave me this, and she asked me to show it here today. This is a photograph of Caitlin in happier days. Caitlin suffered from some health issues. She was actually a recipient of a kidney transplant, and the prognosis was very good. The prognosis was that she would live a pretty long and healthy life if she was well looked after. But her health and immune challenges weren\u2019t the only challenges she had; she did have mental health challenges, and her mum was upfront about that. But Caitlin, as we now know, died in Christchurch on a cold night, homeless and alone. She, essentially, chronicled her own journey to the bottom, really, and put it on YouTube, and you can see that. You can see that she was troubled. You can see that she needed help and assistance. It\u2019s fascinating\u2014not fascinating, but it\u2019s more to the point and it\u2019s something we need to know: her mum, Wendy Proffitt, didn\u2019t come from some troubled background. The line between a flourishing life and ending up as Caitlin did is a narrow one indeed, and it was interesting to hear that Caitlin\u2019s mum, Wendy Proffitt, was in fact a clerk of the Justice Committee many years ago. She is an educated woman who knew what was going on. But we can\u2019t always protect our children from everything, and she couldn\u2019t protect Caitlin from that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand has failed Caitlin and those other people\u2014who have died on our streets. They have died on our streets\u2014died of cold, of hunger, and of illness\u2014because we haven\u2019t helped. And what is the solution we hear? What is the solution that this Government has come up with? The solution is to just move the problem on\u2014move it to where they can\u2019t see it; move it out of sight and out of mind.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECaitlin\u2019s mum asked me to bring this photograph here and wanted Caitlin\u2019s story to be told. She recognises that we failed Caitlin but she points out that moving on people like Caitlin would make things worse, and that is what this bill does. It simply makes things worse. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI was concerned to hear one member in the House say that she\u2019d talked to retailers, because we had retailers in the 3,000-odd submissions. Retail New Zealand was very clear that their members didn\u2019t want this piece of legislation. They didn\u2019t see the solution to this problem as being just to move people on and then if they don\u2019t move on or if they come back, they have a fine issued to them, because that doesn\u2019t solve the issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course we want streets that are accessible to everyone. The other thing to point out is that if we look at what\u2019s going on here, other than people not having a place to live, all the other things that we\u2019re looking at are pretty much illegal already. So the only thing we\u2019re really making illegal is not having somewhere to sleep, not having a roof over your head. As for behaving in a manner that is disorderly, intimidating, or threatening, anyone who knows the Summary Offences Act knows that disorderly behaviour is an offence. Intimidating behaviour is an offence. Making threats is an offence. So all of those things, the law already deals with. If someone is doing that already, the police already have the powers to intervene.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAgain, behaving in a manner that\u2019s disruptive, that\u2019s disorderly, is already able to be dealt with. Once again, here we are in the dying gasps of this Parliament and the Government is sending a signal that it\u2019s tough; but you know what it\u2019s doing, really? It\u2019s dividing our community. It\u2019s saying that people like Caitlin and the other homeless people who are on the streets, people living in tenuous circumstances\u2014and I speak to them as well\u2014they\u2019re not us. They\u2019re the opposite of us. They\u2019re them, and we\u2019ll move them on. We\u2019ll get them out of sight. Well, that kind of \u201Cthem\u201D and \u201Cus\u201D governance is exactly the sort of governance and Government I want no part of, because they are us. They are our children. They are our brothers and sisters. They\u2019re our family. You look at the least of these people, those people who struggle most, and you are the least kind to them. This is the most heartless Government I have seen in here. I\u2019m a lawyer, and I could talk about the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act aspect of this, that we are going to make it illegal to ask for help, to sit on the street corner and say, \u201CThe original draft of this bill made it illegal to say I\u2019m hungry, will you give me a dollar?\u201D It made it illegal. Can you believe that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, to the credit of the members of the Justice Committee and the many submitters, we realised how unreasonable that was and how counter to any sense of human justice and kindness it was. Now, with the Minister of Justice\u2019s further amendment, we\u2019ve got that it has to be \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D; so maybe someone who\u2019s not hungry enough is unreasonably begging\u2014I don\u2019t know what that means. But that\u2019s the other thing about this legislation. It\u2019s pretty much unworkable, because, if you think about it, talking about what is and what isn\u2019t unreasonable begging is problematic. Then, of course, we\u2019ve got the removal orders so that you can move someone on. Of course, they are allowed to come back but just not to beg. They can come back, for example, if they need to pick up a prescription at the chemist in the main street. Now, of course they can, but it\u2019s not that the law is being improved by the select committee by allowing them to come back. Instead, it\u2019s that it was a stupid suggestion in the first place to exclude them from the high street of our towns and cities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing is this: we hear from the other side as if the police want this. The police don\u2019t even want this. The police, to their credit, do a fantastic job in managing these people, some of whom we accept are difficult\u2014they have addiction and mental health and other issues\u2014and the police are both firm and compassionate. I admire them, and I admire that they gave great advice to the committee, but they don\u2019t even have the required tools to do this. This is an infringement notice system. The police do not have a system that can cope with new infringement notices. They\u2019re not equipped to do it, and they look at this and they have an expectation that, if someone is sitting in an empty doorway and the shop next door doesn\u2019t like it, they\u2019re going to get a call, and they\u2019re going to be like, \u201CYou\u2019ve got the tools now, move them on.\u201D The police are experts at knowing what the risks are, how to engage with people, and how to get the best outcomes and keep our communities safe. They don\u2019t even want this. I\u2019m looking forward to the committee stage and asking\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022163827fb2e3d9971b068d4ee20ff2533\u0022\u003ECarl Bates\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6849280ded41b0897ac6f1f43e93857\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The member\u2019s time\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227bdbfe34a7b4ae63b2ab6a3de560f71a\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I just want to make a point of order that I was finishing my speech and I had about four seconds left and up he jumps. There is a bit of an issue here when you\u2019re concluding your speech and a member\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b1aae3ec969e77013b4c7df23ba3de3\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, you\u2019ve just used your four seconds arguing about it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022 data-id=\u00223ce7f8f4718ded5621e34c4b66fd8d4d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223ce7f8f4718ded5621e34c4b66fd8d4d\u0022\u003EGLEN BENNETT (Chief Whip\u2014Labour) (17:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ESpeakers\u2019 Rulings\u003C/span\u003E are very clear\u2014I think it\u2019s 30/4\u2014that a member isn\u2019t able to take the call until the previous speaker has resumed their seat. I\u2019ve seen it three times already this afternoon where the National Party MPs continue to do the same thing, and I want you to address that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u00226f6d83e8ebd946af8e171b0eac31853f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226f6d83e8ebd946af8e171b0eac31853f\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (17:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, move-on orders are part of this Government\u2019s focus on restoring law and order, and contrary to the Opposition\u2019s continued barrage regarding this, they do not criminalise homelessness. I was proud to be part of the Justice Committee that moved the age from 14 years to 18 years, and I commend this improved bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a4bfb9d21edaf75c62288ec55a976e5b\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the amendments recommended by the Justice Committee by majority be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill be now read a second time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002255da0a42ff7b23c04041b17238df038f\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00226081351478992b8fd8e72b0165fed4c9\u0022\u003EClause 1 Title\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fbd15c7c84f5ddeb0bd5776517fbda06\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the House is in committee on the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill. We come first to clause 1, which is the \u201CTitle\u201D. The question is that clause 1 stand part. The Minister has asked for some opening remarks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022 data-id=\u0022664b562099eaea687c7153c7b1feeb34\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022664b562099eaea687c7153c7b1feeb34\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs) (17:38)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Madam Chair. I\u2019m pleased to be here for the committee of the whole House stage of the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill. The primary purpose of this bill is to amend the Summary Offences Act to provide police with an additional tool to manage public order. The bill equips police with the power to issue move-on orders to people who are behaving in a disorderly or disruptive manner in a public place. Move-on orders are a short-term tool that can be employed to disrupt and de-escalate concerning behaviours, making our public spaces and town centres more enjoyable for everyone who lives, works, and visits there. I\u2019ll now answer your questions as best I can.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022b603dedd810c82fe505cb71aa79ada5a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b603dedd810c82fe505cb71aa79ada5a\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (17:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair, and thanks to the Minister in the chair, the Hon Cameron Brewer, for his opening comments. This bill we\u2019re going through clause by clause, and so, more unusually, we have clause 1 at the beginning rather than at the end of the debate; but, as the Minister has just made some broader comments about the nature of move-on orders, my proposal would be that we make some broad comments about that and then we can talk about specific amendments and then move through the clauses, if that\u2019s OK with the Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f16f7b5de20537f47ea0c53c1ae56a0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s fine.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ac2a75bc79506405a86dc0e4b473c4d\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ve just had\u2014as we\u2019re in urgency\u2014the second reading of the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill, and we\u2019ve discussed a lot of the aspects of it in relation to the Justice Committee and the process associated with some of the changes there. We do have a lot that we can look at in terms of the changes that have been made. Additionally, we\u2019ve got a number of amendments tabled by members of the House and, additionally, one Amendment Paper by the Minister, too, which will come up a little bit later.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGenerally, I think one of the things that wasn\u2019t addressed\u2014well, by me, at least; I didn\u2019t have the opportunity to mention it in the initial second reading that we just had\u2014was the issue around the\u2014and I think this will be an important point in this committee stage\u2014the existing offences that we currently have and what the move-on orders seek to implement. It is important, I think, to look at the title of this and when we move on to the principal Act, as well, because this is an amendment to the Summary Offences Act. I think that is important to remember, because we hear again and again that this doesn\u2019t criminalise homelessness. A lot of the stuff that the Government members have been talking to\u2014that two Ministers have spoken to\u2014are things that are already in the Summary Offences Act, like disorderly behaviour. The main kind of policy change of this bill is putting begging and rough sleeping into the Summary Offences Act. That allows conduct associated with them to be offences. I am interested to hear why the Minister does not consider that this allows normal behaviour associated with homelessness to be a criminal activity. That\u2019s a kind of general question of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, in relation to move-on orders, we do have substantive issues\u2014and I think it is the appropriate time to speak to it here, in clause 1\u2014around the other initiatives that could have been put in place in order to address some of these issues. We can\u2019t ignore the fact that we have a huge increase in homelessness in New Zealand, and there have been a number of cuts to a number of Government programmes, including the K\u0101inga Ora housing programme, including to community housing providers, including to emergency housing. These feed into the fact of the matter: that we have people who do not have a place to call home and are, indeed, present in our communities. And so, really, I think it will be important to go through some of the aspects around the Summary Offences Act and the existing provisions which are in place; but, generally, the new policy that is brought in by the move-on orders\u2014and I\u2019d be interested if the Minister agrees with this\u2014is to bring begging and rough sleeping into the Summary Offences Act, those types of behaviour which would not be considered linked to criminal activity without other additional activity. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is my first contribution. I do have some amendments on the title that I feel\u2014and I think some other members do, as well\u2014may better represent that title, but I do know that other colleagues have some general points that they would probably most appropriately make in clause 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022523e04ca7b9bb6b3a35b8346d2cde488\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022523e04ca7b9bb6b3a35b8346d2cde488\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (17:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I also want to speak on the title clause. I think that my colleague Camilla Belich asked some really good questions, and I think some of these probably actually deserve a bit of attention in clause 3, as well, around whether the Act is, in fact, the best Act for this bill to fall under.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to focus on not the summary offences part; I want to focus on the move-on part. Orders is something we do see within the Summary Offences Act, and we see different types of orders presented in there, but I think one of the things that we\u2019ve heard consistently throughout the committee stage, and we\u2019ve heard submissions on this and we have yet to get clarity on what that means, is: where are we expecting people to move on to\u2014well, to where are we expecting people to move? That\u2019s really important, because there is a finite amount of spaces where people would be able to do that. Now, we heard from my colleague Tamatha Paul in the second reading that there is a genuine concern from community organisations that a lot of the people, and particularly vulnerable people\u2014seniors, women, children\u2014are concentrated in the city centre area because they are well-lit, particularly in the evenings. If they are being moved on into darker corners, into out-of-reach areas, we\u2019re going to be seeing more harm that will be felt then, under this particular bill. My question to the Minister in the chair, the Hon Cameron Brewer, is: where are they moving on to? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut, also, if they are moving from one location to another\u2014and we heard things around how businesses feel, and we have reiterated again and again the submissions we heard from Retail NZ, from Business New Zealand, from the Employers and Manufacturers Association, from the New Zealand Police Association, and all of those, around how they don\u2019t support this bill. Let\u2019s say that a person gets moved on from in front of one shop and they are now down the road, the next street over, in front of another shop; they then get moved on from in front of that shop to another street down the road. Is that what is intended for this bill? That is my second question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess my third question around that is someone then needs to move them along and give them an order, and that would, again, be the responsibility of the police. Are there actually enough police resources in this case for them to be moved on from one street, then the police will follow them when they go to another street, and then the police will give them another move-on order and then they move to another street? Is that what our police really should be doing: following homeless people around to give them move-on orders? I want to ask the Minister what his thoughts are on these questions. I\u2019m sure, depending on the Minister\u2019s response, we will have follow-up questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022 data-id=\u002287660caa018a432b36f2e3f33cbaaf49\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002287660caa018a432b36f2e3f33cbaaf49\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs) (17:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, we\u2019ll just intersperse it here, just to break it up. The question has been put on homelessness and the point being made that homelessness and begging are not crimes. This has resulted\u2014and we acknowledge that\u2014in the behaviours identified in this bill being necessary to address the concerns that have been made by businesses, by stakeholders, by retail groups, and, most importantly, by members of the public about persistent public disorder affecting the safety and enjoyment of our public spaces.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI want to acknowledge all the work\u2014and Tom Rutherford, the chair of the Justice Committee, has done that in the previous reading\u2014and the goodwill that was found on the select committee and the number of submissions that you had to work through. I just want to highlight some of the changes that were made by the Justice Committee in its report back to this House. The definition of \u201Cbegging\u201D was clarified, changing one of the grounds for issuing a move-on order to \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D. Raising the minimum age of a person, which a lot submitted on as far as the proposed age, has moved up, and so a move-on order can be issued to 18-year-olds onwards. The infringement penalty has also changed for a breach of a move-on order to up to three months in prison or a fine of $1,000.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223febe99f2f570dab90302971805ef24d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Dr Duncan Webb. Just before I do, we realise that in clause 1, with the title, there is an opportunity to set the scene, but I think we shouldn\u2019t go too broad on the title clause itself. We\u2019ve set the scene and there\u2019s plenty of opportunity to talk about the other things as we work through.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022245eea4e52a43174e085cc434f1323c7\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the Minister just went very wide-ranging indeed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a640643d81b6ca0966fdf9a78eb6d6da\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, and, look, with these clause by clause bills, we do get a bit broad in that title clause. That happens because we want to set the scene, but we just don\u2019t want to go on clause 1 all night.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u00225f504f3214494bfabfa30e2db7b8b36c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225f504f3214494bfabfa30e2db7b8b36c\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (17:50)\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. Certainly, we\u2019ll have some detailed analysis of some of those other things a bit later on, but I did have one tabled amendment. There are a few amendments on the title, but there\u2019s one in my name I thought I\u2019d like to speak to. I think we should actually, to be fair, change the title of the bill in accordance with this suggestion, because 202 years ago a similar piece of legislation was passed. That was the Vagrancy Act 1824 in the United Kingdom. That is a bill that made not being in good employment and being vagrant on the streets and begging and being a rogue or a vagabond an offence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHere we are. This is how much we\u2019ve progressed. In 2026, we\u2019re doing it again. That bill was repealed in England and Wales\u2014it was an English Act\u2014because it was seen as entirely outdated and inconsistent with what a modern, functioning social democratic State with a welfare system should be doing, but that\u2019s not where we are. We\u2019re back in 1824 making it now an offence to be a beggar and to repeatedly beg in the same place. That means you\u2019re being subject to possible imprisonment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think we should just be up front about it and call this the Vagrancy Act, because that is the philosophy that this Government is adopting. It\u2019s an early Victorian philosophy whereby people who are on the fringes of society and are unable to hold down a job for whatever reason and aren\u2019t the well-to-do in their top hats with their hansom cabs and whatever they had in London back in the day\u2014we can get them put into the poorhouse, which will probably be the next piece of legislation this Government would introduce if they had a chance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do think there\u2019s something to be said about the retrograde nature\u2014my point is the retrograde nature of this bill is casting us back centuries and it\u2019s not looking forward. It\u2019s simply saying that when there are people who are the undeserving poor, we\u2019re going to essentially criminalise them if they don\u2019t get out of our way, out of our sight, and out of our mind.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022 data-id=\u002274b647a0b68197c9074a8a8d82f8088c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002274b647a0b68197c9074a8a8d82f8088c\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (17:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. My learned colleague the Hon Dr Duncan Webb stole a bit of my thunder there so I\u2019ll navigate around that. I really wanted to focus on clause 1 and that title in particular.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 provides that the Act will be known as the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Act 2026. While that title highlights the creation of move-on orders, the bill actually does a lot more than that. It creates a power to detain a person when an order is issued or served, it requires the provision of biographical information, and it establishes new criminal offences and also creates penalties for non-compliance. Then there are also new reporting and review requirements in there as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI suppose that titles do matter, because often they\u2019re the first indication to the public of what the legislation actually does. In this case, the title focuses on the move-on order itself rather than the broader enforcement powers and offence regime that accompanies it. I was just wondering if the Minister could explain why the title is actually being limited to move-on orders when the bill also creates a range of detention powers and new criminal offences. Would a broader title that encompasses a lot of those\u2014and I know a lot of my colleagues have put in some tabled amendments to that effect that will be good to explore later on, but I just want to hear your thoughts on why we don\u2019t make the title broader to encompass those other things that the bill does. Thank you, Madam Chair and Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022 data-id=\u0022959c9a9b7bd63ddd56f5af4351f99124\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022959c9a9b7bd63ddd56f5af4351f99124\u0022\u003EHon CAMERON BREWER (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs) (17:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. The definition of a move-on order was raised. I thought I\u2019d take members through this, and it\u2019s for the benefit of the Parliament TV audience as well. A move-on order is a direction from police for a person to leave a specific area for up to 24 hours. It may be issued to a person engaged in disorderly, disruptive, threatening, or intimidating behaviour, unreasonably obstructing or hindering entry to a business, breaching the peace, unreasonable begging, or rough sleeping or intending to inhabit a public place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221790f7680f5b73d09294565c11c710b5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the time has come for us to break for dinner. The committee is suspended until 7 o\u2019clock. We will resume.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 5.55 p.m. to 7 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bda0049e4e4330ef2fa16442f74f2cc9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Alright, members, the committee is resumed. When we were suspended for the dinner break, we were debating clause 1. Once again, the question is that clause 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002298544a93ea73d0692ac3442a51b337a0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002298544a93ea73d0692ac3442a51b337a0\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just to recap where we were: one of the things is we have this, I guess, in some ways, unfortunate situation of having no parts\u2014we\u2019re debating this clause by clause\u2014and the previous Chair indicated that we can talk a little bit more broadly around some of this bill as part of the title clause. So just to continue on from some of the conversations we had before the dinner break with the Minister in the chair, the Hon Cameron Brewer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWe had some of the responses from the Minister regarding some of the aspects of the move-on orders. I know that we\u2019re going to be discussing the in-depth details of clause 4 and 5 at a later date, but one of the things I want to check with the Minister is why we have seen some changes during the select committee. And again, one of the things that wasn\u2019t clear during the select committee stage is\u2014and we\u2019ve heard this from the Children\u2019s Commissioner as well\u2014how children will be affected. Not necessarily in terms of children being issued a move-on order, but let\u2019s say you have a parent, you know, a mum with a young child, who happens to be finding themselves in a homeless situation: how would that work in terms of a move-on order? And I guess my question to the Minister is: has the Minister, or through conversations with advisers and the ministry, conducted a child impact statement on this bill\u2014in particular, on what the degree or magnitude of the impact on children is and whether we are upholding our, I guess, international commitment around the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child? So I want to hear from the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u00223df08c42cb94942106da4bb00091d3a3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223df08c42cb94942106da4bb00091d3a3\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (19:02)\u003C/span\u003E: I don\u2019t know what that question had to do with the title of the bill. The title of the bill is the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u00223f884ebc324823b7a6353adf06ab798c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223f884ebc324823b7a6353adf06ab798c\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (19:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I did indicate in my earlier contribution that I did have some specific amendments I want to put to the Minister, but I wanted to talk more broadly, first, about the title. The Minister of Justice has said, repeatedly, that this bill does not criminalise homelessness. However, the title of this bill is the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill; so he can\u2019t have it both ways, I want to ask the Minister whether, in his view, it either has offences in it\u2014and we talked earlier about the purpose of the bill and the main policy differences that this bill has compared to the existing Summary Offences Act\u2014or it\u2019s something else and it\u2019s not about offences; it\u2019s about giving a warning. If that were the case, then you\u2019d probably see the provisions looking a wee bit different, and you wouldn\u2019t see\u2014when people failed to comply with the move-on order or failed to remain in place when they were being served with a move-on order, you wouldn\u2019t see offences there. So I wanted to know, from the Minister: which is it? Does this bill create offences, or is this bill a bill which, as the Minister has repeatedly stated, does not criminalise things like homelessness? So that\u2019s my kind of overall question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI did have some amendments. I do appreciate my colleague Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s reflection on the Vagrancy Act in the UK\u2014and I\u2019m not sure if we have had a response to that, have we, Dr Webb?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b32933e39bfb88ffc6ea74cadecd9f20\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: No. Not that I heard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a673b49909efbc78f7e0d7db3de117b0\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: So it would be good to hear from the Minister. I don\u2019t think that\u2019s an irrelevant consideration because we do know that the most equivalent type of legislation that we\u2019ve seen in place for the longest has been the Vagrancy Act in the UK, which they\u2019ve just got rid of. And coincidentally, they have an administration, there, which is now seeking to end homelessness. A very different approach being taken by a country that we\u2019ve often looked to. So it would be good to hear some answers from the Minister on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have some amendments in my name too, that I wanted to put to the Minister, on the title. The first one is changing the name to the \u201CPublic Space Exclusion and Poverty Displacement Act\u201D. Now, the Minister may say, well, that\u2019s not his intention of the Act. He wants to have \u201CMove-on Orders\u201D on there, but this would, perhaps, assist the Minister if his contention is indeed correct, that there aren\u2019t provisions in here which would criminalise homelessness, because it doesn\u2019t talk about offences. Of course, we know that we are amending the Summary Offences Act\u2014and we\u2019ll get to that, I think, in clause 3 and the provisions that are in the Summary Offences Act\u2014but I think that that would be, probably, an accurate title. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think what has been a concerning aspect of this bill is that, when we look at the aspects of this bill which are unique\u2014to remind the Minister that the main unique provisions, as far as I can see, are the provisions relating to homelessness and the provisions relating to begging\u2014because most other provisions are either covered by a by-law or are in the Summary Offences Act. The actual reason that many people are begging or are homeless is because of poverty or sometimes it\u2019s because of desperation or hunger, and so reflecting that in the title, I think, is apt. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also have an amendment which actually takes the opposite approach. So the last amendment\u2014if the Minister wanted to be consistent with his approach that it wasn\u2019t criminalising homelessness, he could go with something that doesn\u2019t mention \u201Coffences\u201D, unlike the current title. If indeed, actually, after this debate, he agrees that, no, this does criminalise homelessness, and the reason it criminalises homelessness is because the actual behaviour that we\u2019re talking about\u2014essentially being without anywhere to live, seeking shelter, being asked to move on, not moving on because, perhaps, that\u2019s the place that you feel safest, that\u2019s where it\u2019s well lit\u2014could result, from a constable, in a move-on order. If you didn\u2019t comply with that, that would lead to, possibly, a criminal conviction, imprisonment, or a fine. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo that seems to be looking at what a homeless person would usually do\u2014be without a home in a public place and seek shelter; consistent with that behaviour\u2014and then we\u2019re seeing offence being put on top of that. So the suggestion that I have is to change it to the \u201CSummary Offences (Criminalising Homeless) Amendment Act\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00226085ece99752abefcab11af672689661\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226085ece99752abefcab11af672689661\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:08)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I do want to check with the Minister of Justice. As I mentioned in my previous contribution\u2014and the Minister is more than happy to have a conversation with the Chair\u2014one of the things that we were directed to is that we can talk more about some of the broader policy because it\u2019s also what the Minister discussed under the title of this part. We\u2019re happy to do that a little bit later, but the Minister said he wasn\u2019t sure what my contribution had to do with the title. Now, we\u2019re talking about move-on orders, right? Therefore, the police are going to be moving people on as a part of that order. You are going to have mums with children who are going to be the recipient of a move-on order. So I think it is important, then, to ask whether there has been, as a part of a move-on order, any child impact statement that\u2019s been conducted. Otherwise, I think that we are going to have issues with the actual intent of this title and what the Minister is trying to achieve.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I agree with my colleague Camilla Belich that the fact that this bill falls under summary offences\u2014and we can talk more about that in clause 3\u2014is problematic because, I think, fundamentally, under summary offences, considering it then becomes an offence\u2014that it is criminalising. And when you\u2019re moving-on and the specific focus that we have on people\u2014it is criminalising homelessness.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think there\u2019s no rational way that the Minister could, either here in this House or publicly, spin their way out of anything that\u2019s different. I do want to check with the Minister whether the Minister would consider my tabled amendment, which is dated 16 September, 22.10.01, which actually just calls it for what it is and replaces \u201Cmove-on orders\u201D with \u201Ccriminalising homelessness\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022d2bd805bed8b3dee6796b4e6f67955d9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d2bd805bed8b3dee6796b4e6f67955d9\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (19:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I do want to take the opportunity, as the former Chair noted, to traverse some of the wider principles underlying on the Act, which debate on the tile clause allows, and in particular, the whole idea of \u201Cmove-on\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would be interested in the Minister of Justice\u2019s reflections on how this fits in with wider Government policy. Ideally, they should be \u201Cmove-in orders\u201D, because it would be great for these people who don\u2019t have anywhere to live to have somewhere to move into. The wider problem is that this Government hasn\u2019t kept up with providing places for people to move into and in fact has sold off more homes than they\u2019ve built. There\u2019s a real challenge here. I\u2019m just curious if this bill, the move-on orders bill, is actually part of the Government\u2019s housing policy, which is that rather than giving people somewhere to live, they just want to move them on somewhere else where they can be homeless. It\u2019s a real problem here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess the wider issue is that we\u2019ve seen, today, the economy go backwards, and yet part of this bill is moving people on who are impoverished. Rather than saying, \u201CCome on and move in and have a feed.\u201D, or \u201CWe\u2019ll give you some support.\u201D, you\u2019re saying \u201CMove on; out of sight, out of mind.\u201D The challenge for me is to understand where this fits into a wider policy of the Government. In particular, in terms of income support\u2014I agree that it\u2019s unfortunate that there are people begging on our streets, because a welfare framework such as that put in by the first Labour Government should be one where people\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df3e6766443b46819410ad4fedf34077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7d872ab8871cd2a8294411ad8818f98\u0022\u003EStuart Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Is that in the title?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022252dd66af7bd13ec95005d1105470e96\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, thank you for that comment. The fact of the matter is that if you were listening to the earlier Chair, you\u2019d understand that the title clause is one where members, particularly in a clause-by-clause debate, are entitled to traverse the wider policies underpinning the bill itself, and that\u2019s in fact what I\u2019m doing. I\u2019ve forgotten\u2014maybe I should go back to the beginning so I can catch my thread again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe point I was trying to make is that if we had an income support system that wasn\u2019t cutting off and limiting access to income support, we would in fact have fewer people on our streets who were begging and seeking support. Of course, one of the real challenges here is the definition of begging, and as we come to that part of the legislation, we\u2019ll go into that in further detail. But the wider policy framework\u2014the wider policy question\u2014is, is this the Government\u2019s approach to the issue of people not having enough money to buy food\u2014that if they\u2019re sitting in the street saying, \u201CCan I have some money to buy some food?\u201D, then the answer is not to give them the money from State to support, and not even to allow other people to give them that support, but rather to prohibit them from asking them for that money?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have a culture, in a Western tradition, where charity is actually considered a virtue\u2014that recognising people who are in a troubled situation and saying, \u201CFrom my bounty, I\u2019m prepared to give you something to make your life a little easier.\u201D, is considered a virtue. Yet here, in this piece of legislation, it\u2019s considered a vice to help someone out. Someone\u2019s on the street, and the proper response isn\u2019t to say, \u201CBrother, here\u2019s some money, buy yourself some food\u201D, or \u201CHere is some food; eat it and be nourished.\u201D The answer is \u201Cmove on\u201D. In terms of the policy of this bill, in terms of the begging aspect of it, I\u2019m interested to understand from the Minister exactly why that\u2019s the policy of the Government and\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] Mr Chair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d6718306b0dc69a684e37b6bb4e50e00\u0022\u003EHon Members: \u003C/span\u003EMr Chair!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u0022d71c5b518dbad61de5d5a29631f5cc74\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d71c5b518dbad61de5d5a29631f5cc74\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (19:15)\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EI move, That debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228940cc8636241e67ba029762dcbe50c1\u0022\u003EHon Members: \u003C/span\u003EMr Chair!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220e854d38724639e8c64516fd3ad2b83a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: I am going to take another call, but I will say to members, I appreciate that there has been some latitude, but we are on the title. I want us to come back to that and make our contributions rather succinct if we can. We are on the title clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022ea1ed99458a45d3e447ad7c83d229cfa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ea1ed99458a45d3e447ad7c83d229cfa\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m also just noting that we have been asking questions of the Minister of Justice regarding the title, as well as, as we have mentioned before, how that title wraps into the broader questions around the policy intent. We\u2019re still waiting on some of those conversations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the questions that we did ask the previous Minister in the chair that we didn\u2019t really get any clarity on is, when we are looking at move-on orders, the question around where they are supposed to be moved on to. Again, this is something that we heard during the select committee stage\u2014that that move-on aspect in the title doesn\u2019t necessarily provide clarity on distance or magnitude. I think, when we talk about some of the aspects later on, it does mention around the duration, but it doesn\u2019t mention distance. I think this is one of the things we did hear from the Police Association around the fact that they are concerned with the lack of clarity on how they are able to apply the move-on orders as stated in the title.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it is important, as we are talking about the broader idea\u2014what is the thing that we\u2019re trying to solve? Now, the Minister did say previously that \u201COne of the things we want to try to solve is we want to ensure that retailers are going to be OK, and there are going to be people who are disrupted.\u201D That\u2019s fine, but if the person is simply moved two shops down, that\u2019s technically moved on; if the person moves three streets away, that\u2019s technically moved on; if the person gets moved to one town over, that\u2019s technically moved on. How are the police going to be able to look at this, because the actual intent that underpins the bill, and therefore is encapsulated in the title of this bill, isn\u2019t quite there. I think this is something we have heard through the select committee and then through submitters, but then we just couldn\u2019t get clarity on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would be interested to hear from the Minister if the Minister is happy to provide any further clarity on, I guess, what he would consider \u201Cmoving on\u201D meant. I will leave it at that for the time being.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u00222f2d1db8650b05dd6c8346232f4c0c4d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222f2d1db8650b05dd6c8346232f4c0c4d\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (19:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I have some questions that I don\u2019t think can be discussed at any other point in the debate, because they are really about the Minister of Justice\u2019s decisions in deciding to bring this move-on orders bill to the House. They are specifically in relation to the regulatory impact statement, and I have some very specific questions that I want to ask the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EReading the regulatory impact statement, it appears that this initiative came from the Minister. The evidence I have for that is that the first line in the regulatory impact statement dated 27 November 2025 is: \u201CThe Minister of Justice is concerned about disorderly and disruptive behaviour in public places\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022021688a672ec9afe9c765c8401370142\u0022\u003EHon Paul Goldsmith\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m not the only one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e867ab3dab0915cd21af4b03cb1f962\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it appears that this has come from the Minister, so I want to know why was this a priority for the Minister, and when did he determine that he would like to implement a move-on orders policy?  We have heard references to the Minister\u2019s previous advocacy for this in previous roles, and I would be interested, and I think the committee would be interested, to know where the impetus for this bill, as reflected in the title, came from in respect of the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second question I have relates to the regulatory impact statement, which states that the Ministry of Justice recommended not to implement move-on orders. They recommended keeping the status quo. However, when this went to Cabinet, the Minister\u2014and I don\u2019t know what Cabinet decided; I assume they agreed with the Minister. It is specifically stated in the regulatory impact statement that the Minister of Justice did not prefer the status quo, which was what was suggested by the Ministry of Justice. He did not prefer the second option, which was a narrow form of move-on order with only a $500 fee, so that would have been slightly more than the status quo but not as much as what we\u2019ve ended up with. And he didn\u2019t prefer the third option, which was a more broad form of move-on order that did not apply, or didn\u2019t appear to apply, to rough sleeping and begging.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENo, what the Minister chose was option No. 4, which is a broader form of move-on order that also applies to begging, rough sleeping, and activities indicating an attempt to inhabit a public place, and it has the same penalty options as option No. 3. The Minister has chosen, in bringing this bill to the House, the most extreme version of a possible move-on orders regime, and I want to know why. I think the committee deserves an explanation. Why, when the Ministry of Justice stated that they recommended the status quo and when there were three other options that would be not as extreme as what he has proposed, did he decide, in his role, to implement the harshest form of move-on orders that capture the contentious elements we have discussed, which are begging and rough sleeping?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother question I have is about the role of the Ministerial Advisory Group for Victims of Retail Crime. We know that this group was set up by the Minister to advise on aspects of retail crime, and we know a number of suggestions that that group proposed have now been implemented by the Minister. This is kind of linked to my first question. What was the impact of that group on his decision? In the regulatory impact statement, even though this was done over a year ago\u2014well, not quite year ago; I think it was in November 2025, but anyway it\u2019s a significant number of months ago\u2014it is indicated that it was done under a specific time frame, and that meant that the consultation that the Ministry of Justice was able to undertake was not at the same level or as extensive as they would otherwise want it to be. How did he consider, and what weight did he give to, the Ministerial Advisory Group for Victims of Retail Crime, as I believe that that group is not established any more and is no longer functioning. I know that some of the participants in that group who were advising it decided to withdraw from it. If he could talk to the impact that that group had on move-on orders, that would be helpful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose are my questions\u2014actually, there is one other last thing. Also, just amazingly, in the regulatory impact statement, there is a statement from the Ministry of Justice that the costs of move-on orders are likely to outweigh the benefits. I want to know from the Minister why he decided to bring this bill forward when the expert evidence from the Ministry of Justice stated that the costs are likely to outweigh the benefits. We have heard from some other speakers about the division this bill is causing in the community. We heard passionate submissions to this effect\u2014testimony of the impact of how detrimental these may be. Even if you were looking at it only in a financial sense, the advice is that the costs outweigh the benefits, so why bring this bill to the House?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022 data-id=\u002246b1c5bea2d6968e66807207f05f1f87\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002246b1c5bea2d6968e66807207f05f1f87\u0022\u003EMILES ANDERSON (National\u2014Waitaki) (19:24)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4e1a4d3a5ba7dd3fc4a6e89feb84e80\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: I will remind members one final time that we are on the title clause. I\u2019m looking for contributions related to the title.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022 data-id=\u00221e8cc11579980065e155efde4fb9dc0c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221e8cc11579980065e155efde4fb9dc0c\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (19:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair; thank you for picking me. I took the last call before the dinner break, and my question wasn\u2019t answered by the Minister. Just for the benefit of the Minister in the chair currently, the Hon Paul Goldsmith, I will ask this question, which is specifically around the title, Mr Chair, so you\u2019ll be happy about that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs we know, clause 1 states, \u201CThis Act is the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Act 2026\u201D. While that title highlights the creation of move-on orders, the bill actually does a lot more than that. It creates a power to detain a person while an order is issued and served. It requires the giving of biographical information, and it also establishes new criminal offences and penalties for non-compliance. There are also reporting and review requirements thrown in there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI suppose titles do matter, because they\u2019re often the first indication to the public of what that legislation actually does, and in this case the title focuses on just the move-on order itself, rather than the broader enforcement powers and offence regime that accompany it. I was just wondering if the Minister would be able to explain why the title has actually been limited to move-on orders when the bill also creates detention powers and new criminal offences. I would like to know the rationale behind that. Thank you, Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u00227328e3e249e1b45ff066191c5cb5af01\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227328e3e249e1b45ff066191c5cb5af01\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (19:26)\u003C/span\u003E: There have been a number of questions asked which I will deal with in clause 3 when we\u2019re dealing with the principal Act. In terms of the title, I called it the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill because it amends the Summary Offences Act, and it brings in a move-on orders regime to that Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u00222fce621665aa2f184200b0a5967124de\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222fce621665aa2f184200b0a5967124de\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (19:27)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a4dfce16e0cd6399fe7666f862c9199c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022f4d9d49daea9517ae08df904565d6c8b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f4d9d49daea9517ae08df904565d6c8b\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (19:27)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Thank you, Mr Temporary Chair. I\u2019m just drawing your attention to Standing Order 137(4), which notes that a Temporary Speaker or, in committee, a Temporary Chairperson may not accept a closure motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ae91275a02366cf8719a19bb0a633526\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Webb. I\u2019m not actually a Temporary Speaker. I am a temporary Assistant Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222809b54c432102552816f8af8cfe7280\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: Well, clearly\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022084eb0371373e1a6aaf69980a5e39f29\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: I am an Assistant Speaker, actually, Mr Webb, so I have that jurisdiction, based on the appointment made by the Speaker and sought approval for from the House earlier this afternoon, and at that time no members had any issues with it and so it was granted. Under that I do have the approval to take closure motions, and I am proceeding. The question is that the debate on this question now close.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004547\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ef135273330f0d777fdbdfc4954be709\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 changing the title to \u201CVagrancy Act 2026\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004554\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b40d92197fd080b493a84e2dd0006618\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 replacing \u201CMove-on Orders\u201D with \u201CRelocation Orders\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004561\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220984efab470c7cd2c7aaf23642d9770a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 replacing \u201CMove-on Orders\u201D with \u201CDisplacement Orders\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004568\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002246c7096c43822d7cb68698e7bde5b2e8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Scott Willis\u2019 tabled amendment to clause 1 replacing \u201CMove-on Orders\u201D with \u201CReshuffling Orders\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004575\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022044ed9cb7293ed3cf7fe7bfcea3c4bed\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 replacing \u201CMove-on Orders\u201D with \u201CPublic Begging Prohibition\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004582\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002284b9c60ce2dd8ffb0e6bb84c46b80ee2\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Camilla Belich\u2019s two tabled amendments to clause 1 are out of order as not offering an objective description of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 is out of order as not offering an objective description of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004590\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022795fe8f898bffca1a630e78b013fa075\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00224ca30169f17b9c3a9f2e16d52252418b\u0022\u003EClause 2 Commencement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f9dd2275963e9dc01565dad4b3667de\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we now come to clause 2; clause 2 is the \u201CCommencement\u201D. The question is that clause 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022b49fff544c155021bcaad86590393e66\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b49fff544c155021bcaad86590393e66\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (19:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I think, in this particular bill, the commencement is something that does require a bit of scrutiny. Because we have a bill which has been through a select committee process, although it was\u2014and I can\u2019t, but the Chair will probably know this better than me\u2014but a shortened committee process. So we did see a significant number of submitters, but we did have a select committee process which did not go on for the full six-month period of time. That\u2019s my recollection, but happy to be corrected.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022476d77c489d927da3a51bf9d3ca070ce\u0022\u003ETim van de Molen\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not a target.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223be87283fb67cfc422cca40840c5ed7e\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Pardon?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022129682e1eac34e5ed1da987cf5c9da0d\u0022\u003ETim van de Molen\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not a target.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022973bb759a584368c61d7049886a212af\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Does the member wish to take a call?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f70e04e0f6491e67c6d619a447516b0\u0022\u003ETim van de Molen\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, yeah\u2014sure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022136400278e216cb84245fd1c039619c6\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not \u201CTitle\u201D, it\u2019s \u201CCommencement\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b31629ab8aad11338bb2e681fdc6320e\u0022\u003ETim van de Molen\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I\u2019ll take a call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299695a3ad81ca08f461e50171e0fb8d9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ll carry on with the \u201CCommencement\u201D, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a8dfc303bb284d2c84f30b95409e9f07\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: The member wishes to take a call on this, so\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b4b630dd9fce4afdd553f80f6fafc320\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m sure if he stands, then he may well get one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c3e6cd30fe55bf556ce59e40bdd7331f\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m happy to yield my time to the member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022 data-id=\u00226fe8239cb391b066cbcdbf43e758aecc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226fe8239cb391b066cbcdbf43e758aecc\u0022\u003ETIM VAN DE MOLEN (National\u2014Waikato) (19:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. The member was talking about the time frame in committee, and that it didn\u2019t go for six months. Six months is not a target, and never has been.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00226881f20bace99bfc03a76666bccaa8ae\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226881f20bace99bfc03a76666bccaa8ae\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I appreciate that member, but the thing is, with a complex bill like this, I think the time frame that the select committee took is the important consideration. Because, you know, if we are\u2014thank you to that member, that we are expanding the scope that we\u2019re discussing here. When we\u2019re looking at a good democratic process, and the fact that we\u2019re looking at the commencement date\u2014which is supposed to come into effect in a month\u2014and literally, except for maybe a handful of submitters, major organisations, including the Police themselves, are saying that this is not going to work, that this is going to be impossible to implement. We do not have the right guidance to be able to undertake this work. Part of the reason is that the committee had such a truncated time frame that they weren\u2019t able to do the full consultation and the full discussion that is needed for us to actually have a workable bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThat is the important consideration of when we\u2019re looking at the commencement, because one month is not going to be enough. We have heard from the Police, we have heard from retailers, we\u2019ve heard from all of those people who say that this is not going to work with a one-month time frame. So I guess, on that, the question to the Minister is: what advice, then, did the Minister get to look at to ensure or to make that one time framework, work? And what advice, if any, has the Minister considered to expand that time frame to further down the track?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022 data-id=\u0022a1eb2001ede74eab96732654d65da95f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a1eb2001ede74eab96732654d65da95f\u0022\u003EORIINI KAIPARA (Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori\u2014T\u0101maki Makaurau) (19:38)\u003C/span\u003E: I have entered an amendment for this and the grave concern that we have in Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori is concerning the commencement date; right here in the bill, it says: \u201Ca month after Royal assent.\u201D However, the concern really is on the capacity and capability right now, but also correct training, ensuring that the police are armed\u2014not armed\u2014but actually have the correct approach to go and do what this bill is asking them to do, which is pretty much move on people who are homeless. So the are question to the Minister is: what operational housing and rights safeguards will exist from day one? And I go back to the fact that, you know, immediate commencement allows coercive powers before training, referral pathways, accommodation capacity, data systems, a whole lot of monitoring that is required. One of the key issues of homelessness, of moving people on, is the fact that there is no credible or existing data. So once you move them on, it creates an even bigger gap.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI will not repeat what has already been said, however when it comes to the commencement of this bill, putting it into action, are the police ready? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat should be a major concern for this House but especially for the members of this House who must represent all their constituents, and homelessness is vast. It\u2019s widespread across Aotearoa, but specifically in T\u0101maki-makau-rau\u2014Auckland\u2014where the police have raised grave concerns and are concerned about how this will roll out. The demand or the urges and the consideration for the Minister is to ensure the ducks are lined up, everything is correct, and they\u2019re not going to punish people who are already being punished by being poor.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u0022aca5e28e10019482cfb0bfd614ccca51\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aca5e28e10019482cfb0bfd614ccca51\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (19:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, thank you. In relation to this question of the commencement, the Act will come into force one month after the Royal assent. If we pass this bill this evening, for example, it will then go off to the Governor-General, the Governor-General will give her assent to it in a timely fashion\u2014it may take two or three days\u2014and then it will be a month after that that it takes effect. I did receive a range of advice on that: it could be one month, it could be two months; it could be one week, it could be two weeks. We fell on one month as an appropriate time to ensure that the police have sufficient time to be prepared for implementing and enforcing this piece of legislation. We have every confidence that the police will be able to do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022685d4284fb83bf57122cb8053662f4b7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022685d4284fb83bf57122cb8053662f4b7\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (19:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I did take a moment to check\u2014I didn\u2019t want to challenge your earlier ruling, but now have a copy of the motion of appointment, or was it actually leave, and I see that the three members, including yourself, were appointed as Temporary Assistant Speakers. In terms of Standing Order 137(4), you clearly are\u2014your appointment is temporary in nature, and therefore, as we proceed in this debate, it\u2019s clear that you are unable to take a closure motion, and your confirmation of that would be appreciated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022 data-id=\u00229b94a3f152deeaaf88d603cb4caf2f7a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229b94a3f152deeaaf88d603cb4caf2f7a\u0022\u003ETIM VAN DE MOLEN (National\u2014Waikato) (19:42)\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order. Thank you, Mr Chair. The member is confused in this instance because there are situations where, over the past couple of Parliaments, we\u2019ve had to appoint a temporary Speaker in the middle of a committee stage. The Speaker at the time, or the Chair in the Chair has had to leave for some relief or whatever moment it may require. That is a temporary Speaker, and in that instance, it would be inappropriate for that person to take a closure motion. In this instance, you have been ratified by Parliament\u2014the entire House\u2014to carry out your role, so it\u2019s entirely within your rights to take closure motions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d7ca5d6b13c904aeb467986ca489e890\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much. The point Mr Van de Molen makes is precisely correct: that in this instance, I am an Assistant Speaker and the Speakers\u2019 rulings give me the jurisdiction to accept closure motions as they come about and I will continue to do so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022b6acd312265e8b4009cfa4d2fa519b51\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b6acd312265e8b4009cfa4d2fa519b51\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (19:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, I don\u2019t want to unduly prolong this discussion, but, Mr Chair, if you could refer to the Speaker\u2019s ruling upon which you rely, it would be greatly appreciated so that I don\u2019t need to seek further clarification.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b1d091a192b0a93f87ce4d2fede82e0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Yep, happy to. Let me talk with the Clerk. Thank you very much, members. The Standing Order is 137(4), which talks about closure motions, and it says, \u201CA temporary Speaker or, in committee, a temporary chairperson may not accept a closure motion.\u201D That\u2019s the point you are trying to make, Mr Webb, but in this case I am an Assistant Speaker, not a temporary Speaker, and we will be proceeding.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226617401a58aa762aebecea21a132248d\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229840edf227e50d324ae8a0e92f42fff5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Please don\u2019t trifle with me, Mr Webb. I have made my ruling clear.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u00220a4ba5df8724ed5112c6be1375efc1f5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220a4ba5df8724ed5112c6be1375efc1f5\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (19:44)\u003C/span\u003E: I know, I won\u2019t\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b75d297533469e0df7850e83dce0b4d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ll just hear it in silence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022784be87d35d5eac562573867cd5e3293\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: The motion appoints you as a temporary\u2014the word in the application for leave, spoken by the Speaker, the leave that was put was for a temporary Assistant Speaker, and the word \u201Ctemporary\u201D is critical. If, from the Chair, you\u2019re not happy to accept that\u2014and it\u2019s entirely within your domain, and we\u2019ve probably reached the end of this discussion, but, if not, I will move that the Speaker be recalled to rule on this point. If that\u2019s the case, I\u2019m happy to do so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec1ae35ea71cb33059e05819ea5db006\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Under Standing Order 34 as well, temporary Speaker\u2014and this was the case last time I was a temporary Speaker about two months or so ago. That is that, while presiding over the House, any member may take the Chair, which is the case. In this case, I was appointed by the House earlier today. Leave was sought. There were no objections, therefore I am an Assistant Speaker. I will not be taking any more points of order on that matter. I have ruled.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u002241bc3da088ed796dffecf7d92a2fc093\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002241bc3da088ed796dffecf7d92a2fc093\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (19:45)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Speaker be recalled to determine whether the Chair is a temporary Chair or not\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220750ac8c5ab70de1395b99f2665415ba\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Is that a point of order, Mr Webb?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ccf3c652bd6ee01b5a5cb5057f48ec64\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s a motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227311c0b7c0b9a08dcfef629ac1e8889d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: OK. Members, the question is, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Speaker be recalled\u003C/span\u003E. All those in favour, say aye.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232a7b37518c82b7c122417c86ed35c1d\u0022\u003EHon Members: \u003C/span\u003EAye.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220639b0bd5144c0ce7dee50f9dafb3439\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: To the contrary, no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a8d3a8dce0f999840a1dd82e554b1662\u0022\u003EHon Members: \u003C/span\u003ENo.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022395d2308844e3992831eeb13fd2d3f3a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, by convention, members do not oppose a motion to recall the Speaker\u2014Speaker\u2019s ruling 81/2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022716846685ebd5b13b01d70c39637b30d\u0022\u003ETim van de Molen\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a convention, not a requirement. We have opposed it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f785a55937b62d410423b2ad79d4f0c9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll put the question again. The question is, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Speaker be recalled\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e676d316aae688a75cede913545419fb\u0022\u003ESpeaker Recalled\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227efdca62dbb093d3ef699b6b1c7337da\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, the committee has asked that you be recalled to clarify as to whether I am an Assistant or temporary Speaker and have the ability to accept or decline closure motions when they are put in the committee stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4f3e85c070be55f431b8beaa2f9bc01\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The situation is quite straightforward. The House today appointed you, Tangi Utikere, and Jenny Salesa as Assistant Speakers until the close of play on Saturday, so there is no issue. You have full authority that normally comes with anyone who is acting as Chair of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u002270967d7242dd7d5fbb2a8b08774608a8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002270967d7242dd7d5fbb2a8b08774608a8\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (19:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to that point of order, if I have from the Clerk the correct transcript of the words that you spoke when you sought leave for that appointment, it was for the appointment of temporary Assistant Speakers. It may be that the word \u201Ctemporary\u201D was a slip or it just, perhaps, was descriptive rather than talking about \u201Ctemporary\u201D in terms of Standing Order 137, but it\u2019s unfortunate that the appointment was made of temporary Assistant Speakers rather than just Assistant Speakers. It may be a lesson for us, but it does appear that the appointment was explicitly\u2014and I\u2019m sure the Clerk can provide you with the leave that was put, that wording. The words of Standing Order 137(4) are very clear: that a person in a temporary position can\u2019t accept a closure motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EObviously, your ruling\u2019s absolute, but I just think we need to get clear as to whether when you said you sought leave for the members to be appointed as temporary Assistant Speakers, whether that is what you intended or not. If you did intend them to be temporary Speakers, it seems that we\u2019re in a position where they can\u2019t accept closure motions in this debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224a0d8e5c5af3002c6ad3742bc4b08519\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, \u201Ctemporary\u201D is a word. In the context that you\u2019re talking of it, it would be if someone who\u2019s in the Chair and for some reason needs to leave the Chair quickly\u2014as has happened many times in the time I\u2019ve been here\u2014then someone is put into the Chair on a temporary basis. They\u2019ve never been approved by the House; they\u2019ve just been requested by whoever was in the Chair to occupy that Chair on a very temporary basis. \u201CTemporary\u201D in the context of the motion that the House dealt with today quite clearly meant that they would be acting as Assistant Speakers until 11.59 on this coming Saturday, so my previous ruling stands. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022OfficeSpeech\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00222338b122327b9904dd0eef0dd35b0d6c\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004648\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00224ae25a52a680410713e18c4192888f49\u0022\u003EClause 2 Commencement (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255f6ab1ebc640009d110453cae99980d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, when we were interrupted, we were on clause 2, which is the commencement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u0022928709e48751292bbe278ecd551bb93d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022928709e48751292bbe278ecd551bb93d\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (19:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. My question relates to the commencement date, but specifically in terms of the advisory group that the New Zealand Police have assembled, who are operationalising the move-on orders. Obviously, this is a specialist task force of experts who specialise in supporting people who are experiencing homelessness. I believe there might be people representing retail. I know that Judge Tony Fitzgerald is also on that group. Obviously, their group and advice to the Police about how they operationalise the move-on orders is really important. My question is, by the time this bill meets Royal assent, does the Minister know how many meetings the advisory group might have had by that point, or would they have been able to meet to inform these being executed in real life.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00227e91fe35cb592fe230a6f2b60278a277\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227e91fe35cb592fe230a6f2b60278a277\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I think, following on from the previous question, the response that the Minister has given us wasn\u2019t a response. \u201CI have full confidence\u2014\u201D is a slogan; it\u2019s not a response to a genuine question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ELet me ask it a different way: has the Police been preparing for the implementation of this bill currently, before the bill passes through third reading? Has the Police been actively working on guidelines for how this will be implemented, including guidelines on things like: what distance can a person move on to? At what point is that distance going to matter when it comes to potentially any subsequent infringement? Are they currently working on this?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u00227b9c41cd82281bf5626e7fa5e69e4e5d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227b9c41cd82281bf5626e7fa5e69e4e5d\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (19:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Simply to say that the operations of the Police are a matter for them; they are operationally independent. The simple point of this clause is that it gives them a month after the bill is passed before the Act takes effect, and that gives them an extra month to be prepared.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u00224772e2a7e51e00717594e04eec4d0272\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224772e2a7e51e00717594e04eec4d0272\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (19:54)\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\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022162503298beebff54380744af70c3d78\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022162503298beebff54380744af70c3d78\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (19:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I appreciate being able to take the call as I did yield some of my previous time to a very enthusiastic colleague on the other side. I do have some additional questions in relation to commencement. I was interested in the Minister\u2019s answers in relation to why he considered a month to be sufficient. I accept that that\u2019s what he chose. But when we actually look at one month, we see that, for example, if the bill was to pass in the next couple of days, maybe it\u2019s given Royal assent next week, then we count forward to when a month would be, and it ends up being around about two weeks before the general election.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo me, for something that is so controversial and so significant, it seems that that does not appear to be the ideal time for this Act to come into force. For example, if the Minister was to, say, make it for two months, or even for six weeks, possibly it would come in after the election, and that\u2019s probably a much quieter time for the Police to be able to consider the impact of move-on orders. We do know that, regretfully, during election campaigns, there sometimes are additional tasks for police, and that is the reality of the current political situation. We know that the Police are often ensuring and protecting our democracy\u2014they do have a role in protecting our democracy, and it\u2019s regretful that that\u2019s the case, but it\u2019s a reality. So putting an additional task on police just before the general election appears to be not the most useful decision, and it\u2019s totally up to this House to determine that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would suggest, and I don\u2019t think I have particular tabled amendment on this, but I would put to the committee that we replace clause 2 with \u201CThis Act comes into force two months after the date that it receives its Royal assent,\u201D and that would at least get us past the general election. I actually think that\u2019s very pragmatic. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe do know that the Police will need to issue some guidance. We may think that everyone in the world watches the proceedings of this House, and understands what we\u2019re going through, and what bills are coming through, but to be fair, all of our loyal constabulary and constables in New Zealand\u2014they\u2019re not watching the House of Representatives. They rely on Police HQ telling them: \u201CThis is a new law. This is what it means. This is what we expect you to do.\u201D That\u2019s actually not unreasonable at all. I don\u2019t know if there is sufficient amount of time for that to happen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second point in relation to the election is probably more of the argument that you might expect me to make, which is that this is a very unpopular bill, and there isn\u2019t a lot of support. We have evidence for that, in the sense that we saw at select committee that we had 98 percent of people opposing these bills and less than 1 percent supporting. We have lots of people saying that this is not going to be a good thing for New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI speculate that this is not the best decision that could be made for our democracy\u2014to pass this in urgency, in a way that would mean that it would come into effect two weeks before the general election. There isn\u2019t time; there just simply isn\u2019t time for the Police to operationalise it. And no matter what happens, the voter is always right: if the mood of the country is that move-on orders are not something that we want, or not something that we want in this form, they should have the opportunity to elect a Government that reflects that. So it might be that this Government is returned; it might be that this Government is not returned. But certainly, there needs to be a sufficient period of time, probably longer than two months, in respect of my second point, and I do have a tabled amendment that would take commencement to 12 months, which would be my ideal situation. Two months would be better than the status quo in clause 2, but 12 months, I think, would be even better, because that would allow guidance, it would allow a new Government to, perhaps, change or repeal or go ahead with the move-on orders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe had a four-month select committee process. I didn\u2019t hear the colleague before. He said it\u2019s not a target, but certainly, when we have rushed lawmaking, we end up sometimes making mistakes. I think we can all accept that. We know that the advisers were rushed too. Now we\u2019re rushing it through the House. So, this is the third time, in relation to a process of this bill, that things have been rushed. I ask the Minister: would he consider a small amendment to the commencement to actually make this practically implementable for the New Zealand Police, and with regards to the upcoming general election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022 data-id=\u00223dc8da8e8bfd260a7839b64a904fc602\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223dc8da8e8bfd260a7839b64a904fc602\u0022\u003ESAM UFFINDELL (National\u2014Tauranga) (19:59)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ef3a658cd1f892cff9d3db1f9ef1d94b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, I am looking for questions related to the commencement. Tamatha Paul.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u0022b6b37670325501da7978f26c057ba55d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b6b37670325501da7978f26c057ba55d\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (19:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you for your guidance, Mr Chair. One thing that I think should be taken into consideration, in terms of the commencement, is how much the bill has evolved over the last year, or this year alone. There have been some pretty substantial changes made to this bill, and I think we\u2019ve got to consider those in a context where the Police Association, in their submission on the bill, said, \u201CThis is effectively an onus on the officer without clear statutory guidance as to how compliance is to be achieved in practical terms.\u201D I\u2019m not satisfied with the Minister of Justice\u2019s answer. I don\u2019t think anybody is satisfied with the Minister\u2019s answer that that is an operational matter, because what we are discussing is the bill, and the bill needs to be as clear as possible to those discharging those powers so that they know what they\u2019re doing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, how could any police force prepare for a bill that has changed so much? It has changed in terms of the age of people who are captured under the move-on orders, as the Minister knows, but it\u2019s also, I think, really importantly, changed in terms of some of the more interpretive terms in this bill, specifically around begging and rough sleeping, and it might change even more tonight because I know the Minister has some amendments to reverse some of those changes that were implemented in the Justice Committee. And it\u2019s not just police; it\u2019s also the courts and the judges, and all of the people\u2014the lawyers who are defending people who have been charged under this law\u2014who have to interpret this law. We have to make sure that it\u2019s in the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E as clear as day, about what the Minister intends to do under this bill. How can anybody\u2014how can any of those people that I just named\u2014interpret what the bill means in such a short period of time when such substantial parts of the bill have changed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor example, in terms of the parameters that have been set aside in terms of rough sleeping, they don\u2019t even know right now\u2014which is, as you say, a month away from commencement\u2014whether they will be serving somebody a move-on order for simply begging or for unreasonable begging. Even if that\u2019s the case, we still need to talk about, and make clear in the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E, what those terms mean. We are kind of doing this all on the smell of an oily rag tonight, and then we\u2019re giving them a month to interpret a bill that has had such major changes and is open to so much interpretation. That is too much of a responsibility to put on any officer who might not have legal experience, who might not know what the interpretation of these words are, and we haven\u2019t had any assurances that the police have been given adequate support to actually operationalise these, even if it\u2019s in the way that the Minister intended the bill to be in the first place. That is a really important consideration\u2014that there is so much uncertainty and not enough time to determine that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve had a really good day in the House today in terms of the committee of the whole House. We had the Minister for Children who was engaging, I think, in good faith, answering our questions and being constructive, so it would be appreciated if the Minister of Justice could answer these questions fully, and not just with sound bites and lines, and tell us why we couldn\u2019t just have a bit of extra time so that that certainty is clarified even further, due to the big changes that this bill has been through and will go through tonight.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u0022f2874a930fd96889cede9bd3125b3ebe\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f2874a930fd96889cede9bd3125b3ebe\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (20:03)\u003C/span\u003E: I won\u2019t be extending it to two months, or 12 months, as one member indicated. I do think one month is sufficient for the police to be ready. The police, of course, have contributed to the development of the bill, including its implementation throughout the policy process. They\u2019ve been deeply involved with that, and I understand that they have already been preparing for the implementation of this bill. Once it is finalised, of course, they will then have an extra month for any final preparations before it takes effect, and I think that is sufficient time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u0022365bac11d666d31e15982d029a487bea\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022365bac11d666d31e15982d029a487bea\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (20:04)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004671\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b29c59766650b28b848bf66cbe3be8d4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 2 set out on Amendment Paper 775 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004678\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b3a39d768b3ee86a3a964f6fc2870df\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 2 set out on Amendment Paper 776 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004685\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ff4cfe100dbe72f53f7b37db786eba2\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 2 set out on Amendment Paper 777 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004692\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022587fd06921dd5da8c3c37811da79511a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 2 set out on Amendment 790 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004699\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022938ef67e03b56444143421e6e16a202e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Camilla Belich\u2019s and Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendments to clause 2 providing for the Act to come into force 12 months after Royal assent are out of order as being the same as a previous amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Camilla Belich\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 2 providing for new section 8A(1)(e) and (f) to come into force 12 months after Royal assent be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004707\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e3039b1e6fcc330b4f7470de5848e52\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 2 providing for the Act to come into force on a date set by Order in Council be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004714\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aceaa6b5db40c73a13ce1fcc757e0cf9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment inserting a new clause 2A is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat clause 2 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a843a672651b243b929f14201f1e4ee7\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022031ae2cd965bb8b8a0e9e97cacbf6143\u0022\u003EClause 3 Principal Act\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a294f0034d2622616cebb0e6a59040c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we now come to clause 3, \u201CPrincipal Act\u201D. The question is that clause 3 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022b9ebd779fa473601fb9ca5a1450fa5fa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b9ebd779fa473601fb9ca5a1450fa5fa\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (20:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m looking forward to discussing the Summary Offences Act with the Minister of Justice. As it states in clause 3, this is the principal Act that this amendment bill amends. It is particularly important, because there has been quite a lot of criticism of move-on orders. There are already a number of similar provisions in the Act that are allegedly replicated in this bill\u2014and that\u2019s what I\u2019m interested to ask the Minister about\u2014and that appear to be the same as what is in the move-on orders legislation. That\u2019s apart from the rough sleeping and the homelessness.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI wanted to go through some of the sections in the Summary Offences Act and actually ask the Minister what is going to be different about the provisions which are in this amendment bill. If we look at the main areas, the Minister has focused on these a lot in terms of disorderly and disruptive behaviour, threatening, intimidating, and obstructing or impeding someone else from entering a business. If we look at the Summary Offences Act at section 3, we see that behaving in a disorderly manner is already included in there. I wanted to know from the Minister: what is the additional benefit in having that provision in the move-on orders so that people can be moved on?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EProbably a fundamental question as well is: what does the Minister understand in terms of police behaviour and interaction with people? Is his understanding that, currently, the police can ask someone doing anything to move on, if they wish? Has he discussed that with the police, and does he have any information as to how effective that is? I would imagine that, in a large percentage of times that you\u2019re asked by a police officer to stop doing something and please move on, people would comply with that without the need for this legislation. So the police already have the power to request that someone moves on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI suppose the reason I\u2019m raising this is that I\u2019m sure the Minister will state that, well, one of the aspects of the policy considerations of a move-on order is that it is something short of a criminal sanction at first instance. But, of course, once a move-on order is issued, if it\u2019s not complied with or if someone doesn\u2019t stay in place in order to be served with a move-on order, it does then become something of a criminal conviction as well. We have that in section 3. If we look at \u201Cthreatening behaviour\u201D, we also have section 4 of the Summary Offences Act, \u201COffensive behaviour or language\u201D, which exists at the moment, where we look at intimidation. In section 21 of the Summary Offences Act, we have intimidation as a factor, specifically in section 21(2). These have slightly different definitions, but they are available currently.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things that I did want specifically to ask the Minister about is that we have, in the move-on orders, a desire to prevent people from stopping people from entering a business. We\u2019ll talk about that a bit later in terms of this provision, but if we look at the equivalent provision in the Summary Offences Act, we see that section 22, \u201CObstructing Public Way\u201D, is already in the Summary Offences Act. As I understand it, by-laws in some of our biggest cities, including Auckland, allow for people to be moved on without necessarily coming under the Summary Offences Act, but that\u2019s a comparable power under the Summary Offences Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen we have breaching the peace. Now, as I understand, we don\u2019t have a provision for breaching the peace in the Summary Offences Act, but we do have a specific provision in the Crimes Act, which is the much more serious Act compared with the Summary Offences Act, where we have, in section 42, \u201Cbreach of the peace\u201D covered there. Then we look at the only other two sections I wanted to highlight in the Summary Offences Act, which were section 12, \u201CActs endangering safety\u201D, and I\u2019ve already, I think, mentioned section 22, \u201CObstructing Public Way\u201D. My question to the Minister is: how did these existing provisions differ from what he\u2019s proposing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u00224b2b73b0cc2dee12b18ae0260e21cac0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224b2b73b0cc2dee12b18ae0260e21cac0\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (20:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. In terms of the clause here, which deals with the substance of this legislation, we\u2019ve done this because we have a very real concern about the situation in our CBDs and market places and town squares around the country. The proposition that was being put forward by the previous speaker, Camilla Belich, was \u201CWe have all the tools we need to deal with the situation and what are you concerned about?\u201D Of course, as is obvious to everybody that has been into our CBDs over the last few years, if that was the case, then something\u2019s not quite right, because these behaviours are manifest throughout the community and are causing people to feel unsafe and unwelcome and uncomfortable in our town squares. The purpose of this legislation is to reclaim those areas for the benefit of those who live there and work there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHow this is different: well, of course, at the moment some of those behaviours are captured in the Summary Offences Act. The police, ultimately, have a choice between arresting somebody and going through the whole court process and establishing a level of meeting the threshold, and very little else up their sleeves\u2014whereas this legislation introduces another tool, another option, which is to provide for an order to move on and go somewhere else. It doesn\u2019t require arresting, it doesn\u2019t require going to court\u2014and, of course, given the pressures on the police, that seldom happens\u2014so it is providing another tool to be able to deal with behaviours in a more timely fashion. Of course, it can apply to some who are above the criminal threshold, but also to some who are below the criminal threshold as well, who can be subject to a move-on order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s what it does: it provides the police with an extra tool. That\u2019s the point I\u2019ve made, and many people have jumped up and down about this, saying, \u201CWell, this doesn\u2019t solve some of the deeper issues that we face.\u201D We\u2019ve never claimed that this legislation will solve those problems. It won\u2019t solve homelessness, and it won\u2019t solve all sorts of social ills; we have many other tools that are designed to do that. We don\u2019t live in a perfect world\u2014not every situation is dealt with perfectly, and not every problem is resolved\u2014but we throw many resources through our welfare system and through our health system and through our mental health system and our housing systems to help those who are in need, and we will continue to invest.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere may be an argument about investing more, but what we\u2019re dealing with here with this legislation is to provide another tool to the police to deal with those situations that they are confronted with on the streets, without necessarily having to go through an arrest and court process, which is the option primarily available at the moment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022af18e27cf24c7d5b2e7353f5526e0351\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022af18e27cf24c7d5b2e7353f5526e0351\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. It\u2019s interesting for the Minister of Justice to say that, yes, this does provide another option\u2014I think no one is disputing that\u2014but if the existing options under the Summary Offences Act aren\u2019t working, is another option going to help that situation at all?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister specifically mentioned that some of the options will involve courts, and I just want to point to some of the other clauses that my colleague Camilla Belich mentioned and ask which clauses or which other offences the Minister thinks would differ or require a court process as opposed to what we are currently seeing here. Let\u2019s give an example: if the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind providing some guidance around section 22 of the Summary Offences Act, around \u201Cobstructing public way\u201D, I think it would help people to understand and for there to be some form of clarity. If a person finds themselves in that situation\u2014or indeed, for the police, if the police find themselves in that situation\u2014how would the police choose which one of these options best suits that particular context? The Minister of Justice is the Minister in charge of this bill, and therefore the Minister is responsible. I think it is not simply an operational matter; it\u2019s a policy matter. I think it is important for the Minister to respond to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy colleague Camilla Belich mentioned a few other things beyond the Summary Offences Act that may also interact with this particular bill that I think fall under the idea of which principal Act this should fall under. When we\u2019re looking at by-laws, for example, T\u0101maki-makau-rau Auckland has the Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013. If this bill comes into effect\u2014we\u2019re seeking guidance on how the choices that a police officer would have are expanded, but also how the choices for police officers in those jurisdictions with by-laws have also expanded. I want to check, as a part of a principal Act and any particular consequential Act as a result of this particular bill, whether the Minister has sought any guidance about whether this trumps existing by-laws. How does this interact with existing by-laws?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose are my two questions: one on some examples of how, then, a police officer or person would know which selection of the different varieties under the Summary Offences Act they are going to be charged with; which one of the ones that my colleague Camilla Belich mentioned, and the Minister mentioned, requires a court process? And how does it interact with council by-laws? I gave one example, the Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 in Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u0022c18b3b33625d4b0e0c1f54215b1203ee\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c18b3b33625d4b0e0c1f54215b1203ee\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (20:23)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, in answer to the first one, in terms of how the police would make a judgment as to which one to apply, I would expect the police to use their judgment in the circumstances. In terms of the second question\u2014I\u2019ve forgotten it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc384e0f03766be8ae2b159773f37a7e\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: By-laws\u2014by-laws and courts. How many of them go through the courts?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5907de1bed1d4726707c47048ef1cf7\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, how it relates to the by-laws: the by-laws, of course, are one of the many things that we\u2019re not happy with the effectiveness of, because clearly, they haven\u2019t been working effectively and haven\u2019t been able to be made to work effectively in Auckland, for example, where we have seen many instances where people don\u2019t feel safe moving and working. I went to a business where the young women of the office formed a walking bus to get down to the train station at 5 o\u2019clock each night because they felt unsafe on their own. That, to me, is not acceptable in a CBD, and that\u2019s what we\u2019re trying to address with this interaction here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI do want to, while I\u2019m on my feet, refer to Amendment Paper 804, which I\u2019m bringing to the House, in relation to begging. The bill, as it was introduced originally\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d6cc7422003d3864b0f2ffaac5f41c3f\u0022\u003ECamilla Belich\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s in the next clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ae5c3eb404c730a6f499548bdf011465\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014just sought to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226100839ff570fac2c6a148d1e8e117d6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll just remind the Minister that that is on clause 4. We\u2019re debating clause 3, which is the principal Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ed2a1a0888cf19e8e490fce9e1e5926\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I\u2019m getting too excited. I\u2019m sorry about that\u2014I\u2019m get ahead of myself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u002280d449052cfdeeb1ae559f9bb6e9fd22\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002280d449052cfdeeb1ae559f9bb6e9fd22\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (20:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m not wanting to take too much more time, but I just want to respond to some of the Minister of Justice\u2019s answer\u2019s that he\u2019s given around this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDoes the Minister accept\u2014and I\u2019ve gone through it in a lot of detail, and my colleague Lawrence Xu-Nan has as well\u2014that apart from rough sleeping and begging, the majority of the types of behaviour that he is mentioning that he\u2019s concerned about in this bill, which does amend the Summary Offences Act, are already included in the Summary Offences Act or other pieces of legislation? It would be helpful to know if he does accept that that is the case. Of course, it is the case that, as he said, the choices are for the police to arrest someone or do nothing. Well, the police can say to someone, \u201CDo you know that this behaviour, if it continues, is likely to breach the Summary Offences Act?\u201D That, to me, seems very similar to what a move-on order would be\u2014only in oral form and with much less parliamentary time\u2014especially around the behaviours which are already in place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other question I have for the Minister is: this is the Summary Offences Act; it is to provide for offences. I appreciate that they\u2019re not the highest level of offences\u2014we\u2019re not talking about the Crimes Act here\u2014but they are offences. What is the Minister\u2019s view of an offence under the Summary Offences Act if it falls short of criminality? I think that\u2019s also important to know.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe last question I had for the Minister is: when he talks about people forming a walking bus\u2014and I think we have to be sensitive here not to portray the opposition to move-on orders as an opposition to safe central cities. I think everyone in this House is united in wanting people to be safe and not wanting people to feel intimidated and not wanting people to feel like they can only walk around in a walking bus. But I would infer that the reason they\u2019re doing that is probably not because they are afraid of a homeless person but because they are more concerned about something that would actually be a crime under either the Summary Offences Act or under the Crimes Act. That is what people are generally afraid of.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI did want to ask the Minister\u2014I\u2019ve had it reported to me by community housing providers that rough sleepers, who will be included in the Summary Offences Act for the first time under this bill, are more likely to be the victims of crime than the perpetrators of crime. I wanted to know if the Minister was aware of that and agreed with that fact, because that does change the inclusion of rough sleepers within the Summary Offences Act\u2014because, actually, if that statistic is correct, they\u2019re the people we should be protecting from crime, not including in the Summary Offences Act. I would appreciate if the Minister had any thoughts he could share. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004757\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b731da66cafabb69584a4eee90eb0b48\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00226f028e3c3c11033a1637948f9467cd9e\u0022\u003EClause 4 Section 2 amended (Interpretation)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002276f2f9a79130fc90ff16ff3907a99461\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we now come to clause 4. Clause 4 is \u201CSection 2 amended (Interpretation)\u201D. The question is that clause 4 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002294bfad625fad08b860acc4174f2a7dc2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002294bfad625fad08b860acc4174f2a7dc2\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. This is a really interesting section, because when we\u2019re looking at \u201CInterpretation\u201D, because this is section 2 amended\u2014and I think I want to start with the premise that under good statutory interpretation of any legislation, you always start with the higher-order clause, and with a section 2 on interpretation, it actually underpins a lot of how the other parts should be interpreted. I think it\u2019s really important for us to get the interpretation right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBecause of that, I want to start with the definition for \u201Cbegging\u201D, and I want to start with new paragraph (a), noting that I\u2019m sure lots of people have questions for both (a) and (b). I want to start with just specifically (a): \u201Cmeans requesting or demanding a donation of money, food, or other goods\u201D. Now, my first question is: what about services? Would that be considered a form of begging, because it is not a good? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy second question is: what then would constitute as a good? I then would potentially interpret asking for someone\u2019s vote as a good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216e87f0e5ae716899e970ccd47aa7a5a\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: You don\u2019t beg, Lawrence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e697d339213b12af4dfec5e7da6bec16\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: No, I don\u2019t, but I have seen political parties hold up election signs. It means requesting or demanding of goods through other conducts\u2014i.e., holding a sign. Would that be now considered begging? I\u2019m going to start with those two questions for the time being, and then we\u2019ll work through our way on some of the definitions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u002243851fed6f2cfe8f1ffdecb266eea0eb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002243851fed6f2cfe8f1ffdecb266eea0eb\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (20:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I appreciate the call. Begging\u2014well, this is a big subject, and there are a lot of different things to mention here, because, of course, we had begging as it was originally drafted in the bill, as the Minister introduced it, come through, and then we heard his colleague the Attorney-General say that \u201CThe proposed treatment of begging as a stand-alone ground for issuing move-on order appears to be inconsistent with the right to freedom of expression in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.\u201D That is a pretty statement that the Minister\u2019s bill was inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act in respect of freedom of expression. I\u2019ve said it before, but it was a very clear and very strong statement by the Minister\u2019s colleague, the Attorney-General, Chris Bishop, to say that the original begging provision did not meet the standard where it would be required to be consistent with freedom of expression under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. I wanted to ask the Minister if he wanted to comment on that, because I think that\u2019s a big factor in this change from begging in this bill. That\u2019s the first thing that I wanted to mention.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing\u2014just for the context of the House\u2014we had a situation where we had a significant amount of submissions on begging. The select committee really came to the party on begging where we had a change to \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D and a definitional change that means that it wouldn\u2019t simply be begging out of desperation and poverty\u2014which I have to say is the reason that most people would be in the situation of needing to be beg\u2014but begging that would interfere with people\u2019s lives. The kind of example that people bring up is maybe you\u2019re going to the ATM, and someone\u2019s kind of pestering you, and they know that you\u2019ve obviously got money in your hand because you\u2019ve just been to the ATM\u2014maybe that would be considered unreasonable begging, or \u201CGive me your money or else.\u201D, or something like that\u2014threatening. So there had to be another element of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen we had the situation\u2014you can see it publicly released in the select committee report where the Minister\u2019s party, the National Party, was outvoted in select committee to include this change. The Minister must have\u2014I assume it was a caucus decision\u2014decided, despite his own colleague\u2019s statement that the begging provision was contrary to the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, to make, in select committee, no change at all to that. To have a provision which is inconsistent and not justified, because we know that our New Zealand Bill of Rights Act provisions allow justification in a free and democratic society\u2014not justified a statement, and his party\u2019s position was that no change should be made. I commend the other parties in the House that enabled us to get that change through. It is now in the bill, as it is stated here. We had T\u0101kuta Ferris, and we had ACT, we had the Greens, and we had Labour, but, actually, New Zealand First voted against it, I do believe. Was that correct, Lawrence? Yeah. You might want to change your mind though. There\u2019s still time. There\u2019s still time for New Zealand First to be on the right side of history there, David Wilson. That\u2019s quite a shocking situation\u2014not something that you usually expect to see\u2014and so I want the Minister to be able to comment on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, a really important thing that we have to remember that we\u2019ll talk about, I think, actually in clause 5, which is the next clause, will be the Minister\u2019s amendment. I won\u2019t touch on that now\u2014we\u2019ll leave that to clause 5, but the history of begging, as it is defined here and as it is stated in this bill has only been changed as a result of a significant amount of work from the select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI probably don\u2019t have enough time, but I have a few questions around what would be included in \u201Cbegging\u201D. In clause 4, new section 2(1)(a)(ii), we have a description of \u201Cholding a sign\u201D that would be included, but I wondered if a cup or asking for a bus fare, that kind of thing, would be included in the definition of \u201Cbegging\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u0022bdc5a1278a2bb6d661a896d5b1bfd037\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bdc5a1278a2bb6d661a896d5b1bfd037\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (20:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Just in answer to the question earlier from the member from the Greens, who was talking about whether asking for a vote was a good, obviously new paragraph (b), which refers to excluding requests for, well, donations and charitable things, says that it is not included. It does not capture any exchange of goods or services\u2014that\u2019s not begging; that is an exchange of goods and purposes. The definition of \u201Cbegging\u201D, I think, is very clearly outlined in the section.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe other member, Camilla Belich, referred to the changes that were made during the select committee process, which I\u2019m very happy to address when we\u2019re talking about clause 5 and the change with the inclusion of \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D in my Amendment Paper, which deals with that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022483f1b5174ca814984f8ea4195768ccf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022483f1b5174ca814984f8ea4195768ccf\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Now, I want to first check with the Minister\u2014yes, I do note that new paragraph (b)(ii) does mention specifically around donation. What I asked before was around asking for a vote\u2014like, say, asking for a party vote or electoral candidate vote. The level of specificity of some of the examples we\u2019re looking at here is important, and I just want to check with the Minister\u2014Minister, you mentioned that \u201Cgoods\u201D is here, but does \u201Cgoods\u201D imply both goods and services, because services is not implied here?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think when we\u2019re looking at goods we\u2019re going to consider the idea of property ownership to a certain extent. Let\u2019s say\u2014for example, in terms of a service\u2014that the sign isn\u2019t to ask for something; the sign is to ask for service\u2014\u201CCould you please, on my behalf, do X, Y, and Z?\u201D Is that something that is going to be allowed under this current definition? Or, for example, if you have a sign that isn\u2019t asking, \u201CPlease give me some money for food.\u201D; it\u2019s asking, \u201CPlease put some money in that box over there, not to me but to a box.\u201D And it just so happens that once the money is in that box, there is no ownership of that particular money or particular good, and anyone as a homeless person can go there and pick up the particular good or money or property that has no ownership attached to it. Would that be acceptable under this current definition?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen I want to them move on to new paragraph (b)(i). It \u201Cdoes not include charitable or not-for-profit fundraising lawfully carried out by or on behalf of an organisation\u2014(i) charitable or not-for-profit fundraising lawfully carried out by or on behalf of an organisation;\u201D Let\u2019s say, if I were the Auckland City Mission, as a charitable organisation, and I happen to have people who are part of my organisation who happen to be homeless and they are fundraising on behalf of the Auckland City Mission, despite the fact that they are homeless etc., would that now be considered not a form of begging, because they are lawfully carrying out a donation on behalf of a not-for-profit or charitable organisation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWould that now be acceptable? I think it is important for us to be able to tease out some of those scenarios. Again, many may not see what we\u2019re doing here, but what we\u2019re doing here, potentially, if someone\u2019s in a situation where they have been issued a move-on order or been fined, etc.\u2014this does affect how we interpret it in the court or in the matter of law. I want to check with the Minister of Justice in terms of those couple of examples that I raised.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022 data-id=\u00226fbd593fe8c40f904ad66321c03c76a1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226fbd593fe8c40f904ad66321c03c76a1\u0022\u003EFRANCISCO HERNANDEZ (Green) (20:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m just seeking a quick call just to ask a couple of quick questions around section 2, amended by clause 4. My question is: is there a potential thing we could insert in section 2(b) whereby if a person who owns a business or if a person whose shop, for example, the begging is happening outside of has consented to those activities, is it possible that that\u2019s not considered to be begging? There could be situations\u2014my colleagues Tamatha Paul and the Hon Julie Anne Genter have already talked about the coalition that they\u2019ve assembled in their electorates whereby the small-business owners who\u2019ve got that sign in front of them don\u2019t consider the people who are outside to be begging. Are there situations whereby it\u2019s possible that someone who is outside one\u2019s shop and you actually don\u2019t have a problem with that\u2014is there potential that this law could still consider them to be begging in that situation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have a similar amendment around the tabled amendments from the Green Party last night at 9.30 that has a specific exemption clause and creates a new paragraph (iv) in the amended section 2(b) around religious organisations, for example, temples, mosques, and religious institutions where the people of that mosque, or the priest or imam or whatever the relevant religious authority on this issue, has consented to that activity taking place, and if that community has consented, it should not be considered and it should not then be penalised.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004784\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to acknowledge the role that a lot of the submitters who are of particular religious faiths played in the submission process\u2014organisations like Common Grace, I think St Matthew-in-the-City, and other of these organisations that have that have the Christian faith and have the ideas of social justice foremost in their mind. The Bible does call for us: do not turn away from those who want to borrow from you. That\u2019s Matthew 5:42. In 1 Samuel 2:8 it also articulates that He\u2014\u201CHe\u201D being God\u2014raises the poor from the dust and lifts the needy from the ash heap. He seats them with the princes and has them inherit a throne of honour. I do think it\u2019s particularly important to acknowledge that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat ties into my other amendment around clause 4 to insert paragraph (iv) in the amended section 2(1)(b), which is to have an amendment that if someone is begging in the tradition of asking for alms, in the context of being outside a public faith institution, that should not be considered begging. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy other question is: what happens if there is, for example, a conflict between section 2(a) and (b)? Someone potentially could be begging but also either requesting charitable or not-for-profit fund-raising or seeking donations or party donations. What happens if someone is begging but also conducting (b), does (b) cancel out them begging? What happens if there is a conflict between those two sections?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAgain, my questions were: what does happen if someone is consenting to someone being outside of their place? Is that still considered begging? Could the person still then be moved on even if the person who owns the business or the church or organisation in fact has no problem with them being there? Could there be exemptions for religious organisations, temples, mosques, etc., who do consent to these activities taking place? Is there a provision for the potential for the begging of alms in some religious traditions to be included in this? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy final question is: what happens if there is a potential clash between sections (a) and (b) when someone is begging and also carrying out one of these activities as listed in the amended section 2(1)(b)(i) or 2(1)(b)(ii) or even 2(1)(b)(iii), for example, because some homeless people are also buskers?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u0022b37549fb120072e456214946d1137966\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b37549fb120072e456214946d1137966\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (20:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Just responding to an earlier question around whether a vote is a good. My advice is that a vote is not a good. Now, it\u2019s a good thing to vote for National, but that\u2019s a separate thing!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn terms of the definition of \u201Cbegging\u201D, we\u2019ve dealt with that at some length and I\u2019d just remind people who are tuning in to this debate that we will, in the next clause, be talking about the words around begging, which we\u2019re amending to say \u201Cbegging that unreasonably interferes with the use or enjoyment of a public place\u201D. This word \u201Cbegging\u201D that we\u2019re defining in section 2 amended by clause 4, which we\u2019re debating at the moment, is the word that\u2019s part of a phrase in the next clause which provides a greater context. The police, of course, will determine, based on the circumstances whether a request or demand constitutes begging. Then they will issue a move-on order if they think that it does. The interpretation of the courts only gets involved, of course, if the person refuses to move on and it then draws upon the next phase of the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022c0537bc882c000c7761dde1626cae5bf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c0537bc882c000c7761dde1626cae5bf\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (20:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a few more questions on begging before we get into the changes that the Minister of Justice indicated that we would, which I am also keen to contribute to. We have to remember that the definition of \u201Cbegging\u201D is going into the Summary Offences Act. It\u2019s not as if the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill will sit alone in the Summary Offences Act. The little sections that we are looking at now and that we\u2019re scrutinising will be inserted into the Summary Offences Act. We will see the definition of \u201Cbegging\u201D quite separate to the move-on order provisions that do, as the Minister said, slightly change that definition in respect of move-on orders. But this definition will be in the Summary Offences Act, so I think it is wise that we scrutinise it thoroughly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question I have\u2014they are just specific questions now. In the definition of \u201Cbegging\u201D in section 2(a)(ii), amended by clause 4, we have \u201Cother conduct\u201D, so begging means \u201Crequesting or demanding a donation for money or food through (i) speech or (ii) other conduct\u201D. My question is: is someone prostrating on the ground with their hands like this considered to be \u201Cother conduct\u201D? They\u2019re not really doing anything; they\u2019re just being present with their hands out. Now, we might know what that means, that they might want money, but is that considered begging under this definition? Speech or other conduct kind of implies something active, so I wanted to know if that would be included. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have another question in relation to new section 2(b)(iii) when we talk about lawful busking or engaging in lawful street performances. Now, this is kind of a new concept. We haven\u2019t really touched on this so far in the definition of \u201Cbegging\u201D, but I wanted to know to what extent would a lawful street performance be considered to be excluded if it was acting in a way which required, in some active way, a contribution to watch the performance. You sometimes have that overseas where you have, maybe, people travelling, and they are doing a performance, and you might watch, or they might say, \u201COh, come and take a photo.\u201D or something, and then they\u2019re like, \u201COh, can you please pay for that.\u201D Would that be included or excluded under that definition? We have lawful busking or engaging in street performances excluded under the begging definition, but we don\u2019t really have much insight into what types of behaviour would be included there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother thing I wanted to ask was in relation to freedom camping. Now, we have freedom camping here because, of course, it\u2019s important that we understand the impact of freedom campers in relation to rough sleepers, although that\u2019s actually separate from begging. It might be that other colleagues have questions on freedom camping that they may want to raise as well. It is within clause 4, but we haven\u2019t touched on it at all yet, and it\u2019s important to know the policy rationale around freedom camping. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat is the purpose of including freedom camping? Is the policy intent\u2014and I didn\u2019t really get this from select committee; maybe another member did\u2014to allow freedom camping or to restrict freedom camping with this? Is it something which is desired to be included or excluded within the definition of rough sleeping? We haven\u2019t really touched on that at all. It may be that others focused on it more in select committee, but it\u2019s a point that I wanted to ask because I don\u2019t really understand the policy intent for the Government, and I\u2019d like to know.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other question I wanted to finally as is, because this definition of begging is going in the Summary Offences Act as a definition, there may be other Summary Offences Act provisions\u2014other offences within the Summary Offences Act\u2014that cover things that are done online. Now, obviously, with the move on orders, there is an implication that everything is done to be present; it\u2019s not something that\u2019s done online. But of course, in this day and age, probably the way that are most asked for money is not necessarily by someone that we see in the street. It might be emails from people; it could be text message; it could be Givealittles\u2014that kind of thing. We know that charitable and not-for-profit fund-raising is excluded, but would that include every online request? Is there a risk at all, and could the Minister advise us if online begging would be included in this definition at all?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b6754229ca8f816eb7e54d85accc6f28\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: I call on Dan Rosewarne.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbd7d1ad2fe47a431ffcea4ffb5c53f1\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a687e96acbad1436728951eaac1bddf\u0022\u003EHon Paul Goldsmith\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, sorry\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a9ec99743a169091a090bbbb928594af\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, I\u2019m so sorry, Minister. I call on the Hon Paul Goldsmith.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u0022b252e6c96183e2dcff60266bf1496e2d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b252e6c96183e2dcff60266bf1496e2d\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (20:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. In terms of the questions that were just ask around requesting donations online and so forth, I will point the member to clause 5 inserting new sections 8A to 8I, where it refers to conducting things in a public place. The purpose of the bill, of course, is to deal with situations in the town squares and CBDs and our town streets where we\u2019re dealing with particular behaviours that are making people feel unsafe and creating an atmosphere of intimidation and dysfunction. Things going on online are dealt with in other legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn terms of the question of whether a gesture rather than speech is \u201Cother conduct\u201D\u2014such as holding a hand out\u2014yes, that would be included in \u201Cother conduct\u201D when it comes to the definition of begging, is my advice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022 data-id=\u002291318222ce0c9d57b0c65d079401f437\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002291318222ce0c9d57b0c65d079401f437\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (20:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I won\u2019t need to do lunges in the gym tomorrow; I\u2019ve been doing plenty of sets tonight!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EOne of the things with clause 4 that I don\u2019t believe has been covered yet is that we\u2019ve inserted definitions for \u201Cbegging\u201D, \u201Cfreedom camping\u201D, and \u201Cmove-on order\u201D, and the Justice Committee also recommended that the definition of begging exclude \u201Clawful busking\u201D, \u201Clawful street performances\u201D, and charitable fund-raising, which has been covered. But what I do find interesting is that the bill goes to considerable lengths to define some concepts in some quite detailed terms. It defines begging, but it doesn\u2019t actually define rough sleeping, and I found that quite interesting, because it\u2019s not a commonly defined legal term\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b29f681b90a0157f6d68fb2c475236e4\u0022\u003ECamilla Belich\u003C/span\u003E: The Law Society asked for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ee40806ee15ee513573f2d53b7e60a6\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014in New Zealand legislation, and that came up with the Law Society\u2019s submission. Different people may actually understand it different. Is it a person sleeping in a sleeping bag, or a person sheltering overnight in a doorway, or is it a person just lying on a park bench during the day\u2014or maybe even a person sleeping in a vehicle? That might be viewed differently depending on who\u2019s actually applying the law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThis came up in the select committee\u2014concerns around the lack of a definition and the potential for inconsistencies in how these new powers could be exercised. My question to the Minster for Justice is: why has the Government chosen to define begging, freedom camping, busking, street performance, and fund-raising activities but not actually define rough sleeping when rough-sleeping is one of the principal grounds upon which a move-on order may be issued? Thank you, Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00224a33d489b6b15da0f9f042ee9db6dd43\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224a33d489b6b15da0f9f042ee9db6dd43\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:55)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just while the Minister is getting some advice on that question\u2014I think that\u2019s a really good question\u2014one of the things I do want to check is, under the Summary Offences Act, there is no definition for \u201Clawful busking\u201D or \u201Clawful street performance\u201D. What then makes it lawful? Is it lawful because they have applied for it? For example, we know that there are certain areas where there might be by-laws that you have to make an application to be able to busk. Or is lawful just simply defined as non-disruptive, in which case, how then do you define that? I do want to check with the Minister, what is considered lawful busking and lawful street performances?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do have a question around the freedom camping. My colleague Camilla Belich is absolutely correct: the definition around what this is trying to capture, or potentially the exemption, I guess, for freedom campers, is quite vague. We get the idea that you are not considered\u2014and we\u2019ll discuss that a little bit more later on\u2014or this is not applicable if you are a freedom camper, I believe. I think I remember seeing it in one of the\u2014here we go; it\u2019s in the next clause. But in terms of the definition here, I want to have a look at section 5 of the Freedom Camping Act. It\u2019s not very clear on exactly who those people are. Partly, it\u2019s living in a tent\u2014we kind of get that\u2014but, for example, living in your vehicle, but the vehicle has to be a certain distance from a Great Walk or a beach. I just find that part quite vague in terms of what that\u2019s trying to capture.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose are my two questions for the time being. One of them is what is lawful when it comes to busking and street performances, and exactly what is the policy intent? What is trying to be excluded when it comes to freedom camping. I think I will leave it to those questions for now, which is clause 4. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u002220730cab4e73933adde2eb00dca0318d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002220730cab4e73933adde2eb00dca0318d\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (20:58)\u003C/span\u003E: In response to those questions in terms of \u201Clawful\u201D: my advice is that it refers to busking and/or street performing that is included in council by-laws\u2014so if it is included in those by-laws, then it is lawful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn terms of the freedom-camping definition, all this is doing, in clause 4, is referring to the definition that\u2019s in the existing Freedom Camping Act, so it is referring to an existing definition that is already in place. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e090b1e29256caaf2229e578353441a3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I call on Camilla Belich, I do want to just say to our members that this particular clause is all about definitions, but a lot of what we\u2019re talking about in terms of references will be covered in the next part. So as long as your contribution is all about the definitions, yes, go ahead, but the substantial part is the next one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u002229471c821bedcffe65bc83e22e240a67\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002229471c821bedcffe65bc83e22e240a67\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (20:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. This is just a very quick call just to ask the Minister a specific question. I don\u2019t mind if he answers in subsequent clauses.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe only point that I don\u2019t feel\u2014maybe I didn\u2019t convey it properly, but the point around the definition of begging and the other definitions is really that when they are passed, they will form part of the definitions in the Summary Offences Act. I wanted to know specifically, has the Minister had any advice on how they may interact with existing offences within the Summary Offences Act\u2014these definitions specifically. Obviously, we can talk about how they apply to move-on orders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI didn\u2019t hear a reply to that, but I\u2019m happy if the Minister of Justice\u2019s advisers do have any specific advice, and hopefully the answer is that they\u2019re not expected to interact too much with any other offences; but because they are quite specific in what they define, I just wanted to have some clarity on that, so just a quick question on that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u0022fe081d085b9e0934e006076af9d8f65d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004817\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fe081d085b9e0934e006076af9d8f65d\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (21:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, I can give a quick answer. My advice is that there are no other references in the Act to begging.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u00221b48c4010250b9d25b05b08186e1a7e0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221b48c4010250b9d25b05b08186e1a7e0\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (21:00)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004819\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a8315132c5163b3df2bf99d8936b284b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 4 set out on Amendment Paper 794 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004826\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 55, Noes 67.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ceb6e1eca6b1796348fe2db111ca254c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new definitions into section 2(1) is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004834\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 replacing the definition of begging be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004835\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004840\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004841\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 55, Noes 67.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004842\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200b2dc153ba1a3ba9e6f342e5896d902\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Chl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 deleting \u201Crequesting or\u201D from the new definition of begging be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004843\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004844\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004845\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004846\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004847\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004848\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004849\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 51, Noes 67.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004850\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216190ab5b98dd5411d5b07e0330607b8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 deleting \u201Cfood or other goods\u201D from the new definition of begging be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004851\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004852\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004853\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004854\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004855\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004857\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c6325755a261f9321103c1893199c41a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new subparagraph (iv) into paragraph (b) of the new definition of begging, relating to owner or lease holder consent, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004858\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004859\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004860\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004861\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004862\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004863\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004864\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022060a32acce55d9e8bfe511601be11d9d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new subparagraph (iv) into paragraph (b) of the new definition of begging, relating to begging at religious buildings, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004865\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004866\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004867\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004868\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004869\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004870\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004871\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229211e5757d7292e84bcc5b4e28429dc2\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new subparagraph (iv) into paragraph (b) of the new definition of begging, relating to begging in accordance with religious practice or belief, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004872\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004873\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004874\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004875\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004876\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004877\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004878\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022984f95bb0f348e562c6a74e42bab9286\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new subparagraph (iv) into paragraph (b) of the new definition of begging, relating to begging with a sign, receptacle, or other item, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004879\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004880\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004881\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004882\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004883\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004884\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004885\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2580b881675556ca33654330d33a343\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new subparagraph (iv) into paragraph (b) of the new definition of begging, relating to requesting items to meet immediate basic needs, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004886\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004887\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004890\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004891\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004892\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3eb9e79d4939b8ec1257b185f06e552\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new subparagraph (iv) into paragraph (b) of the new definition of begging, relating to requesting assistance contacting various groups, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004893\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004894\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004895\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004896\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004897\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004898\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004899\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f56beb438b7b81bc7102fefb8e104ad\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Ricardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new subparagraph (iv) into paragraph (b) of the new definition of begging, relating to offering goods for sale or requesting donations, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004900\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004901\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004902\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004903\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004904\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004905\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004906\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002209723763f09c06cce866cea2f85a0e22\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Scott Willis\u2019 tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new subparagraph (iv) into paragraph (b) of the new definition of begging, relating to responding to a person, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004907\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004908\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004909\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004911\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004912\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004913\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022310d644e97b1fef0fb0252943b524491\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting a definition of rough sleeping into section 2(1) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004914\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004916\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004917\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004918\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004919\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004920\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat clause 4 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004921\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004922\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004923\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004924\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 4 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004926\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c87575bb75537496d0850a403ce29820\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004927\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e96ab6ba60ff305872770c321e0ab701\u0022\u003EClause 5 New sections 8A to 8I and cross-heading inserted\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004928\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e3427900111d096c3223d594eef6c170\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to clause 5. Clause 5 covers new sections 8A to 81 and the cross-heading that has been inserted. The question is that clause 5 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022c4e89ad96692f3778c22de421608ad7f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004929\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c4e89ad96692f3778c22de421608ad7f\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (21:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. We are going clause by clause through this bill, as there are no parts, but you\u2019ll notice that clause\u00A05 has substantially more clauses in it under the new clause 8 than any other part of this bill, so this is where the substantive debate will be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004930\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002226113ff721152091e27c0d561e144279\u0022\u003EHon James Meager\u003C/span\u003E: Clause 5 has one clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004931\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222782e40fe9cc9b14fcb937b27ff44cae\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Would you like to take a call?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004932\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e01f7271fd4d46b08c1e2f17fa5132b3\u0022\u003EHon James Meager\u003C/span\u003E: No, I just said clause 5 has one clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004933\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227148920b7921189017d890b91fbdc32f\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, so if you\u2014have you read the bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004934\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202b0d308d1262db5aa66ff8c3697a0fb\u0022\u003EHon James Meager\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I\u2019m looking at it right now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022437768a6dde069795cf2ea2febd36f16\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Because clause 5 is here, and then it inserts new clauses, so it inserts new clause 8A\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004936\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002228a80dc53476426d6b69ff4db287a1c8\u0022\u003EHon James Meager\u003C/span\u003E: So that\u2019s new sections.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004937\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bffc0a218b6f7ca653a0e3c956d80282\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, no, they\u2019re not sections until they\u2019re passed, Mr Meager, are they? Thank you. Thanks. I\u2019m happy to take any contributions from the other side, because I know that you would like this debate to be going on as long as possible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004938\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAnyway, there is a lot under clause 5 which does insert these new parts of the Act, so we will need to cover those in some detail. I\u2019m proposing that we move through the different parts of it as far as we possibly can. So\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004939\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea39c424e5d5313f4f0dd1d6287f17de\u0022\u003EHon James Meager\u003C/span\u003E: What\u2019s the title of clause 5? What\u2019s it called?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004940\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d63aedf01ba2696b9270e095f6ab4100\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Meager, I\u2019m happy to yield some time if you want to give a lecture on statutory interpretation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u00226879a040ffc2edef65b0f1c0a91eea69\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004941\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226879a040ffc2edef65b0f1c0a91eea69\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (21:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019d just like to read out the title of clause 5. Clause 5 says \u201CNew sections 8A to 8I and cross-heading inserted\u201D. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u002288d7d0e7fe3fddbed0273900133b934f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004942\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002288d7d0e7fe3fddbed0273900133b934f\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (21:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks very much for the intervention, Mr Meager. It\u2019s really good to know that you can read.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af05f951ec8c8259a3d310abca359e67\u0022\u003EHon James Meager\u003C/span\u003E: At least one of us can\u2014at least one of us can!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004944\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e84739b42dbcaf7f44784da8cb7e91e\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: But it\u2019s not a section unless it\u2019s passed, but it proposes to insert a new section.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004945\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd4897ec982e92e7614aecf5881ff518\u0022\u003EHon James Meager\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004946\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1c38fdbc0b7f987120ee760fa7f7f62\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: OK? I think we agree, but anyway\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004947\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d3da3f1f80bd1634cdcf11c3e7dd8d2\u0022\u003EHon James Meager\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not inserting a clause; it\u2019s inserting a section.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004948\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256c33757764bb3cdf697866f537095eb\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, look, I\u2019m happy for us to debate this all night, so if you want to take another call, I\u2019m happy to yield some time for you, but I do have some questions for the Minister, who\u2019s looking rather left out at the moment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004949\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EUnder new section 8A, inserted by clause 5, I have a question for the Minister of Justice. This is the power to issue a move-on order, and under new section 8A(1), it states, \u201CA constable may issue a move-on order to a person\u201D. I want to know: has the Minister received any advice on the type of discretion, or will the guidance to constables when they are issuing move-on orders actually cover the type of discretion that a constable should use when issuing a move-on order? Because this is kind of quite fundamental to the way that the bill will operate when it\u2019s in force, because the constables will have discretion. I know it\u2019s obviously up to the constable to decide\u2014and I assume this is the same\u2014that there is the same ability for them to think, when they would prosecute someone, that they had the same independent discretion; and I assume that\u2019s the same with issuing a move-on order, although we accept that that initial step to put forward a move-on order is different from arresting someone or initiating a prosecution. I would like to know if any guidance is going to be given in relation to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004950\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also have a question around the part in new section 8A(1) that states whether the person has engaged in, or recently engaged in, some conduct which could be subject to a move-on order. When we talk about \u201Crecently engaged\u201D, what is the time frame that the Minister expects that that would be applicable to? Would that be a situation which had just been completed? For example, if someone was sleeping and they were lying down and asleep, and then they got up immediately, would that be \u201Crecently engaged in\u201D? Or if someone had been begging that they\u2019d heard of perhaps the day before, or the week before, would that be considered \u201Crecently\u201D? What is the scope and the extent to which \u201Crecently\u201D would be considered to cover? There might perhaps be some guidance in other statutes that may elucidate that, but maybe the Minister may have some advice, so that would be helpful to know that too.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004951\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen we go down to new section 8A(1)(c), and I wanted to talk about the definition of \u201Cunreasonably\u201D. I do have some further questions around the change that has been made to \u201Cbegging\u201D, which has \u201Cunreasonable\u201D in it, not \u201Cunreasonably\u201D, but I wanted to ask some preliminary questions first on these initial clauses. When the Minister, because he\u2019s the author of this bill, talks about \u201Cunreasonably obstructing, hindering, or preventing someone from entering or leaving a place\u201D, what guidance does he have around what may be considered \u201Cunreasonably\u201D? I\u2019ve been trying to think of some examples where there might be a legitimate reason for people to prevent someone from accessing a place. Say if there was a hidden danger that they weren\u2019t aware of, the person might feel that there was some obstruction, but maybe that wouldn\u2019t be considered to be unreasonable. I just wanted to know if there\u2019s been any thought as to how that will be interpreted and would be grateful for the Minister\u2019s thoughts on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004952\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI will come back to \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D because I think that\u2019s a separate question that I won\u2019t have time for. But just while I have a few seconds, when we talk about rough sleeping, there\u2019s quite a detailed description of setting out personal possessions, and there\u2019s been some concern that, maybe, that might cover camping, festivals, that kind of thing. How is the Minister assured that those types of legitimate activities would not be covered under that definition in paragraph (f)?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u00227fb9effc33c981e749a2dca9b4fd182d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004953\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227fb9effc33c981e749a2dca9b4fd182d\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (21:24)\u003C/span\u003E: The member said that she assumed that the guidance and the usual discretion that police officers would apply in other cases would apply in this case, and that is indeed the case. They will be given some guidance on all these matters and then they will use their discretion accordingly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004954\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI want to take this opportunity, while I\u2019m on my feet, to point to the main Amendment Paper that I\u2019m making. When it was introduced, this legislation, it just referred to \u201Cbegging\u201D in the grounds for issuing a move-on order. Throughout the discussions in the Justice Committee, some parties in the select committee agreed to change that to  \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D. As Ms Belich has referred to, the National Party and the New Zealand First Party didn\u2019t support that change, but the ACT Party did. We were concerned about the enforceability of that, and so, subsequently, we\u2019ve given some further thought to the question. That\u2019s why I have Amendment Paper 804, which replaces \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D with \u201Cbegging that unreasonably interferes with the use or enjoyment of the public place by another person in the vicinity of the begging\u201D. We\u2019ve done that because we think that will be a clearer definition and will more effectively be able to be enforced by the police. I\u2019ll be making that Amendment Paper available for a vote further on, and happy to be answering any questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022 data-id=\u00223997fba0ad8bcfd390828f872b54b1d6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004955\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223997fba0ad8bcfd390828f872b54b1d6\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN (Green) (21:26)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I seek leave to correct the Green Party\u2019s votes on clause 4 for Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment set out on Amendment Paper 794, Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment replacing the definition of \u201Cbegging\u201D, and Chl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u2019s tabled amendment to be 13 votes in favour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004956\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002286b6a177ae00017d9d2a12f0a8804803\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave for that correction to be made. Are there any objections? There are none.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u0022061d400e63ddb128634a239460bfb467\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004957\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022061d400e63ddb128634a239460bfb467\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (21:26)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to ask a question about the new section 8A(1), inserted by clause 5, at the moment, and I want to ask particularly about the discretion of the constable. The use of the word \u201Cmay\u201D is permissive, and I understand that I said that the actual discretion is not necessarily a bad thing because there is a capacity to be more humane, but what I want to know is what kinds of checks and balances the Minister of Justice has or intends to put in place with regard to the use of a discretion, which could easily be used to enforce prejudice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004958\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is because that happens in life. We\u2019ve dealt with it in other laws where we\u2019ve been careful because people come with prejudices that are built in, and they don\u2019t even recognise themselves. When you\u2019re making a decision about a move-on order and whether to issue it, and the nature of what\u2019s happening in front of you in terms of reasonableness, then I would be very concerned that those baked-in prejudices turn up with statistical evidence that some people are being issued with those orders and not others. I want to know from the Minister, and I\u2019d like an actual answer to this, what thought has been put into place in terms of making sure that we are tracking who is getting these orders and who is not, and what sort of checks and balances are in place with regard to that? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d also like to ask a question about the new paragraph (f), the rough sleeping paragraph. What I want to know there is that it\u2019s actually related to the issue of the violence that we see in our society at this present time. We have a real housing crisis, a housing shortage, and we have a lot of people coming out of violent situations, often women, and sometimes\u2014more often than ever should be\u2014young people coming out of those situations, and they tend to sleep in the light in the street.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004960\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI asked the commissioner of the city mission this question in the submissions period. I said, \u201CAre you concerned that people will move from light places to dark ones because of this law and that they will be at risk of more sexual violence and violence as a result?\u201D I was told that that was a serious concern of the mission, and I\u2019ve also heard the same thing from Lifewise. So when it comes to the inclusion of rough sleeping here, I want to know if that is going to be something that is taken into account\u2014that a constable making a decision may not be the best thing to do in the circumstances. How much is the Minister expecting the constable to take into account the vulnerabilities of the person on the street and the risk to them of moving? How much is that going to happen when it comes to that discretion, and what sort of guidance have the constables been given about that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004961\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I appreciate that later on we\u2019re going to come to an amendment in the law, from 14 to 18 years, but there are a lot of vulnerable 18-year-olds out there. There are a lot of vulnerable people out there, and they tend to be the people that end up on our streets.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u0022a51f0ca56aa829fa486eb83bb64ceacb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004962\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a51f0ca56aa829fa486eb83bb64ceacb\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (21:31)\u003C/span\u003E: On the question of discretion and prejudice, obviously we back the thousands of New Zealanders of every ethnicity who are in the police force and who strive every day to do their best and do not seek to act in a prejudiced way but seek to enforce the law. We back them in doing that. Of course, the police, as part of this legislation, will be regularly reporting on their use of move-on orders, and people will no doubt be able to study those as to the extent to which those move-on orders are resisted and ignored, and people are sent before the courts. Then, obviously, the courts will have oversight of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004963\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the question about safety, obviously the Government is very concerned about public safety and that\u2019s why we\u2019ve had an absolute focus on reducing the number of victims of crime, and the good news is that we\u2019ve been making good progress on that. There are 37,000 fewer victims of violent or sexual offending since we took office, according to the latest figures. So that is very much our focus. Police make all those considerations when making move-on orders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004964\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut, of course, there are many, many things\u2014and I\u2019ll be getting very repetitive if I keep reminding the committee of this\u2014and this legislation is not designed to be the Government\u2019s sole response to homelessness and the many other problems that people confront and face. There are many, many other things that the Government does on behalf of New Zealanders to help those who are in need, and we have huge resources devoted to those. This legislation is about giving the police an extra tool to deal with behaviours that are creating a sense of dysfunction and chaos in our CBDs and in our town squares so we can reclaim those areas for the benefit of those who live and work there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u002247c5895d182a9f6efe6871eabe02638f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004965\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002247c5895d182a9f6efe6871eabe02638f\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (21:34)\u003C/span\u003E: That last sentence from the Minister is actually what I was going to ask about, because my understanding of the intent behind this bill is to address the issue of people rough sleeping or begging in the central city, within the CBD. However, section 8A(1), in clause 5, is in relation to conduct in a public place, which is incredibly broad. My question to the Minister in relation to that is why not define that to add some parameters around where this actually applies?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004966\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs the Minister knows, there are public places everywhere and this isn\u2019t targeted to the area that he has talked about so often when he\u2019s talked about this bill and who it is designed to, apparently, be for. So why did the Minister not consider adding some parameters around that? And because this is about a public place, did he consider that if you moved a person on, if there were sufficient numbers of constables who chose to enforce this against every single person who was rough sleeping in this country, everywhere, not just in the city spaces, that that would move people out of public spaces and into private places? In terms of people who are rough sleeping and squatting in abandoned buildings, which are private property, did he think about the implications of people moving from public spaces into private property?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004967\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other question I have\u2014and this is still on section 8A(1)\u2014is around the term \u201Cengaging in, or has recently engaged in\u201D and this is about the behaviours listed. I think \u201Cengaging\u201D is an interesting term, and I am keen to hear what the Minister\u2019s and his advisers\u2019 definition of \u201Cengaging\u201D is because when you look at rough sleeping, for example, engaging is a word that seems to imply an intent\u2014you\u2019re engaged in something; you are participating in the thing. But rough sleeping could be as  simple as falling asleep.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004968\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI had a genuine example of that recently at one of my events where a homeless person came along and fell asleep in a chair, a young person, and we were all kind of going, \u201CIs this person all right?\u201D only to find out that they had fallen asleep because they were tired. And that is kind of the point. If you engage in an activity\u2014I don\u2019t know if anyone ever says, \u201CI\u2019m going to engage in a sleep.\u201D\u2014there is an intentionality behind the word \u201Cengaging\u201D, which I don\u2019t think is captured when you are rough sleeping. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004969\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHomeless people are running on adrenaline because they have no shelter, because they are in a public place, because they are constantly under threat, because they are trying to avoid conflict with all the people and all the politics that might be happening on the streets, and they might not actually choose where they fall asleep. When we think about the people who are older or disabled and might be rough sleeping, they might not choose to fall asleep in a particular place. If someone who doesn\u2019t have fixed accommodation was sitting outside a business on a park bench or a street bench outside a shop and they fell asleep there by chance, they didn\u2019t necessarily engage in any particular behaviour. They just fell asleep. I think that what a lot of the submitters were trying to capture when it came to rough sleeping was that rough sleeping is sleeping. It is something that everybody does, that every human being has to do. The \u201Crough\u201D component is where you do it. If you don\u2019t have fixed accommodation and you simply fall asleep, this bill means you\u2019re committing a crime. So can the Minster talk to us about how he and his officials came to the word \u201Cengaging\u201D and how someone could ever be engaging in sleeping. It simply doesn\u2019t make any sense.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004970\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing I wanted to talk about is section 8A(1)(a), which mentions behaving in a manner that is disorderly, intimidating, or threatening. Can the Minister talk to us about the term \u201Cintimidating\u201D? What you might find intimidating or what he might find intimidating , and what I might find intimidating, and what everybody in this room might find intimidating could be completely different. For example, he might be walking down the street and see someone with a hoodie pulled up and be intimidated. Is that intimidating? What guidelines would the police, who are enforcing this law, develop in order to determine whether something is intimidating or not? I\u2019m really keen to understand what \u201Cintimidating\u201D means. Also, what is the threshold that makes it criminal? You could ask\u2014and I know the Minister knows this because he would have engaged with lots of violence prevention organisations and advocates when he was developing the stalking law. What a young woman might find intimidating might be not completely unsafe. It\u2019s subjective. It\u2019s a subjective term. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004971\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo what we\u2019re trying to do is clarify\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004972\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002292778105cb91edccec31c65db1ad7ba6\u0022\u003EHon Paul Goldsmith\u003C/span\u003E: You were very happy with it with the stalking legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004973\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227aa85ba9373d47fd916b6ecac420ea89\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: You can answer when you take a call, Minister. I\u2019m still asking my question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004974\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat are the guidelines by which these police officers will define \u201Cintimidating\u201D? It\u2019s not good enough to stand up and say, \u201COh, well, I have faith in the hard-working thousands of people who are in the police.\u201D\u2014that\u2019s not good enough, because this process is to determine what those people, actually, do in real life. So to stand up and give these broad-brush statements that provide no legal clarity, since the Minister\u2019s such a big fan of legal clarity\u2014Treaty of Waitangi clauses\u2014then, maybe, he should tell us what that means, so that it is clear for police officers, so that, if any those police officers end up in trouble, or end up before the courts because their decision to classify something as \u201Cdisorderly, \u2026 intimidating, or threatening\u201D, is challenged, they\u2019re not going to have a leg to stand on. They won\u2019t be very happy with the Minister because he didn\u2019t want to stand up and tell us what \u201Cintimidating\u201D means. While he was at it, he could have explained what \u201Cdisorderly\u201D and \u201Cthreatening\u201D is. Sure he might say, \u201Cit\u2019s based on case law\u201D\u2014go for it; just an answer would be awesome.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004975\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other question that I had was in relation to new clause 8A(1)(b), which is about \u201Cbehaving in a manner that is disruptive\u201D. What does \u201Cdisruptive\u201D mean in this sense as well? Does that include people who are protesting outside of a store? Because, in Wellington, Cuba Street, Left Bank, there are constantly protests outside of there. Does that behaviour\u2014will those protestors be moved on? Sometimes they\u2019re really small protests. Sometimes they\u2019re only three or four people\u2014do those people get captured within the manner that is disruptive? Who defines what is \u201Cdisruptive\u201D? This is the problem with the bill, that we\u2019re going to be having\u2014we\u2019re going to have to spend a lot of time on this. Because it is so vague, because it is so unclear , we\u2019re just going to have to keep asking\u2014even if we have to ask what each and every single word means\u2014because it is so uncertain. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004976\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other question that I had, actually, in relation to the answer that the Minister gave previously around his Amendment Paper that he\u2019s introduced, which changes \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D to \u201Cbegging\u201D\u2014da, da, da, the bits he\u2019s added on\u2014can he explain what the difference is, practically, between the application of \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D and this new phrasing, which is \u201Cbegging that unreasonably interferes with the use or enjoyment of the public place by another person in the vicinity of the begging.\u201D I would really appreciate knowing the difference between that sentence and \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u0022ec6c0aed584c3bd65489b673c4b356d7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004977\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ec6c0aed584c3bd65489b673c4b356d7\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (21:42)\u003C/span\u003E: Right. There was a lot in that 10 minutes. In terms of \u201Cfalling asleep\u201D\u2014and that\u2019s something that I\u2019m sure is on the mind of many members at the moment\u2014of course, that is the purpose of the move-on orders, in the sense that it may be that some person may fall asleep, and they are not subject, of course, to any criminal liability. What we\u2019re providing here is the tool; that the police officer could wake them up and tell them to move on, and there is no great suffering on the part of the person involved other than to move, which may be inconvenient, it may be not what they want to do, but it is not the most difficult thing in the world. So it\u2019s only the refusal to follow that order that creates any liability.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004978\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the definition, the definition of \u201Cintimidating\u201D\u2014for example\u2014that is well-defined by the courts, and we\u2019ll be referring to those, no doubt: intending to cause and instil fear in order to influence conduct. I do find it very interesting that the member did make the point that some people will find behaviour intimidating, which others wouldn\u2019t find intimidating. And she did refer to the stalking legislation. I do find it fascinating that that member was very supportive of the stalking legislation, which has subjective things like \u201Cfear\u201D and \u201Cdistress\u201D\u2014very subjective\u2014and she was very happy to support those. But, of course, she\u2019s not happy to support these, which are something that can be handled by the courts. So that\u2019s an interesting difference that we\u2019re seeing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004979\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo all I\u2019m saying is, in terms of \u201Cif somebody was to fall asleep\u201D, then the worst that can happen is that they could be woken by the police officer and then invited to move on\u2014and then the relations of the Act would take place. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004980\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd so the definitions of \u201Cintimidation\u201D, \u201Cdisruptive\u201D\u2014all those things have case law definitions that have been developed over time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022262cd959713ec516ab700140f004eaab\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004981\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022262cd959713ec516ab700140f004eaab\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (21:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the opportunity. I do note my colleague Dan Rosewarne is very keen to take a call. So I just note that for the Chair\u2019s information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004982\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMy colleague Tamatha Paul has moved on to \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D and I will now, too. This is a big subject because this is a change from the original bill. We talked a little bit about\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004983\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d573e4de3f6d93db909e414e5140bb5f\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: Last-minute amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225490974c65f61cf5422a32fb8b52ecad\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014that\u2019s right, a last-minute amendment\u2014we talked a little bit about this in the definition of \u201Cbegging\u201D, but I want to go into a little bit more now what the Minister of Justice is proposing. I have to say the Labour Party will not be supporting the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper, and I wanted to outline why that is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004985\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason is because I think what the Justice Committee put in place is a stronger and more robust definition of \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D compared to what the Minister has put in place, and I can go through the reasons for that. The reasons for that is not only do we have a change of the definition of \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D from \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D to, as Tamatha Paul said, \u201Cbegging that unreasonably interferes with the use or enjoyment of a public place by another person in the vicinity of the begging\u201D, which is, you know, on a plain-language test, probably not as good as \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D\u2014it is more descriptive. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004986\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I note that also there have been subsequent deletions. If we\u2019re looking at the primary bill here, 8A(1B) has been deleted by the Amendment Paper. That provides the detailed information of what might be considered to be \u201Cunreasonable begging\u201D. This has actually got a basis in case law, so it\u2019s important to understand why I think that this is not the right approach to take. This is really helpful because it says, for a constable, it allows them to have regard to the \u201Ctime at which the begging is occurring or occurred; the duration of the begging; where the begging is occurring or occurred; the effect of the person\u2019s begging on the enjoyment of public spaces \u2026 in the vicinity of the begging.\u201D That is very descriptive. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004987\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EInterestingly, we\u2019ve got\u2014and I don\u2019t think we\u2019ve referred to this before\u2014a second vet by the Attorney-General, under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, and that was only tabled, I think, on the 15\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E\u2014it\u2019s still the 15\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E, so today, in parliamentary terms. This was really interesting because this bill\u2014actually, what we asked for at select committee, was \u201Ccan we understand if the amendments that we\u2019re making at select committee seek to mitigate the concerns that were raised around the breaches of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act by\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004988\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe4b781cbe1b791192165b1bd1788ed0\u0022\u003EHon Paul Goldsmith\u003C/span\u003E: And it has.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004989\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220197a7883befbab55b9ca7028acf77a1\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Pardon me, Minister?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004990\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224be275b3be6fbad6a0551f5598275933\u0022\u003EHon Paul Goldsmith\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, and it has.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004991\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002271dfe92d86f50a8327014811bfc6a9ab\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, we asked that question at select committee and we\u2014regretfully, due to the way that parliamentary advice happens, the Ministry of Justice told us they\u2019re unable to give legal advice. So I was actually going to say, it was actually quite helpful to have this set out in this way by the Attorney-General, so I do thank him for providing this. It\u2019s quite unusual. I don\u2019t know if I\u2019ve seen that before\u2014a view on an Amendment Paper\u2014but, actually, it\u2019s what we requested at select committee and it is helpful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004992\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason I raise it\u2014also for the committee to be aware that it exists\u2014is the Attorney-General specifically addresses, in his Amendment Paper, whether the change to the definition, as proposed by the Minister, would still alleviate the New Zealand Bill of Rights concerns. In paragraph nine of his opinion he states that he considers that the courts could be able to consider the factors that have been removed by the Amendment Paper. He says\u2014and I quote\u2014\u201CI consider that the courts will interpret \u2018unreasonably interferes\u2019 as including these factors and constables can be expected to exercise their discretion to issue move-on orders consistently by considering these and any other relevant factors.\u201D So, essentially, the Attorney-General is stating that, in his view, even though the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper has deleted 8A(1B) that these should be considered by constables in a practical sense when they consider whether to issue a move-on order for unreasonable begging. So that is quite an interesting perspective that the Attorney-General has indicated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004993\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EEssentially, the Attorney-General is stating that, in his view, even though the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper has deleted new section 8A(1B), these should be considered by constables in a practical when they consider whether to issue a move-on order for unreasonable begging. That is quite an interesting perspective that the Attorney-General has indicated. Essentially, the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper has deleted a clause, and the Attorney General says, \u201CBut we still envisage that constables will take those into account.\u201D The reason that the Attorney-General states that he thinks that that should still be taken into account is actually because of a Supreme Court decision in \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EBrooker\u003C/span\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003E v Police\u003C/span\u003E where they looked at disorderly behaviour and the right to freedom of expression, and the Supreme Court of New Zealand applied the factors of time, place, and duration to find out if it was reasonable or not in terms of the behaviour. My question to the Minister\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd2c9c3aa7974099bfcaac8ea7452994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225fecf72c0c5238623ac7544081809beb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just ask members on my right\u2014the Minister wants to hear the contribution\u2014on the chatting. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004995\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0cea3e9531376ec3c05875e26df64fa\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. The question that I have for the Minister is: does he agree with the Attorney-General\u2019s view that despite the deletion of new section\u00A08A(1B) in his Amendment Paper, in fact the constables issuing a move-on order should consider those factors before issuing a move-on order? That\u2019s quite important. The other reasons that I don\u2019t consider that the Minister\u2019s paper is an improvement on what the select committee did is because of the other clauses that it deletes. Those come up a little bit later, so I might leave those for now, but, essentially, I do think that is an important question to have on the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E. Does the Minister agree with the Attorney-General around those deletions? Is he expecting constables to still consider those factors prior to the issuing of a move-on order?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224ee4471ecdcf4eeda5bd6179167372f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022be5111e8da54d722b09f597f862eab4b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004996\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224ee4471ecdcf4eeda5bd6179167372f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022be5111e8da54d722b09f597f862eab4b\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (21:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you for picking me, Madam Chair; it\u2019s much appreciated. I\u2019m really interested to hear the Minister of Justice\u2019s responses to Camilla Belich\u2019s questions. I just want to also just touch on clause 5, new section 8A(1) just around the \u201Creasonable grounds to suspect\u201D. What strikes me about new section 8A(1) is that it\u2019s not based on a finding that an offence has occurred or even a prosecution or conviction. Instead, it rests on the constable having reasonable grounds to suspect that conduct is occurring or has recently occurred. This is, therefore, a preventative power rather than a traditional enforcement power. Because it is the foundation on which the rest of this bill or this regime sits, it\u2019s important that Parliament understands\u2014or we all understand\u2014exactly how it is intended to operate. My question to the Minister is: could the Minister explain why \u201Creasonable grounds to suspect\u201D is an appropriate threshold for restricting a person\u2019s ability to remain in, or return to, a public place for up to 24\u00A0hours, and what safeguards exist to ensure that the power is exercised consistently across the country and appropriately?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u002291e876340bbe5c8869d74f95e90b8f65\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004997\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002291e876340bbe5c8869d74f95e90b8f65\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (21:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I was asked to comment on the Attorney-General\u2019s section 7 report on this legislation and whether I agree with it. I\u2019m looking at paragraph 13, the conclusion that the Attorney-General considers that the bill as proposed to be amended by the Justice Committee and the Amendment Paper\u2014that\u2019s my Amendment Paper\u2014would no longer appear to be inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. I agree with that conclusion, and I\u2019m pleased about it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004998\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0f084b24de256b1ae375f5b87b41e52\u0022\u003ECamilla Belich\u003C/span\u003E: What about the other parts? What about his reasoning?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0004999\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca670030f7e03e0845e3e97e9a28ded0\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I mean, he\u2019s made various comments, and people can draw conclusions from them. The Amendment Paper, I believe, provides a more objective standard for police to apply, instead of relying on a list of factors. The police will take consideration of those factors, such as the time, place, and duration into account as part of their operational guidance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022a4ed900863182813c0f9d0e4c4a6275a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a4ed900863182813c0f9d0e4c4a6275a\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (21:55)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do want you to pick up on some of the stuff around what has been removed in Amendment Paper\u00A0804, but, this is my first call for clause 5. I do want to touch on a few additional questions and responses from the Minister of Justice. First of all, the point that my colleague Tamatha Paul is trying to make in and around intimidation is not about the test that we\u2019re looking at it. We\u2019re simply looking at the clarity around what is to be expected when a constable is making a determination on what they find intimidating. Again, different people, like the Minister said and like my colleague Tamatha Paul said and Camilla Belich said, might perceive that differently, so we\u2019re just simply asking for clarity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen we\u2019re looking at new sections 8A(1)(c) and (f)\u2014actually, no, I\u2019ll go to (1)(f) when it comes to rough sleeping\u2014it specifically states \u201Ca public place\u201D. Now, if we\u2019re looking at, let\u2019s say, Auckland CBD and if you look at the place where I used to work on K Road, we had a tall building with a massive eave in the front. We had homeless wh\u0101nau sleeping underneath that because it\u2019s sheltered from the wind. They set up their own little corner. They have dogs and they have pot plants. It\u2019s very pretty. They decorate it very well. That\u2019s not a public place, even though it is open air. That is the property of my building. So, as the property manager of that building, I would not appreciate if the police then come and move someone on, because they\u2019re not in a public place; they are in a private place. In those instances\u2014can I just check?\u2014do constables have jurisdiction to move someone on from a private property? By extension, if we\u2019re looking at places, such as shops, leaving a place where there\u2019s lawful trade or business, a little alcove where there might be the entrance to a cafe\u2014those are all private properties. In those cases, would the constable or the police be given explicit guidance that, in those areas, they actually have no jurisdiction then to move people on? I think that is an important clarification we\u2019re seeking from the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, moving on to the Amendment Paper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba4e6e4e40b5164b5471b6184a6fc59e\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EMoving on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289453ae74e7b475623c96b6aada50736\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, moving on to Amendment Paper 804, I understand where the Minister\u2019s coming from. What we are looking at is the removal of new section\u00A08A(1B), in this case. What is being deleted in (1B)\u2014I just want to check because I think I heard the Minister correctly that that is now going to be built in as a part of the general guidelines for the police when it comes to the duration of begging and all of those.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI do want to check, because we have kind of asked this question before\u2014we\u2019re looking at new section 8A(2). In there, it does specify 24 hours, but, again, it doesn\u2019t specify\u2014and this is the question we\u2019ve been asking since the beginning of the debate, and we haven\u2019t really got any clarity on\u2014what the distance is and how far they are expected to be moved on before they are considered to be in violation of that move-on order? Is that going to be regionally dependent? Is that going to be a by-law that\u2019s expected? Is that going to depend on the individual constable? Would the order itself specify that you need to be further than 500 metres from this particular location? Again, this is a clarifying question, I think, that we haven\u2019t really got any sort of response to from the Minister. I will leave it at those questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u002241abdcfd557a9abb227a0084d20d3298\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002241abdcfd557a9abb227a0084d20d3298\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (21:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I can provide some clarification for the member. These move-on orders will only apply in public places. If someone is in a private place, then that is a matter for the owner of that property. If they were of a mind to, they could apply trespass legislation in that place, but if you\u2019re at a private place, that\u2019s over to the owner of the property to deal with it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThat is why we\u2019re doing this, of course, so that if you\u2019re trying to operate a business and people are lined up on the public pavement in front of the office, yelling at people as they\u2019re trying to sort of go about their business and potentially come in and buy a cup of coffee or do whatever they needed to do, then that would be an appropriate thing for a move-on order. But if it\u2019s in private property, not so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b20110dfd4fc03bfa164fe503c1f1421\u0022\u003EHon Members: \u003C/span\u003EMadam Chair! Madam Chair!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226ff2330d4deb731d366499d5c4d1a145\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Crikey! Let me get settled!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u00226a410c0175428f06c97532de7162555e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226a410c0175428f06c97532de7162555e\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (22:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. In the spirit of what should happen here, which is a little bit of conversation about this, I would like to just take the point that the Minister the Hon Paul Goldsmith made. Isn\u2019t it a likely unintended consequence of this piece of legislation that people will move\u2014particularly we\u2019re talking about rough sleeping. I don\u2019t want to blend in the issue of behaviour which is noisy, etc., but with rough sleeping, aren\u2019t they likely to move from public spaces into private ones? So, for example, I have several places in my area where people can break in and they can go and sleep because they are buildings that are unused. Aren\u2019t they likely to move into buildings, etc., rather than being in those spaces? Haven\u2019t we just moved the problem somewhere else?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, we\u2019ve heard discussions about that\u2014about the problem moving from one place to another\u2014that simply by moving people on, that\u2019s exactly what you\u2019re doing. But should people be concerned that, in fact, what is now going to happen is that people are going to rough sleep in derelict buildings, etc., rather than in open spaces? It\u2019s a really genuine question, because if it happens, I\u2019d like to be able to hold this Government to account for that. Because that wouldn\u2019t necessarily be something that the community was expecting. We\u2019ve seen it with other things where crimes have been moved, etc., and disorder moved, but particularly rough sleeping, because rough sleeping is not subject to the rationale that the Minister just gave, which was about making a lot of noise\u2014it\u2019s not; it\u2019s people sleeping. So could you answer that question, please? Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u00223c628451ad30228f82bfad8c4fcd916d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223c628451ad30228f82bfad8c4fcd916d\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (22:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, just in reply to that question: yes, a lot of thought has been given to the implications of where people are to be moved on to and whether that will lead to a different outcome. Of course, the primary outcome that we want to see is people not rough sleeping in public places and overall creating a sense of disorder in our main streets. As I\u2019ve said, and I\u2019m repeating myself again and again in this debate, which is to say that this legislation has never been designed to be our full Government response to the issue of homelessness. There are many, many other things that we do as a Government on behalf of New Zealanders who have a deep concern about those who are struggling in our society. That is why we invest billions of dollars in housing support in many, many respects. So, yes, it\u2019s an ongoing task to deal with those behaviours, but this legislation is not designed to solve all those problems, it is to provide the police with an extra tool to be able to deal with a real and practical problem that we face.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022aa9c2e7290af8d959c1ebc7c5be5bc10\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aa9c2e7290af8d959c1ebc7c5be5bc10\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (22:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ac69ad91c85cb20d2af5d8130bc21fd\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227cf4d54a7f14f1537979dda67cd8d682\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I won\u2019t be doing cartwheels, just to remind the Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220514eab7a16ff75430a6189892f7befc\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: You won\u2019t be doing what, sorry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a379a8d41df8d71a9dd2a91876c0bf2\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Cartwheels, as we discussed before, because it\u2019s hard to\u2014I\u2019m sorry, my bad, Madam Chair. I just want to check, the Minister has kind of opened the discussion for the debate because he\u2019s talking about investment of billions of dollars into other things. Can I seek your clarification, Madam Chair, if we can now start wrapping some of those investments into the discussion of this bill, since the Minister has broadened the scope?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f9707c328fc345d28f89e649f27e1ff3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: No, we\u2019re sticking to clause 5 of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u00223d90146ed55a5c946e817ac009ff35e5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223d90146ed55a5c946e817ac009ff35e5\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (22:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just for your information, which I know that you will know, but perhaps some colleagues on the other side of the Chamber don\u2019t, that we\u2019ve got several parts to clause 5 that we have not yet discussed at all\u2014several pages we haven\u2019t covered: page 4, page 5, page 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e533dfb9d1c2eacd654363b2f71d7a4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I can read, yeah.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260158d4da813a1eec21e33ab7ed98ae7\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, no, that was mainly for your colleagues\u2019 benefit, Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002257954c7d39a888a9d43e2965da7707db\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re addressing me, though.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022001d62ec12cd3baf00c9bf41979b951c\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, yes. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I do have some further questions, was my point, and some further issues to raise, which haven\u2019t been touched on. The first thing that I wanted to raise, just in respect of the rough sleeping, before I move on from that particular part in new section 8F inserted by clause 5. Now, I did have a question for the Minister of Justice around types of situations, because we don\u2019t have a definition of rough sleeping in this bill. This has been raised by the Law Society and it was raised in the definition section. But the reason that we\u2019re asking about this now in new section 8F is because it\u2019s not clear exactly what it covers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo my question was: would it cover a situation where you might have people who were setting up for a festival or we have freedom camping excluded, but we don\u2019t have generalised camping? I do think it\u2019s important for the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E and for the record for the Minister to clarify exactly what he means in this bill when it comes to rough sleeping. I think that\u2019s really important, and I don\u2019t think we\u2019ve had a clear answer to that yet. We do have setting up possessions and makeshift shelters. I think there\u2019s an amendment that my colleague the Hon Dr Duncan Webb has around specifically excluding things like tents and camping and that kind of thing. I think that\u2019s important, I won\u2019t ask further questions on it, but it\u2019d be nice to have a response from the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen I do want to move over now to the part that is entitled \u201CRequirement to leave specified area\u201D in new section 8A(2), inserted by clause 5. Now, this is when a move-on order is issued and it specifies to leave a public place, but one of the changes that we made at the Justice Committee was to make it a \u201Creasonable distance away\u201D. So we\u2019ve taken \u201Cspecified distance\u201D, we\u2019ve made it \u201Creasonable distance\u201D, and we\u2019ve also added that into subsection (2)(b)(ii). I wanted to ask the Minister\u2014and, obviously, this is a question that he may be able to get some guidance from officials\u2014if they\u2019re going to be any constraints in relation to \u201Creasonable\u201D, because that is a new part of this section, and what exactly is meant by that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, I wondered if it is OK now to come to what was quite a big issue in the discussion of the bill but hasn\u2019t yet been touched on in its substantive section, and that is that there\u2019s been a change from the bill as it was originally introduced to exclude those aged 14 to 17 years old. That\u2019s under section\u2014scared to use language now, in case someone criticises me. But the heading is, \u201CWho move-on order may be issued to\u201D. It states that it may only be up to 18-year-olds. The issue here was that we had quite a lot of information in select committee that there was a discrepancy and a contradiction between the ability of police to utilise move-on orders for children and the Oranga Tamariki Act. We also had a reluctance from police to utilise a move-on order when dealing with children, which I think is absolutely fair enough.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to understand, this is a significant back-down by this Government. It\u2019s a significant change in policy. I\u2019ve asked the Minister a number of times why he included children originally. Every time I\u2019ve asked him about it, he\u2019s said he believes that children should be covered that are of the criminal age, which is the definition which is included in here\u2014criminal age of responsibility. He\u2019s backed down on this. I want to understand why he\u2019s decided to do that and the reasoning\u2014whether it was the Oranga Tamariki Act, whether it was a reflection that he was wrong. I think it\u2019s important to know why there has been this quite significant policy change, which I think is the right decision and I\u2019m supportive of it, but it\u2019d be good to know the Minister\u2019s reasoning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u00227915139b19ca073635b246af852b4693\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227915139b19ca073635b246af852b4693\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (22:09)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll just say to the member that, quite often, members will try and persuade members from the other side of the House as to their arguments, and they\u2019ll make a case, and other people will make a case in submissions; in this case, around young people, that there were very good reasons for not including them in the legislation.  We, as a Government, listened to those submissions, and we decided, on balance, that, yes, they made more sense.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, to describe that in a pejorative term such as \u201Cback-down\u201D I don\u2019t think is necessarily helpful to the overall business of Parliament. The process was that we started out with some legislation where, yes, we went firm because we were determined to reclaim our town squares for the benefit of people who live there and work there and visit, but we heard the submissions on this matter and we thought, on balance, that it made sense, and so we\u2019ve made the change. I wouldn\u2019t describe that as a back-down; I would describe that as democracy in action\u2014and I think that was all. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022698a5521c3c3b4e37adc2a61e86a5cef\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022698a5521c3c3b4e37adc2a61e86a5cef\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (22:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do wish to move on a little bit, noting that my colleagues may have questions, but it\u2019s clear from some of the responses that we are not going to get a straightforward clarification from the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to check with the Minister around new section 8B in clause 5, and so I am moving to new section 8B at this stage, which is on page 4 of this bill. This is to do with when we\u2019re looking at the service of a move-on order. I want to check: in that instance, yes, we have a list of possible methods that the constable is able to use to serve a move-on order under new section 8B(2)(a), (b), and (c), but can I just check that if the constable said \u201CHere is a move-on order.\u201D and they serve it to the person, but the person is already leaving the area, would the move-on order still be in effect? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne would assume that when you are being moved on, or when a person leaves, you are going from one specific location in a public place to another specific location in a public place, but what happens if the person moves from a public place to a private place? How, then, would that move-on order take effect?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFollowing on from that particular scenario, if a constable is approaching someone or has a discussion with someone with the intention to issue a move-on order, but the person moves to a private space, then you can no longer issue a move-on order, and instead you would be expecting whoever is the resident of that private place to then either call the constable or issue a trespass order. Based on what the Minister said before that this is only applicable to public places and if you are in private places, you have the option of issuing a trespass order, I\u2019m just thinking, again, how many people would then move between the liminal spaces of public and private places? That\u2019s my question to the Minister around new section 8B.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u002213217853753fc9a8e4e803af3494b4a7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002213217853753fc9a8e4e803af3494b4a7\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (22:13)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019ll also move to a separate section that we haven\u2019t discussed yet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust before we get to new section 8B in clause 5, I just had a final question around quite an important part of this bill, which is the exclusion where there is a political purpose to the conduct\u2014for example, I\u2019m thinking of a sit-in or a demonstration. When I lived in London, there was a big protest outside St Paul\u2019s Cathedral which was Occupy London, and they had a lot of tents and things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m assuming that the purpose of the restriction from and exclusion of move-on orders is if there\u2019s a point of view, a cause, or a campaign, and I just wanted to ask the Minister: does he see it as being quite a wide and loose test if there\u2019s some kind of political or protest element to it and the move-on orders wouldn\u2019t apply? I do think that\u2019s an important characterisation of this bill, and it is one that I agree with. I don\u2019t think move-on orders should apply to political protests.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, moving on to new section 8B\u2014which has just been discussed a little bit by my colleague Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2014I just wanted to note that there is a provision in new section 8B(2)(c) which requires the \u201Cexpress consent\u201D of an individual before providing a move-on order electronically. We haven\u2019t mentioned it, but there was a provision earlier in the bill\u2014which we\u2019ve now gone past\u2014that talks about the fact that it has to be in writing. But there is a need for an express consent for the move-on order to be sent electronically in terms of the service of it, and I wanted to know: has the Minister had any advice on what express consent would include? Is it simply verbal consent, or would it be also required in writing, or not? What would that exactly mean?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of new section 8B(3), there\u2019s a provision here that requires an explanation before sending the order, and what I wanted to know is: because this is a specific requirement and a separate limb of the bill, how will that be recorded? Will there be a requirement for a constable who is serving a move-on order electronically to record the way in which that explanation of the order has been given, because it is a specific explanation. It\u2019s quite detailed, the process that the constable has to go through here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust jumping slightly back but still in new section 8B, I had a question around the word \u201Cimmediately\u201D. A constable has to \u201Cimmediately\u201D serve the person with the move-on order, and it\u2019d be good to get an answer on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI can leave it there. I do have some questions, probably, moving on to new section 8C in clause 5, but I\u2019ll just see if the Minister wishes to answer any of those questions\u2014yes, he does.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u0022834e32872e0119789b37ecaab4324b38\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022834e32872e0119789b37ecaab4324b38\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (22:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. There are a couple of questions in there from Ms Belich, but first I\u2019ll go to the one from Lawrence Xu-Nan. It was a question around where a person is leaving an area from public to private: once the order is served, it is in effect until the specific time expires.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen there were questions from Camilla Belich around new section 8A(5) on protest and campaign activities and how wide this would be. You would interpret the section as widely as to protect the lawful right to protest and campaign, which are legitimate activities in a democratic society, and which this subsection (5) protects. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen there were some further questions around what express consent includes. It can include oral consent to receive the electronic notice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen there was a question on what \u201Cimmediately after\u201D means in new section 8B(1). It means in the moments immediately following the issuing of a move-on order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u0022c614da308db211e27803326671f2b125\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c614da308db211e27803326671f2b125\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (22:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Minister, for those answers. We were just saying that it\u2019s very refreshing to just have answers without all the attitude, so thank you for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6733591907339f0d9e3dd2372840e25\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Maybe we can just have questions without the attitude.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022778d10820924c0a97f93535de7459e51\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: Touch\u00E9, Madam Chair\u2014touch\u00E9. All right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnyway, I know we have asked a few questions about the age thing. It was a big point raised by a lot of submitters, but I will ask questions that haven\u2019t been asked yet around the age moving up to 18 for this bill, and I just have some pretty straightforward questions. Knowing that a lot of people under 18 don\u2019t have a form of ID that verifies their age\u2014and I\u2019m guessing if they are rough sleeping or begging, they definitely won\u2019t have a passport or, potentially, a driver\u2019s licence\u2014I just wanted to ask: if an officer is unsure about what the age is of a young person, what tools might they use to determine the age before being able to serve a notice, if that person is over 18? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen the other question I had in relation to the age is this. I do appreciate that we did change the age within the select committee process due, I think\u2014to put it most simply\u2014to the vulnerability of people aged 14 to 17. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just wanted to know whether officials or the Minister considered other forms of vulnerability, and what people who are rough sleeping or homeless or begging might be experiencing in terms of, potentially, disabilities. They might have intellectual disabilities or physical disabilities, such as things like fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, which is a disability that does make someone incredibly vulnerable, and vulnerabilities around their safety. So I am just trying to consider vulnerability in the broader sense of the term, and, when the Minister was deciding to support that change in age due to the vulnerability of young people, whether they might have considered other ways that people might be vulnerable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u00228935f471402442f93cdd8b44a41ea4c2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228935f471402442f93cdd8b44a41ea4c2\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (22:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m of the view that you earn the right to have attitude in this place, and some of that comes from longevity, and I certainly haven\u2019t been here long enough to express any attitude. So I\u2019ll answer the questions as straightly and succinctly as I can.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3cbd14483378ea53d33fc8b718427a2\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Didn\u2019t you just do that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b464e1d8528855997682460859e96846\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha! There\u2019s a question around how will ID be proven or given by police. The police use their existing tools and operating procedures to interact with individuals to determine their age, as is operationally appropriate, and the police have a range of information and tools with which they can do that. Where an individual is under the age of 18, the obligations under the Oranga Tamariki Act apply, so that\u2019s the reason for the age limit being put in place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b689d335ab8f994c715b96df9caa0d42\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ve got a little bit to go yet. Camilla Belich.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022c679e9eb9afbe3ba8e14f047097de333\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c679e9eb9afbe3ba8e14f047097de333\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (22:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate that, and we\u2019re trying to move through these new parts. My very last question on new section 8B, inserted by clause 5, was that I recalled that the Law Society had a submission to put in an amendment to this section, which was, I think, based on the experience in Western Australia. They had a suggestion to put an amendment in which was based on the Western Australian Criminal Investigation Act. In their equivalent to move-on orders, they have a provision which states that police officers need to consider, when issuing a move-on order, the person\u2019s personal safety and their ability to access places where they usually reside. I think probably the main question I have is around personal safety, because we do have a clause which addresses some of the other aspects of their submission. So I wondered if the Minister in the chair, the Hon James Meager, would be open to the idea of having an amendment where police officers have to consider personal safety.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason I suggest that is a really compelling argument against move-on orders, specifically for rough sleepers, was the aspect of being safe in a public place. That was especially for women, because often where there were lights and CCTV cameras and the ability to be recorded and safe and visible, the evidence that we received is they often felt more safe. While we\u2019re looking, just before we move to new section 8C, I just wanted to know if, in section 8B, the Minister would think about having to consider that, because if you\u2019re moving a female homeless person on and they\u2019re not allowed to be in a brightly lit public place, that is a safety concern, and that\u2019s the evidence that we heard. So I thought that was a really good point that they raised.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I wanted to suggest, moving on to 8C: I do believe there probably are some on the Table, but another amendment that was suggested at the Justice Committee but didn\u2019t end up being picked up was when we look at section 8C(1) and detaining the person for a time that\u2019s \u201Creasonably necessary\u201D. We did have some submissions stating that there should be a time limit for that so it wouldn\u2019t be as reasonably necessary, and that was an extension of time that could go on for ever as long as it was reasonable, and that maybe we had 15 minutes or an hour. So I thought those were actually really sensible suggestions, and I wanted to know whether the Minister would be open to accepting one of those amendments to have just a kind of a time period so that someone wasn\u2019t being detained. I think there is a term, \u201Cunreasonable imprisonment\u201D, which is a common law type of imprisonment. Helen White may remind me, but that\u2019s, if I recall, from law school. If you don\u2019t have a genuine reason\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c9ef348c1ca271a509bc7bcfbf9bf18\u0022\u003EHon Members: \u003C/span\u003EFalse imprisonment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022053b8b12b41de6e8b542fd728336f799\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014that\u2019s right\u2014it could be false imprisonment. I think if we had a time period, then that would limit the chances of that being challenged. So I think that that is particularly important. That\u2019s all I have on new section 8C, so I\u2019ll ask the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u00229cdbea6402d09b5d2a5036b89121046c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229cdbea6402d09b5d2a5036b89121046c\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (22:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. There\u2019s a couple of question there. One was around public safety and whether or not we would accept an amendment to require the police to consider, I think, the safety of the individual. Public safety is already a core function under the Policing Act, and, of course, the New Zealand Police take the safety of all New Zealanders incredibly seriously. So it\u2019s not required to have an amendment, because it\u2019s already part of what they do as part of good policing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe second question around whether or not we should accept an amendment to build in a time limit to help further define what is reasonable\u2014I think that would provide some difficulties because if you accept 15 minutes, 20 minutes, 25 minutes, what is reasonable in some circumstance might take longer than that. I think it\u2019s important to make sure that we look at the context and the situation and just take an approach where reasonableness says, \u201CLook at the circumstances, look at the situation\u2014what would a reasonable person think is a reasonable amount of time in that situation?\u201D Of course, you\u2019ve got New Zealand Bill of Rights Act considerations around arbitrary detention in considerations like that, which would help influence that. So we don\u2019t think it\u2019s necessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00229c0d4a052fb04be291d4341256c52773\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229c0d4a052fb04be291d4341256c52773\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (22:26)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Sorry, just one clarification from the Minister: was that the part around \u201Creasonable excuse?\u201D I missed the clause where he said \u201Creasonable\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dab92074ca9ac35c71738a8e643be0d5\u0022\u003EHon James Meager\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s new section 8C(1): detention for a period that\u2019s reasonably necessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ceb490cfa15caa16ef56a7b1c3ce7312\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: OK. Thank you\u2014thank you. I just want to make sure that I\u2019m not duplicating my question; that\u2019s all. My question is actually on the next part, which is new section 8C(2). Again, it is good to have the Minister in the chair on record in terms of some of these aspects because I want to know what is considered a reasonable excuse for someone to be able to stay in a particular location. We have, and I can\u2019t remember whether it is somewhere in this bill or somewhere else\u2014I remember reading that, for example, it is now considered a reasonable excuse if they need to be in that area for things like groceries, for things like medicine, pharmacy. Can I just double-check with the Minister that those are still considered a reasonable excuse.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to check one thing with the Minister, and I\u2019m going to move a little bit further, noting that my colleagues may have other questions for section 8C. But there is something I want to ask regarding new section 8D, when it comes to the duty of the constable to explain the move-on order\u2014but also noting that there have been members here who have not taken a call yet on any of the parts, so they may have other questions for the earlier parts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen it comes to the duty constable explaining the move-on order, I want to draw the Minister\u2019s attention to Amendment Paper 800, from my colleague Tamatha Paul. While it is important for a constable to explain to the person all of those effects and the duration of consequences, it is also important because we\u2019re looking at the police here as well. There is an ability for the person to also be told of their right to complain to the Independent Police Conduct Authority. I want to check with the Minister if that is something that the Minister thinks should be an amendment to be adopted or if the Minister thinks that it\u2019s something that is already embedded within the everyday operations of the duty of the constable\u2014that it doesn\u2019t need to be its own specific amendment. If that\u2019s the case, I acknowledge that and understand why the Minister wouldn\u2019t support the amendment, but I do want to check that with the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u0022b785e306a03305bbfb1127559c9ce8fc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b785e306a03305bbfb1127559c9ce8fc\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (22:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Mine is a small point, but it is about section 8C, inserted by clause 5, and it is about the irony in the thrust of this section. Section 8C(2) says, \u201CA person commits an offence [who] without reasonable excuse, fails or refuses to remain at the place where the person is detained.\u201D This is for the purpose of giving them a move-on order. We\u2019re telling them to stay still because we want to tell them to move on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt seemed to me that, earlier, the Minister of Justice talked about the fact that this was to allow people to be moved on, when in fact it might be a lot simpler if the police officers simply asked them to move on in certain circumstances. We already have law that covers things like behaviour that is disorderly, and we can move them on. Now we\u2019re getting them to stay in place so we can tell them to move on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen the Minister talked about how this is not a criminal act, giving a move-on order\u2014that was not the criminal act; it was only the refusal. But then it looks, when I look at this section, as if we are assuming something that\u2019s of quite a high threshold, because we\u2019re getting names and addresses, we\u2019re making people stay in situ at our constables\u2019 express command. Those are all things that we would say are much more likely to be considered in a criminal situation, and we\u2019re not dealing with something that is threatening in the way that we have had in other areas. For example, I was contrasting, I was thinking, \u201CWell, you know, we do this for drug-driving and driving under the influence of drink.\u201D, but those are actually serious safety issues for the public. We\u2019re not talking about that here, because the Minister has talked to us about doing this because it\u2019s something where he wants businesses to thrive. We\u2019re not in that league.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDoes the Minister accept that these conditions in this section are much more akin to what we do in a situation where there is criminality? How did he balance that situation when it came to getting all that information off somebody who has not actually committed a criminal offence, and told them they have to stay in place, when, in fact, what the legislation\u2019s thrust seems to be is to move them on? Could you just explain, how does that work? We are using terms like \u201Creasonable\u201D, so we\u2019re not limiting the impact on that person\u2019s freedom; we\u2019re giving very broad scope when it comes to that. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u002281b16f80d10a303d866f7b240bd14f20\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002281b16f80d10a303d866f7b240bd14f20\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (22:32)\u003C/span\u003E: In terms of taking a person\u2019s biographical details, the previous member, Helen White, sort of made that out to be some form of inquisition or unreasonable thing, and I don\u2019t think any reasonable person would think that. Taking one\u2019s name, address if there is one, and date of birth, those sorts of things\u2014biographical details\u2014are fine.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn relation to what is a reasonable excuse for breaching a move-on order\u2014there was a lot of questioning around that from Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2014a \u201Creasonable excuse\u201D is a common feature of many criminal offences and allows for scenarios that would otherwise amount to an offence having had to their individual circumstances. It\u2019s ultimately up to the courts to decide that. Of course, nobody needs to go anywhere near a court if they follow the move-on order, and that is the purpose of the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022 data-id=\u00223a8e4978fb88e50241edd037e85aabc6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223a8e4978fb88e50241edd037e85aabc6\u0022\u003EORIINI KAIPARA (Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori\u2014T\u0101maki Makaurau) (22:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, t\u0113n\u0101 koe. I just want to note that this is my first call for this section. However, I want to ask the Minister of Justice a question specifically around the biographical details, which is new section 8C(5), inserted by clause 5.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question really is\u2014and it\u2019s a concern about truth and honesty and who to believe and who not to believe. Really it comes down to the officer making a decision on whether or not a person deemed to be disrupting the peace or targeted for this move-on order is telling a police officer the truth. They may be telling the officer the truth, but the officer then doesn\u2019t believe them. There\u2019s no indication in this to ensure that when a person is asked by an officer to declare their name and their date of birth\u2014because it doesn\u2019t have in brackets \u201Cif any\u201D, and I do acknowledge that paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) do allow for room to move. But with name and address, where a beggar or somebody without a stable abode is told by a police officer to declare their name and (1) they either refuse or (2) they tell the truth but they\u2019re not believed\u2014that\u2019s actually something that happens quite often, especially when we\u2019re dealing with M\u0101ori or Pasifika: they tell the truth, but they\u2019re often not believed\u2014that\u2019s got to be considered seriously by the Minister in determining biographical details.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have a tabled amendment to delete that \u201Cbelief only\u201D limb, to require \u201Cknowing falsity\u201D, and accept a \u201Cno fixed abode\u201D, which is here, and I do acknowledge that. But, really, the question to the Minister is: must the prosecution prove the details were actually false? That\u2019s really important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have another question, and it\u2019s moving on to section 8D, please. I note that there is a tabled amendment that has been put forward, not by me specifically, but by my colleagues, and it\u2019s really important. It speaks to a duty of care\u2014to enact a duty to assist. It\u2019s so important. I have embedded that in my first member\u2019s bill, which speaks only to preventing youth homelessness, but this is a broad subject. We\u2019re talking about move-on orders, and there is no duty of care. When we look to who this bill largely impacts, it is people who require serious care. With duty of care, it doesn\u2019t exist anywhere\u2014it doesn\u2019t exist\u2014so nobody\u2019s responsible. But we all in this House are responsible to ensure that everybody is safe, not just those being targeted by this bill. The duty of care ensures that no one falls through the gaps. That has been a constant for generations; people are constantly falling through the gaps.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI acknowledge that the age limit has been raised to 18. However, rangatahi that exit State care are still very much acutely suffering and don\u2019t have the same supports as your typical 18- to 24-year-olds. Is there a duty of care to those rangatahi who exit the State system who have absolutely no support? Whether that\u2019s by the system itself or from wh\u0101nau, there is absolutely no support. There must be a duty of care\u2014especially to rangatahi\u2014like the people in Kick Back up in Auckland, who are constantly meeting these rangatahi who are being underserved and underprotected by the law but also by the community.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA duty of care, specifically in a tabled amendment before this committee tonight, speaks specifically to the Ministry of Social Development to ensure that healthcare access is still made available. If people are moved on, that duty of care ensures that the front-line services are still able to provide those specific people with the care that they need. It takes a very long time, as this House knows and as the Minister knows, for a service provider to, one, find a homeless person and to engage them safely\u2014to approach them\u2014and to build the trust. Trust is so important when you are dealing with homeless people and transient people\u2014especially those who are known as \u201Clifers\u201D. Lifers continue to move around, and they end up back in the same place. A duty of care ensures that no one falls through the gaps.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI go back to the point that we have a growing issue of homelessness, and to mitigate that continuing to put pressure on every single system that is out there\u2014including healthcare, mental health, and everything, the Ministry of Social Development should have a duty of care. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022 data-id=\u00224a34586516c60a9e07ab8571036c4664\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224a34586516c60a9e07ab8571036c4664\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (22:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to discuss new section 8D, inserted by clause 5. That\u2019s the duty to explain a move-on order, and it requires a constable, so far as is reasonably practical, to explain the effect of the order, its duration, and the consequences of breaching it. For begging, the constable must also explain why that behaviour was considered unreasonable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think most members in this House would agree that if a breach of a move-on order can ultimately result in criminal proceedings, then understanding the order becomes very important. Compliance depends not only on receiving the order but actually understanding what is actually required. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo my question to the Minister there is: what will happen if a person does not properly understand the move-on order because of a communication difficulty, a disability, or a literacy issue, or they may even be in mental distress? How will police demonstrate that the explanation requirement has been met? This is actually something that came up in submissions, in particular from the Epilepsy Waikato Charitable Trust, and they highlighted that concern as well. Any response from the Minister will be great. Cheers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3b749ce6ee68fe7b2dc5a479bf8ef1a\u0022\u003ECarl Bates\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002227d19573a8ba4d8283b17374978c8ea2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cf345525a5fb43252cf8549d7c5bee91\u0022\u003EGrant McCallum\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002280b60c2f069b491db2f18824227257e6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: We are getting close, but the Minister, I think, is itching to get on his feet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u0022806aa5f04ad6b72d930ee6839de83c73\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022806aa5f04ad6b72d930ee6839de83c73\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (22:40)\u003C/span\u003E: In terms of the duty of care\u2014and I am repeating myself on this matter\u2014in terms of this legislation, it\u2019s around providing the police with a tool to deal with particular behaviours that have been blighting our CBDs. It is not a comprehensive Government response to homelessness, and there are many, many other elements in our Government response.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe member Oriini Kaipara referred to the Ministry of Social Development (MSD), and we\u2019re not proposing changes to the way that MSD operates and that our welfare system operates. We have help which is available, but we don\u2019t pretend that the State can look after every single person in this country perfectly. That is an impossibility, but what we can do is provide our services as best we can. It doesn\u2019t change that broader social setting; all it does is provide the police with that extra tool to deal with particular behaviours.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the question around biographical information if proven to be true, even though the constable didn\u2019t believe it to be true, it\u2019s pretty easy in cases when somebody says their name is Mickey Mouse, for example, but there may be other misunderstandings. If biographical information is proven to be true, the offence of providing false details will, of course, not stand. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb0dbb1fb26970e8b0c6ca50bc30f843\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Getting close, getting close.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002237bbccf8c97dea5566de5d91db726a53\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002237bbccf8c97dea5566de5d91db726a53\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (22:42)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do want to make the comment that in Amendment Papers 805 and 806, proposed by my colleague Chl\u00F6e Swarbrick for the introduction of proposed new section 8DA, we\u2019re not asking for there to be any changes; we\u2019re just saying that the constable should have a requirement to direct a person to the right services that they should have access to, and it\u2019s up to the existing systems to sort that out, but I\u2019ll leave that with the Minister of Justice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI actually want to pick up on the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 804. Minister, you\u2019ve also made two deletions in new sections 8D and 8E. In your Amendment Paper, again, kind of last minute, you deleted\u2014sorry, my apologies; the Minister, in the Amendment Paper deleted, not the Chair. I used the second person pronoun. Minister, in your Amendment Paper, new sections 8D(1)(c) and 8E(fa) have been removed, which is that the constable has a duty to explain why the begging was unreasonable. Other than remove the provision, there\u2019s actually no real explanation as to why those new sections will be removed. I want to check with the Minister why the Minister thinks that it\u2019s not necessary for the constable to explain why such begging was unreasonable. If the person doesn\u2019t know why and simply gets told that they\u2019re unreasonable, wouldn\u2019t they then just simply make the same mistake over and over again and get themselves further into trouble? I want to check with the Minister for that particular rationale.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m now moving on to new section\u00A08E, \u201CContent of move-on order\u201D. Having dealt with a lot of the previous sections, I do thank the Minister for his engagement. In terms of that content, they must include everything from new section 8E(a) to 8E(i), but can I just check if that is an exhaustive list, or can a move-on order also include additional information? Usually, we have some cues in the first line that say \u201Cincluding\u201D or \u201Cexplicitly\u201D, etc., but over here it just says it \u201Cmust contain the following information:\u201D, but it doesn\u2019t actually say if more information could be included.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022d27f988965e61fc83b57b3c1f9f0e349\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d27f988965e61fc83b57b3c1f9f0e349\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (22:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do want to move just slightly further on than my colleague Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan, to briefly touch on\u2014I did mention earlier, around the Amendment Paper, that the Labour Party won\u2019t be supporting that. The reason for this is the two deletions that my colleague Lawrence Xu-Nan has alluded to. I\u2019d be interested to hear why those were deleted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI can understand if there was a drafting change for clarity, and I do agree with the Minister of Justice\u2019s deletion of the new section 8D(1)(a) \u201Cand\u201D. That is a good correction. Thanks for picking that up. The other terminology change and the deletion of the list\u2014I prefer the select committee\u2019s way of drafting it, but I do think something is lost in the bill by the Minister\u2019s deletion. I\u2019ll refer to\u2014because we\u2019ve moved on to new section 8E\u2014new section\u00A08E(fa). That one really just means that people don\u2019t know the reason for their move-on order and why their being there was unreasonable. That is why we won\u2019t be voting for it, but can the Minister provide an explanation that he received some advice from officials that may assist at this stage even?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI wanted to move on from that, which I do think is quite important. There are two provisions in new section\u00A08E. Section 8E(h) states that \u201Cit is an offence to breach the order knowingly or recklessly\u201D. Then again, and I\u2019m moving over to the penultimate page now, which is new section\u00A08F(1)(b)\u2014so moving on to the next part\u2014that is \u201Cknowingly or recklessly, and without reasonable excuse\u201D, and this is looking at the offence. Now, we just heard from my colleague Dan Rosewarne about knowledge and being able to have things explained to you. It\u2019s difficult to think of a situation where it would be appropriate to convict someone of an offence, of a move-on order, when they did not knowingly breach it\u2014it\u2019s a test: it\u2019s either knowingly or recklessly. I just can\u2019t think of an example\u2014maybe the Minister or his officials have an example of a situation where someone \u201Crecklessly\u201D breached a move on order, but not \u201Cknowingly\u201D. I suppose the question is: why is that \u201Cor\u201D rather than \u201Cand\u201D? It\u2019s used, as I said, twice in new section 8E, which we\u2019ve just, maybe, finished\u2014I have, certainly, but maybe other colleagues have a final question on it\u2014but, in new section 8F, \u201Cknowing or recklessly\u201D, why isn\u2019t it one or the other?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do have some questions on new section 8F(1A), and I want to mention new section 8F(2) as well. That would be my next question, but we\u2019ll just see if the Minister may be getting some advice on that. We\u2019ll see\u2014so anyway, if I move on briefly, now, while he\u2019s receiving some advice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think that it\u2019s important to note that another change that the Justice Committee made was the change of the fee. It was originally meant to be $2,000, and we\u2019ve changed it to $1,000. I wanted to know: does the Minister agree with us, and does he have any thoughts about the change of fee? The reason the select committee decided to go with that fee was because it appeared to us to be more consistent with other offences which were similar to move-on orders. That, for our consideration, was an appropriate justification for that, but I\u2019d be interested to know if the Minister did have a view on that change, which is quite substantial; down by 50\u00A0percent of the fine\u2014sorry, fine not fee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022fa5c732aceba926b48e40534fd73031d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fa5c732aceba926b48e40534fd73031d\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (22:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Minister, you do actually have to respond. I know the Minister of Justice keeps trying to get up to answer questions. We do have questions. I am going to move on to new section 8F, in clause\u00A05. I know that my colleague Camilla Belich has already asked some of the questions. I also note that we are almost there, but we do have a couple of final questions about sections 8H and 8I as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to check with the Minister\u2014and, again, this is something we never really got clarity on during the select committee process\u2014section 8F(2), \u201CA person who commits an offence against this section is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 months or a fine not exceeding $1,000.\u201D I know that we have comparable provisions within the Summary Offences Act. We mentioned before section 22 of the Summary Offences Act, which also has a fine of $1,000. In those instances, how successful has it been to get particularly homeless wh\u0101nau to pay a fine of $1,000?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn this case, I think it\u2019s great that the select committee has reduced that amount from $2,000 to $1,000, maybe for consistency as well. If people can\u2019t pay that $1,000, does it automatically mean that they get the three months\u2019 imprisonment? How would that be determined? Would it mean that, if they can\u2019t pay, they would get prison for three months? If the court determines that it is going to be a $1,000 fine, what plans are there to ensure that the person is even able to pay that off, considering they can\u2019t go and beg for money?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m going to move on to sections 8H and 8I, inserted by clause 5. I think that both these sections are important new additions to this bill, but I do want to know the Minister\u2019s view of these particular additions, particularly when we are considering whether the review of these sections suggests that they are not working as intended or that by-laws or sections of the Summary Offences Act have been used instead. I wondered if there is a way for this section 8H, \u201CAnnual reporting by Commissioner\u201D\u2014the number of occasions on which a move-on order is issued\u2014to be able to be expanded to consider some of the other comparable, I guess, orders as well. Again, we mention that in terms of section 22 of the Summary Offences Act. I think my colleague Camilla Belich mentioned the Crimes Act. There are also various by-laws. I wondered if that is something the Minister would consider incorporating into the review so we get a fuller picture. Those are my two questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u00220cc4dd226052c6083ce8747be2a5cce1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220cc4dd226052c6083ce8747be2a5cce1\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (22:53)\u003C/span\u003E: I was asked to explain the difference between \u201Cknowingly\u201D and \u201Crecklessly\u201D. \u201CKnowingly\u201D is when someone knew they were breaching  it, and \u201Crecklessly\u201D is when they knew there was a chance that they could breach it and decided to do it anyway. So that was that. I can\u2019t think of anything else in particular that I wanted to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa5b65d717fa44ee6476771f6d8d3344\u0022\u003ECamilla Belich\u003C/span\u003E: The fine\u2014what do you think about the fine?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002250d0f6757395f788679553715dee75a7\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, yes\u2014the fine is going from $2,000 to $1,000. Yes, I did agree with that change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ce427b04a43343f65631a56dd088284\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019d like to be surprised with some very last-minute questions. I can\u2019t see very much room for many more, but I will give Camilla Belich another go.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022408dd9196615199367d930a646f7327a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022408dd9196615199367d930a646f7327a\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (22:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, these last few questions are around the changes that the select committee has made, and they are important. The one that I specifically want to mention, which I didn\u2019t get to mention before, is in section 8F(1A). Essentially, this change means that, if someone has a lawful reason which is part of a move-on order to return to a place, they may do that as long as they don\u2019t participate in conduct that is consistent with the move-on order. This is really important because this provision, section 8F(1A), is the reason that the Attorney-General has found that, in terms of freedom of movement, the bill no longer is in breach of that right. I think that\u2019s quite a significant change, and I thank the Minister of Justice and the Justice Committee for putting that change in. I want to know if he has any reflections on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to note for the record that the reference to the Oranga Tamariki Act was just about a deletion because of the fact that children are no longer covered, so it\u2019s not at all to diminish the status of  that Act. The other thing I wanted to ask is a really important question\u2014and, Madam Chair, it may my final question, because it looks like the Minister may need a move-on order himself from falling asleep in his chair in a public place! It is about a new clause that talks about the review of the operation of move-on orders. This is a really good clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou know, I don\u2019t think this is a good bill. I specifically don\u2019t agree with it in relation to rough sleeping and in relation to begging, but I do think there are a significant number of changes that are really good from the select committee, and this is one of them. It is about the review of move-on orders, which happens after three years. If he is the Minister of Justice at the time of this review, and the review shows that these move-on orders haven\u2019t worked, as I predicted, and haven\u2019t met the objective of reducing intimidation and creating safer environments in our city centres, and if they have impacted rough sleepers negatively, and if they have unfairly impacted people who are begging, will the Minister be open to, after the conclusion of this review which he\u2019s agreeing to under this legislation, reconsidering his position on move-on orders? If they are not working, on the basis of evidence from this review, will he repeal them?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u002259c25a69aa5f4eac344d4851d700b031\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002259c25a69aa5f4eac344d4851d700b031\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (22:57)\u003C/span\u003E: That review in three years\u2019 time will be a genuine review, and if I\u2019m the Minister of Justice, I will undertake that genuinely. I\u2019m very confident that this legislation will work very effectively.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u00224a8de5cb79eda04fe74dca98bff4aa7c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224a8de5cb79eda04fe74dca98bff4aa7c\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (22:57)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005112\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e2d47d471b5005984535ffe40adbc487\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to Amendment Paper 804 deleting the amendment to clause 5 to delete new section 8A(1B) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment to the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13 Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment to the amendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226584bd6c33b454d8fa51f38f8a7ebc3b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendments to Amendment Paper 804 deleting the amendments to clause 5 to delete new sections 8D(1)(c) and 8E(fa) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments to the amendments be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments to the amendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200144d8bc5cb00f488272e43195a6c86\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to clause 5 set out on Amendment Paper 804 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005133\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002205d624b6e16f973320a270d9cb0387d1\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendments to clause 5 set out on Amendment Paper 778 are out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECamilla Belich\u2019s tabled amendment inserting a subclause (1AA) into the bill is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5, new section 8A(1), set out on Amendment Paper 780 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005142\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a5a5d74d407e8690f2b5fb2e9de3f6f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5, new section 8A(1), set out on Amendment Paper 798 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005149\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c43d8e101daf57ef3752858fa3f9de2b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5, new section 8A(1), relating to the repetition of conduct be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005156\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c3d4e6fad189d8931082186df414240b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 deleting \u201Cor has recently engaged in\u201D from new section 8A(1) is out of order as being the same as a previous amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Scott Willis\u2019 tabled amendment to clause 5 replacing \u201Creasonable grounds to suspect\u201D with \u201Creasonable certainty\u201D in new section 8A(1) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005164\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229479480fd60d86168471e892ffdfd3a0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 replacing new section 8A(1)(a) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005171\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022177b8b102f2a5ed4d32333edac51d731\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Kahurangi Carter\u2019s tabled amendment to clause\u00A05 deleting new section 8A(1)(e) is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 replacing new section 8A(1)(e) is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendments to clause 5 deleting new section 8A(1)(e) and (f), (1A) and (1B), new section 8D(1)(c), new section 8E(fa) and (ha), and new section 8F(1A) are out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 deleting new section 8A(1)(f) and (1A), new section 8E(ha), and new section 8F(1A) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005181\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002238ab59a36a4e0e2d3502bd75eb80b2df\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 deleting new section 8A(1)(f) set out on Amendment Paper 779 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005188\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb36e0b486ef185754cb3b6c86d1f273\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Scott Willis\u2019 tabled amendment to clause 5 deleting new section 8A(1)(f) is out of order as being the same as a previous amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECamilla Belich\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 deleting new section 8A(1)(f) is out of order as being the same as a previous amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Celia Wade-Brown\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 replacing new section 8A(1)(f) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005197\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c16c9e6da9dc74cf7386dad26c2e8fe\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Camilla Belich\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(1)(g) is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(1AA) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005205\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b6edb3700dab43630f0a72f6fd79acc5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Steve Abel\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 replacing new section 8A(1A) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005212\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022564ac44f1b9b3fc17158bd9d8a89b51a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Camilla Belich\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(1B) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005219\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e5dfe4d0618f4e77d96c3c89eb7f6881\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(1B)(e) is out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(1C) set out on Amendment Paper 766 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005227\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1514feae241b39cf6f8b6b42054ab1c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(1C) set out on Amendment Paper 782 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005234\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022204f55a8c8ba286cab8f35436baf6c47\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(1C) set out on Amendment Paper 783 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005241\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a81885ecfcfe7bfab51fa405caa2dc2b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(1C) set out on Amendment Paper 789 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005248\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002250667cec6650a2bca0b999be1cc0282b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(1C) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005255\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a1a726d41463f270c93ec0387c212d5e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendments to clause 5, new section 8A(2), set out on Amendment Paper 795 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005262\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a3cbd3e3d22e77fd94068dddc1b9a3b6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting text after \u201Cspecified area\u201D in new section 8A(2) is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5, new sections 8A and 8E, relating to a specified reasonable distance be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005270\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f444edb0962165ad302706ad189957be\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 replacing \u201C24 hours\u201D with \u201C12 hours\u201D in new section 8A(2)(b) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005277\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002233587382486bc9de275aa42d9586f279\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 replacing \u201C24 hours\u201D with \u201C6 hours\u201D in new section 8A(2)(b) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005284\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224eaa63be166a68c9ab816361da5e3229\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 replacing \u201C24 hours\u201D with \u201C2 hours\u201D in new section 8A(2)(b) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005291\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c20904b4cfe79195131c50aa83d6a947\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(2A) set out on Amendment Paper 767 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005298\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221fe2e9d447c4a7eaf3a617aee1267286\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(2A) set out on Amendment Paper 781 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005305\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cfdc63b0e9da6e73f48b279d235f18b9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(2A) set out on Amendment Paper 799 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005312\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c73cc4751520d61401feae9353f9436b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(2A) relating to \u201Cpublic place\u201D being an identifiable location be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005319\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd9956aa409769d79d55b6a620cc925f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(2A) relating to orders not preventing persons from accessing certain things is out of order as being the same in substance as a previous amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(2A) and replacing new section 8E(g) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005327\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022529325b8568aab97ed00701284111bb3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Kahurangi Carter\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 replacing new section 8A(3) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005334\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e98e848193a450c6da5a5b98048fa2f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(3A) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005341\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224a9f9e4be75c904c64debe95125f03e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Celia Wade-Brown\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 replacing new section 8A(4) relating to orders being issued in writing be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005348\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240fa31b5abfab03219d163669cff8e3d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(4A) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005355\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb412d18fa706deecc05ed37b39f1e3b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Francisco Hernandez\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 replacing new section 8A(5) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005362\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022611c7c13184ce48223979521a57466ce\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Scott Willis\u2019 tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(6) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005369\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e924918fd653eea72f45cb7b639f9aab\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(6) relating to safe emergency accommodation be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005376\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220485c42cb48da887f221a39e7357563a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(6) relating to essential places and services be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005383\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227778619df5236ec9a44360c2fe7780c6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(6) relating to excluding a person from their residence is out of order as being the same in substance as a previous amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(6) relating to issuing move-on orders within 24 hours of each other be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005391\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225eb2db454853ce4b1e5333afcc50307d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8A(6) set out on Amendment Paper 765 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005398\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228313d821f5707d5e94de2936f3d9da47\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 deleting new section 8B(2)(c) is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 replacing new section 8B(2)(c) be agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005406\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f91c61348da056205a8d71282c90c43\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 replacing new section 8C(1) set out on Amendment Paper 764 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005413\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240608f372305b26e27d0b1aff4a16dae\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 new section 8C(1) set out on Amendment Paper 763 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005420\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022066137605ea68bb4ecf6554529481d71\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 replacing new section 8C(1) is out of order as being the same in substance as a previous amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 deleting new section 8C(3)(b) set out on Amendment Paper 762 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005428\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0ce8d42d08321a9d0d9aff2ba740987\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 replacing new section 8C(3)(b) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005435\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002275714b443085cf5ef519684a932ec4d9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5, new section 8D(1), set out on Amendment Paper 761 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005442\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e0f98cd02cf5d5e28ec4f61ff0f74cb2\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendments to clause 5, new section 8D(1), be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005449\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d1e3f36ef281533e87b7fdd752d0a95\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendments to clause 5, new sections 8D and 8F, set out on Amendment Paper 800 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005456\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002209148d80c11cea72c900669b98e533ca\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8D(3) set out on Amendment Paper 801 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005463\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002213587a3485ade1d44d3e8013c56ce618\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Chl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u2019s amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8DA set out on Amendment Paper 805 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005470\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff2bef34d411b0bc72e425effbdb48eb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Chl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u2019s amendment to clause 5 inserting new sections 8DA and 8E(faaa) set out on Amendment Paper 806 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005477\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253230b4cf69ec0f642c7f9b41cf2d2a3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8DA be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005484\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022454806b263afbe497a2604a523ea7e06\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 deleting new section 8F set out on Amendment Paper 760 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005491\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002245a38ce0aae106e6d2233f79c3b78425\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8F(1B) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005498\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022817e239774c011e2be8637f591b38842\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5, new section 8F(2), set out on Amendment Paper 784 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005505\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261d05447ac6f8318a9b1502aa70fdaff\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5, new section 8F(2), set out on Amendment Paper 785 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005512\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022888cf0350f3c5b8a7112841c570796d7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5, new section 8F(2), set out on Amendment Paper 786 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005519\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ade0e6d46e4ab22cdc5e79b7346497a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5, new section 8F(2), set out on Amendment Paper 787 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005526\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e44e36a7e5ad31e25675a3b08f807978\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 replacing new section 8F(2) set out on Amendment Paper 788 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005533\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229e2abcb98747f585c5db61717380877e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 5 replacing new section 8F(2) is out of order as being the same in substance as a previous amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8G set out on Amendment Paper 796 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005541\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fefc0850ec36d2a0f979bd8a6240ac8a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to clause 5 inserting new section 8G set out on Amendment Paper 797 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005548\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f5a586fb22392026e6417f1417d55af8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendments to clause 5, new sections 8H and 8I, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005555\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat clause 5 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 5 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill to be reported with amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c11b3d9a546e2c25f7b76971c5d5919\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, the committee has considered the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) 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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cbca0f98d4eb2a1170af6b051547b631\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: This bill is set down for third reading immediately. It\u2019s time for the House to suspend, and we will resume at 9 a.m. tomorrow.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 11.55 p.m. to 9 a.m. (Friday)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002240569e8eddec4659f5972258d3398247\u0022\u003EUrgency\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b5df2445f78be0a1b3cdbd3a38506500\u0022\u003EFriday, 18 September 2026\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022efa6fc0e7c93aa96540ba7a6e34c094f\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002287c4a59bb0eff28db6ad33d7863618b0\u0022\u003ESummary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002220d13b1feb111a71302b872779e44b78\u0022\u003ELegislative Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ed17794cf822b4ec880c532ed7a1a256\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: The House is resumed. Kia orana. Good morning, members. When the House suspended last night, we were up to the third reading of the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u002253da61d26f899b2c2f0fb7c758d3cfd0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002253da61d26f899b2c2f0fb7c758d3cfd0\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (09:00)\u003C/span\u003E: I present a legislative statement on the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1ea54878c4840f411c27e32ea680d2d\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00226299aa751c7fa75b5474b31c096ad308\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022 data-id=\u00222c47ec416c84d5cfa181d6d503e789f4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222c47ec416c84d5cfa181d6d503e789f4\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice) (09:00)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill be now read a third time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EToday, the Government is building on its commitment to restore law and order, to fix the basics in law and order, and to build a future where all New Zealanders feel safe in our communities. The critical part of that is ensuring that our streets and our town squares feel safe for everybody who visits, works, and lives there\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e0283bab4321fa6dd7d67887ecdcf973\u0022\u003ETamatha Paul\u003C/span\u003E: Not in Wellington.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002291c0e777ce3d4711ace36a15c7e22ffe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022070133e84b544728c4e836bc13db3dd4\u0022\u003EHon PAUL GOLDSMITH\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and every New Zealander should be able to walk through their local town centre, visit a park\u2014in Wellington, in Auckland, in Napier, or in Taup\u014D\u2014take their children to a public place, get to work, and run a business without being subjected to intimidation, disruption, or disorder.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPublic places belong to everyone and they should be welcoming, accessible, and safe, and yet for too many New Zealanders, that has not been the case for a while. Across our cities our business communities, residents, workers, and visitors have voiced growing concerns about persistent disorder in our public places. We\u2019ve spoken about behaviour that makes people feel unsafe, discourages families from spending time in the town centres, deters customers from local businesses, and undermines confidence in our public places. This legislation represents part of this Government\u2019s efforts to turn that around. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill amends the Summary Offences Act to provide police with the power to issue move-on orders to somebody engaging in disorderly, disruptive, or threatening behaviours; interfering with business; breaching the peace; begging that interferes with the public; or rough sleeping, or to someone who is continually occupying a public place. The move-on order will require a person to leave a specified area for 24 hours. People who are begging or rough sleeping could return to the area while the order is in force for other purposes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet me make one point clear. It will be a criminal offence only if a person does not comply with the move-on order, and we\u2019ll hear a lot of nonsense about this topic, but that\u2019s the reality. Move-on orders are a practical tool for police to intervene early, restore order, and prevent situations from worsening. They\u2019re certainly not criminalising homelessness. It\u2019s about reclaiming our town squares, our CBDs, and our central business districts for the enjoyment of people who live there, who work there, and who visit there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn that basis, it\u2019s about restoring confidence to our public places, and it is part of the three years of effort we\u2019ve had, in this Government, to restore law and order. The choice that people have in the election coming up is whether to stay strong on law and order, or go back to where Labour, the Greens, and Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori took us in the years before. On that basis, I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002288227e1dee49814a6da4c68e553441fd\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u00225f7a38e3b4e4069cfa852772f92288c6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225f7a38e3b4e4069cfa852772f92288c6\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (09:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I feel a weight of responsibility today because we are about to pass a bill through the House that targets our most vulnerable. Now, it\u2019s often been said that the mark of a society is how you treat your most vulnerable, and if this is how we treat our most vulnerable\u2014by moving them along when they\u2019re in their hour of need and by telling them they need to be somewhere else when they\u2019re in our public spaces\u2014we\u2019re not focusing our resources, as we should be today, on providing them with homes, with help, and with support, then this is a very, very shameful day for our Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve heard a lot about how the bill works and we\u2019ve been through an extensive process of analysing this at the committee of the whole House stage and also at the Justice Committee. I want to again acknowledge everyone who attended the select committee and made a submission on this bill. We had thousands of people oppose this bill. Thousands of New Zealanders came to this Parliament to asked the Government to listen. They asked it to listen to the lived experiences of people who work with homeless people, asked it to listen to their lived experience of people who are homeless or rough sleeping, and asked it to listen to the lived experience of people who work with our New Zealanders who are living in poverty, which has, unfortunately, got worse under this Government. But, instead of listening to New Zealanders, this Government has turned away, and on the most pressing issue that we heard in select committee, this Government\u2019s silence has been deafening. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere was no change to any of the provisions in relation to rough sleeping. There was no change to recognise that many people who are rough sleeping in New Zealand or homeless are not there because of choice; they\u2019re there because of poverty and they\u2019re there because of terrible life circumstances. They are there because they have no choice, and instead of providing them with things that we know that work, like a warm, dry home, we are saying, \u201CWe don\u2019t want to see you; we want you out of our sight.\u201D That is absolutely shameful. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to reflect for a moment on the people who brought the lived experience of those who have been homeless on the streets of New Zealand. Now, for most people that may see homelessness, they may see it as being someone who is homeless, but for those people, they are actually experiencing something that will kill them. Homelessness kills people in New Zealand. People who are homeless pass away 30 percent sooner than the general population, and that is a huge reduction in life expectancy for people living on our streets. Living outside in the cold is so bad for you and kills you in such a slow, painful way that the experience of listening to some of those people was very harrowing, and so I want to acknowledge all of those people who tried to get the Government to remove the begging and homelessness provisions from this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe acknowledge that when this bill was first introduced, it included children. The fact that that, in and of itself, was a provision in this bill should be of total shame to this Government\u2014that this was even a proposal put forward. But the people spoke on that and, thankfully, in relation to children, that provision will no longer go forward, and I want to thank everyone who made strong submissions on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe know that this won\u2019t work, and the reason we know that it won\u2019t work towards addressing some of the issues that the Government has raised in terms of antisocial behaviour in our cities is because other countries have tried it and it hasn\u2019t worked. In fact, just recently, the UK has got rid of its vagrancy law, which has been in place for such a long time, and decided to have a goal of ending homelessness. This Government has gone down the totally opposite track and brought in an archaic law that decades and decades of experience in other countries shows does not work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother reason why this particular proposal should not move forward is that we went through in detail about the powers that the police already have, and this is not about saying that there isn\u2019t antisocial behaviour in our cities or that it isn\u2019t important. We all want safe city centres, we all want all of our public spaces to be safe and secure, and we want to make sure that every person who utilises those areas feels safe, and that includes the people who are homeless. It was brought to my attention by community housing providers that those who are homeless are actually, statistically, more likely to have a crime committed against them than to commit a crime against other people. When we consider who we are as a society, we need to include those people who are homeless or rough sleeping as well, because they, statistically speaking, are actually more at risk.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe know that the police already have powers and we know that police officers can tell people to move on. Police officers have a lot of mana within our society and our community. Most people, if they\u2019re told to move on by a police officer orally will do so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen we looked at the Summary Offences Act and we went through almost every provision in relation to the antisocial behaviour aspects of this bill, and that is already a power that exists within New Zealand law. It was almost mirrored in the Summary Offences Act, and so not only do police, obviously, have powers to ask people to move on, they also have powers within the Summary Offences Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd that means that there is very little policy impetus for actually bringing this bill, in terms of the antisocial behaviour aspect, which is what the Government has asked us to focus on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have to say, it did grate me when I heard the Prime Minister say what we need to be thinking about when we\u2019re looking at move-on orders is Chuck and Mary getting off their cruise ship and walking down Queen Street and seeing something that they didn\u2019t want to see. That person is part of our community that Chuck and Mary may see and not be comfortable about. That person is a New Zealander. We need to be looking after their interests and making sure that we provide a solution for them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe frustrating thing about this is we know what the answer to that is. It\u2019s programmes like Housing First. It\u2019s making sure that K\u0101inga Ora is well-funded. It\u2019s making sure that we fund community housing. It\u2019s making sure that we have emergency housing that is actually being able to be practically used. It\u2019s making sure that we have things like emergency housing special needs grants available to people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe know what works. If the Prime Minister is concerned about that, those are the kind of things that he should be focusing on: providing that person with help so they can make sure that they\u2019re living in a safe environment. He should not be focusing on the perceptions of others when they come to New Zealand, because if he\u2019s just focused on moving a problem away, that is not solving it; that is just moving it on to somewhere else.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s been said again and again in this debate: move on to where? Move on to a suburb? Move on to a place that\u2019s adjacent to a city centre? All of the local MPs\u2014if this bill has the effect that the Government intends it to\u2014will soon be hearing about some of the issues that have been raised in our city centres in their own backyards, and that is just pointless. Let\u2019s look at the root of the issue here and support people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe didn\u2019t have a lot of time to talk about it in committee stage, but almost every party in Opposition put forward a proposal to amend the bill which would provide some kind of duty to assist the people when they interact with someone from the Government or a provider. We had proposals that when police interact with people who are homeless or rough sleeping or begging, that there is a reference to the Ministry of Social Development and that those Government agencies actually take responsibility for making sure that something happens to ensure that that person is safe and that they receive stable accommodation. Now, this isn\u2019t a big ask. These services are already available, but somebody needs to take responsibility for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen we look at people who are struggling in our community, when we look at people who are the most vulnerable, when we look at people who our society has failed, what we say is our answer should not be \u201Cmove on\u201D. Our answer should be \u201CHow can we help you? How can we get you out of this place which has got you to such a terrible situation where you have nowhere to live, you have nowhere to go, you are asking for money on the street, you have no future being here unless you are assisted to move your life forwards.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a shameful day for our Parliament. It\u2019s a shameful way to treat our most vulnerable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u0022074f43b2ed46316fc7e27408c924f0fd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022074f43b2ed46316fc7e27408c924f0fd\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (09:13)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. This is a bill that criminalises homelessness. This is a fact. This has been a fact since the beginning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet the record show that this Government has made choices to increase homelessness. They changed the criteria for the most vulnerable people in Aotearoa seeking to access emergency housing and made the criteria of those making decisions to assess whether that person contributed to their own homelessness. They do not collect any reliable data on who is experiencing homelessness and where, which means that all of the front-line housing organisations have had to come together and pool together every scrap and shred that they have from the front lines to try and paint a picture of what is being experienced in Aotearoa right now. Even then, that reality is denied by the Ministers in this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet the record show that this Government chose to cancel thousands of State houses. Let the record show that this Government chose to reinstate no-cause evictions\u2014the provisions by which a renter can be kicked out of their home for no reason at all. Let us look over to the UK and see that no-fault evictions are the leading cause of homelessness in that country and that that was what was stated in the regulatory impact statement when it came to no-cause evictions and that they still did it anyway. And the UK has actually just repealed no-fault evictions because it is so disastrous.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet the record show that they did not fund the Housing First need that existed, that front-line organisations from Auckland to Christchurch to Wellington to Dunedin said, \u201CIf you fund us, we will be able to get every single person off the streets.\u201D, and that their requests were denied. Meanwhile, they hand out massive tax cuts for landlords. Meanwhile, they themselves accumulate more houses at a time of record homelessness. Shame\u2014shame on them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f3cfebb2a857ec9c3a35a3a00250c27\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019ve already lied about that one. Are you going to apologise?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289e17df2cc4bc6789cbe7a81488a88e9\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: Let the record show that they sanctioned benefits of the most vulnerable people in this country\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022360df6867f1fdb3e8c406fbb442fab1a\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: My apologies to interrupt the member, but interjections coming from my right should not be bringing the Speaker into the debate. Please refrain from doing so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022134ee27590fc5aa8d6f5ff5c3921b9a9\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: Let the record show how shameless they are that they can\u2019t handle the truth, they can\u2019t shut their mouths and listen to the consequences of their actions. Because these are the choices that they made and this is the response to the homelessness that they caused and they can\u2019t handle it\u2014they can\u2019t handle it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey are the ones who chose to use unemployment and unemployed people as a tool to manage interest rates while talented and skilled people in this country languish on the jobseeker benefit. They cannot handle the consequences of their own decisions. That is why they want to render the people that they have made vulnerable invisible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut this will not solve the problem. This will not end homelessness because they did not even attempt to address the root factors of why there is record-level homelessness in this country. It makes them uncomfortable to see what they have created. That is what we are talking about here today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet the record show that Police do not have their back. Let the record show Corrections, the Ministry of Justice do not have their back; the front-line organisations, the officials, and every single ministry did not have their back on this decision. Let the record show that businesses do not support what they are doing today. Let the record show that over 50 businesses in Wellington City do not support what they are doing. Let the record show that Karangahape Road Business Association in Auckland Central do not support what they\u2019re doing. They don\u2019t have the support of businesses. They do not\u2014not in our name here in Wellington Central, not in any city across this country because they are so far out of touch.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet the record show that we put forward an Amendment Paper for a duty to assist, that we put forward a pragmatic solution which would require the Ministry of Social Development to provide assistance to every person who had been moved on\u2014a provision that exists in other countries around the world and helps people who are experiencing homelessness access the support that they need urgently. Let the record show that they had the opportunity and they said no\u2014they said no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPaul Goldsmith is the only Minister I have ever heard talk proudly about this bill. He is the only one that I have seen get up in the media and talk proudly about criminalising homelessness. When I have engaged with Chris Bishop, the Minister of Housing, in my housing portfolio, he has never talked proudly about the move-on orders, and that is because, actually, I think that Cabinet Ministers in this Government are ashamed of this policy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s an idea that Paul Goldsmith has been pushing for decades\u2014for decades\u2014but it does not reflect the communities that he lives in or that he wants to represent, which is probably why he\u2019s never won an electorate in his life. Guess what! He won\u2019t be back here after the election because their party numbers will not get him back in there. So this is his last cruel attempt to punch down on people he has always hated. He has always hated homeless people. He tried to do this as an Auckland City councillor. He had to wait until he got himself in here on the list\u2014on the list. Because let\u2019s be real, an electorate MP could never say the things that he\u2019s saying, which is why his colleagues don\u2019t repeat the things that he says.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet the record show that that Minister who has brought this bill through does not even understand the system that he is in charge of. Let the record show how petty and pathetic this response is compared to what other people during his time as a councillor did. I brought this example up in the second reading of this bill. At the time when Paul Goldsmith was an Auckland City councillor pushing to ban homeless people from the inner city, there was another man in Auckland City that saw the rise in homelessness and chose to do something different. That man was Judge Tony Fitzgerald, who established the homelessness court. It shows that you\u2019ve got two different people here. You\u2019ve got Judge Tony, who understands the criminal justice system and understands the complexity of homelessness and what is required to fix it, and then you have cruel, mean-spirited, nasty pieces of work like Paul Goldsmith, who turns around and decides to rally up all the homeless people, send them to prison, and lock them up. It is disgusting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is one of the most shameful days in our country, because you can end homelessness. As I said in the second reading, it is possible to end homelessness. The evidence-based solutions to ending homelessness are abundantly clear. If only this House would not be so ignorant and would listen to the actual people who are working on the front line, and what they have told us will work, if only we just supported them, we gave them the resources necessary to open more emergency accommodation across the country, to provide the wraparound care that people need.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to finally acknowledge the fact that the age that applies to move-on orders has been increased because of the Police, actually, and because\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002245221e9c3385bfca8bbc2e57b4eed37b\u0022\u003ERima Nakhle\u003C/span\u003E: Well, no, because we were lobbying as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022736acf66772dac4d552dcb1f25e53842\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014of advice from the Police\u2014because of advice from the Police that you heard, Rima Nakhle. We heard that advice\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200d345449a4239f3056803350419ec42\u0022\u003ERima Nakhle\u003C/span\u003E: You don\u2019t know the conversations that take place behind closed doors, Tamatha.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d48c95ae683b59fea35a6079683724e1\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014so I thank them for making that change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a5d8c249275d091c2853e5f2e0b18b6\u0022\u003ERima Nakhle\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re not omnipresent and know everything going on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d5651c3bfba8fd0fd4623d687f60ce50\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: I wish that the Government\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220980eaa8ebb58ace6c72a3eabecf4532\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: Order! Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1ac21c1dcd1a1007c5504e5bf6e559b\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, cut it out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e4b30b23052c5e1ab67ccd6f3476f6b\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, interruptions should not bring the Speaker into the debate, and it is not an opportunity to have an extended period of sentence structure. They should be discreet interjections and to the point. Apologies, Tamatha Paul.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cf32c4de86ae1de1da1fe7c59ecda49f\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: Could I please have my\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002201269b7aeac3e49de3f43156a0aa333f\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ll reset it to one minute.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002205b5aaf10467eb10d9981906b1a8bba9\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. What this is is defensiveness from the Government. They cannot control themselves from responding, from the truth. But guess what! You\u2019re not just gonna hear it in here; you are gonna hear it over the next two months. They are gonna hear it for the next two months. When we come into Government and when we reverse this cruel, punishing law, they will hang their heads in shame and will for ever be remembered as the cruel Government that chose to put the cruel ideas of a few over the wellbeing, potential, and humanity and dignity of the most vulnerable people in this country that they will never speak to\u2014they will never speak to. They get into their limousines, they drive through the city centres, they go through the tunnel to the Koru Lounge, and then they go back to their mansions. That\u2019s how it works.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EHave a conversation with the people that you are making decisions on behalf of. Have a conversation to the people who are on the front line, who know this better than they will ever do, because they were born with silver spoons in their mouths and they have no empathy at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022373c6091ae6913ae7cfbd3a7c50bbe3b\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, the member\u2019s time has expired.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022 data-id=\u00229ed2ff833afe91c500c7f14b75cea05f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229ed2ff833afe91c500c7f14b75cea05f\u0022\u003ETODD STEPHENSON (ACT) (09:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Look, I rise on behalf of ACT to speak in support of the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELook, in ACT, we make no apology for having the backs of New Zealanders in regards to law and order issues. As I said yesterday, still the same day in parliamentary time, we came in, we inherited a mess in law and order, and this is yet another tool that we\u2019re putting in place to deal with anti-social behaviour. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet\u2019s be clear: ACT secured the changes in this bill and we worked through it with our colleagues to do that. We believe it strikes the right balance. Look, we want to make sure that our streets and towns are safe for New Zealanders, and we\u2019ll be campaigning on that just like we did last election. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u00220c03d8523f6025f256ca75bdbaf99d68\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220c03d8523f6025f256ca75bdbaf99d68\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Police) (09:25)\u003C/span\u003E: I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to talk on the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First strongly supports this piece of legislation. Putting aside some of the performance that we\u2019ve seen so far this morning, I think we could reflect on the similar speeches that were reflected during the gang patch ban: \u201CThis will never work; this is the worst piece of legislation.\u201D Actually, as we see in the streets, it has worked perfectly. The police who reflected concerns have been applauding the piece of legislation. Every meeting I go to with the police, they reflect on how positive that piece of legislation is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis piece of legislation, despite this idea that we are all born with silver spoons in our mouths, I can assure you that we were not. As for riding around in our limousines, I can assure you I walk the Wellington streets every single day. This is not about punching down; this is about providing an opportunity to allow our communities to use our inner city centres. When there is an issue\u2014and this is where we have great faith in our police, across this side of the House\u2014the police have the powers to intervene. We\u2019ve asked the police to do something. They have outlined the restrictions on doing anything practical, and this Government has delivered a piece of legislation that will give them the practical tools they need. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor a long time, law-abiding citizens of this country have watched our city centres, the hearts of our communities and economies, be handed over to those who think civilised society does not apply to them. So this bill takes our streets back. It gives an opportunity to put some common-sense tools in the hands of police. It ensures that constables are able to intervene. This idea that we are criminalising homelessness is just na\u00EFve, performative nonsense from the other side of the House. This is about allowing us to engage, to move people, and to intervene\u2014provide those necessary supports that they\u2019re saying we\u2019re not providing. This is a really essential tool to give to the police. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is the performance that we see on that side of the House where they make a lot of noise and recite a lot of performative nonsense because they won\u2019t get challenged, because it\u2019ll be put on YouTube, and then they get to say, \u201CLook how powerful and strong we are.\u201D What we\u2019re actually doing is practical steps. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m the Minister for Seniors, and I recognise the concerns that older people have about even using a money machine in the town centre because they feel unsafe and uneasy. They talk about the issues they have about getting their access. So this is about ensuring that we can say to them that we\u2019re doing things. This isn\u2019t arresting people. This isn\u2019t making people criminalised, as that side of the House would like to do. This is about providing an opportunity for them to move on. If they return, yes, then there\u2019s an issue. Why would they return to where they\u2019ve been told to move on unless they\u2019re refusing to acknowledge the rights of other New Zealanders? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAbsolutely, New Zealand First fully endorses this bill and commends it to the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f92bfb831c4c0fa6ec657bf76f8e0681\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: This is a split call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022 data-id=\u00220c00440c3e0181dadeb76b4865d8687a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b11bafcf5b5427480393ffeef4fe6e8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220c00440c3e0181dadeb76b4865d8687a\u0022\u003EORIINI KAIPARA (Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori\u2014T\u0101maki Makaurau) (09:29)\u003C/span\u003E: The heart is heavy today, this morning, waking up to messages from wh\u0101nau on the streets who have accessed some form of device to message me direct to say, \u201CPlease save us. If this bill goes through, our lives will be 10 times worse than what it is already now.\u201D By-laws across T\u0101maki Makaurau have already been enacted. People have already been moved on for the last few months. Ask Aaron Hendry from Kick Back. He has been screaming from the rooftops of T\u0101maki-makau-rau, on K Road specifically, that this bill is going to cause more damage than do anymore good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELast night, this House had a choice: remove harmful behaviour from our streets or remove poor people from out of sight. The Government chose the second. It was offered a clean amendment: begging and rough sleeping could have been removed as stand-alone triggers, while every power dealing with threats, intimidation, disruption, obstruction, and breaches of the peace remained. Government members voted to keep poverty in the clause. That vote tells us what this bill is really about and who it\u2019s really for.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA person may now be ordered away, not for harming anyone, but for asking for kai. In a cost of living crisis where no food banks have been replenished with the necessary funding that they need, begging for kai should not be criminalised. For sleeping, they will be criminalised for arranging the only positions they have in a way that suggests they may stay. Then comes the legal machinery: the order, the duty to leave, the risk of the breach, a fine of up to $1,000, and possible jail time. No home, no money, but here\u2019s a fine, and dare to challenge the fine or refuse to move\u2014go to jail. That\u2019s the logic this House is about to make law, and that is heavy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Justice Committee did remove under-18s, and we supported that correction, but an 18\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E birthday is not a housing intervention. It doesn\u2019t make the person safe, nor does it cure a trauma, produce a tenancy, or return whenua. In the words of a rangatahi living on the streets of T\u0101maki-makau-rau through the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EMore Than a Home\u003C/span\u003E report by Manaaki Rangatahi: \u201CMy moko will have a whare.\u201D That\u2019s the promise of intergenerational repair. This bill offers intergenerational displacement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor M\u0101ori, homelessness didn\u2019t arrive without history. Whenua was taken, communities were fragmented, te reo and m\u0101tauranga were attacked, and economic policy channelled M\u0101ori into insecurity and then blamed wh\u0101nau for the outcomes. Dr Kathie Irwin describes that path across generations. You don\u2019t arrive at old age without economic security by chance. Policy walked w\u0101hine M\u0101ori there, and now, on their own whenua, w\u0101hine M\u0101ori may be told to move. W\u0101hine M\u0101ori are actually disproportionately represented in today\u2019s population of homeless across Aotearoa. The Coalition to End Women\u2019s Homelessness names the truth. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAotearoa is home for M\u0101ori. W\u0101hine M\u0101ori are not without a homeland; they are unhoused through a process of colonisation that failed to protect their rights. Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori will not call that failure neutral, and we will not accept another coercive Crown response as the cure. We put practical safeguards before this House: somewhere safe and accessible to go; a duty of care; protected access to healthcare, food, transport, and outreach; a necessity and proportionality test; protection against repeated orders; early independent review; and transparent M\u0101ori data, which is needed. The Government refused every single path from displacement to support\u2014shame! Shame on you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Youth Homelessness Prevention Bill, which I put through this House, would require action before homelessness. It\u2019s about preventing the problem. You cannot hide nor disguise the truth that exists across our streets. You cannot hide, and you should address the problem and face it head on. Stop hiding the truth. We have more than 100,000 people in desperate need of housing. You have more than 160,000 homes across this motu with no people living in them. Unlock them and house our wh\u0101nau. House them directly now. The solutions already exist. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou had only one shot and you\u2019ve failed to deliver it. That is the same on your record, and I thank the member to my right who noted every single attempt that we, on the left side, have made. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe will continue to fight, despite the fact that the House rises\u20147 November is our chance to make the necessary change to create a better future for Aotearoa and for all our mokopuna. We absolutely oppose this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022b00e054b48c9a5a0051d38e965d320eb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b00e054b48c9a5a0051d38e965d320eb\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (09:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. This is a shameful bill, not simply because it criminalises homelessness, but the fact is that this Government has proven yet again that they in the pockets of the few. They are in the pocket of lobbyists and not of New Zealanders. They are a Government that does not care about you, as New Zealanders, and your interests.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a Government that doesn\u2019t care about evidence or about data. This is a Government that see itself as being above the law. This is a Government that perpetuates schoolyard bullying behaviour in trying to oppress the people of Aotearoa, and trying to befuddle them and gaslighting them into thinking that they are the ones who are the reason for the situation and the circumstances they\u2019ve found themselves in. That is false, and those members know it. I don\u2019t know how any member of this Government can look at themselves in the mirror in the morning and think about what they have done. How do any of them face themselves? How do any of them face their families, or face their communities, for those of them who are electorate MPs?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister of Justice has said that this is a bill that is for every New Zealander. We have heard through the Justice Committee about the people who will be harmed as a result of this bill. Where is the so-called every New Zealander who will be hurt by this bill? What about the seniors, who have seen a massive increase in homelessness? We have heard from Housing First \u014Ctautahi that seniors make up the highest proportion and the highest increase in the social housing register. Not only are they more vulnerable but there\u2019s also the added stigma of asking for help. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhere is the so-called every New Zealander when women and children are going to be hurt by this bill? We\u2019ve heard that they are in city centres, in well-lit places, because they are the places that they feel safe. They are the places where they can find support. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat about the youth who will be harmed by this bill, particularly rangatahi M\u0101ori? What about the rainbow youth who will be harmed by this bill? What about the disabled youth who will be harmed by this bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, you hear members of that Government talking about \u201CWell, they just need to move on.\u201D Move on where? Where are they going to be moving on to? We have yet to hear the Minister or anyone definitively tell us where are they going to be moving on to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOur co-leader Chl\u00F6e Swarbrick, our Auckland Central MP, put in an amendment for a duty to assist. We\u2019re not asking for the moon. All we are asking for is a requirement that if they get moved on, that there is a requirement that they be directed to the support that they need. That should be basic\u2014that should be fundamental\u2014and yet the Minister doesn\u2019t give a crap.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe reiterate again that nobody wants this bill. The police don\u2019t want it. Members of the communities, Retail New Zealand\u2014I want to thank those people who came out, including the seniors and the elders, and said, \u201CI have never experienced homelessness, but I know this bill is wrong.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis Government doesn\u2019t care about the voices of our communities because\u2014I reiterate again\u2014the only housing policy of this Government is prison. That is their only housing policy, and they will continue to tinker with the data and they will continue to reject people because that is their performance indicator for the Ministry of Social Development to reject people for emergency housing. The Greens will not support this bill, because we know there\u2019s a win-win situation if we have warm, dry, and safe housing for all of us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022 data-id=\u00227034648b4d8af153b72f487791f9f70b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227034648b4d8af153b72f487791f9f70b\u0022\u003ETOM RUTHERFORD (National\u2014Bay of Plenty) (09:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I want to take a little bit of time with my contribution this morning to talk about what transpired at our select committee process, because I actually think that there is a lot of emotion, and I recognise why that is the case across the House in many different forms. But I actually want to talk about why I think the select committee process\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e76044f942678bdd182dc84f41b963fa\u0022\u003ETamatha Paul\u003C/span\u003E: Some of us do care, actually. But that\u2019s hard for you to comprehend.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d38a4b4373c088028913be541035753e\u0022\u003ETOM RUTHERFORD\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. Tamatha Paul, I didn\u2019t criticise or yell out once during your contribution. I listened.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222de0e27e0582a8cf0fdc67e4d1821d08\u0022\u003ETamatha Paul\u003C/span\u003E: Did you talk to your colleagues?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd9e01b561e1276294e0c181db2d0a7c\u0022\u003ETOM RUTHERFORD\u003C/span\u003E: I listened\u2014I listened. And I like to think that I\u2019m standing here and I\u2019m about to talk about what we did at the select committee. We had nearly 8,000 submissions. We undertook over four days of full oral hearings from submitters\u2014recognising that there was a large amount who had issues with the legislation. We took those views seriously. We, as the Justice Committee, did what I think New Zealanders would expect of us as a committee to do: read the submissions, listened, worked collaboratively in the select committee, but then also\u2014not just there but then also outside of that committee with our ministerial colleagues to say, \u201CThese are the issues we as a committee are hearing from the general public. Please can we look to see if we can make some recommended changes there.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m really proud where we landed. One of the first things we heard was that the age that this legislation, when it was first introduced, was for anyone of 14 years or over. By far, a number of submitters from across the country told us that that was not right. So we took that back with us, as members of the committee, took that to our Ministers, we took that to our colleagues and said, \u201CWe\u2019d love to see it increased to 18.\u201D I\u2019m glad we got to that right place. That\u2019s what I think New Zealanders expect of the select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen we had things like whether the fine was too high\u2014$2,000. There\u2019s many, many Kiwis out there who simply would not be able to afford the $2,000. We got that changed to $1,000. Then there were the things about the provisions for freedom campers and if they got caught up in this\u2014or people out there who collect for charities. Many of us in this House have stood out in public places and collected for organisations like the Breast Cancer Foundation, on Daffodil Day. I collected, a couple of weeks ago, for my local Dementia and Alzheimer\u2019s. There was never any intention of this bill applying to people undertaking that work. We remedied and corrected that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen there were discussions around begging and unreasonable begging. The ability for people after receiving a move-on order to come back to the area. Whether police needed to actually believe someone provided false information or needed to be able to prove that they had provided false information. Those are the things that we, as a collective Justice Committee, fixed and tidied up in this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe did our job. Not just \u201Cwe\u201D as in the National Party and the ACT Party and New Zealand First but \u201Cwe\u201D as a House. I say thank you to those members who engaged and worked collaboratively on the select committee to get the bill to a place where we think we can be happy to progress it in this House. That is what we are focused on. That\u2019s what I\u2019m proud of as the chair of the Justice Committee that we\u2019ve delivered for the House and for the people of New Zealand. That\u2019s why I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022 data-id=\u00221df2cf516f807b2ec8ce8f748c7ac34b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221df2cf516f807b2ec8ce8f748c7ac34b\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON (Labour) (09:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Good to hear that k\u014Drero from the chair of the Justice Committee. I accept some of that k\u014Drero in terms of wanting to at least address some of the issue that people had brought up. There\u2019s no doubt the select committees work better when there is a bipartisan approach.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think, though, with this particular one, while there are a few things like that the chairman has talked about\u2014and rightfully so, and I\u2019m pleased they came out with the right result\u2014the reality is that it is still not enough. It is still not enough. I acknowledge the chair addressing those areas, and I\u2019m pleased to hear that, but it\u2019s not enough.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou can hear the pain and the frustration from members on this side of the House today because the reality is that more than 98 percent of the 7,680 submissions opposed the bill. So we can\u2019t get away from the fact that, while there was some work done to address a few issues, a huge majority\u201498 percent of the submissions\u2014said no to this bill. They say no to this bill because it\u2019s a cruel bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Attorney-General himself\u2014or was it herself at the time? Was it Judith? I\u2019m not sure\u2014identified New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 issues. It may well have been Judith Collins.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253c17413710296302ab5b3f1df4a7c25\u0022\u003ETodd Stephenson\u003C/span\u003E: It was Chris Bishop.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d0f4f08e3ba43a96cb822421de3f67d\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, it was Chris Bishop. OK. Thanks for that. So there we go, one of the most senior Ministers in this Government, if not, close to the most senior Minister, the Attorney-General identifies New Zealand Bill of Rights Act issues, and what is the response from the committee? What is the response from the Government? They continue with this nonsense.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENo one wants the police to have these arrest powers for the homeless. These rough sleepers need support, need help; they don\u2019t need prison. This is what people are saying. We\u2019re also clear, too, and you\u2019ve heard that today, the Government created the homelessness we\u2019re seeing. Every single housing advocate warned this Government their re-definition of who could apply for the emergency would result in more homelessness. We said this to the Minister of Housing\u2014he happens to be the Attorney-General too. We\u2019ve said this to Tama Potaka. But it\u2019s just on deaf ears all the time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat happened after the Government ignored every voice in the sector and changed who was eligible for emergency housing? Well, we had the exact spike in homelessness that was predicted. Our advocates were saying that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI saw Helen Robinson in the gallery last night. I want to acknowledge her work; tremendous work, in terms of what\u2019s happening on the streets in terms of what\u2019s happening from Helen and the City Mission, who are doing the business, having relationships still with this Government, as they must\u2014as they must. But their budgets are being cut back. They\u2019re living off the smell of an oily rag, and this passionate advocate Helen Robinson, who sat in the gallery last night and watched all the k\u014Drero, continues despite the continued attacks from this Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHow did the Government go about dealing with the homelessness their policy manufactured? Well, I\u2019ve said it before with Minister Goldsmith, they\u2019ve criminalised being homeless. It\u2019s as simple as that. He won\u2019t accept it and the Government won\u2019t accept it, but they\u2019ve criminalised a whole area of homelessness to gloss over\u2014to gloss over\u2014their social policy failure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELike everyone else on this side of the House, we believe that this Government should be ashamed of the actions they\u2019ve taken\u2014so ashamed at the poverty they\u2019ve caused, and now they prefer to arrest the homeless so that they won\u2019t be embarrassed in front of the cruise ship tourists. This is what it\u2019s coming down to. Of course we want to support business people in Auckland. Everyone on this side of the House wants to do that. But we must show some humanity, and humanity is not being shown in this instance. It\u2019s shameful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThese Kiwis, these people, some of them are down on their luck\u2014we all know that. But many of them are our wh\u0101nau, our community, and we throw them into the street and then we criminalise them on to the street. Of all the malice and spite that the Government has overseen in the last three years, arresting the homeless is surely one of the most obscene strategies and actions that a Government could roll out with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut I do want to congratulate Minister Goldsmith. I think he deserves congratulations here. We should salute what he\u2019s done, because back in 2008, when he was an Auckland City councillor\u2014he\u2019s actually been trying to arrest the homeless for 18 years. In a Radio New Zealand report from 2008, Minister Goldsmith was quoted as saying, \u201CIt\u2019s unacceptable for vagrants to be seen on the city streets\u201D ,and he wanted the police to move them on. Well, congratulations, Minister Goldsmith\u201418 years later, you finally got your wish. You can finally arrest the homeless for offending your sensibilities. It\u2019s a shame he\u2019s not here\u2014it\u2019s a shame he\u2019s not here. Minister Goldsmith is proof-positive that if you\u2019re mean-spirited for almost two decades, you too can rise through the National Party ranks to kick someone out who is weaker than you\u2014to kick someone in the guts who is weaker than you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I want to congratulate Minister Goldsmith! He and I do a few things together, and I forgot to congratulate him this morning in terms of achieving a lifelong ambition in terms of criminalising the homeless. Well done to \u201CGoldie\u201D! Well done to Minister Goldsmith. And to any other young aspiring National Party candidates out there, this is the way forward for you. Declare war on the vulnerable, declare war on the weak, and you too can rise up to be one of the most senior members, if not the most senior-portfolio holder, in the National Party. Well done, \u201CGoldie\u201D\u2014you should be ashamed of yourself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ae664ace2d2f5fd8a18db763490b40da\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Not me\u2014not me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022715425704e4e4283acdae2119fd3e77b\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: My apologies, Mr Speaker. Not you, of course; Minister Goldsmith should be totally ashamed of himself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EYou can\u2019t move on someone who has nowhere to move to. That\u2019s the point that everyone\u2019s making. You know, it\u2019s like, \u201CWe\u2019ll move them on, kick these ones out, kick this one out,\u201D Move to where? Why don\u2019t they move to Minister Goldsmith\u2019s house or go to Minister Potaka\u2019s house? Where are these people going to go? It is such a ruthless, cold, heartless strategy, and I\u2019m sure that if you\u2019re not going to listen to Helen Robinson, who has the feel of the streets in the Auckland inner city, then who are you going to listen to? All this bill is doing is criminalising poverty by another name. Fining desperately poor people is nonsensical. Under this bill the homeless can be fined $2,000. Where are people who are homeless going to find 2,000? [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] Oh, from the ACT Party?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a3194467ccafbe0ce2c0fd8cddaeb297\u0022\u003ETodd Stephenson\u003C/span\u003E: No\u2014you got the number wrong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223b22825bba66e6b65370ea92b4f3ca61\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, what\u2019s the number?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc0d1cf21a43a3807d16188a455d3d16\u0022\u003ETodd Stephenson\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s $1,000.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022323d3c783d3c1898010b43a74cac4bc9\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I say it\u2019s $2,000.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002263c680658e9720751e7287c143316ba4\u0022\u003ETodd Stephenson\u003C/span\u003E: Well, you\u2019re wrong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227b4d3bb878f0c46327186b0d78545ee1\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll still say it. I reckon it\u2019s $2,000, so let\u2019s debate it. I\u2019m sure it\u2019s $2,000. Maybe it\u2019s not. Who cares anyway? You are still attacking the homeless, and who\u2019s going to be paying the fines in terms of the homeless? The ACT Party donors? We know that there are hundreds of them. It is such a sad state of affairs here. In the last couple of weeks of Parliament, we have an unprecedented attack on vulnerable people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7b26179d004b087839b8080bcdf17bd\u0022\u003ETodd Stephenson\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, like the Speaker!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222faae79e7e80605669409341dad40f06\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, we heard what you said. We heard when your ACT member played up in the House. You didn\u2019t say a word, did you? Gutless wonder.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002228e324604cdba4b5cdfd0d173f3b4bbd\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Back to the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6f27a9850c78582cbc8cf1e46695ec2\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Anyway, coming back to the topic\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220b61495fb5c83c4afeb4c46ad926ed5d\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EThat\u2019s out of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b2ec2d56773065178cd29d88473136b\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, you\u2019ve got to be out of order sometimes\u2014I have to put you in your place. These ACT members who breach rules all the time don\u2019t say a word when their members break the rules. But I come back to the homeless\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a83ae8c8d45d26e41b14a137125816c1\u0022\u003ETodd Stephenson\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019s a joke.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f079bbdf8db5df8be5aa19cb3b861683\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: It is a joke, you are a joke, and the ACT Party is a joke. This bill is a joke. Shame on the ACT Party for supporting it. Shame on New Zealand First. Shame on this useless, rotten Government who continue to attack the vulnerable. So go jump in the lake.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022 data-id=\u0022d250479fff60e06d2c96f2671a360c74\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d250479fff60e06d2c96f2671a360c74\u0022\u003ERYAN HAMILTON (National\u2014Hamilton East) (09:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is a pleasure to speak on this bill. I was actually involved at the start of it as a member\u2019s bill after conversations with my area commander in Hamilton, Andrea McBeth. So for members opposite to be saying that the Police are opposed to it isn\u2019t really accurate, because the area commander Andrea McBeth had done a paper to support this right across the country, and, in fact, the district commander was also very supportive of it. In every state in Australia, they use move-on orders in different ways and with different strengths and jurisdictions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is this thing called Summary Offences Act 1981. If someone is displaying anti-social behaviour\u2014for example, they are drunk and their behaviour is starting to escalate\u2014the police can\u2019t do anything. They can\u2019t do anything until the behaviour escalates to such a point that they can then arrest the person. The problem is that by then, violence has often been undertaken, and there has been damage to property and damage to people, and the move-on order is a way to intervene early to prevent behaviour escalating.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo the move-on order is actually quite broad. It is about anti-social behaviour. You could even, for example, have a creepy dude in a van scoping out school children, which is completely inappropriate and disgusting behaviour but there is nothing the police can do. But with a move-on order, they can ascertain that that\u2019s inappropriate behaviour and issue a move-on order on that vehicle. So the point is that although this bill has been weaponised by the Opposition as being against the homeless and the rough sleeping and the begging, that is a very small part of a very broad and holistic bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPolice have a range of skills and discretions that they can use and deploy. One of the worst things we can do for those that are sleeping rough and begging is to do nothing. The Opposition would just like to point the finger at the Government and say that we\u2019re being mean and we\u2019re being cruel, but the reality of it is that leaving them in those conditions is being cruel. The move-on order is an opportunity to intervene, to ascertain why they are there, and to actually say, \u201CThis is not acceptable for you and for anyone in the community.\u201D It is an opportunity to offer support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo this bill is far broader than what the Opposition would have us believe. It\u2019s another tool in the tool box for our police force, and I am pleased to commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022abdaba04688fe68130530f56e256b5d9\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The next call is a split five-minute call\u2014Dan Rosewarne.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224ee4471ecdcf4eeda5bd6179167372f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022a233cb0193f421662759c156485df490\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224ee4471ecdcf4eeda5bd6179167372f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a233cb0193f421662759c156485df490\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (09:56)\u003C/span\u003E: As this debate comes to a close, I just want to acknowledge the thousands of New Zealanders who took the time to make a submission, appear before the Justice Committee, and share their experiences. Their contribution actually made this a better bill than the one that first arrived in the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis legislation as introduced would have allowed move-on orders to be issued to vulnerable 14-, 15-, 16- and 17-year-olds. It took submitters, officials, Opposition members, and ultimately pressure from within the Government\u2019s own support parties to have that removed. That was the right outcome at the end of the day. A homeless young person needs help; they don\u2019t need a move-on order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill that leaves this House today is less bad than the one that entered it, but the core problem remains unchanged. This legislation is built on the idea that if a social problem becomes less visible, then somehow it is solved\u2014when it hasn\u2019t been. If someone is sleeping rough tonight in Wellington, Christchurch, Auckland, Dunedin, or anywhere else in New Zealand, they will still be sleeping rough tomorrow whether they receive a move-on order or not, and if somebody is struggling with addiction, mental health challenges, family violence, or poverty, those challenges do not disappear simply because a piece of paper tells them to move on down the road.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Government talks a lot about reclaiming public spaces, but public spaces already belong to all New Zealanders. They belong to the business owner opening their shop in the morning. They belong to the family heading into town for the day, and, yes, they also belong to the person who has nowhere else to go. What troubled me throughout this debate was that the Government seems determined to treat homelessness as a matter of public disorder rather than a sign that something else has gone wrong. Most people sleeping rough are not there because they choose that life; they are there because housing costs have become unaffordable, because relationships have broken down, because of mental illness, and because of addiction. It is also because they have experienced violence and the systems that are meant to be there to help them have failed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen those failures occur, I don\u2019t think that New Zealanders expect Parliament\u2019s response to be to move them along. I think they expect us to ask how we can actually fix the problem, and the reality is that this bill creates absolutely no housing. It creates no emergency accommodation, it creates no new mental health services, and it creates no new addiction programmes. Also, it creates no duty for anyone to provide assistance. What it does create is another enforcement tool and another consequence for people who are already among the most vulnerable in our communities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThroughout this process, we heard officials raise a lot of concerns.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe heard legal experts. We heard charities, churches, service providers, and community organisations, and we even heard from people who worked directly with businesses and city centres who questioned whether this approach would actually achieve what the Government claims that it would achieve. At every stage, the same question keeps surfacing: what happens after the move-on order has been issued? The Government has never actually properly answered that question, because if there is nowhere to move on to, then the move-on order becomes little more than a mechanism for shifting people out of sight when the cruise ships arrive, and out of sight should never be confused with out of hardship. The Government will no doubt point to this bill as evidence, as taking action. But legislation should be judged by whether it solves a problem, not whether it actually generates a headline.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWill fewer people be homeless because of this bill? Will people be housed because of this bill? I don\u2019t think so, and for that reason, that\u2019s why we don\u2019t support the bill. Thank you, Mr Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022739b3bbed7fe4186aa30494700144b3a\u0022 data-id=\u002201dfbe5e6f89107feba38a0204536e8a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022739b3bbed7fe4186aa30494700144b3a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002201dfbe5e6f89107feba38a0204536e8a\u0022\u003EPAULO GARCIA (National\u2014New Lynn) (10:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, thank you. Firstly, I\u2019d like to acknowledge the Justice Committee chair and the members, who went through a process that was not easy for any one of us. The vulnerability that people who are affected by this bill, successive Governments have sought to use tools that they had and that we are now trying to have to help them out of the vulnerable state that they\u2019re in. Move-on orders are a tool for a specific portion of people when they are vulnerable and on the streets.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI acknowledge also the previous speakers who have spoken with civility and dignity, and I acknowledge the politics from which they speak. However, when people in this House speak and perform in a way that inflames the public, I think that it is really quite unreasonable and they take advantage of people who are out there and who are vulnerable. It\u2019s sad. I understand the politics behind it, but I don\u2019t understand when things are misrepresented and mis-declared, and mainly to incense a public that\u2019s already vulnerable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI myself thought through this bill and took the time and asked many people about it, and I have come to the point that I can stand here and commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u00226936945db1f564a27ae654cd4c1a094d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226936945db1f564a27ae654cd4c1a094d\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (10:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wonder if Paulo Garcia spoke to any homeless people or people who were on the brink of homelessness, because, as a central city MP, Christchurch Central city MP, we have a homelessness problem, as do many central cities and other places in New Zealand. And it\u2019s got worse, you know. This Government has made homelessness worse. It\u2019s extraordinary to hear Tama Potaka come to this House and celebrate that he has cleared out emergency housing, and he doesn\u2019t know where they\u2019ve gone. Sure, some have gone into social housing or private housing, but we know, and I know, that a number of our homeless people could be housed, but this Government chooses not to house them. This is what they choose to do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI had a person come into my office who had once been a scaffolder, had fallen off the scaffolding, had very seriously injured his back and went to hospital, lost his job, lost his accommodation while he was in hospital, turned up at my office in his car for housing assistance. He was told that he didn\u2019t need emergency housing, so he went and slept in his car in a car park until his back got so infected that he went back to hospital. It was only at that point that we managed to persuade the Ministry of Social Development that this man needed a place to sleep. That is Government policy. That is not an administrative error. That is a direction from the Government about when they\u2019ll provide housing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo is it any surprise that retailers are concerned, that people are troubled when they see people on the street? No, it\u2019s not a surprise, but the cause of it is these Government policies. They have chosen that. They have chosen to put a squeeze on our economy and people. The car park at the Holy Trinity Church was being used as a place for people to sleep, a place that was relatively safe, that had running water and sanitation. I went down there and spoke to people, the number of people who had had jobs but lost their jobs and couldn\u2019t keep paying their rent. So to make ends meet, they left their rental, rather than running up rent bills, and whilst they tried to sort themselves out, they were living in that car park. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the sad fact is that it\u2019s pretty hard to sort yourself out, find a new job, look good for your job interview, keep good nutrition, keep yourself looking tidy from a church car park in a ute. But they were doing their best. But that is a choice that this Government has made. They have chosen to increase unemployment. They have chosen to squeeze the Public Service. They have chosen to make it harder to get a job in this economy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd you know what they\u2019re doing in housing? Here\u2019s a frightening fact\u2014here\u2019s a frightening fact. In Christchurch, they have built more prison cells than houses. That is the kind of approach that this Government has to problems around homelessness in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo what we\u2019ve now got is that when someone is without shelter, when someone is hungry and alone, what\u2019s the response of this Government? Is it a compassionate response that says, \u201CBrother, I will feed you. Sister, I will give you a roof.\u201D? No, it\u2019s not\u2014let\u2019s move on; move out of sight. It\u2019s entirely unworkable. The fact of the matter is that here we are. Someone is sitting on the street and they want some food, some money to help them with their rent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELook, we know; we\u2019re not going to pretend that all of these people are easy to deal with. We know that they sometimes have mental health, addiction issues. They have criminal records. They\u2019ve come through the State system, perhaps through State care institutions and prisons. They\u2019re people who have suffered harm and trauma, and they themselves may have caused that as well. But there is no one who is undeserving of our help. There is no one who is undeserving of our help. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHere we have a Government that says, \u201CIf you beg, we can move you out of sight. And if you come back and beg again, you\u2019re a criminal.\u201D You\u2019re a criminal for being in need, for not going away and getting out of my sight when I want you to. It\u2019s like an evil Victorian parent\u2014\u201CGet out of my sight. I don\u2019t want to see you.\u201D It doesn\u2019t disappear the problem. In fact, it exacerbates it. We know that these people, that the people who need our help, are vulnerable. We know, and we accept\u2014on this side of the House, we accept\u2014that there is social harm going on here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut we want to address the cause of the harm. This is a sticking plaster over a wound. This needs genuine attention. There are ways\u2014we know there are ways\u2014to address this. We know that the mental health issues can be addressed. We know that the housing issues, even for the most difficult to house, can be addressed. We know that the addiction issues can be addressed. We know that the income issues can be addressed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut this Government is making choices. It\u2019s making choices not to address the causes of this harm. It\u2019s making the choice to appeal to the least-attractive instincts of the public, to say, \u201CThose people are not us, they are somebody else\u201D; to say that they are not deserving of compassion and care; they\u2019re deserving of punishment and exclusion. Those are the principles that I would hope are most foreign to this House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELook, the select committee did listen to a lot of the submissions, and changes were made. It was interesting, and, in some ways, gratifying, in a sense, to see the change in demeanour of the members of Parliament from the other side who were listening, who came in thinking one thing, but when they listened to the stories\u2014when they listened to the stories, and when they listened to the evidence\u2014they came around.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd, of course, one of the most compelling was about the Minister\u2019s initial idea, that you could move on and then fine or possibly imprison a 14-year-old for not having somewhere to sleep\u2014a 14-year-old for asking for something to eat. The mind boggles that someone, somewhere thought that was a good idea. That person was Paul Goldsmith. That person, Paul Goldsmith, is the person who\u2019s entrusted with our justice system. And his initial idea was to criminalise 14-year-olds because they don\u2019t move on and they beg more than once. That is the person that we think\u2014well, that this Government thinks\u2014is best trusted with the justice portfolio.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo here we have a bill\u2014it\u2019s not as bad as it was, but it is a bad bill. It doesn\u2019t fix the problem. It doesn\u2019t provide a roof over anyone\u2019s head. It doesn\u2019t fill an empty tummy. What it does is it moves the problem away, out of sight, out of the Government\u2019s mind\u2014but I hope it\u2019s never out of our mind.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022 data-id=\u00224657fa3e28235a0a47ba3c65ca54cca6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224657fa3e28235a0a47ba3c65ca54cca6\u0022\u003ERIMA NAKHLE (National\u2014Takanini) (10:13)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve heard a lot of talk about the champagne socialists on K Road and all of those over there and how bad this is\u2014they\u2019ve said this is awful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI haven\u2019t heard anyone on the other side talk about the business owners in South Auckland\u2014the migrant business owners that are trying to pay off a mortgage. I haven\u2019t heard anyone talk about the Indian Business Association that gave a submission in support of this bill. No, they only go over there when they want votes\u2014when they want to harvest votes. This is helping our migrant communities as well. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill be now read a third time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 47\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e54547d16f0e44b5abbc5e19e56b0ca5\u0022\u003EAgricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ae68b1f7f6146c3c3e25d14f10ea650e\u0022\u003ELegislative Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u00226053b05e06df149cd12edf2974962424\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226053b05e06df149cd12edf2974962424\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (10:16)\u003C/span\u003E: on behalf of the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister for Food Safety\u003C/span\u003E: I present a legislative statement on the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254f7dee9fe1169200eb0a8e4c8d80917\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022dea6ef3f81d92de22be90cae7b11a777\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u00229f6a094ddf6c84536e6e27c0ccf289c6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229f6a094ddf6c84536e6e27c0ccf289c6\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (10:16)\u003C/span\u003E: on behalf of the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister for Food Safety\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the \u003C/span\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003EAgricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003E be now read a second time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to begin by thanking the chair, Miles Anderson, and the members of the Primary Production Committee. This bill came back to the House with bipartisan report, and that does not happen by accident. It happens when members are willing to sit down with a technical bill and do the work\u2014and it is technical. The agricultural compounds and veterinary medicines (ACVM) framework is not a subject that fills the public gallery. But it decides what a vet can reach for, what a grower can put on a crop, and how long a good product sits waiting for permission. The committee treated that seriously, and I am grateful for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also acknowledge the submitters, and I will come back to them, because there were a great many. I thank the Parliamentary Counsel Office and the officials at the Ministry for Primary Industries for their work on this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis bill did not come out of nowhere. It comes out of the agricultural and horticultural products review carried out by the Ministry for Regulation in 2024. That review went and asked the regulated parties, \u201CWhat is getting in your way?\u201D The answer came back loud and clear: the cost and the delay of agrichemical and veterinary medicine products was holding this country back against our competitors.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe products we are talking about are not marginal. They are newer pesticides that are safer to use and that keep our produce at export quality. They are inhibitors that reduce environmental impact. They are the products that let a farmer do right by an animal or by a waterway\u2014if they can get hold of them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBroadly, the bill provides for streamlining approval pathways so that regulatory effort matches the level of risk and removing barriers that serve no purpose; strengthening the use of trusted overseas assessments so we can make proper use of international science instead of repeating work that has already been done well; modernising public notification methods and regulatory processes so that people can actually follow them; improving manufacturing oversight through a good manufacturing practice scheme, so that product quality stays high; and updating technical provisions to give applicants clarity and consistency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOverall, these changes make the ACVM system clearer, more flexible, and easier to navigate while holding firm on what the system exists to protect: public health, animal welfare, trade and primary produce, and agricultural security.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow to the submissions: the committee received 1,168 of them. I want to acknowledge every person who sat down and wrote one. A good many of those submissions raised matters that sit outside of what this bill does. I do not brush those views aside. People who take the time to write to a select committee about the products used on our farms and orchards are entitled to be heard, and there are other forums where those particular questions are properly dealt with. Of the submissions that went to what this bill actually does, there was broad support for its intent, along with sensible recommendations for minor and technical improvement. The committee took those up and made six changes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFirst, submitters told us that the original wording on overseas regulators\u2019 assessments did not make it clear enough how those assessments should be weighted. That was a fair point. The bill now requires that trusted assessments from recognised overseas regulators be taken into account alongside other criteria, including New Zealand - specific scientific information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESecond\u2014and so that recognition keeps meaning something\u2014recognised overseas regulators must now be reviewed at least every 10 years, with recognition withdrawn if one or more of the criteria are no longer met. A tick of approval that is never revisited is not worth a great deal. Let me be very clear on this point because it matters more than any other in the bill. Overseas assessments do not determine ACVM decisions. They are evidence and they sit alongside the rest of the evidence. New Zealand - specific risks must still be properly assessed. This bill is not about cutting corners; it is about not doing the same work twice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThird, on transparency, the bill as introduced allowed more flexibility in how public notifications were made. Some submitters were concerned that removing mandatory \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EGazette\u003C/span\u003E publication would cost them visibility. They were right to raise it: public notifications will continue to be published in the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Gazette\u003C/span\u003E and they will now also be published on the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) website. That is a better outcome than the bill arrived with, and it came from submitters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFourth, some submitters asked how a decision on a good manufacturing practice certificate could be challenged. The bill now makes it clear that those decisions may be reviewed. A manufacturer is entitled to know that a decision affecting their operation is transparent and can be tested.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFifth, I want to acknowledge the Regulations Review Committee, which spotted that the bill did not require reasons for granting exemptions to be published. The select committee has addressed that. Reasons for all exemption decisions will now be made public. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESixth, the bill picks up minor consequential and technical amendments, including updated cross-references to reflect recent changes made by the Regulatory Systems (Primary Industries) Amendment Act 2026.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to draw out what these changes have in common. Every one of them leaves the system more transparent, more accountable, and more durable than it was when the bill came into this House. This is what the select committee is for, and it is why I\u2019m pleased to see this work reach this point. I thank everybody who contributed to it. I do note concern from some submitters about shifting approval time limits out of the primary Act and into the regulations. I want to make clear that moving those time limits into regulations means that they can be kept current and tailored to different kinds of applications.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe intent is to make Ministers and officials more accountable for their performance against these time frame targets. It should be a priority for the Government, when this bill is passed, to progress these regulations so that the applicants have certainty over those time frames. Any changes to time frames will not affect the level of scientific scrutiny applied to an ACVM application. I look forward to the bill going into more detail during the committee of the whole House, and on that note I commend this bill to the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208531560f3ae90f6df028b24ee8899ef\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d839e70748034293b9dc7da14cde6c13\u0022 data-id=\u0022b754ade93de33dab1443d413ba9243c0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d839e70748034293b9dc7da14cde6c13\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b754ade93de33dab1443d413ba9243c0\u0022\u003EHon JO LUXTON (Labour) (10:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I am pleased to rise and take a call on the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill. Labour is supporting the bill at second reading. We do, however, have some amendments that we have tabled that we will be speaking to in the committee of the whole House. We\u2019ll go into more detail about those. We did hear some concerns about the lack of recognition of potential impacts on the environment, but those will be things that we do cover off in the committee of the whole House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to acknowledge my fellow colleagues on the Primary Production Committee. We are a select committee that does work well together. We try to come to agreement on most things, as much as is possible, and we recognise that this piece of legislation is going to be of benefit for our agriculture sector and farmers and growers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe often hear from the agricultural sector that things take too long. When there are things that are available overseas that are not available here, the process tends to take an awful long time for it to become available here in New Zealand. There is a fear that with the length of time that these processes take, it can make us less competitive in the market if we don\u2019t have access to a lot of the products, medicines, etc., that those overseas do have. An example of where that has been an issue is an insecticide\u2014a vital insecticide, actually\u2014for mealybugs in grapes that reportedly, as of November 2025, has been sitting in that approvals system since 2019; while potato and onion growers have been waiting for a new, more environmentally friendly product to deal with thrips and blight. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the benefits of this piece of legislation is where we might be currently using a chemical compound or a medicine\u2014I\u2019ll talk about a chemical compound, perhaps, more so than a veterinary medicine. There could be an alternative that is being used overseas that is a far more environmental option that we are missing out on here. If we wish to remain at the forefront and competitive, this is going to be a piece of legislation that will enable it to happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis piece of legislation came about as a result of the Ministry for Regulation doing an agricultural and horticultural products review. I do think that this has been a sensible thing that has been brought forward to the Primary Production Committee for us to review. It does implement policy changes arising from this particular review, and the bill does give effect to recommendations that relate to the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act (ACVM Act). It was quite interesting because we looked at the ACVM Act and the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act alongside each other, which made it quite confusing, I think, for a lot of submitters. They\u2019re both quite technical bills, so it was a bit tricky.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt was a bit of a shame that it was a somewhat slightly shortened process as well, because I do think when we are dealing with pieces of legislation like this that could have quite profound impacts for us here in New Zealand, these sorts of pieces of legislation should go through the full-length time frame, not simply be shortened because the current Government wishes to get something through quickly. When we are dealing with our agricultural sector, whilst I acknowledge the need to have access in a timely manner to new products, our agriculture sector is what carries much of this country. So we do need to make sure that when we are dealing with legislation that we hope will have a positive impact, we need to be sure that what we\u2019re doing does not in some way accidentally have a negative impact. I don\u2019t believe that rushing through something like this is a good idea. However, here we are today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the changes that we made to this piece of legislation, and I note that the Minister of Internal Affairs has covered off some of them but we did have quite a substantial amount of submitters too\u2014over 1,000 submitters\u2014and I do wonder if we might have had some more, should there have been a longer length of time.  However, clause 10 of the bill, which would insert new section 8AA, is around the publication of the exemptions that have been granted. It would give the director-general discretionary power to exempt agricultural compounds from the registration requirement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the Regulations Review Committee are very helpful when we\u2019re looking different pieces of legislation. They go through it and then they will forward in things that they put up through to select committees to take into consideration. So they wrote to us with concern that the bill wouldn\u2019t require the director-general to publish the reasons for making exemptions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, in order for the public to have transparency\u2014and, I think, understanding of why something has been exempted\u2014it\u2019s very important because, again, it allows people to understand why that decision has been made. And as I said, there is a huge risk, if we get this wrong, to our primary sector. So we agreed with the Regulations Review Committee and their concerns that the reasons for an exemption should be published. So that was something that the select committee made changes to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to turn to the recognition of the overseas regulators, because there was some concern that should we go down this path, it would just mean that we\u2019ll just take into consideration what they were doing overseas, and if that looked good enough, then we would adopt that. So I want to give assurance to the public out there that that is certainly not the intention of this piece of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESome submitters wanted more clarity about how overseas regulators would be recognised and monitored. We also recognised as a select committee that recognition should be subject to an ongoing review, and we considered that periodic reviews and public notification of those reviews were important, and it\u2019s actually appropriate to show that we keep up to date\u2014which is what part of this legislation wants to do: to keep us up to date with new technologies and medicines, etc. But a review would also allow us to keep up to date with changes that were also happening overseas, whether something was no longer suitable or there were better options out there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other change that I would like to talk about\u2014I think the Minister might have mentioned, in her contribution, the thinking about the overseas evidence that would be taken into consideration here in New Zealand. As I said, submitters were worried that would just mean that if someone overseas was doing it, then we would just base it on their situation, their circumstances, and their farming methods, and that it would automatically happen here. I note Minister did say that whilst the evidence that\u2019s brought to us from overseas would simply be taken into consideration, it does not mean that it is instantly granted and that New Zealand - specific risks would have to be assessed and taken into account.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe New Zealand Law Society noted that the bill wouldn\u2019t provide a right of review for some decisions that were made. So the select committee thought that this is something that we needed to take into consideration as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am pleased to stand and say that we do support this piece of legislation. We do have some changes that we would like to make through amendment proposals at the committee of the whole House. But, ultimately, we want to ensure that our agriculture sector does have access in a timely way to the chemicals and the veterinary medicines that it needs. Thank you, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u0022793a3165819bdbc747f1646bf36f03cc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005784\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022793a3165819bdbc747f1646bf36f03cc\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (10:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It is a pleasant surprise that the Government side have flipped the Order Paper and brought through this Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, this is a fascinating example of where industry lobbies. We\u2019ve had some proud elucidations from a senior Minister in this Government\u2019s Cabinet, Christopher Bishop, yesterday, that he\u2019s very proud to be the recipient of industry lobbying.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is an instance where those corporations in the world who manufacture agrichemicals, some of which are amongst the very biggest companies on our planet\u2014huge agrichemical companies; the likes of Syngenta and BASF and Bayer\u2014have very effectively lobbied through front groups that greenwash their intentions by having innocuous names like \u201CAnimal and Plant Health New Zealand\u201D, which sounds great, until you find out that it\u2019s Bayer and Syngenta and BASF.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat they want is what all agrichemical companies have always wanted since the Second World War, when we massively increased our production of novel synthetic chemicals, including those very most-toxic substances known to biology: human-invented toxic substances that were initially used, actually, in the wars\u2014first of all, mustard gas in the First World War\u2014and then they got banned through the Geneva Convention as chemicals for use against humans.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose same companies started thinking, \u201CWell how can we use these really effective toxic synthetic chemicals and make some money out of it? We\u2019ll use them in agriculture to kill bugs that we don\u2019t like and to kill plants that we don\u2019t like.\u201D So these companies make their billions from producing and marketing and selling these highly toxic substances. One example in New Zealand is a company called Syngenta, who are the global producer of a chemical called atrazine. Atrazine is a highly persistent chemical. It\u2019s widely found to exist in ground water. It is banned in 40 countries around the world. It\u2019s not banned in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThese same companies want to have a means to more readily deregulate the use of agricultural chemical compounds and veterinary medicines. Now, some of those agricultural compounds seem innocuous and seem bland. But, in fact, what they really are seeking and what this bill does is it deregulates. It deregulates the scrutiny that the public are allowed to bring through our regulatory frameworks on these compounds and these chemicals.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESome of those include \u201Cnovel biologicals\u201D, as they\u2019re called, some of which include genetically modified biologicals. Those need to supposedly go through the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 Act as well, which is one of the reasons the select committee dealt with both the amendments to the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act and the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill at the same time. It seems obvious\u2014well, it at least seems obvious to me and perhaps others on the committee\u2014that it would be logical at some point in time for us to combine both these pieces of legislation because there\u2019s so much crossover. But that\u2019s not what this bill does today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have come away from that whole process at the select committee\u2014when I say \u201Cwe\u201D, I mean the Greens\u2014with some concern about the actual underlying motives behind this deregulation. It is no accident that it\u2019s come through David Seymour\u2019s Ministry for Regulation, the proposal that we reduce the regulatory oversight. One of the more extraordinary experiences that I\u2019ve had in my time at Parliament was attending a public event over this bill where David Seymour was asked at the end of his introductory speech to one of the organisations there advocating for this deregulation if he\u2019d done a sufficiently good job, and he said, \u201CThis is a good example of industry lobbying.\u201D I really appreciated him saying the quiet bit out loud, because this is a good example of agrichemical industry lobbying. There\u2019s a very intimate relationship between the agrichemical industry and the genetically modified plant and crop and microbe industry, because those companies\u2014the likes of Syngenta and BASF and Bayer\u2014see the opportunity in producing novel compounds that are not just chemical but also biological and also potentially self-replicating. There has been drawn to our attention an issue with the release of a double-stranded RNA compound in field-trial form that has already occurred since 2018 in this country, in 114 field trials. It may be that that was done without the appropriate scrutiny of the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act through the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat was not brought to our attention at the select committee. We scrutinised heavily at the select committee about whether this legislation or the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act involved a lowering of the bar on public scrutiny and regulatory oversight of these chemicals and substances and were repeatedly assured that they did not. I have not come, I\u2019m sad to say, away from that process convinced that that is actually correct. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo, for that reason, we think that it\u2019s inappropriate to bring this bill under urgency. This bill deserves more scrutiny and should have had more scrutiny, and we will be voting against this bill. In the committee of the whole House stage, we intend to bring some amendments that we think could improve the bill and we would seek the support of the House for those amendments. I also want to recognise that it is not unreasonable for those who are genuinely seeking to find less toxic options and genuinely safe biological and new chemicals and substances to move away from current dependencies on more toxic chemicals. We don\u2019t disagree with that principle. That is correct. I do seriously question whether the problem is the actual law itself or whether it\u2019s the systems we have in place to deal with appropriate vetting and assessments on these new chemicals and substances so that they can get to market more quickly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have heard that message from those in industry, who I believe are absolutely good faith actors and are genuinely trying to get alternatives to more toxic chemicals. We\u2019ve heard that message, just to be clear, and we are sympathetic to that, but we do not believe that this legislation in its current form gets the balance right. We are not in support of a deregulation of what, in effect\u2014alongside the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act, the agricultural compounds bit of it and the veterinary medicines bit\u2014can lead, potentially, to faster pathways to chemicals that have not been sufficiently scrutinised. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to make a final note that there is very little contention around the question of veterinary medicines. We are very keen to see faster access to veterinary medicines. We support that component of the intention. Not unlike human medicines, there is already much more scrutiny of veterinary medicines. So if something is approved for use in another jurisdiction, for use on animals, we can be much more certain that it is safe to use on animals here. As there should not be barriers to use of approved human medicines in other jurisdictions, there should not be barriers to use of veterinary medicines in New Zealand. So that is a component of the bill that we support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut, on balance, overall, we are not satisfied that this bill is in the public interest. We will be voting against it and we will be asking a number of questions at the committee of the whole House stage. Thank you, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022 data-id=\u00223b3f6de9ffe02fc2a3cf4baf93b85871\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223b3f6de9ffe02fc2a3cf4baf93b85871\u0022\u003EMILES ANDERSON (National\u2014Waitaki) (10:44)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise to speak on the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill in the second reading, and I\u2019m very pleased to do so. The Primary Production Committee examined a lot of submissions over quite a while and came up with the finalised document that we see in front of us today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELook, I just want to cover off a few things that have been said in the House today. In our own commentary, the select committee\u2019s commentary, we said, \u201CWe note the bill does not amend the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO Act), nor alter New Zealand\u2019s regulatory settings in relation to GMOs or GE. Any GMO or GE product would still be subject to approval under the HSNO Act. Additionally, any use of overseas regulators would still have to meet New Zealand\u2019s legislative requirements as the approval of GMO- and GE-based agricultural compound products is already restricted through the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act and other legislation. We consider that no further changes are necessary.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I\u2019d just also like to point out that both Labour and the Greens voted to shorten the report-back date, and Labour has never raised any concerns with this bill at the select committee stage and voted in favour of the changes made and voted in favour of the bill as it is now. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am very thrilled to have this bill come to this stage. It\u2019s been a real sticking point for farmers and growers that a number of products that are available in like jurisdictions around the world are not available to us. These products are generally ones that are far more effective, and in many, many cases they\u2019re far safer than what is currently available. I commend this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022 data-id=\u002225b95af196bb91211fd3bbc66e1afb69\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002225b95af196bb91211fd3bbc66e1afb69\u0022\u003EHon MARK PATTERSON (Associate Minister of Agriculture) (10:46)\u003C/span\u003E: I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak on this Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill. This is a really important bill\u2014$64 billion worth of primary exports to this country, so it\u2019s absolutely critical that we have access to world-class, gold standard agrichemicals and veterinary medicines.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt had become clear through this process that the system was constipated. It has taken a very, very long time to get new agrichemicals particularly registered in New Zealand for use, which was holding back our farmers and growers. There were some very real world consequences here. There was a few aspersions cast about Bayer in Steve Abel\u2019s speech, but Bayer actually withdrew from the New Zealand market. They sold their Hawke\u2019s Bay research property, which is not a step forward for New Zealand. We need these chemicals to be able to be researched in New Zealand conditions. So the idea here is to get access to less toxic, more effective chemicals more quickly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHaving said that, the consequences of getting this wrong are really high. We\u2019ve had the dicyandiamide (DCD) incident with the urea treatment that ended up showing traces in the milk that had significant consequences for our exports, particularly into China. So we do have to have really good regulations. This is fiendishly complex. The interface between the hazardous substances and new organisms (HSNO), the work we\u2019re doing trying to upgrade gene technology and how that flows into the agricultural compounds and veterinary medicines (ACVM). \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe were concerned to find out through an Official Information Act process at the end of last week, actually, that the double-stranded RNA treatment for varroa mite is being trialled in New Zealand. That wasn\u2019t disclosed through the select committee. That had got through the HSNO process because it had been treated as a hazardous substance rather than the new organism. So that throws a light on how tight have we got our regulations. I think this probably sits more in the HSNO\u2014New Zealand First has leaned towards that view. In our review of the HSNO Act, we have to make sure that anything flowing through into the ACVM is absolutely not in conflict with our gene technology legislation of the day. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of what the select committee did, I mean, there was a huge amount of work getting through 1,100-odd submissions. Some key changes in there in terms of the overseas regulators\u2014that\u2019s one of the key things this bill looks to do: take more accountancy of work that\u2019s already been done overseas. What tends to be happening now is we\u2019re just starting from scratch and not putting enough weighting on to work that\u2019s already been done overseas. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe key change there from \u201Chave regard to\u201D to \u201Ctake into account\u201D does mean the Director-General of the Ministry for Primary Industries does have to take more weighting on those overseas regulators\u2019 findings. That\u2019s not the be all and end all; we still need the checks and balances. And we will certainly, through the committee stage, be asking some more questions about that interface between HSNO and ACVM and how we\u2019re not going to have a repeat of this double-stranded Resource Management Act (RMA) situation. But it does make sense not to start absolutely from scratch. We\u2019ve been doing it now, which is really held up our process and is denying our farmers and growers access to world-class chemicals and medicines. New Zealand First continues to support this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022 data-id=\u0022542ebdf0b98daafb893227a25e5297dd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022542ebdf0b98daafb893227a25e5297dd\u0022\u003ELAN PHAM (Green) (10:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I want to start with the unfortunate point that the Green Party came in initially supporting this bill. But, like a lot of bills that have been through in this term of Government, it actually got worse at select committee. My colleague Steve Abel has already outlined that we will now be opposing this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s really clear that the intent is generally sound\u2014it\u2019s to speed up approvals for agricultural compounds and veterinary medicines by reducing regulation. Again, my colleague Steve Abel has pointed out how we have no problem, particularly around the veterinary medicine aspects of that. Just generally\u2014before this is interpreted as, \u201CThe Greens actually like bureaucracy or slowing things down\u201D\u2014we absolutely support making regulatory processes more efficient where this can really be done safely.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it\u2019s been really clear in understanding the implications of this bill that the substances and the chemicals and the compounds which we are talking about are those that can be genuinely toxic and genuinely unsafe and persist in the environment and potentially cause huge harm, or certainly heightened risk, to community and ecosystem health. That is our real concern: that there is deregulation of the system when it has such serious implications.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut we also acknowledge that in certain circumstances, faster approval of products and compounds which are genuinely low risk could have benefits for the country. That\u2019s where we wish this bill was actually going in terms of actual safeguards. Now, unfortunately, the changes that have happened at the Primary Production Committee have only strengthened our concerns around significant lobbying from the agricultural chemical industry. There\u2019s been a lot said about lobbying recently, and I just want to make it clear as well: it\u2019s not the lobbying itself. Anyone can lobby; anyone can try and talk and have dialogue, and that\u2019s great\u2014we support that. It\u2019s the fact that then the changes are actually put into practice and some are listened to and some aren\u2019t. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe problem with a lot of these bills that are going through is that those who are listened to are the big corporations, are the vested interests, rather than the public good. At least my perception of government, and what I\u2019d love to see this Government and every Government afterwards actually prioritise, is that public good and those safeguards for our communities and our environment over private profit. Unfortunately, we\u2019re not seeing that there. It\u2019s entirely possible that faster approvals don\u2019t have to mean fewer safeguards, particularly when we\u2019re talking about some of the most toxic substances. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe point I also want to make is that this is really concerning when it comes to limiting M\u0101ori participation in these processes. We know that our agricultural approval system needs to take account of Aotearoa\u2019s unique environment, but also the fact that our communities, and particularly iwi and hap\u016B, need to have a real say. There\u2019s a very clear lack of requirements when it comes to M\u0101ori engagement, and it doesn\u2019t require the Director-General of the Ministry for Primary Industries to partner with or even consult with iwi M\u0101ori before approving agricultural chemical products that could harm te taiao. This is completely inconsistent with the Green Party\u2019s view that we would uphold Te Tiriti and tino rangatiratanga in every sphere, but particularly those that could impact and risk so clearly the health of our environment and the health of our communities. The Green Party will not be supporting this bill, but we will be proposing some very clear changes. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022ee7e38260bfb4a20d9377a995205d3ba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ee7e38260bfb4a20d9377a995205d3ba\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (10:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I was expecting a National Party speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022428f62cf0317a512b53d9ebf5d77e2be\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: So was I.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc8ba04f668e3f735dd6dfca41912e01\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: There we go. Here I am. I am not a National Party MP, to be clear. Madam Speaker, thank you for this opportunity to speak on the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill (ACVM Bill).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am privileged to be Labour\u2019s spokesperson for food safety. Of course, most food safety issues go to the Primary Production Committee, which sits on Thursday morning. At that same time, the Environment Committee sits and I am also lucky to be the environment spokesperson and resource management reform spokesperson. There has been a bit going through that select committee, so I have not been involved in the deliberations of this ACVM Bill, nor the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Bill that\u2019s been mentioned a wee bit in the discussions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005817\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut before this term of Government, at the end of the last term of Government, I was the Minister for Food Safety. This came about in quite unusual circumstances when Meka Whaitiri crossed the floor, and voila! I became the Minister for Food Safety, which was of course a real privilege and very interesting\u2014lots of things to learn about in that portfolio. In that portfolio, I did go to a conference very near the end of last term, so approximately three years ago now, where there was some real disquiet about this legislation. Of course, what we\u2019re talking about today is an amendment bill and it is an amendment to the 1997 piece of legislation that I have here ready for our committee stage. Whilst the legislation has been amended for some time, clearly there has been some slowness in the process and some inefficiency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBack then, three years ago, I did agree that it needed to be looked at, so it\u2019s good that this Government has done this. It\u2019s unfortunate that we\u2019ve taken three years to get to this spot and that we didn\u2019t have the full select committee process. That\u2019s relevant because there has been some real concern that I know we will talk about in the committee stage of the bill about what is currently called a provisional registration that becomes a consent for research and other information or other purposes. There was a concern that this process is going to let some products through that might have negative consequences and that the tests around that aren\u2019t strong enough.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat has meant that there has been a flurry of tabled amendments, and I do note that some of these tabled amendments came from the New Zealand First Party, which was interesting, and were in the name of an associate agricultural Minister, Mark Patterson. They were to very much strengthen the provisions of this consent that used to be called a provisional registration. That\u2019s always interesting, when you have one Government party and one Associate Minister of Agriculture making tabled amendments on a bill in the name of another Associate Minister of Agriculture. But it appears that they are no longer upon the Table.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, in response to those concerns of New Zealand First, I have also drafted some amendment papers that didn\u2019t go nearly as far as New Zealand First\u2019s papers but did try to add in some additional comfort to those submitters who are concerned that this new consent process is just a little bit too wide and that some things that might be risky and might harm us and might harm the environment could get through. So that is what I will be focusing on in the committee of whole House stage, which, of course, we\u2019re not yet at.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut I did want to respond to this point that was made by Miles Anderson that he seemed to be surprised that Labour would be offering up any amendments or criticising a process in any form at all. So that is the history of this process and why we are\u2014of course, we were also surprised that we suddenly had a change up of which bill we\u2019re speaking about. All of sudden\u2014we thought there were three Treaty bills to get through before we got to the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill. Yet, they have somehow disappeared, so that is interesting as well. So something\u2014something\u2014appears to be going on with the coalition, which is very interesting to watch and is not surprising that they can\u2019t make up their mind on anything or work together.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs I was saying, we have this 1997 legislation. \u201CThe purpose of the Act is to (a) prevent or manage risks associated with the use of agricultural compounds, being \u2026 (i) risks to trade and primary produce; and (ii) risks to animal welfare; and (iii) risks to agricultural security: (b) ensure that the use of agricultural compounds does not result in breaches of domestic food residue standards: (c) ensure the provision of sufficient consumer information about agricultural compounds.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo my reading of the legislation is that that purpose does not change. That is important because some of the amendments refer back to that purpose. That purpose is also relevant to the amendments that are on\u2014and off\u2014the Table about the considerations to things like the environment and the relationship with the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO). There is a separate piece of legislation going through that amends that piece of legislation. I\u2019m not talking to that except\u2014full stop. I\u2019m not talking to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut\u2014however. No, these are all the wrong words.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2c39c3fadcace6a1829c77dd6f5403f\u0022\u003EMiles Anderson\u003C/span\u003E: As it turns out, you are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005826\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022271021cf75b91e5f9253c6c3e1bb9e39\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: No, I am not talking about them because I am talking about this piece of legislation, which refers to that other piece of legislation. Why that is important is because before you can get this consent to import, which is currently called provisional registration, you are blocked from getting that permission if you need a permission under the HSNO legislation. The Government parties and other people say well, the HSNO legislation\u2014the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act that does a risk assessment on environmental issues. So if HSNO applies, then that will consider the environment, so then the argument is that then this piece of legislation, the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill, does not need to consider the environment because it\u2019s already been considered under that other Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI understand that logic of that argument. What though, if you do not require a consent under the HSNO legislation\u2014under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act\u2014should there be some provision for the consideration of the environment under the agricultural compounds and veterinary medicines process and how does that relate back to the purpose that I just talked about, which is managing these risks to trade, to animal welfare, to agricultural security, food residue standards, and consumer information. These are questions that we will pursue in the next debate\u2014to give some context there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are also some concerns over what these consents to import, etc. and use agricultural compounds for research and other purposes\u2014how wide they can be. Because the way that it\u2019s been described to me, these things are not for sale. If they\u2019re something that comes in, it will be for a short term on the consent condition, and it\u2019s to work out if they\u2019re going to work in New Zealand or not. Why then would they be sold for commercial gain if they\u2019re simply for research? So these are some questions that I will raise that go to my amendments. I want to assure the members opposite that those amendments have been written in good faith and they\u2019re very much about just trying to give some comfort to those people who are concerned that this might be going just a step too far.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022 data-id=\u0022f7c7dde001d52c0d2951fec96c156c74\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f7c7dde001d52c0d2951fec96c156c74\u0022\u003ESUZE REDMAYNE (National\u2014Rangit\u012Bkei) (11:06)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This is a practical bill for practical people. It streamlines regulatory processes, reduces red tape. It backs our local vets and rural suppliers who support our farmers who feed New Zealand and the world. It\u2019s about fixing the basics and building the future. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022 data-id=\u00226f567421441c73d27cda252fb470afb8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226f567421441c73d27cda252fb470afb8\u0022\u003EDAVID MacLEOD (National\u2014New Plymouth) (11:06)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. I\u2019m very pleased to speak on this special day, the Miles Anderson appreciation day. It\u2019s always good to be appreciated from time to time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAnyway, this amendment bill is another bill that allows our agricultural and horticultural farmers to continue to advance themselves and be the world-class producers that they are. Most importantly, it does that while maintaining strong protections for public health, food safety, biosecurity, environmental outcomes, and international trade obligations. I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002242067e22c7a349218b3b868f58eda79d\u0022 data-id=\u00229130867d23a7fdd8a262ec24ec5a2010\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002242067e22c7a349218b3b868f58eda79d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229130867d23a7fdd8a262ec24ec5a2010\u0022\u003ERACHEL BOYACK (Labour\u2014Nelson) (11:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It\u2019s certainly been an interesting 24 hours, in terms of discussion around this bill. As my colleague Rachel Brooking pointed out in her contribution just now, there were some tabled amendments from one of the Government parties, the New Zealand First Party, in the name of Associate Minister Hon Mark Patterson that we did take some time considering, again, in good faith, and now they\u2019ve mysteriously been removed. So we\u2019re not quite sure\u2014I guess when we get to committee of the whole House stage, they may reappear. We\u2019ll find out, potentially, exactly what\u2019s going on amongst the Government parties, although from the Associate Minister\u2019s speech, it would sound like he wasn\u2019t foreshadowing any amendments, so we\u2019re a little bit confused on this side of the House about what the coalition Government is doing, although I think they\u2019re quite confused as well. They\u2019ve been a bit confused around who was taking a call before. And I think the country\u2019s confused around what they\u2019re trying to achieve also. So an interesting day, in terms of what is actually quite an important bill, Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things that this bill does that I want to talk to a little bit is\u2014it streamlines the process for what was called provisional registration. That has now had a terminology change to be called a consent. And what that is is when a compound or a medicine is not being put forward by a company or a supplier or whoever may be putting it forward for that full registration process but it\u2019s coming through for a temporary approval process but for a very defined purpose, usually around research and sometimes the research that\u2019s being performed during that short time frame is actually being used to build a body research to go on to the full registration process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005834\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things I do want to point out is this is an amendment bill and so what it is doing is amending the existing Act. Actually, that process is not changing per se. There have always been two processes, one for a temporary provisional registration, which has now been called a consent, and one for that fulsome registration.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005835\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I do want to point out is that having a consent and reaching the ending point of that consent doesn\u2019t automatically lead to registration becoming automatic. They are actually two separate processes, so there have been some concerns raised around that but actually you still\u2014just because you\u2019ve received that initial consent does not mean there is an automatic registration process or that fulsome registration will necessary be granted. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn light of my comments earlier about amendments from New Zealand First and also some commentary from the Greens raising some concerns around the bill, I would note that this bill has been considered by the Primary Production Committee at the same time as the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Amendment Bill, which has not reappeared yet, and there is some interaction between those two bills. That\u2019s interesting, again, in terms of what might be happening around the coalition Government discussions. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI did want to point out just a couple of changes that my colleague Hon Rachel Brooking has proposed which I think are very good. The second amendment that she\u2019s made is that initial consent could have a maximum duration of less than five years, so I think that\u2019s a good safeguard to ensure it doesn\u2019t go on and on forever. She\u2019s got a third amendment here\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EBell rings\u003C/span\u003E]just keeping an eye on the clock\u2014around ensuring there are some strengthened provisions around the impact of any compound or medicine on the environment. A further one which I thought was a very good amendment, again, following some discussions with officials: the fifth amendment which is when we\u2019re talking about a consent, and selling something for consent, to note that it\u2019s for commercial gain, so that consent is not to be for gain by selling a product, and that makes sense. It\u2019s a sensible amendment because most of those provisional registrations, now consents, are done for the purposes of research, so we actually couldn\u2019t find a decent rationale for why there might be a sale of such a product. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, a note around research on the final amendment\u2014and I have run out of time; I could have spoken for a lot longer. Labour is supporting this bill. We will have many, many questions at the committee of the whole House. Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f0d31505882949b1a768aad60863fba9\u0022 data-id=\u0022a4fcf9c880abb1f4647ca7f7a1d863d8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f0d31505882949b1a768aad60863fba9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a4fcf9c880abb1f4647ca7f7a1d863d8\u0022\u003EJOSEPH MOONEY (National\u2014Southland) (11:12)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. The Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill is intended to improve approval pathways for agricultural compounds and veterinary medicines; and reduce unnecessary costs, complexity, and delays for applicants seeking approval for agricultural compounds and veterinary medicines. Just because of some of the comments that were made in the House, I note that the Primary Production Committee was at pains to point out that the bill did not amend the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act of New Zealand\u2019s regulatory settings in relation to GMOs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005840\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EJust the last thing: I do sit on the Regulations Review Committee and I\u2019m pleased to see that the Primary Production Committee noted our recommendation that the director-general published reasons for exemptions decisions and has recommended changes accordingly. I recommend this to the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005841\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221b3215a211423c84e6f829e4b2b4dc1\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Damien O\u2019Connor. Sorry\u2014the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u00226951ae8448b9cd5c08aa670635054c69\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005842\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226951ae8448b9cd5c08aa670635054c69\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (11:13)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s fine with you, Maureen\u2014sorry, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005843\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022357662936367750fe78e5e0f852a5c27\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Touch\u00E9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005844\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c495868de15538945584cf4cb4f50af\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: Look, thank you, Madam Speaker. The Opposition has every right to be wary of this piece of legislation. On the face of it, it sounds OK. There have been calls for many, many years\u2014probably going back a decade or so\u2014to actually have this process streamlined. Indeed, it is a cautious approach that the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) and Government agencies over time have taken to the approval of the ongoing evolution of veterinary medicines and agricultural products into this country. We, more than pretty much any other country in the world, are reliant on our primary production sector\u2014agriculture, horticulture, and other areas\u2014so it is really critical that we look at this very, very carefully.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005845\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWe have every right to be suspicious of what has been a stupid Government that has rushed through legislation time and time again that has proved to be faulty. We cannot afford to do the same thing with this piece of legislation and indeed the fact that it\u2019s been rushed to under urgency is a risk. I\u2019m pleased to say that some of the amendments that my colleague the Hon Rachel Brooking is going to table, I think\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005846\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b35da8a788b9f3193a76d9a39e78a29d\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: She has tabled.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005847\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022daefcc72e0256b0ca272b7cf631a221d\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014tabled\u2014are necessary. They are necessary because, in one particular area, the omission\u2014elimination\u2014of any environmental consideration is just stupid. Absolutely outrageous.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005848\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m not unfamiliar with the kind of goods we that we\u2019re talking about here. I\u2019ve been a dairy farmer, grown a few boysenberries, and so understand that the chemicals that we use are critical to good, efficient production. But they\u2019ve got to be used in the way that they are meant to be used. Kiwi growers and farmers are very, very innovative and have been over the century, which has kind of served us reasonably well, but it\u2019s also actually meant that people cut corners. As we see the evolution of agricultural compounds and veterinary medicines, there will be new innovative ways of creating them\u2014not just GE or GMOs, but actually incorporating chemicals that may be banned in some countries but not in others, so ensuring that what we have through our borders is safe for use, and then is used according to instructions, is absolutely critical.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005849\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMost of the laws or many of the laws we make\u2014most, in fact\u2014in this House are for a minority of people who don\u2019t want to do the right thing, and so, once again, that\u2019s what we are talking about here. There\u2019s great enthusiasm from the chemical companies around the world to sell a bit of stuff into New Zealand. We\u2019re not a huge market but, from an agricultural perspective, it\u2019s reasonably solid, so they have been coming to us on numerous occasions over the years with new products, and they\u2019ve been frustrated by the process through the EPA and other Government agencies. This bill aims to streamline; it creates a new consent regime for research and information gathering. That\u2019s OK as long as it\u2019s robustly implemented. It allows recognition of overseas regulators, as long as that is ensuring that the advice that is brought to New Zealand from research and, I guess, oversight in other countries is legitimate, is credible, and is honest; that is absolutely critical and important. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005850\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think the concern that I have through this bill is that we will rely on the director-general to make all those judgments. A lot of that occurs at the moment but what we\u2019ve seen over the last almost three years, now, is a growing political influence over public servants, and that concerns me. The lobbying and the amount of money that has been paid into political parties that are governing, for fast track and for other projects\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005851\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223dc95c390c87f7118bc39c4b70fe5e4c\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Be very careful about making assumptions about that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005852\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b2c5ce3f878ff40ef750c65779f2fd6\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: No, these are facts, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005853\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe8398ac59a955898a4d491f67b3c9d5\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s inappropriate to make those comments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005854\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223dd596e7b0f9d4a1255273ec5399a601\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, there has been a growing amount of donations to political parties that currently serve in the Government and all of those amounts and the people who have donated are publicly available. I\u2019m referring to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005855\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c192e9f01b94e65d7ffaa1da19d31900\u0022\u003ESuze Redmayne\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re talking about veterinary compounds\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c31ad837feee9d632f1af92539bb3b2\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: What concerns me is the influence over fast track that we have, then: the political\u2014or the potential for there to be influence over processes like this. That is why the Opposition has to be absolutely robust in our scrutiny of this critical piece of legislation, because the members over there\u2014one of them, a well-known and respected farmer; she knows the importance of the misuse of things like dicyandiamide, where we hadn\u2019t done our homework, we hadn\u2019t done an maximum residue limit, and in fact what could have been a very good emissions mitigation tool in the agricultural sector has now been eliminated because the homework wasn\u2019t done.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005857\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy concern is that this change in legislation might allow shortcutting and influence over the director-general that might lead to another terrible outcome for our primary sectors. So we need to be cautious; we need to have in place obligations around the potential environmental impacts of bringing these chemicals into our country and having them tipped out or wasted\u2014so what happens on farm. Now, although there\u2019s veterinary oversight, large volumes of veterinary medicines can be dispensed to a farmer, with a vet signing it off. If there\u2019s a change in a farming system or something goes wrong, they could be left with a large volume of unused veterinary medicines or chemicals.  Indeed, I had some myself on a farm. The process of disposal is really, really messy and difficult, so the potential for those things to be tipped into a stream is real\u2014is real. Some of that might be insignificant in terms of environmental impact, but some of it not so. Consideration of the potential for that to be wasted into the environment should be part of the consideration when it comes to approval. That\u2019s one issue that my colleague is going to pursue as we move through this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005858\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELow-risk products to be exempted from registration by the director-general\u2014again, the assessment of what is low or high risk is actually really, really important. We need to ensure that that is followed through in the way that is intended, not in the way that could come under possible commercial pressure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005859\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EModernise notification, manufacturing compliance provisions, statutory time frames\u2014a lot in this bill is really sensible progress, as was said by members of the Government. But I come back to the point about our obligation to put in place legislation and regulations that protect us from the potential misuse or abuse of something in this system that is so critical to our country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005860\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf we end up with a maximum residue level\u2014take for example, another thing that the Government has done under the guise of efficiency. They\u2019ve allowed farmers to go out and use drones for spraying. Agricultural operators are strictly controlled because these chemicals are really important. If they get in the wrong place at the wrong time, they can get into our food chain. The point being, the Government\u2019s enthusiasm to deregulate everything means that there are growing risks to our international reputation and to our food systems that might jump up and bite us big time into the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005861\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs any responsible Government should, or, in this case, the responsible Opposition, we have to scrutinise and look with some cynicism at the possible outcomes of the passage of this legislation\u2014accepting, of course, there can be some improvements. There always can be. But the ideology of the Government, which is to deregulate and leave it to the market, leaves us exposed if the provisions in this bill are not followed through.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005862\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy concern\u2014and the Primary Production Committee has had a look at it, I know, and made some adjustments. I\u2019m not saying this is irresponsible, but I\u2019m saying if we don\u2019t close the gaps and put back in an obligation around the environment by the Government supporting my colleagues\u2019 amendments, we have left open a door that could bite us into the future. This can be a useful piece of legislation, but we have to be mindful that it needs to be improved through a few amendments that will be tabled by the Labour Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b618b847a57b4afb94b76eaea9e042a5\u0022 data-id=\u002269af933920d87ac3f8f87d2db65b4b16\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005863\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b618b847a57b4afb94b76eaea9e042a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002269af933920d87ac3f8f87d2db65b4b16\u0022\u003EDr CARLOS CHEUNG (National\u2014Mt Roskill) (11:23)\u003C/span\u003E: We listened to the sector, we did our homework, and we are now delivering. We are cutting the red tape and getting things moving. We are fixing the basics and building the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022739b3bbed7fe4186aa30494700144b3a\u0022 data-id=\u0022429dacdbb28170c70aeab265f029d186\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005864\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022739b3bbed7fe4186aa30494700144b3a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022429dacdbb28170c70aeab265f029d186\u0022\u003EPAULO GARCIA (National\u2014New Lynn) (11:23)\u003C/span\u003E: I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005865\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill be now read a second time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005866\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 98\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005867\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 31; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005868\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 18\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005869\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005870\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005871\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005872\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bde5f1e0ba31f0c1c1e5711fde3cfe0f\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: This bill is set down for committee stage immediately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005873\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e76db0e98c3c59697adfa1f4e83e64fc\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005874\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00223ecd7224217a433c76894e4a34eddefa\u0022\u003EPart 1 Main amendments\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005875\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227b4c997f1709c879e283436066f1ab26\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the House is in committee on the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill. Members, we come to Part 1. This is the debate on clauses 4 to 76, \u201CMain amendments\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=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022483018c21ef948e2544ae302deb50013\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005876\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022483018c21ef948e2544ae302deb50013\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (11:26)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Most of the tabled amendments relate to clause 40 and are around clause 40, but before we get there, I\u2019ve got some questions on the way through. My first question is about the definitions. I love this\u2014when you get to go to the lobby and get the principal Act. I have a copy of that, but it\u2019s got all these little pages in it, which can be quite difficult to follow. I apologise in advance if I\u2019ve missed something that\u2019s in one of these little amendments that goes into these hard copies of the Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005877\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy first question, though, is about the interpretation. We\u2019re at clause 4, and clause 4 amends section 2 of the Act that is in my hand here, and it includes \u201Capproved form\u201D and \u201Capproved information\u201D. What I\u2019m interested in\u2014and I\u2019ll raise it probably in another minute\u2014is why there is no definition of \u201Cregistered trade name product\u201D. Throughout the legislation, there is this term, \u201Cregistered trade name product\u201D. In fact, if you look across to clause 9, so just on page 7 of the amendment bill, at new section 8, you will see at (1)(a)(i), (2)(a)(i), (3)(a)(i), and at (4)(a)(i) this term \u201Cregistered trade name product\u201D. The Act defines both \u201Ctrade name product\u201D and it also defines \u201Cregistered\u201D product, but I\u2019m wondering how the two interact.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005878\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is important, because it\u2019s an important term throughout the legislation, because it\u2019s the main substantive approval, as I understand it, that you get. It\u2019s also relevant because the wording is different at clause 5(2). It\u2019s talking about \u201Can assessment\u201D, and then it says, \u201Cto decide whether it should be registered as a trade name product,\u201D, which is then different from the term that\u2019s later used, which is \u201Cregistered trade name product\u201D. It may be that it\u2019s because, you know\u2014are they meant to be two different things: you can be registered and not a trade name product or you can be a trade name product that\u2019s not registered, or can you only ever be a registered trade name product?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005879\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s a question that goes to quite a lot of the legislation in terms of what we\u2019re thinking about with this bigger application process that is undertaken, subject to\u2014I think it\u2019s around sections 20 and 21 of the principal Act that go to this registration. If she can make a comment on that, that would be very useful\u2014where we\u2019re going with these terms, how we should best think about them, and how it applies throughout the piece of legislation. That\u2019s my first question. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThe\u003C/span\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHon\u003C/span\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EBrooke van Velden raises hand to seek call\u003C/span\u003E] If you do your hand, then I\u2019ll\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u0022638fc02a25ea536b3a57a2ac7d509233\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005880\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022638fc02a25ea536b3a57a2ac7d509233\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (11:30)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for the question; I will ask my officials for that technical piece of advice, but I thank the member for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022dae872479d1e362afa2a8bebeaabbbef\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005881\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dae872479d1e362afa2a8bebeaabbbef\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (11:30)\u003C/span\u003E: I will move on, then, and thank you to the Minister for asking officials for that advice. That\u2019s useful. And thank you also to the Minister in the chair for raising her hand\u2014that is helpful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005882\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, then, I would go on to page 9. This is at clause 10, and clause 10 is the \u201CExemptions from registration\u201D\u2014that\u2019s the subheading before the new sections or clauses. At new section 8AA, it is \u201CExemption from requirement to register for agricultural compound or class\u201D, and it goes through how that happens. Then, at subsection (4), there\u2019s \u201CPreconditions to granting exemption\u201D, and it\u2019s that \u201CThe Director-General may grant an exemption under this section only if satisfied that\u2014\u201D, and so we have: \u201C(a) the exemption is not inconsistent with the purpose of this Act\u201D. I refer to my second reading speech just now, to the purpose of the Act, which goes to risks associated with agricultural compounds, those being: risk to trade, risk to animal welfare, risk to agricultural security, to domestic food residue, and consumer information. That purpose in the Act doesn\u2019t change. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005883\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am interested in this issue of the environment, and we\u2019ll come to this later when we\u2019re at clause 40. The reading of that purpose\u2014the word \u201Cenvironment\u201D is not there. However, if you are concerned about trade in primary produce, then presumably there is some relationship with the environment there. We do have trade agreements that talk about the environment, for instance, the ones with the European Union and the United Kingdom. So trade is there; environment is related to trade and, also, agricultural security. Is there a space for the environment within the purpose? That\u2019s one question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005884\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy next question is at (4)(b), which states that the exemption can be granted, but only if: \u201C(i) the likely cost of assessing and registering the agricultural compound \u2026 outweighs the likely risks\u201D. I\u2019ve missed out a few words there, but\u2014so this is 8AA(4)(b)(i). This seems to be an example of where cost can override risks, because it\u2019s \u201Coutweighs the likely risks\u201D. This is of course an interesting philosophical point\u2014and I know that the Minister\u2019s party is particularly interested in looking at costs. So my question is: who are the costs to? Is it the cost to society? Is it the cost to the individual applicant? Is it the cost to\u2014going back to the purpose\u2014other people who trade in primary produce? Is it the cost to animal welfare? Can she tell us more about the costs, and who they are to? I might leave those questions there and see if the Minister\u2019s got any responses, then I can move on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u002212d75535a93eb81c8ff451047e95383d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005885\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002212d75535a93eb81c8ff451047e95383d\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (11:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Look, I think I can tuck away, hopefully, the new section 8AA(4)(b) question about where the likely cost is borne. It is in the wording at (i), where it says: \u201Cthe likely cost of assessing and registering the agricultural compound \u2026 under this subpart outweighs the likely risks\u201D. So that is a cost of assessing and registering.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005886\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e7a91da057affbc50cd57d02f3037da\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: But to whom?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005887\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022afe863a35f97c26ee3fe01c70595d367\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that would be to the person assisting and registering, because somebody is not doing the assessing and registering if they\u2019re not doing the assessing and registering. So I think it seems relatively straightforward. In terms of the other questions that Rachel Brooking has had, in regards to whether or not there is space for the environmental considerations: the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act regulates environmental considerations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to her earlier contribution, regarding the registration of trade name products and the term \u201Cregistered\u201D: the terms \u201Cregistered\u201D and \u201Ctrade name product\u201D can be read together and should be read together. Only \u201CTNP\u201D can be registered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022b95833935a15fb9a4487582babf380aa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b95833935a15fb9a4487582babf380aa\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (11:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, just that last one: was it \u201CTNP\u201D, and does that stand for \u201Ctrade name product\u201D? She\u2019s saying that only trade name products can be registered, nothing else can be registered, and that is why they are read together? The officials are nodding.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005890\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c4efb90a98ee31bf5fe21978ba0387cc\u0022\u003EHon Brooke van Velden\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, then that would be correct.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005891\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002246763fc3f8825bc1a4b48f2982f402eb\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Better to use the words, even if I am guilty of acronyms\u2014so no shade on anybody.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005892\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EJust going back to that cost question then, the cost of assessing and registering, that it\u2019s still the cost to who\u2014is that the cost to the regulator or is it the cost to the applicant? So: broader or narrower? That\u2019s the question there.  \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u0022e2c1ce374063a5af454df1081d4f4fa3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e2c1ce374063a5af454df1081d4f4fa3\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (11:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m also on Part 1, and in the \u201CMain amendments\u201D\u2014clause 4, section 2 amendments\u2014the current wording has: \u201Capproved form means a form that is approved by the Director-General\u201D. We\u2019re on page 6, here. The Minister just pointed out that the definition of \u201Cenvironment\u201D relates to that in the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Amendment Bill, which is a non-helpful point to make, because there is a close relationship between these two bills\u2014which is one of the reasons they both came to the select committee at the same time. It is certainly my view that, in due course, it would be a good idea for us as a Parliament to work out how to combine these two pieces of legislation. That would certainly assist with the large amount of overlap and complexity. Part of that overlap is between\u2014and that will be drawn out through the course of this committee stage, I hope\u2014where an agricultural compound is also a genetically modified organism. The process by which it gets approved through the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act before it can then be approved by the agricultural compounds Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005894\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor clarifying the definition of \u201Cenvironment\u201D, I have an Amendment Paper tabled for clause 4. That after clause 4(1), we insert the words\u2014simply\u2014\u201Cenvironment has the same meaning as in the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996\u201D. That would go to the exact point the Minister just made, but it is not actually articulated in the legislation. So I\u2019d appreciate, given that she\u2019s made the point herself, that we could actually put it in black and white. That would not be a particularly controversial thing to do, but it would certainly clarify what the definition of \u201Cenvironment\u201D is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005895\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy second question is on clause 5, where, under (2)(aa)(a), there is now inserted \u201Can assessment of the compound and consent for its use in research or for obtaining further information to decide whether it should be registered as a trade name product, subject to specifically imposed conditions:\u201D. I wonder, because this question of research may come up in other parts of the bill, but it is pertinent because one of the things\u2014that has only just been revealed to us through an Official Information Act request that landed this weekend just gone\u2014is that, indeed, through a combination of this Act in its existing form, not in this amended form, obviously,  there has been the release of an agricultural compound in the form of a field trial of a substance that had a double-stranded RNA component, which is being trialled as a solution to varroa mites\u2014an admirable cause, let\u2019s not question that. But there are questions around whether that should have been more properly classified as a genetically modified organism and gone through the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act before it got approved through the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005896\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is to ask the Minister to expand on the intention and the reason for this amendment in clause 5(2), and the other component of that is whether it should be registered as a trade name product. Could she please explain what the circumstances are around which products are or are not registered as trade name products and why that might be an important thing to do?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u0022397bc6f04a3caa86662472686ab760cf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005897\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022397bc6f04a3caa86662472686ab760cf\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (11:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just ticking off the last question from Rachel Brooking in terms of who the costs are in relation to the risks: the costs are directly related to the assessment applicant. Thank you very much.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022ffd1091e16e48c773f44093bab6f9ee3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005898\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ffd1091e16e48c773f44093bab6f9ee3\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (11:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to start with a question on clause 5, noting that clauses 9 and 10 are the more substantial bits. Clause 5, \u201CSection 4A amended\u201D, basically introduces a new scheme of the Act, and it\u2019s specifically around the research element. What isn\u2019t clear is with clause 5, subclause (2), when we\u2019re talking about research: could the Minister clarify if the research restricts to in vitro or also includes in vivo? As in, when we\u2019re looking at research, is it purely within a laboratory environment or would that research of that compound and testing be able to be done in, I guess, living organisms, which also means in public spaces, on plants, on animals, etc.? That is important from the perspective that if it\u2019s done in vivo, you are potentially looking at like a more stringent requirement around risks of cross-contamination. I do want to check with the Minister on that particular clarification.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005899\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m going to move on to clause 9, knowing that others may have other questions. So clause 9 is the replacement for section 8, and I may have additional questions; I\u2019m just trying to compare what some of the changes are. But I want to check in terms of a broader question\u2014when we\u2019re looking at agricultural compounds into New Zealand is when we\u2019re looking at imports and exports. Can I just check whether the Ministry for Primary Industries or anyone else have had a conversation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade around whether a lot of the things and the changes we\u2019re making is in line with our existing trade obligations under various trade agreements? And particularly when we\u2019re looking at a trade-named product, how would then certain jurisdictions and intellectual property be involved as a part of that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005900\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy final question just on this particular part is that for certain trade agreements, we have a specific requirement around place of origin, in terms of ingredients, in terms of compounds. I just want to check in terms of whether even the labelling standards and requirements are also met as a part of this with our various trade agreements. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d839e70748034293b9dc7da14cde6c13\u0022 data-id=\u0022a7c0e36b46f4c15738c337aee5da9d18\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005901\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d839e70748034293b9dc7da14cde6c13\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a7c0e36b46f4c15738c337aee5da9d18\u0022\u003EHon JO LUXTON (Labour) (11:44)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to touch on clause 10, under the exemptions from registration section. With this new exemption from requirement to register for agricultural compound or class, I\u2019m interested to know, because this is all new, just following on from this, the reasoning\u2014obviously I can understand some reasons for this, but I\u2019d be interested to know if there\u2019s been any work done on how many exemptions the Minister might expect to be granted each year under this new exemption framework. Because it would be interesting to know how this thinking came about to make this framework part of the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005902\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe other part that I want to ask about is around new section 8AAB, \u201CRequirements relating to records, returns, and information\u201D. Now, one of the changes that were, I think, made in the legislation was that it had to be notified to make it a bit more open and transparent\u2014perhaps why something was exempted or not. I\u2019m interested to know, when that information is made publicly available about exemption decisions, is the Minister sure, or what precautions will be taken, to make sure that the information around the decision when it\u2019s published is sufficiently transparent, but still protecting the commercially sensitive information that\u2019s been supplied by the applicants? Because I think that\u2019s really important to know.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022d3402f4d1749d19708ba85101916510c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005903\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d3402f4d1749d19708ba85101916510c\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (11:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I was just wanting to go back to trying to find the original legislation, actually, because I\u2019m referring to clause 10, new section 8AA, and coming down to subclause (4)(a), and this is regarding exemptions that may be granted by the director-general. An exemption may be granted if \u201Cthe exemption is not inconsistent with the purpose of this Act as set out in section 4;\u201D. The Minister may be able to clarify that for me, because I\u2019ve kind of gone back to section 4 in the bill here and can\u2019t find it. As I\u2019ve said in my earlier speech, I\u2019m a little wary and I do want to make sure that the objectives of the bill are clearly laid out in front of the House now, so that we are assured that this is not the\u2014and could the Minister say if this is for the efficient processing and registration of agricultural compounds and veterinary medicines? Or is it for the growth and progress of the New Zealand agriculture and horticultural sectors? Or is it for the management of the medicines themselves? I think it is really important that the Minister take the opportunity to clarify what is the purpose of the Act and what will it be when this bill is passed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005904\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI then go to another question that I have of subclause (b), and it\u2019s been raised by my colleague the Hon Rachel Brooking around cost. An exemption can be provided if \u201CAt least one of the following applies: (i) the likely cost of assessing and registering the agricultural compound, or agricultural compounds of the relevant class, under this subpart outweighs the likely risks from the use of the agricultural compound, or those \u2026 compounds,\u201D. The question is of cost to who, and I know that was a question asked by my colleague. Does the cost extend out to the point I made earlier around the cost to the environment or to the wider community or to the sector and industry if something should get out of control and we have some residues picked up in some export? So it\u2019s a question around the extent of the cost assessment, raised by my colleague, but, actually, I want to hear an explanation. And then you come back to clarity\u2014absolute clarity\u2014on the purpose of the Act and the purpose of the Act subsequent to the changes from this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u00229a6fdddda14671250171833640be980a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005905\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229a6fdddda14671250171833640be980a\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (11:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Look, I\u2019ll take the contribution by the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor first in regards to what is the overall purpose of the bill. I mentioned this in passing in the second reading speech, which is that the products that we are talking about within this bill are newer pesticides and things that are safer to use in the country, and ultimately this will lead to a greater access to newer and safer products that can be used on farms or by people raising cattle, or even in domestic circumstances.  However, it also has the additional purpose here of keeping our produce at export quality, and so there is, I guess, a double win-win here, where we are accessing newer and safer products, but in doing so, that actually helps us grow our export quality and have that at a higher and better standard. So that is that part of the contribution.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005906\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESecond to that, there was also the question, once again, about costs, and I will just go back to the original contribution I made to the Hon Rachel Brooking, that in regards to the particular section the member was referring to, the costs are directly related to assessment applicants.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005907\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGoing back to Steve Abel\u2019s original contribution regarding his Amendment Paper and whether or not we should insert a definition for \u201Cenvironment\u201D within this law, the Government won\u2019t be doing that. We won\u2019t be adopting that Amendment Paper. Inserting that definition into this Act, or bill as it is at the moment, would imply that the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act has some role in regulating environmental risk; whereas I mentioned before that there is a space for environmental considerations but that is in the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act\u2014that regulates environmental considerations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005908\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESteve Abel also wished to go into a little bit more detail regarding the circumstances around trade name products. The definition of \u201Ctrade name product\u201D is within the Act. A product needs to meet the test for registration in section 21 to be considered for registration.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005909\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELawrence Xu-Nan had a contribution in regard to whether or not research is restricted to in vitro or to living organisms, and the response to this is that the applicant themselves would decide on the scope for their trials for the particular product or agricultural compound. However, it is then up to the approval process, during the application process, as to how broad that scope would actually end up being.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELawrence Xu-Nan also asked whether or not the Ministry for Primary Industries had talked to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade around alignment with trade agreements. Yes, I can confirm that that did happen in the same way it happens with laws that do pass through Government processes. That was a consideration that was made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005911\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere was also a contribution by Damien O\u2019Connor regarding, I believe, section 54 about whether or not it\u2019s an efficient process or about growth of management of medicines. The purpose of the overall Act itself has not changed. But I did discuss the wider purpose, I believe, of the intent. Damien O\u2019Connor also did talk about whether or not the costs extended to the environment, to the sector, or to the public. No\u2014it is, once again, about the cost to the applicant. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005912\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen we had a contribution\u2014I think it may have been by Jo Luxton; I\u2019m not exactly sure if I can remember\u2014about how many exemptions are expected under the new regime. The numbers are very variable, so it\u2019s not possible to provide numbers at this stage, but that was also the situation under the current regulations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022bb4ccfd32ee6b0c44302a21f2876642c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005913\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bb4ccfd32ee6b0c44302a21f2876642c\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (11:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Firstly, I will go to the Minister\u2019s answer where she said the wider purpose or intent is for safer products to be enabled. That doesn\u2019t come through in the unchanged purpose of the Act, and I was wondering if she thinks there would be some room to specify that in fact that is the purpose\u2014to enable safer products to be registered in New Zealand. I can\u2019t see that anywhere in the legislation before us, and if that is the Government\u2019s intent, then it would be good to have that in the law. So that\u2019s one question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005914\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy second question goes back to the cost issue, and she has answered that the word \u201Ccost\u201D there is the cost to the applicant. So that means that if it\u2019s going to be too expensive for an applicant, then they don\u2019t have to bother. That\u2019s what her answer means: \u201COh, sorry. The applicant says this is going to cost lots of money.\u201D so an exemption can be granted if that cost outweighs the likely risk. This seems to be an unusual way to make a law, and I\u2019m wondering if the Minister can give any other examples in a regulatory process where because the applicant is going to have a cost burden, they can avoid the registration process. That is my second  question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy third question is, again,  on clause 10, on new section 8AA about exemptions, and I\u2019m talking about subsection (4)(b)(ii)\u2014I was at subparagraph (i); now I\u2019m at subparagraph (ii)\u2014and it says that another reason for an exemption can be that the compounds are already adequately managed by restrictions that apply under another Act to that substance or those substances. Is the most likely of those other Acts the Hazardous Substance and New Organisms Act (HSNO Act)? That would be useful to know because we know that\u2014but, then, if it is HSNO, why does it need to be specified there? Could it also be the Resource Management Act (RMA) or the other statutes that it is anticipated would meet that test of already adequately managing the restrictions, noting that the Minister has said that this Act, this amendment and the principal Act, are not about the environment? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005916\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo if the HSNO Act and the RMA are there to protect the environment, that doesn\u2019t, under her logic, have anything to do with the Agricultural and Veterinary Medicines Act or this bill. So would that, then, mean that those Acts don\u2019t adequately manage the restrictions because they don\u2019t go to trade, animal welfare, agricultural  security, domestic food residue, and sufficient consumer information? That\u2019s my third question. I\u2019ll keep going, Madam Chair. I see that the select committee has made a change\u2014that the reasons for granting an exception must be published. That\u2019s a good change. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005917\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I\u2019m going over the page to my fourth question, which is about clause 16. This is replacing the heading to section 12 of the Act with \u201CPublic notification under section 14: information involving trade secrets, etc, to be withheld\u201D. Then there is some repeal of the sections there. I would like the Minister to comment on who the information is being withheld from. Is it simply that if there is an Official Information Act  request\u2014and that is what section 12 of the Act applies to, as I can see when I look at it here. Is it simply to say that under the Official Information Act, if there is a trade secret, then information can be withheld, or does it go wider than that? That is my fourth question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005918\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy fifth and last question in this contribution is on clause 18. I\u2019m referring to subclause (4), which says \u201CAfter section 15(3), insert:\u201D, and this is about new subsection (4) of section 15\u2014in clause 18\u2014and it says, \u201CThe Director-General may waive the requirement to publicly notify an application under section 14 if, in the Director-General\u2019s opinion,\u2014(a) an emergency has arisen that involves risks to public health, risks to trade in primary produce, risks to animal welfare, or risks to agricultural security; and (b) the trade name product that is the subject of the application is likely to be required for use in that emergency.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005919\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question here is about the use of the word \u201Clikely\u201D. I understand that emergencies happen and it\u2019s important to be able to respond to them. But does the Minister consider that \u201Clikely\u201D is a strong enough protection against the risks of an unregistered product being used because there\u2019s an emergency? I know it\u2019s only to waive the notification but, presumably, there will be groups that know about these things and might have an opinion, so would she consider using a different term that is stronger than \u201Clikely to be required\u201D? So, you know, it\u2019s like, \u201CWe really, really need to use this stuff to fix the emergency, not that we just might not want to.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005920\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cff793c4688851aced5d4a32a901c48c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just say that we seem to have got stuck back at the beginning. This bill has been through a select committee process, so when we\u2019re getting down to scrutinising semantics and wording, I think we\u2019re getting too far into the weeds. So I  do encourage members to keep moving forward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d839e70748034293b9dc7da14cde6c13\u0022 data-id=\u00225daeec2a260c392236095f9a13c8b3f3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005921\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d839e70748034293b9dc7da14cde6c13\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225daeec2a260c392236095f9a13c8b3f3\u0022\u003EHon JO LUXTON (Labour) (11:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I wish to ask a question around clause 19, new section 16, the \u201CTime limits relating to applications\u201D. Now, I understand that we hear, quite often, that farmers and growers need access to, whether it be chemical compounds or veterinary medicines, in a timely manner. So I\u2019m just interested to know, but I have a couple of questions with regard to this section here. What reduction, if any, in average approval times, does the Minister expect because of these reforms? I think that\u2019s something that the wider public might be interested in knowing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005922\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThen it talks about \u201CThe Director-General must decide the application within any period determined in accordance with the regulations.\u201D This is the date for deciding the application. How is the Minister going to ensure that the pressure, if any, needed to meet certain time frames doesn\u2019t compromise the quality and robustness of safety assessments? And what assurance can the Minister provide that faster approvals, if any, won\u2019t come at the expense of maintaining strong domestic scientific expertise and toxicology, ecology, risk assessment, and regulatory science? And what benefits, on time frames, does the Minister expect to deliver for biological products specifically, and will the new framework provide a faster or more proportionate pathway for lower risk biologicals compared with conventional agrochemicals?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005923\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022601c15a6ea5849061546e8a139cbae94\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Mark Mitchell.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005924\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aec2538de6cff4b8f272c473d4062c1e\u0022\u003EHon Mark Patterson\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c06d714d96e8cf84dc59c906b4747373\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, sorry, Mark Patterson\u2014getting my Marks mixed up, apologies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022 data-id=\u0022434fa1006d3e159806932915efccc194\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005926\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022434fa1006d3e159806932915efccc194\u0022\u003EHon MARK PATTERSON (Associate Minister of Agriculture) (12:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Look, I know we\u2019ve had a change with the Chair\u2014the previous Chair talked about getting into the weeds, but that\u2019s exactly what we have to do here. This is a very complex piece of legislation which has quite wide ramifications.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005927\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m just on clause 10, new section 8AA(2)\u2014this issue around the exemptions. We\u2019ve got a very real issue here, where we\u2019ve had a double-stranded RNA treatment on varroa mite that, only through an Official Information Act request, have we found out about. We found out there\u2019s something like 103 such trials of these, sort of, novel compounds that are going on, seemingly, without much oversight from the public.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005928\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, we\u2019re convinced that that this is an issue with the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO) primarily, but that\u2019s where this exemption issue becomes quite critical. How deeply is this exemption going to be able to be applied? I\u2019m keen to understand that in a real-world sense because, OK, we\u2019re talking here about the ability to exempt classes of agricultural compounds. So that double-stranded RNA are used\u2014in this case, for treatment for varroa mite on honey bees\u2014if that becomes a class exemption, if a similar technology is used for a spray on to pastures to get rid of pests, what checks and balances are going to be used here? I just can\u2019t see it. How are we going to capture that it\u2019s going to be a case by case basis that takes into account\u2014obviously, bees and cows and sheep are very different biological species\u2014how that novel synthetic protein or whatever it is will interact? That\u2019s how complex this stuff is; it it\u2019s really complex: how they interact with each other will be totally different. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005929\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I\u2019m just concerned, here, that we\u2019ve opened this to class exemptions where we need to have very careful checks and balances to make sure it\u2019s case by case. I\u2019d like some assurances, please, that this is, in fact, exactly what it\u2019s going to deliver and we\u2019re not going to open a door slightly, you know, and have a lot of stuff come through that, perhaps, has not\u2014there might be some unintended consequences to that. So I\u2019d like some assurances there, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u0022cd774e76b4ed59b8c2862a3850dbf263\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005930\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cd774e76b4ed59b8c2862a3850dbf263\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I\u2019ll start with the latest contribution by Mark Patterson regarding his concerns around clause 10, new section 8AA, relating to the exemptions and whether or not that would enable the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO) to be bypassed, especially when it comes to different forms of treatment. Look, the research trials are not unrestricted commercial use. They\u2019re not for unrestricted commercial use. An approval is required under HSNO before the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines (ACVM) regime has any say. And so, therefore, I can give the member a form of comfort that the exemption clauses do not open up the risk that he has been referring to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005931\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to some of the earlier contributions by Rachel Brooking, she had a number of questions. Firstly, in regards to clause 10, new section 8AA(4)(b)(ii) For the reasons for exemption if the risk is adequately managed: this is the same test as currently applied for exemptions set out in regulations, and it is rare that there would be another Act adequately managing those risks. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005932\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHer second contribution was in regards to the term \u201Clikely\u201D in exemptions for trade name products that were likely to be needed for an emergency. The term \u201Clikely\u201D is a term that is well-understood within law and the Government is satisfied that the wording here is appropriate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005933\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHer third question and contribution was in regards to whether or not we had examples where the cost burden can be exempt from registration. There are other examples of legislation where costs of complying do exceed benefits and then this, therefore, leads to exemptions under law. A clear example of this is the Organic Products and Production Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005934\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe fourth contribution is \u201Cwould there be room to specify the purpose is safer products?\u201D Look, the ACVM and the HSNO are complementary Acts and bills, and they ensure that all products on the market will have their risks managed appropriately. Therefore, we don\u2019t believe, as a Government, that there is any need to be specifying the purpose for safer products. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe fifth contribution was in regards to the trade secrets, which was in regards to clause 11B\u2014not exactly sure at this stage\u2014oh, sorry, clause 16. And that was: trade secrets are the primary reason for this clause. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005936\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to the contribution by Jo Luxton around shorter time frames and does that mean, potentially, less complete assessments\u2014no, moving time frames does not change the statutory requirement to assess and manage the relevant risks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u0022d8e1b2510b96fa8a45fdad221df79279\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005937\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d8e1b2510b96fa8a45fdad221df79279\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (12:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Chair, and thank you, Minister, for your responses there. One of your early responses I want to pick up on is that you did actually mention, in one of your answers, that pesticides are an example\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005938\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202d3f8888869ef794119a87c91862d4d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Just the use of the word \u201Cyou\u201D and \u201Cyour\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005939\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002210aaca5933289bd66b3ea6da5a43ef05\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: Pardon me, Mr. Chair. I apologise for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005940\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister did mention, in one of her answers, that pesticides were an example of an agricultural compound. Now, this, I think, is part of the challenge for the public and certainly part of the challenge for us, as a Parliament, getting our heads around what is captured in this Act and what is not captured by this Act. So going to the actual definition, in the original Act, of agricultural compounds\u2014and I certainly will not suffer the committee to have to hear the entire thing read out\u2014does start by saying \u201Cany substance, mixture of substances, or biological compound, used or intended for use in the direct management of plants and animals, or to be applied to the land, place, or water on or in which the plants and animals are managed, for the purposes of\u2014managing or eradicating pests, including vertebrate pests;\u201D\u2014and it goes on with a whole bunch of other things. That seems, to me, a very significant catch-all of just about every blimmin thing you could do on the land with a chemical or a substance or a compound. You said pesticides would be captured by that. That seems an obvious interpretation of the idea that it\u2019s going to be used for the management or eradication of pests, including vertebrate pests. My question is: are there any herbicides captured by this legislation, or do herbicides sit exclusively in the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act? I just would love to have some clarity on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005941\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen my next question is around Subpart 2, where there are restrictions on importation manufacture, and that includes this question of exemptions. I\u2019m in Subpart 2, section 8(3) amended by clause 9. \u201CA person may sell an agricultural compound within New Zealand only if the agricultural compound is a registered trade name product; or is exempt from registration under section 8AA\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005942\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI noticed on the Ministry for Primary Industries website, where it sets out to define in layperson\u2019s terms what is captured as an agricultural compound, that it says \u201CSubstances that could be used as agricultural compounds\u201D, for example\u2014I should read the whole thing; it\u2019s not that long. \u201CThey can be used as they are without further manufacture or modification, and they have a stated purpose fitting the ACVM definition. For example, if you bought a bag [of] \u2018zinc sulphate\u2019 without a stated use, it would not be an agricultural compound. If the same bag\u201D\u2014I insert in brackets for clarity: of the same substance, zinc sulphate\u2014\u201Chad a label stating it is \u2018for use on farm animals to treat foot-rot\u2019, it would be an agricultural compound.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, that seems very surprising to me, Minister, because you\u2019re saying the very same substance without a label is not captured by the bill. But if it\u2019s got a label that says you\u2019re going to use it for foot-rot, it is captured. Can you please clarify if that definition remains correct in these amendments, or whether these amendments are actually tightening up so that you can\u2019t just have an unlabelled substance in a package? And so long as it remains unlabelled, it can avoid the scrutiny of the regulation, which obviously would be concerning to us. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005944\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002242067e22c7a349218b3b868f58eda79d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f9208e000c2bfffc98e459985bc103de\u0022\u003ERachel Boyack\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d839e70748034293b9dc7da14cde6c13\u0022 data-id=\u00222b607b88e278334d0862e05d425b08be\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005945\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d839e70748034293b9dc7da14cde6c13\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222b607b88e278334d0862e05d425b08be\u0022\u003EHon JO LUXTON (Labour) (12:12)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005946\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002242067e22c7a349218b3b868f58eda79d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289912b6da728e87ffb1598a668390751\u0022\u003ERachel Boyack\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, Mr Chair. Sorry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005947\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d839e70748034293b9dc7da14cde6c13\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214b857676e7e0b3f1b99ee92a93820fc\u0022\u003EHon JO LUXTON\u003C/span\u003E: I want to move to clause 20, section 20 on amending \u201Chave regard to\u201D to \u201Ctake into account\u201D, and I\u2019m interested to hear the Minister in the chair\u2019s reasoning for changing that wording specifically. I imagine the public will be as well, because I would have thought that \u201Chaving regard to\u201D would have been sufficient enough rather than having to \u201Ctake into account\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005948\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan the Minister provide examples of circumstances where a recognised overseas regulator has approved a product, but the Director-General of the Ministry for Primary Industries would have declined registration in New Zealand due to the previous clause that says \u201Chave regard to\u201D rather than \u201Ctake into account\u201D? Because I think it\u2019s important for us to understand why the Minister for Food Safety felt it so essential to change that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005949\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan the Minister also provide an example of a circumstance where a recognised overseas regulator has approved a product, but the director-general would have declined registration in New Zealand because of New Zealand - specific risks or concerns? Submitters raised concerns\u2014and we did talk about this in our speeches\u2014about the reliance on overseas assessments, that they might weaken New Zealand - specific scrutiny of agricultural compounds and veterinary medicines. I wonder if the Minister could tell us what safeguards exist within clause 20 to ensure that local ecological primary production and biosecurity considerations continue to take precedence where overseas assessments do not well reflect different climatic conditions or farming systems.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002242067e22c7a349218b3b868f58eda79d\u0022 data-id=\u00220d846870bfb8ab18196353b6458a8f1e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005950\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002242067e22c7a349218b3b868f58eda79d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220d846870bfb8ab18196353b6458a8f1e\u0022\u003ERACHEL BOYACK (Labour\u2014Nelson) (12:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Apologies for misgendering you earlier\u2014I hadn\u2019t clocked the change in Chair. Just on Part 1, I have a couple of questions for the Minister in the chair on clause 21, so this is the new section 20A inserted, \u201CRecognition of overseas regulators for purposes of section 20(aa)\u201D. Slightly different questions to my colleague Jo Luxton.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005951\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy first question is in new section 20A(1) it says that \u201CThe Director-General may declare that a person in another jurisdiction is a recognised overseas regulator for the purposes of section 20(aa).\u201D I\u2019m interested in this use of the word \u201Cperson\u201D, and I\u2019d be grateful if the Minister could put on the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E for us what the definition of a person is. What this this clause does\u2014for those watching at home\u2014is it allows New Zealand to recognise that another jurisdiction has approved a compound or a medicine and therefore make the same application in New Zealand. But I am interested in that use of the word \u201Cperson\u201D as opposed to an agency or an organisation or Government organisation. Or is it a broader use of the word \u201Cperson\u201D, so the word \u201Cperson\u201D as opposed to a named individual or a named role? So it could be the name of someone who is the senior person in a regulator similar to what is in this law, which is the Director-General of the Ministry for Primary Industries is the person making the decisions. Or is it a broader use of the word \u201Cperson\u201D, as in a legal personhood type situation? I just would like to get some clarity on that particular part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005952\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen I just had some questions around (3A), which is the new piece added in by the Primary Production Committee, which states that \u201CThe Director-General must review the declaration at intervals not exceeding 10 years.\u201D I\u2019m just interested in why 10 years was chosen as the time frame, not a shorter time frame of, say, five years. Ten years does seem like a lengthy time frame for that review of a declaration to be determined. I\u2019d just be interested in some explanations from the Minister about whether other time frames were considered and why 10, because it does seem to be quite a lengthy period of time. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u00224a2b442facf410d4fc21d60ed55457b1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005953\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224a2b442facf410d4fc21d60ed55457b1\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (12:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Chairman. I just want to move on to new section 8AA(5), added by clause 10: \u201CThe Director-General may grant an exemption under this section only if (a) the Director-General has done everything reasonably practicable to consult the organisations that the Director-General considers represent the persons who will or may be affected by the exemption;\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005954\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve got a little bit of subjectivity into the piece of legislation. I guess a clear explanation, given that the cost estimate\u2014as the Minister in the chair said before\u2014is one based on the cost to the applicant, not the cost to anyone else, so that\u2019s a somewhat subjective judgement. Then we move on to practicability\u2014that\u2019s one\u2014and then the persons who may be affected. There are three critical areas of assessment that this bill will allow as making change on the basis that it makes more efficient the process of application, but in my view opens the door to further risk. \u201CEverything reasonably practicable\u201D in a changing role of communication is something that maybe the Minister can give us an answer to what she considers as \u201Cpracticable\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005955\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen \u201Cthe persons who will or may be affected\u201D: is that just the present farmers or horticulturalists, is it just the company that has made the application, or is it the distribution system that will, I guess, sell this? Or is it indeed future farmers who may be affected by some impact on the country\u2019s reputation because we\u2019ve made a mistake, or that there\u2019s an MRL\u2014maximum residue level\u2014assessment that needs to be undertaken.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005956\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo my questions for the Minister are around \u201Cpracticable\u201D as a term and then the definition or who should decide \u201Cthe persons who will be affected\u201D that would allow an exemption.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u00228014eaee53efc7be6d2c062887549e1d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005957\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228014eaee53efc7be6d2c062887549e1d\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I will start with the contributions from Steve Abel regarding whether or not the definition of herbicides are captured within the definitions of \u201Cagricultural compounds\u201D. I can confirm that, yes, herbicides are captured as they are a subset of pesticides.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005958\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second contribution from Steve Abel was in regards to substances being registered versus non-registered for specific purposes, and if a label doesn\u2019t capture a specific use, would it not be covered by the Act? The note that I have from my officials is that salt is a great example to be used here. So salt is a known risk. However, the bill does not change that, but it would manage that, I guess, if it was registered for that particular use. But we don\u2019t need to register salt or everything. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo the next contribution, then, was from Rachel Boyack, and she asked for the definition of \u201Cperson\u201D. Look, this is a well understood legal term. It applies to legal persons. I\u2019d refer the member to the Legislation Act, where she\u2019ll find the specific mention there.  Rachel Boyack also referred to safeguards for biosecurity. The safeguards for biosecurity remain unchanged by this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005960\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJo Luxton then had a contribution in regards to \u201Chave regard to\u201D versus \u201Ctake into account\u201D. I\u2019m advised that this was actually a response that came through by the Primary Production Committee rather than the Government. My understanding is that this was changed through responding to submitters\u2019 concerns, and in part recommendation 2 of the departmental report, where \u201Ctake into account\u201D puts beyond doubt that the director-general must actively consider all relevant information, including assessments of recognised overseas regulators when evaluating the risks and benefits of a product. It does not require the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) to accept the overseas regulator\u2019s conclusions, but this change clarifies that applicable overseas assessments must be considered alongside all other relevant statutory matters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005961\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe subsequent question was: can MPI reach a different decision from an overseas regulator? Yes, I can confirm that is the case. MPI may reach a different conclusion where New Zealand law, evidence, or local conditions support a different decision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00221ddb94545e74b8bfde675bf591cf1eea\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005962\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221ddb94545e74b8bfde675bf591cf1eea\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (12:22)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chairman.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005963\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022adf77b90caa09ed8a9f36090b30eb6f0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m trying to share it around.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005964\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229c51e57d7b8b8082ca991d91de19082\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Just for clarity, I only have the opportunity now to also respond to some of the questions by the Minister in the chair, in terms of my previous question. So I am going back just slightly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005965\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMinister, you mentioned that it is up to the person or anyone who is doing the research in assessing, for obtaining further information regarding a particular scheme. Sorry, I am going to cause 5. It\u2019s up to them, but can I just check that that also then includes that any assessment will have a risk assessment around cross contamination.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005966\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m going to just go forward a little bit. Now, picking up on what the Minister said before, I do want to check that when the Minister says \u201Csalt\u201D, the Minister specifically refers to sodium chloride, because \u201Csalt\u201D, as a basic ionic compound, could also potentially be toxic, right? We could have heavy metal salt. So I just want to double-check that the Minister means sodium chloride. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005967\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe are asking a lot of questions here because there\u2019s no regulatory impact statement for this bill. So a lot of the things and the risks that we are asking kind of manifested through the committee stage and this is the only chance we have to really engage with the Minister on this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005968\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI really want to kind of tease out a particular example with the Minister regarding the exemption of class of agricultural compounds. This is new section 8AA(1), inserted by clause 10. Now, I want to acknowledge what the Hon Mark Patterson has said regarding some of the risks around this. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005969\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe example I want to give is, let\u2019s say, for example, organochlorines. Although it\u2019s a little bit outdated, it\u2019s probably an area that most people are familiar with. This is something that we have seen reports here in New Zealand on, around the persistent organochlorines in our soil and air and water systems. They are considered a class of compound or agricultural compound. But each of them\u2014so whether you\u2019re looking at dioxins, whether you\u2019re looking at PCBs, or polychlorinated biphenyls, or whether you\u2019re looking at the more commonly known dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, or DDT, they interact differently. Again, their risk to the environment and to the human body also works differently. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005970\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo when the director-general exempted a class of agricultural compounds, are they required to know whether each of those individual potential compounds within that whole class would interact with the human body or with the environment, and how would they determine the long-term impact of some of those compounds? So, for example, it wasn\u2019t until much later on that we saw some of the harmful aspects and the toxicity around DDT, and then it stopped being used. So it\u2019s a long-term impact, and I think it\u2019s also important to get clarification on, in terms of the exemption.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005971\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, I want to check with the Minister\u2014and I think this is something that the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor kind of touched on\u2014in terms of new section 8AA(5). But I actually want to focus on new section 8AA(6), because there seems to be a mechanism where the director-general can bypass the process for an exemption if it\u2019s been granted urgently. But so far, from what I\u2019ve heard\u2014please correct me if I\u2019m wrong\u2014there\u2019s been no clarification from the Minister on what then would be considered to be urgent by the director-general to be able to bypass that process under subclause 6. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005972\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo those are my three, maybe four, questions\u2014if the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind quickly clarifying the question on the salt as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00222cc4cde85cdca4b2567454721865e992\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005973\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222cc4cde85cdca4b2567454721865e992\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (12:26)\u003C/span\u003E: Just a little question. I don\u2019t have more questions until we get to clause 40, where I\u2019ve got a number of tabled amendments. But relating to that is this word \u201Csale\u201D: in clause 9 here, new Subpart 2, \u201CMain controls on importation, manufacture, sale, or use of agricultural compounds\u201D, if we look at the definitions in the primary legislation, it says \u201Csale includes barter, and also includes offering, exposing, or attempting to sell, or having in possession for sale, or sending or delivering for sale, or causing or allowing to be sold, offered, or exposed for sale; and also includes\u2014\u201D\u2014and this is the interesting bit\u2014\u201C(a) delivering or disposing of by way of gift, loan, or otherwise; and (b) giving or distributing, in the course of business\u201D\u2014oh, that bit might have been deleted; I\u2019m working off an old copy of the Act\u2014\u201Cgiving or distributing, in the course of business, as a sample or otherwise, without charge\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005974\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe issue here is that that definition of \u201Csale\u201D is very wide and it includes things where there is no commercial exchange at all. So I was wondering if the Minister has considered or would consider an amendment to that \u201Csale\u201D, or wants to make some comment about why it is that that definition needs to be so wide. This is relevant to an amendment that I have in a later clause, in clause 40, about trying to use some language around where sale isn\u2019t for commercial gain. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005975\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo just a general question on \u201Csale\u201D and \u201Csale\u201D being so wide to include giving away, which is not commercial, whether she thinks it would be better to change the definition so that \u201Csale\u201D is just about commercial gain, and then add in a gifting provision as well. Or if it\u2019s for some reason more useful just to bundle the two up together\u2014I just don\u2019t understand the rationale for bundling up a non-commercial gifting with commercial sale. That\u2019s the question there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u0022490787ddab0afcffee8235909fe98ea9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005976\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022490787ddab0afcffee8235909fe98ea9\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. In regards to Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s question about salt, which is my favourite contribution of the morning so far.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005977\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002225e133dd0a7b38b5647ef18772acedf0\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: Aw!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005978\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f168363baf3f804252b3be00872537b0\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN\u003C/span\u003E: I know, I know. Come on, guys, you gotta ask more questions about salt, clearly. No, this is a serious topic. This is about whether or not salt is defined as sodium chloride. Yes, yes, that was what my officials were talking about.  Many compounds that can be used can simply be bought from supermarkets and we as a Government do not propose to regulate who can buy salt.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005979\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen it comes to the contribution from Damien O\u2019Connor, he had questions in regards to consultation and what would be reasonably practicable for consultation and who are the persons who may be affected and consulted. Examples of what would be deemed reasonably practicable would be contact with peak bodies, public notification, and Ministry for Primary Industries stakeholder lists. \u201CAffected persons\u201D is a good-faith test with discretion in the same way as applies using the existing test within the Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005980\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ERachel Brooking then also had a contribution in regards to the definition of \u201Csale\u201D. She believes the definition is wide and would it be better to amend it? Look, the definition is wide because under the Food Act, people can try to use any excuse to bypass regulation by saying that they aren\u2019t selling. We do not propose to amend this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022 data-id=\u002282ebcd51fbea1f7a12e4216331482a30\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005981\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002282ebcd51fbea1f7a12e4216331482a30\u0022\u003ELAN PHAM (Green) (12:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I want to pick up on clause 20, the evaluation of risks and benefits\u2014sorry, this is on page 12 of the bill if you\u2019re looking\u2014because this is such a critical part of the bill. I mean, my understanding is that there has been a change at the Primary Production Committee which is really beneficial in terms of more specific language being proposed here, changing \u201Chave regard to\u201D to \u201Ctake into account\u201D, which we really support. But my question was about the director-general taking into account the recognised overseas regulators. I\u2019m wondering in what ways does this replace or change existing requirements to evaluate risks and benefits explicitly in relation to manufacture and use in New Zealand? My understanding is that there are existing requirements and that that would be changed more directly for the director-general to take these into account. I\u2019m really interested to understand that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005982\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen it goes on in clause 20 by inserting new section 20(aa), which requires these assessments from recognised overseas regulators when evaluating these risks. Are there specific frameworks or methodologies, I guess, that the director-general then takes to undertake this consideration, or are there sections in the bill where that is very clearly spelt out about what those methodologies or undertakings are?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005983\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen my next question is on clause 21. This is the insertion of new section 20A. It talks about the declaration process itself, including public notification, consultation, and consideration of submissions. The whole point of that is presumably to ensure greater transparency. Some of our main concerns with this bill are that it does not specifically have any provisions for the consultation of iwi M\u0101ori. I\u2019m interested in the public notification around that aspect. Is that purely a general public notification, or is there an ability within that for the director-general, for example, to assess what the actual implications are for the specific substance or compound and therefore then make some really clear decisions around that and specifications so that particular mana whenua or iwi and hap\u016B could actually be specifically consulted on that, or is it simply a general public notification?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen I\u2019m interested in whether the provisions themselves within clause 20 allow sort of like automatic acceptance of overseas assessments or whether those are purely still a case by case basis. For example, we know how detailed these assessments often need to be. Sometimes we\u2019re talking years and years of research and methodology to actually assess these things. Would there, for example, be a case for the director-general to do like a grouping or use an overseas regulator and set up more like a framework where they would say, for example, we would take this group of substances because they\u2019ve all been approved by that company or whatever entity is actually involved?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005985\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen finally, I\u2019m interested in the reduction of duplication in terms of scientific assessments, particularly for, I guess, potentially less risky compounds, so like companion animal products or other non-food compounds. What are the different requirements based on the actual category? Like, do different categories have different methodologies that the director-general has to undertake or not? Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d839e70748034293b9dc7da14cde6c13\u0022 data-id=\u00223b8d614e8e0c36de42984f9ed98fe6b6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005986\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d839e70748034293b9dc7da14cde6c13\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223b8d614e8e0c36de42984f9ed98fe6b6\u0022\u003EHon JO LUXTON (Labour) (12:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Chair, and thank you to the Minister of Internal Affairs for her fulsome answers to our questions. My questions are related to clause 21 in a more broad sense with regard to recognition of overseas regulators. I\u2019m just wondering if there\u2019s been any thought given or analysis or thinking around whether the recognition of overseas regulators could disproportionately benefit larger multinational applicants that already hold overseas approvals compared to smaller New Zealand developers, M\u0101ori enterprises, and niche industries. Also how will the Government maintain and grow New Zealand\u2019s domestic scientific capability if overseas assessments are used more extensively under the new regime, or is there a chance that overseas assistance may well be used more extensively? How will this bill improve biological products developed in New Zealand, particularly where these products do not already have approvals from recognised overseas regulators?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u0022aa2bde73f8537dc18caa00c84f3385fc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005987\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aa2bde73f8537dc18caa00c84f3385fc\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Look, I\u2019ll take the contributions by Lan Pham first. In relation to consultation with iwi M\u0101ori and regarding general consultation or whether it will be specific, the Government, including the Ministry for Primary Industries, does its best to identify stakeholders, which includes M\u0101ori.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005988\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELawrence Xu-Nan then had a contribution regarding organochlorines. A number of organochlorines are prohibited to be manufactured, imported, sold, or used as agricultural compounds under Schedule 1 in the agricultural compounds and veterinary medicines exemptions and prohibited substances regulations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005989\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to the other contribution by Lan Pham about whether or not overseas decisions would be accepted automatically or if it\u2019s done on a case by case basis, no, the bill does not provide for automatic acceptance of an overseas assessment or approval. It would still need to be done on a case by case basis.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005990\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELawrence Xu-Nan also had a query about clause 8AA(6) and what is considered urgent when bypassing the exemption clauses. This would be for biosecurity situations as an example. He also queried classes of compounds and whether or not the director-general is required to understand how every effect of a compound would work in this particular class. Understanding of the class of compounds is in terms of a\u2014I\u2019m sorry, I can\u2019t actually read that particular bit of writing, so I\u2019ll come back to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005991\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI will come back to clause 5. Will there be a risk assessment for cross-contamination? Cross-contamination is considered as part of the risk assessment in relation to the risks under the Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u0022a9948d71712f76e4f3646716ba826cc6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005992\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a9948d71712f76e4f3646716ba826cc6\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (12:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I appreciate the conversation we\u2019re having now around how we practically implement the recognition of overseas regulators, because this is an important question, and it did come up in part at the Primary Production Committee around the risks to regulatory sovereignty for us of the extent to which we take on board determinations made in other jurisdictions. One of the obvious challenges, which the Minister hasn\u2019t yet clarified for us, not that it\u2019s necessarily been specifically asked, is that where we have these recognised overseas regulators\u2014and I think it would be useful for the committee if the Minister could outline who those recognised overseas regulators are, which specific regulators she is talking about. But they don\u2019t agree on how a particular compound should be regulated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005993\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne very obvious example, and it\u2019s useful that the Minister has pointed out that herbicides and pesticides are covered by this legislation, is the one I mentioned in my opening speech, atrazine. Atrazine is a substance which is legally used in the United States. It is banned in the European Union. Now, that\u2019s an existing example. It\u2019s legally used in New Zealand, so we are taking the lowest bar on regulation of that substance, and we are an outlier in terms of the 40 nations around the world that have actually banned the use of that substance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is: will we, in accepting the determination of an overseas regulator, take the one with the highest bar or will we take the one with the lowest bar? That seems to me to be a very important question as to whom we are taking most into account in deregulation of scrutiny over some of these chemicals and substances. That\u2019s my first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005995\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other question I have, and I\u2019m not exactly sure where it fits, but I think it probably could be in these sections 20 and 20A, and perhaps the Minister can expand on this, is: do these amendments have any determination or opinion on the processes around removal of toxic chemicals from the existing register of approved substances? The reason I ask that is because one of the strong cases made for this liberalisation of the regulatory framework is that it will facilitate our access to supposedly less harmful and less toxic substances and so-called biologicals. But the corollary of that is: are we reducing the number of toxic substances in that list of available ones or are we just adding to it? Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022d86dee01213a8e3b0a2b7b9997fa0d18\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005996\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d86dee01213a8e3b0a2b7b9997fa0d18\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (12:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I would like to move on to clause 40, but I know that my friend Lawrence Xu-Nan has probably got more questions based on fifth-form chemistry\u2014that\u2019s ageing me, not him\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005997\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223245f3a1bbf922d6a4a5aa75dae94e45\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re going through the whole periodic table today, guys.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005998\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d501cfa9b2a8a72e5dfaff9ac9b2a30c\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014on earlier parts of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0005999\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnyway, on to clause 40. This is the big\u2014oh, I think it\u2019s the biggest\u2014new clause. It\u2019s a big insertion, and it\u2019s where we are\u2014earlier on, there\u2019s been a repeal of the provisions relating to provisional registration, and this provisional registration concept is now being replaced with these consents under clause 40. Those are \u201CConsent to import, etc and use agricultural compounds for research and other purposes\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s been a little bit of back and forth over the past week, and we\u2019ve seen that from New Zealand First, with tabled amendments that have now disappeared\u2014not on the Table anymore, mysteriously untabled. Is that a word\u2014\u201Cuntabled\u201D amendments?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c40000c9246f9b392a6b33c66d9a90d4\u0022\u003EHon Mark Patterson\u003C/span\u003E: Disappeared.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be936e0660a87e9fb90c97f51ac8890a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll allow it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022938a3ae970fc8ddca62f9504f308c78a\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m hearing from the Hon Mark Patterson that they\u2019ve disappeared. However, I had had a look at them and I\u2019ve had a look at the Greens\u2019 amendments as well, and it seems that there is this concern that this \u201CConsent to import, etc\u201D is not used as a back door to avoid the full registration process that we\u2019ve been talking about, and that is the registration process for those trade name products. Everybody seems to agree that the process for trade name products is a big, robust process, and most of the changes aren\u2019t about that big, robust process; they\u2019re about this. My understanding is that these consents that were called \u201Cprovisional registration\u201D are really for research, and they are very much to work out whether or not you\u2019re going to want to take a product through that big, robust process that I\u2019ve just been talking about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy first amendment, which is actually the last amendment in my little packet of tabled amendments, is to change the cross-heading. The cross-heading reads, \u201CConsent to import, etc and use agricultural compounds for research and other purposes\u201D, and I have put in the word \u201Crelated\u201D before \u201Cpurposes\u201D so it\u2019s \u201Cand other related purposes\u201D. This is just a very small amendment to try and demonstrate that these consents are not a back door for the big process and that they are very much for that research and other related purposes, not just other purposes. At the moment, the cross-heading is just \u201Cother purposes\u201D, which could be very wide. You could argue that it\u2019s constrained by having the word \u201Cresearch\u201D in front of it, but by putting in the word \u201Crelated\u201D, as my tabled amendment does\u2014and that was tabled on 17 September at 6.50.06 p.m.\u2014then it would lead to some constraint.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would like to talk to my other amendments as well, but I\u2019ll start with that one and let the Minister know that my general approach to these amendments has not been to disrupt the whole scheme of the bill or anything like that. I note that Miles Anderson, in his second reading speech, queried why Labour was doing any amendments when, supposedly, he said, we\u2019d voted for the select committee to have a short time\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022113e6e80f9fc2fbcb7fae1a56cb543df\u0022\u003EMiles Anderson\u003C/span\u003E: You did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f01205280423435c5367e29a3611eefa\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: We did not. He might want to consider that and he might want to come back and apologise, because I have checked the voting record.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMy point is that we are not trying to undermine the legislation, but we are trying to give some comfort to people who are concerned that this consent process could be a back door. It\u2019s not a back door. It\u2019s not intended to be a back door. That is why I\u2019ve suggested some tweaks, and this is the first of those tweaks. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u00221bd086fc3d26f27f8c4b7721e29e36c9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221bd086fc3d26f27f8c4b7721e29e36c9\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:47)\u003C/span\u003E: I will tick off the last one I had for Lawrence Xu-Nan before he gets on to another one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002209be3eda78097b998ceeec712934b6f6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Any chemicals involved?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261cb39081cce679416b05954c056e889\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it was about classes of compounds. Yes. This was in regards to the director-general\u2014is the director-general required to understand how every effect of the compounds happens in a class? Understanding of the class of compounds is in terms of the risks that need to be considered under the Act\u2014is the answer to that query.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to Jo Luxton\u2019s contributions about overseas assessments\u2014could these favour particular multinationals over New Zealand companies? It\u2019s, I don\u2019t believe, quite that simple. Overseas assessments do go both ways. They also benefit New Zealand companies that have done research overseas.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s also been a contribution in regards to the overseas assessments, once again, in regards to whether or not they favour a multinational over New Zealand. The system is available to any company, and there are potentially many companies not considered to be multinational that could utilise the system as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESteve Abel had a contribution regarding the overseas regulators and what bar we would reach, really, if there were different conclusions. The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) will consider each relevant assessment in relation to the New Zealand situation, and MPI will then make its own decisions under the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ERachel Brooking has mentioned a multitude of amendments that may be coming, however managed to mainly talk about one. We do thank the member for her amendments. As a Government, we have considered all of them, but, unfortunately for the member, we will not be supporting them, as they do not make material improvements to the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00221672ef199b8ab009355a54e56f819d6f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221672ef199b8ab009355a54e56f819d6f\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (12:49)\u003C/span\u003E: I see the Government members want to close down the debate just as we\u2019re coming to the amendments. But I wonder what New Zealand First will do\u2014if they will vote for a closure motion\u2014after we have heard from the Hon Mark Patterson that this bill is very important and needs close scrutiny. Yet, his Amendment Papers have disappeared. I, of course, am thankful that the Minister has had officials check, look at my amendments, and I\u2019m disappointed that they will not consider them when they are trying to respond to this discomfort. There is time to do them, and that one that I just mentioned is a very small, discreet change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnyway, if she\u2019s not going to make the change, can she put on the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E what she thinks the scope of \u201Cother purposes\u201D is? That is important; that\u2019s why I put \u201Crelated purposes\u201D in. Can she comment on that? That\u2019s my first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen I will go to a second question, and it also relates to one of my amendments. These are all tabled, Minister. I think you said you might being seeing them; they\u2019ve been on the Table and came in last night.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe next one would at new section 35AA, \u201CApplication\u201D, which would be inserted by clause 40. So \u201Ca person may apply to the Director-General to\u2014\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc4407788c95979e1d0fedcdff2e4849\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: What\u2019s the time stamp on that Amendment Paper?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ccce3186ad6d4b077df6f749627deee7\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: 17 September, 6.50.05. And it\u2019s referring to the word \u201Csell\u201D. So you\u2019re applying for to consent to import, manufacture, or sell\u2014and I\u2019ve got an amendment there that would say \u201Csell for commercial gain\u201D. That is because we\u2019ve already discussed the definition of \u201Csale\u201D, and that can include gifting. So it\u2019s just really to make the point of why you would be applying for one of these. That may be the wrong place for the amendment; I am no way saying that these are perfect amendments, but that is the point there\u2014she can consider that. I\u2019m more interested in this scope of \u201Cother purposes\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen we can go to other amendments as well. We have this clause 40 works through the application, the notification of that application, and the period within which that application can be decided, and then there is a decision on the application. I have some amendments around this, just because I think the wording could be clearer. But again, the Minister may provide some \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E that could be useful on these issues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo looking at new section 35AAD, which would be inserted by clause 40, that is decision on application. This is on page 21 of the bill. At (1), \u201Cthe Director-General must identify the risks\u201D\u2014that seems very sensible; I\u2019ve got no changes there. Then at (2), it says \u201CThe Director-General must grant the application if the Director-General is satisfied about the risks\u201D. Risks are defined subsequently.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe issue here is the \u201Cmust grant\u201D. There appears to be no flip side, no requirement that the Minister doesn\u2019t grant at (2). We turn over the page and see at (3), \u201CHowever, the Director-General must not grant\u201D if it requires a hazardous substance approval.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo what happens if you don\u2019t require\u2014not you, Mr Chair\u2014if the applicant does not require a Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO) approval, so (3) does not apply, and we go back to (2), where is the ability for the director-general to not grant?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve proposed some wording that\u2014what is the wording? \u201CCan only grant\u201D\u2014some change like that. Yes, \u201Cmay only grant\u201D\u2014and this is at Amendment Paper, date stamped 17 September 2026 at 6.50.04 p.m., and that is just to provide a flip side. There might be another method to have a flip where the HSNO application is irrelevant. So it would be useful for the Minister at least to comment on why that\u2019s not needed and whether or not\u2014where those criteria are not met that that means that the director-general does not have to grant the\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u0022bf7fd33046f256473354e5ff25d7b8f5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bf7fd33046f256473354e5ff25d7b8f5\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:54)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019d like to tick off a range of contributions. Firstly, to Rachel Brooking, in regards to her Amendment Paper about scope and what is the scope of \u201Cother purposes\u201D under new section 35AAD(2)(a). The provision recognises that research and information gathering may support a range of legitimate purposes beyond registration. For example, a company may wish to compare a product it does not intend to register against another product that it intends to register. The activity must still be for research or information gathering and meet the requirements of the Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to her other contribution around new section 35AA and the wording of \u201Csell\u201D. The member is quite right to recognise that we have ticked off the definitions of \u201Csale\u201D, and I would refer her to my previous answer. The proposed amendment by the member could increase risks to the bill by opening up a loophole.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESteve Abel also had a contribution that we hadn\u2019t quite covered about toxic pesticides. The risk assessment takes into the level of risk of a product on a case-by-case basis. The Act provides for ability to reassess any registration of trade-named products.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ERachel Brooking also asked what happens if the applicant does not require a Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act approval, can the director-general approve it? There is no requirement for the director-general to grant consent if the test is not met. So we believe that the law is sufficiently covered through this bill without amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f374e20a87aefc60f495017da746459a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The time has come for me to leave the Chair. The House will resume at 2 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 12.56 p.m. to 2 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7bca1b8ba7cc1de3b3b5ed5e7feb0c9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the committee is resumed on the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill. Before the lunch break, we were debating Part 1; it\u2019s the debate on clauses 4 to 76, which are the main amendments. I note from the previous work that\u2019s been done in the committee, we\u2019re around about clause 40 on page 20\u2014is that about where we got to? Rachel Brooking is nodding. So the question is, again, that Part 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u002246bb8ca76ce8a91fd3bce83135e4962d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002246bb8ca76ce8a91fd3bce83135e4962d\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (14:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, I\u2019m on clause 40; some other people might be still getting up to clause 40.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220e8cf8e3df385398c75bd19d93fad77e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s cool. Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan will tell me where he\u2019s up to when he gets up to his call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224aec6db9b36fcd88f4654bdc400ec80f\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: He will\u2014he will, indeed, won\u2019t he? But I\u2019m on clause 40. Before the lunch break, the Minister was being helpful with assuaging some of my concerns that I\u2019d been trying to fix via Amendment Paper, and he\u2019d been doing it by responses to me on the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E. That is very useful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have talked about my amendment to talk about selling for commercial gain, and it might be that I\u2019ve put that in the wrong place, and I can do a Mark Patterson and withdraw my tabled amendment. What I would very much like to hear from the Minister in the chair, though, is about the comfort given to these consents that are not the big robust consents, these are the research consents, that they\u2019re unlikely to be sold for commercial gain. That is what I\u2019m looking for some comfort for: that you wouldn\u2019t expect the research consent to be finding that at the shop to buy; it may be that the person who\u2019s applying for the application will have to have a number of different people using the product to do the research, and to get people to use the product they might have to give them the product to use, and under the definition of \u201Csale\u201D, that counts, but what I\u2019m worried about and what I\u2019m seeking some reassurance on is that these research consents made under this clause 40 won\u2019t be used to sell things for commercial gain, because that would seem to be the process that you\u2019d use for the bigger section 21 of the Act process\u2014the full application, the full robust process. That is one question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, if I move on\u2014also, just on that selling, noting, also, at new section 35AAD of the Act, inserted by clause 40 of the bill, \u201CDecision on application\u201D, it again uses that word \u201Csold\u201D. \u201CThe Director-General must grant the application \u2026 by imposing conditions on the consent that ensure that\u2014(a) neither of the following is sold, released, or used in any way \u2026 other than those for which the consent is granted:\u201D. I don\u2019t understand why it would be sold for commercial gain under this type of application. I understand, obviously, it would be sold for commercial gain under an application made under section 20 of the Act. I thank the member earlier in the chair, who said that the director-general does not have to grant the consent if those conditions are not met; that was useful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI go over the page, and look at risks. Risks include \u201C(a) risks to public health: (b) risks to trade \u2026 : (c) risks to agricultural security: (d) risks to the welfare of animals \u2026 [and] (e) risks to domestic food residue standards.\u201D Now, the risks there\u2014this is at new subsection (5)\u2014at (b), (c), (d), and (e) match the purpose of the Act, although they don\u2019t mention consumer information, but paragraph (a) does not; (a) is not found in that purpose of the Act, and that is \u201Crisks to public health:\u201D. I believe it\u2019s to do with antimicrobial resistance and there being some gaps in the legislation, so I\u2019m not complaining about \u201Crisks to public health:\u201D being in that list, but the issue is around whether or not we could include \u201Cenvironment\u201D, but environment that is not already considered under the hazardous substances and new organisms (HSNO) legislation. I know, and I accept that, if a permission is required under HSNO, then that process will take care of the environment. But what if there is some environmental effect that could relate to trade and primary production, that could relate to animal welfare, could relate to agricultural security? Surely that is a risk that should also be determined. It might be that the Minister wants to say, on the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E, \u201CWell, they\u2019re already covered by the risk to trade at (b).\u201D, because, obviously, any risk to the environment is therefore a risk to trade. So is that something that this process looks at, and, if not, how far does it go?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose are two questions: one on when you would\u2014Madam Chair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b25356845d358e7de230448f3d1fe45\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Rachel Brooking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022826be516eff93598190abe77b93f26b7\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Yep, I\u2019ll just be very quick for these two questions. The question is: is something that gets a consent ever likely to be sold for commercial gain? Can you give us some comfort that that is not what the research is for? The second question is: in these risks, can we include a risk to the environment that\u2019s not assessed by HSNO; or can he give us some comfort that where trade or agricultural security relates to the environment, that that risk will already be considered under (b), (c), and (d)? Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d839e70748034293b9dc7da14cde6c13\u0022 data-id=\u00221db343871ea8d9447a4beca2babf47eb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d839e70748034293b9dc7da14cde6c13\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221db343871ea8d9447a4beca2babf47eb\u0022\u003EHon JO LUXTON (Labour) (14:06)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a reasonably quick question for the Minister with regard to clause 33, \u201CSection 30A amended (Suspension of registration)\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, it says, \u201CThe Director-General may suspend the registration of a registered trade name product, for a period of up to\u201D\u2014up to\u2014\u201C3 months, if the Director-General has reasonable grounds to believe that\u2014(a) a condition imposed on the registered trade name product is not being complied with; or (b) the registered trade name product poses a risk to public health, trade in primary produce, animal welfare, or agricultural security.\u201D A period of up to three months doesn\u2019t seem like an awful lot if this product poses a risk to public health, trade, animal welfare, or agricultural security. It then goes on to say, \u201CThe effect of a suspension [etc., etc.] \u2026 or use the relevant trade name product during the period of suspension, except as authorised by the Director-General \u2026 If satisfied that it is necessary in the circumstances, the Director-General may extend the period of suspension once\u201D\u2014once\u2014\u201Cfor a further period not exceeding 3 months that the Director-General notifies to the registrant in writing before the original suspension expires.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m really interested in that three-month specific time frame, because if something poses a risk to public health, why would there be a period time frame put on something? If something poses a risk and there needs to be something more looked into it, it could well be that it\u2019s going to take a heck of a lot longer than three months to sort out. And then if it is decided that it needs to continue, it can only be for another three months. I\u2019m interested in understanding what the purpose is of the three-month specific time frame is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u002286c0893b2d2d6fe0dcddd7cdaa59995c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002286c0893b2d2d6fe0dcddd7cdaa59995c\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Associate Minister of Agriculture) (14:08)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just in regards to the questions from the Hon Rachel Brooking\u2014\u201CDoes the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines (ACVM) Act consider environmental risk?\u201D\u2014the Act has a specific set of purposes that does not include considering or managing environmental risk; environmental risks from hazardous substances and new organisms are managed under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFurther question: \u201CDoes the ACVM Act consider public health risk and not environment?\u201D The risk to public health was not in the original Act; it was added later based on a gap between the Health and HSNO Acts on managing certain public health risk associated with agricultural compounds. The main concern was antimicrobial resistance from use of ag compounds, mainly veterinary medicines, and crossover resistance to humans impacting on human medicines. There has never been a similar issue identified for environment\u2014i.e., the HSNO Act manages this appropriately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn reply to the question about new section 35AAD, inserted by clause 40, \u201CWhy wouldn\u2019t it be sold?\u201D Noting we\u2019ve already answered this question: the director-general can specify non-sale as a condition. Further answer to the question around will the consents be sold for commercial gain, noting, again\u2014repeating an answer given previously\u2014I\u2019m comfortable the research consents won\u2019t be used inappropriately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222737c1b89b600218ca8477f1ddd0720a\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: Won\u2019t be?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cca439747ce67351700897c4421b6b78\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK\u003C/span\u003E: Won\u2019t be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAnd, a further answer to a question previously answered on new section 35AAB: could we include environmental effect not covered by HSNO? We wouldn\u2019t want to introduce confusion around what ACVM Act manages; it\u2019s not about environmental risk.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022827a0f0071bca12bb1f4c07b2c57c4ab\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Steve Abel. Just noting that we\u2019ve just received some further amendments from you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u00221c4e56a214470f81f4ece4fbd6082db3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221c4e56a214470f81f4ece4fbd6082db3\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (14:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, thank you. Appreciate that, Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002265560c35b09a2da26574c15d54c79bf5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister now has those.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f325e462dabf6cc970d3f1be5f7c6f9\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, thank you. I wasn\u2019t yet going to speak to those, but\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf3cbb6c16107d70fc6fb61f30d7668e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s alright. I just wanted to note that, just to say they\u2019ve arrived on the desk.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022262dfcfaa7f7b742f5bee09e9345e0fa\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: Bam! I have a very excellent executive support person assisting me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s on this very subject, Minister, and I appreciate you expanding that. So my interpretation of the reason in clause 33, section 30A amended, that in (1)(b) it lists \u201Cpublic health, trade in primary produce, animal welfare, or agricultural security.\u201D but does not list the environment. What I think you\u2019ve just outlined to us is because if there are environmental issues, and for example, an agricultural compound that could turn out to be eco-toxic, for example, i.e. it\u2019s not a human health risk, but it\u2019s an environmental risk; are you clarifying for us that that would be managed under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO) even though that same compound, say a pesticide, is covered by the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act as well? I think that\u2019s what you\u2019ve just told us. But if you could just triple clarify, that would be good. Because my question was why isn\u2019t environmental in there? If you\u2019re assuring us that it\u2019s captured by the HSNO, then I feel that question is allayed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy other question, which is an extension\u2014a different question, but an expansion on a question my colleague Jo Luxton just asked. A registered trade name product can be suspended for three months if the director-general has reasonable grounds that conditions have not been complied with, and then in clause 33(3) it says that suspension will mean that \u201Cno person may import, manufacture, sell, or use the relevant trade name product...\u201D. That seems like a very blunt tool, and I\u2019m trying to understand what are the probable contexts in which no person would be allowed to use something that had not been complied with by some person, if you understand what I mean. I\u2019m imagining an instance where one user of that product is misusing it, and then the director-general only has the ability to stop everybody from using it. Because if you read the condition in subclause (3) it then says once the suspension is put in place, no person can use it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to understand if there\u2019s any nuance and the ability of the director-general to prohibit use by certain persons or entities, but not prohibit use by everybody. Because it seems to me that that\u2019s a very broad and blunt tool, and I can\u2019t quite imagine the circumstance in which misuse of the product means that the most appropriate response would be that no one can use it. I can understand if there\u2019s new information that indicates that particular product is a risk to public health broadly, in which case you do want to suspend it for everybody.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022a30465bd6249239546d0aba35f616dbd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a30465bd6249239546d0aba35f616dbd\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (14:13)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. There are just a few questions before clause 40 that I want to just tidy up with the Minister based on Minister\u2019s previous response. So I\u2019ll be quick and then I\u2019ll move on to clause 40.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe first one is\u2014thank you to the Minister for your previous response regarding clause 10, section 8AA. My last question over here is whether any exemptions will require an active review by the director-general? Or is it only if someone complains about the particular exemption of a compound or any class of compound that there would be a trigger of whether that exemption is necessary? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m going to move now on to clause 18(4). I want to check when we\u2019re looking at the waiver for the notification here, if it\u2019s something that is urgent, would a notification soon need to be given retrospectively?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI now move on to clause 31 and this is regarding trade name products. So clause 31(4). When we\u2019re looking at trade name product, can I just double-check that a trade name needs to be a trade name that is registered here in New Zealand or is it any trade name, and what jurisdiction would count in terms of trade name or via international\u2014like a trade name register or through other trade-related intellectual property scheme or trips? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThank you to the Minister for your response on clause 33(1) on suspension. I understand that if a director-general suspends for three months because something hasn\u2019t been complied with that the suspension may lift when it is complied with. But I want to check how would the director-general, within three months, assess the risk to public health and be able to lift that suspension within three months, or even with the extension of another three months. Does it mean that if the director-general found that there is a risk to public health within that three months or one of the three-month extensions, then that registration is cancelled altogether?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow I am going to move on to clause 40, but I\u2019m only just going to ask one question right now for clause 40, but signalling to you, Madam Chair, that I will be going from clause 40 onwards from here. The question I have is on section 35AAD(5) inserted by clause 40. So this is starting at line 14 on page 22. Over here it does list some of the risks in relation to agricultural compounds. I want to double-check that in subclause (5)(b) the \u201Crisks to trade and market access\u2026\u201D would also apply to, for example, our New Zealand-European free-trade agreement or other multilateral trade agreements with Europe. They have requirements around organic certification that that potential\u2014either cross contamination, or, etc.\u2014would not affect our ability to continue on with that organic certification, and that is built in as part of the risk to trade and market access as well. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022ad87429fc8b56e32dd44bb6b4a0a925a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ad87429fc8b56e32dd44bb6b4a0a925a\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Associate Minister of Agriculture) (14:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. In regards to the question from Steve Abel, would environmental risk be managed under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act? Yes, both Acts apply to the compounds.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to the Hon Jo Luxton\u2019s question around suspension of registration and why only a three-month suspension. This matches the existing time frame in the Act and the clause expands the reasons for suspensions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022ca467e81681b7c12ec03fadb2dc6f1b6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ca467e81681b7c12ec03fadb2dc6f1b6\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (14:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Going back to the sale point, the Minister said it\u2019s been answered several times; it has not. My question was: can he explain why there would be, ever, any commercial sale of something that is being used for research? And he said, \u201COh, well it\u2019s been answered a lot of times.\u201D It hasn\u2019t. And then he said he\u2019s sure it won\u2019t be used inappropriately. So by saying \u201Cinappropriate\u201D, does he mean that there won\u2019t be a commercial use of it? Can he just explain to us why there needs to be provision for commercial use in a consent that we\u2019ve heard is to be restrained and only used for research? So that\u2019s one question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen my second question is in answer to his question about risks. He went back to the purpose of the Act, and I\u2019m well aware of the purpose of the Act, and says it doesn\u2019t provide for the environment, but that wasn\u2019t my question. Well, one of my questions was would you like to include it? But the other question was those risks that are already in the bill and in the purpose of the Act, can they consider the environment when looking at them with a wider lens? So one of the risks is risks to trade and market access for primary produce. I would see a risk for trade would be if there was some environmental harm considered, caused by something that was having one of these research consents. Can that be considered or is he saying that risk to trades needs to be narrowly interpreted? That is my question about environment and risks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ll move on to another amendment that I had, and that relates, still on clause 40, to new section 35AAE, \u201CDuration of consent\u201D. The issue here is that the director-general must be satisfied that the period is \u201Csufficient only to achieve the purpose of the consent\u201D\u2014that is a useful clause. The next one is about extending that time frame, but there is not a maximum for the duration of the consent. And my understanding of these types of consents are that they are, normally, for about one or two years and that they would very, very rarely, or it would be exceptional for them to, go past five years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have a tabled amendment that a inserts a maximum of five years or no more than five years. So would the Minister consider that amendment about including a maximum? That is the amendment that was tabled on 17 September, at 6.50.02, and the wording is \u201Cto insert after (b), \u2018(c) must be less than five years.\u2019\u00A0\u201D The point there is just to put on a maximum. As I\u2019ve been saying throughout my contributions, we\u2019re just trying to give some comfort to people that these consents won\u2019t be misused; they\u2019re not a back door. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy final amendment that I have not yet talked to relates to the reassessment of consent. So if we go to clause 40, new section 35AAH, it is \u201CReassessment of consent\u201D, and it\u2019s that if there is significant new information, then the director-general may, after consultation, decide to reassess. So that is at the discretion of the director-general and it\u2019s based on significant new information. And so I have an amendment\u2014I think it would be useful to discuss this as well\u2014that if there was a significant risk that appears after the consent is granted, whilst during the duration of the consent, then I think it should be incumbent on the director-general to review or reassess that consent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have an amendment that does that as well. That is tabled amendment 17\u00A0September, again, at 6.50.01. It is to insert at new section 35AAH a new (1)(a)\u2014so that\u2019s after the clause that I\u2019ve just been talking about\u2014that says \u201Cthe Director-General must reassess the agricultural compound to which consent applies if, in the opinion of the Director-General, the risk can no longer be adequately managed by the conditions on the consent.\u201D So I\u2019ve used some language that\u2019s used elsewhere in the bill, but the key thing there is that it\u2019s a \u201Cmust\u201D\u2014the director-general \u201Cmust\u201D reassess if these risks are not being adequately managed. I would be very happy for that to be some different tests: stronger than \u201Cadequately managed\u201D; it could be \u201Cif the risk is significant\u201D, or some wording like that. But it\u2019s just to make sure that that reassessment happens. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf the Government is not of a mind to accept my amendment, as seems to have been the way, then it would be useful for the Minister to comment on how he considers that discretion, in paragraph (1) of new section 35AAH, to be used, and what he expects would happen if the research suddenly identifies some large risk, but the consent is continuing\u2014what should happen to their consent. I\u2019m hoping that the Minister will say that it would be his expectation that it would be reassessed and that there is an ability to do that reassessment and that that\u2019s the expectation. At the moment, it\u2019s a discretion, and if it\u2019s a significant risk, noting that, you know, this type of consent isn\u2019t going through the robust process that a registered compound is going through; it\u2019s just going through a lesser test, which is appropriate because it\u2019s for research. But if he could comment on that as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo just to remind the Minister, four things: the first one was on sale: when could it possibly be used for commercial gain? The second one was on risk: with those existing risks to trade, can we incorporate the environment into that or is it a narrow reading of risk to trade? That was my second one. My third one was: would he consider putting a maximum on the duration of the consent. And then, my fourth one: is this a requirement for a mandatory reassessment of consent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u002296f6f7147ea73dbcd15d527d7409ed24\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002296f6f7147ea73dbcd15d527d7409ed24\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Associate Minister of Agriculture) (14:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. An answer to Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s questions: do any exemptions require active review or is it just after complaints? The director-general (DG) can reassess the consent if new information becomes available; new information can be from any source.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother answer to Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan: if a suspension is three months, how can the director-general assist risk within three months? Yes, the DG can assess the risk within three months. There is also the potential to extend the suspension for another period of up to three months if the assessment is not finished.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to Rachel Brooking\u2019s question, if research identifies large risk, would the consent be reassessed? Yes. Reconsideration of a consent: should the DG reassess this if there is new information? Yes, this provision mirrors that in the existing Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd then there\u2019s another lot of questions to be answered from the Hon Rachel Brooking: would you consider environmental harm a risk to trade? I believe this might have been previously answered. Environmental harm is managed under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA further answer to the  Hon Rachel Brooking: is commercial gain an appropriate use? If someone sells a product subject to consent, they breach the conditions, which would have implications for enforcement. A further answer to the question of whether a maximum of five years for research purposes is agreeable: noting this has been answered previously, I considered this amendment and I don\u2019t think it substantially improves the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn response to Steve Abel\u2019s question: why is no person able to use a product that has been suspended? No person can use it except as authorised by the director-general. A single misuse by a user would not be considered grounds for suspension. However, if the product was causing significant issues, for example animal welfare, where the product has been used appropriately, then this would be a reason for suspending.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn answer to Lawrence Xu-Nan questions around risk to trade and market access and whether it is considered around organic certification: organic certification is managed under the organics Act. And to Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s question: does trade name product mean any product overseas, too? Trade name product means something within New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u0022d032a6b1471439917d6a58f6d3071559\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d032a6b1471439917d6a58f6d3071559\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (14:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Look, I\u2019m very acutely aware that we\u2019ve moved on to the 30s and 40s in this part, but I appreciate you mentioning that I\u2019ve tabled some amendments. I believe I can cover them off pretty quickly in a single call and I won\u2019t speak to all of them, but I\u2019ll speak to some of the key ones. They are in earlier clauses in this part. For clause 22, my proposal is that we insert a requirement that the director-general \u201Cmust consider the cumulative, synergistic, and long-term effects of the agricultural compound in the application, including its interaction with other agricultural compounds and contaminants.\u201D Now, this is really bringing to light, I guess, our greater contemporary awareness of the extent to which agrichemicals interact with each other to create cocktail toxins that may be much worse than those chemicals alone, and that that should be part of the consideration under clause 22.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn clause 21, furthermore, not unrelated, I\u2019m proposing to insert, in new section 20A(3)(d), \u201Cthe person will consider in their assessment any New Zealand - specific conditions, including differences in climate, soil, waterways, native species, agricultural practices, animal husbandry, food consumption patterns, exposure pathways, residue standards, antimicrobial resistance, biodiversity impacts, and M\u0101ori interests and m\u0101tauranga M\u0101ori.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat serves the purpose of being very clear of what I think the public should have as an expectation they are sure has been considered in making evaluations that can use determinations made in other jurisdictions. I think laying out these issues makes it very clear that there\u2019s an expectation that those unique factors to our environment and our native biodiversity\u2014for example, and m\u0101tauranga M\u0101ori\u2014are part of that consideration, hence that proposed amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFurther, in clause 21, I\u2019m proposing, in new section 20A(2), that after \u201Cclass of agricultural compounds\u201D we insert \u201Cexcluding genetically modified agricultural compounds\u201D. Now, this cuts to the challenge of us having two Acts that manage both the pesticides, the herbicides, the toxic components and the environmental components through the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 (HSNO Act), and the genetically modified components through the HSNO Act, but they interact with the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act (ACVM Act), and the environmental component of a chemical or a substance or a compound is supposedly managed through HSNO, but, actually, those very chemicals and compounds and substances are in the ACVM Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo for absolute clarity, for the public and for the regulator, the genetically modified agricultural compounds should only be managed through the HSNO Act. That would be the effect of this clause. The reason for it is that we have a specific example of this in a field trial of an agricultural compound that is a double-stranded RNA that was approved  through HSNO and the Environmental Protection Authority but has potentially interacted with other components\u2014it\u2019s classified as a compound in the ACVM Act. So for clarity\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002220ab02e22598e17ff21ec4f96edd2d15\u0022\u003ESuze Redmayne\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ve had this explained.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e69fd8de199cf656c7c5786295ec7270\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: Pardon me?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229940cee30c8fa8bd5a8c7fa81f10e02f\u0022\u003ESuze Redmayne\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022086a0f23cb0ce312e1083a929c9ebe18\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: For clarity, I think it would be beneficial if there\u2019s an explicit exclusion in this Act so that there\u2019s no doubt that it if there is a genetically modified compound, it\u2019s managed by the HSNO Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn fact, I won\u2019t speak to my other clauses, because I\u2019m aware we\u2019re moving on, but those are the main ones that I\u2019d appreciate a response from the Minister on in terms of those tabled amendments. Thank you very much.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022817c094c53fc3161044e8e34c258a2e8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Just noting that when the Minister did answer that last group of questions, some of them had been answered before, so I think we want to\u2014and I know there was some clarifications. But in general\u2014I\u2019m not just pointing to your questions; I\u2019m talking about the questions in general\u2014we really have got to the point where we need to be specific in terms of the uncertainties just because it\u2019s had a select committee. So I think we want to move quite succinctly through the rest of this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00224aa3aa3cff513fcdd5cefed2e3983394\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224aa3aa3cff513fcdd5cefed2e3983394\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (14:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do agree with your point that it has had a select committee, and we were interested that one Government party then put up some amendments to it that have since been removed, so that shows that there is a bit of tension\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c4fce59b94d94182d3f20972dd35dfcd\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I get that, and I hear the depth of the questions. I just think that we need to start moving to the specific things that haven\u2019t been covered in select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225004f6e54e0a65a2d4f23c1ab69633a6\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. It would be useful if the Minister didn\u2019t just repeat what the bill says. But I will go forward. Because I\u2019ve been asking for\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f1e37ab6782792dd6da2db53716ce3d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The bill says what the bill says.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bbc3936d373bd5b175f7dcddd3b7592b\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right\u2014that\u2019s right. The Minister is doing a great job. I\u2019ve got nothing against the Hon Mike Butterick there. But he did say\u2014again, the selling and the commercial gain. Can he give me any examples of where a consent for research would have conditions enabling commercial gain? Do we need to be setting up a system which enables commercial gain for research consents? Or is that something that is farfetched and is not anticipated or is not common, or it would be very heavy regulated or something, because I\u2019m just still worried\u2014he said it won\u2019t be used inappropriately, but I still haven\u2019t heard him say that it\u2019s not his expectation that these compounds that only had the research consent would be being sold, rather than the other permission. So that\u2019s the first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAnd then he did answer: he said the five-year expectation doesn\u2019t help\u2014the five-year maximum to the duration doesn\u2019t help the bill; some words to that effect. Can he give the committee\u2014again, just looking for comfort\u2014any examples or can he give his expectation, really, of whether the norm of these consents which are currently called provisional registrations, being for one or two years\u2014does he expect them to go beyond the five years that I proposed or is there the expectation that they will still mainly be for one or two years and are unlikely to go beyond five years? So if you can just give a little bit more on those two points, that would be very helpful, I think, for the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E. They are my points.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u002242880b215137a50ed0910fd0b7052b81\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002242880b215137a50ed0910fd0b7052b81\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Associate Minister of Agriculture) (14:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. In regards to the question from Steve Abel about new section 20A(2), in relation to the class of products inserting genetically modified, the bill does not change the regulatory framework for genetically modified organisms. I can reassure the member of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s question regarding waiver of notification and whether a notification will be given retrospectively: if the waiver was given urgently, no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd to Steve Abel\u2019s question around cumulative impact of the compound when assessing, noting this has been previously answered, environmental impacts are not regulated under this legislation; negative environmental impacts are regulated by the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to the Hon Rachel Brooking\u2019s question regarding consents post five years, no, it is not my expectation that any consent would go for that long. In answer to another one of Rachel Brooking\u2019s questions, the example of a consent allowing sale for commercial gain, officials assure me they are not aware of any examples where consents\u2014provisional registration, in the old money\u2014have resulted in sale for commercial gain.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022f3799aedeee150bdaed71b6b50ab5fe1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f3799aedeee150bdaed71b6b50ab5fe1\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (14:37)\u003C/span\u003E: In that case, why does commercial gain need to be provided for in clause 40 for these new consents, these research consents, which are the swap out for the provisional registration? So he\u2019s just told us provisional registration has never been for commercial gain. That gives me a lot of comfort, and I thank him for the answer. But then the question is, well, why do we have these provisions about sale in front of us, and if it\u2019s only for non-commercial sale, then why can\u2019t we say it\u2019s only for non-commercial sale\u2014that is, the gifting of products or the distribution of products? So that\u2019s just the tidy-off that I\u2019d appreciate. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223eb789835b611b0ec6469f0ab32cccc9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m going to take a very quick question from Rachel Boyack, only because I believe that the Minister is just waiting for an answer for that question. But we are coming to the end.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002242067e22c7a349218b3b868f58eda79d\u0022 data-id=\u0022ac2abce1e37fc9fb5189f40bc4556d49\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002242067e22c7a349218b3b868f58eda79d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ac2abce1e37fc9fb5189f40bc4556d49\u0022\u003ERACHEL BOYACK (Labour\u2014Nelson) (14:38)\u003C/span\u003E: Just on that very point, just further\u2014it\u2019s actually a really important clarification. Just to add to what my colleague the Hon Rachel Brooking has asked, we understand that a lot of these provisions are literally a copy-paste from the existing Act, and changing from that provisional registration to a consent. My specific question about it is: is that commercial gain reference in the existing law or is that a new terminology that\u2019s been added in the updated legislation? If it is, then it would be wise if there is no suggestion from officials that this could actually occur, for it to not be in there. If it is currently there, and that\u2019s never actually happened, then, again, it would be wise to remove it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESo I just wanted to bring together the conversation about the fact that this is essentially a copy-paste from existing legislation. But we think it\u2019s something that has actually been missed through that select committee process and needs addressing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00227d13aafd8c05d866a79994b878f46eef\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227d13aafd8c05d866a79994b878f46eef\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (14:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aca1f70f7fa922055a802d177c87cb51\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: A bonus question!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022198618e53bff1e075e9d0ddf977c3dc0\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: A bonus question! Well, I\u2019ve just picked these up off the Table and now given them to my whip\u2014Mr Abel has introduced a lot of tabled amendments\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8705759779ea34b3cdf8803c55277f6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Which I mentioned about 20 minutes ago.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002266d9dd9b5cfe48c64dfdd4ee12868d83\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, yes. I thank the Chair for mentioning all of his tabled amendments. We did think, when you, Madam Chair, mentioned the tabled amendments, that it might mean that the Minister for Food Safety had put up a tabled amendment\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e469d9439348a5ee716ffe00fc5a648b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: No, when Steve Abel stood up to take a call, I specifically told Mr Abel that his amendments were now on our desk.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d14cb17cf8edb695a23d217d60d17e91\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, see, I missed that bit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223bae4e481f5babca5e8440e398412fb7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: You did miss that bit!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c5fe76334fe8343260f2a0f030295471\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: I ran to the Table to see if there was a new amendment\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e49ea2c7b9afa94b085c4206030aeab\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m noting also that the Minister looks like he might be ready. If this is only a quick clarification about Mr Abel\u2019s tabled amendments\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227166c7414e811de2ce715692220095b7\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s exactly what it is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228aa44fec43993557ad5dd138cdc2fdde\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Right. Thank you. The honourable Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u002287064771d3533d9445c10352363ab519\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002287064771d3533d9445c10352363ab519\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Associate Minister of Agriculture) (14:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. In answer to the Hon Rachel Brooking, why do we have provisions for sale if there\u2019s never been an example. This clause is a safety net in case the situation ever arises.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b38874d860b1a69bb90414dfacaad5c7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: If you must, Miles Anderson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022 data-id=\u00229219445ebc6c94133dcaf11847300881\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229219445ebc6c94133dcaf11847300881\u0022\u003EMILES ANDERSON (National\u2014Waitaki) (14:41)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006124\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226343e462cde24275225d6848f7071814\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Part 1 set out on Amendment Paper 793 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222035a3a9427712d76b342676224f0a74\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Steve Abel\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006133\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d5b4c751d9760c18975805a3e2ac1d14\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Steve Abel\u2019s tabled amendment to delete clause 10 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006140\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c935158a8f6c2275e956d6347d9a8f0e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Just to let the member know: you may not have been in the position of doing all of the voting before, but you\u2019re welcome to stand on your feet in between those extra votes that you are giving for other people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224fcc860b68c5c5e4bcfba818f9a1fa18\u0022\u003ELan Pham\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1ca4b7f1e73e86024e306869f4a7a4b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. The question is that Steve Abel\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 10 inserting new subsection (6) into new section 8AA be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006149\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216acb07b7449c6778f7e0c80bc147b40\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Steve Abel\u2019s tabled amendment to delete clause 19 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006156\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c27c43d3ed423c086b731719cca6103c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Steve Abel\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 20 is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Steve Abel\u2019s tabled amendment to delete clause 21 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006164\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 17\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 99\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 32; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225c3cf8161e9e9a52c7e969a184765c86\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Steve Abel\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 21 relating to New Zealand - specific conditions is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Steve Abel\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 21 amending new subsection (2) in new section 20A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006172\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228584698280a52211e3d7d3e47a84ca1c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Steve Abel\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 21 amending new subsection (3A) in new section 20A to replace \u201C10\u201D with \u201C5\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006179\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208c4a29560dc55f65836235bc0a90444\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Steve Abel\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 21 inserting new paragraph (d) into new section 20A(5) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006186\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002238ca36b3e525b913b114a225c81ec176\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Steve Abel\u2019s tabled amendment to subclause 22 is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that the Hon Rachel Brooking\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, cross-heading before new section 35AA, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006194\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222553575020405031ad274b90daf63b86\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Rachel Brooking\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new section 35AA(1)(a), be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006201\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225dc997e305b6b7a5c1ce97dbebd76c7e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Rachel Brooking\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new section 35AAD(2), be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006208\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cdbee69251317ce044ab0a38b400e68e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Steve Abel\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new section 35AAD(5)(a), be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006215\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e67ac4a3a365c7bb4f8024e938c5f0f2\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Rachel Brooking\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new section 35AAD(5), inserting new paragraph (f) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006222\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7dc56c8e5ac10721e6cc74b5559e49f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Rachel Brooking\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new section 35AAE(2), inserting new paragraph (c) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006229\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242137027d8c6b6488a9e76727cbebd2b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Rachel Brooking\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 40, new section 35AAH, inserting new subsection (1A) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006236\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022834b03b7b847e54860a982a6354dcdc4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Steve Abel\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 52 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006243\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 49\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006249\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 99\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 32; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 17\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 67, Noes 49.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b396edec7ac0dd03fcfc8948ead64ed1\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00228412b4fd2142d83f9c4e9cf2b891b739\u0022\u003EPart 2 Importation, manufacture, and sale of agricultural compounds, and Schedules 1 and 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220e243badbaf8291533ba40d02a7c57a1\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to Part 2. Part 2 is the debate on clauses 77 and 78\u2014\u201COther amendments\u201D\u2014and Schedules 1 and 2. The question is that Part 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00220f479a7060c2c932f8ddc7e82d3c9e2e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220f479a7060c2c932f8ddc7e82d3c9e2e\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (14:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I actually only have one question on this part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022908aaff1c0448e0fc198965e16d7f81b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Nice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226be02483a0322838967d5f3c6ce3b75a\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: I know! I might think of others. It depends on the responses. It is just a drafting question as well, and it\u2019s to do with what I consider a fairly new drafting technique where you talk about \u201Cnew\u201D provisions and \u201Cold\u201D provisions, referring to the insertions by the amendment Act\u2014those are new, and the old is the one provision that was immediately in force. This works for amendment legislation\u2014I understand that\u2014and at clause 4(2) of Part 2 inserted in Schedule 1, that is described.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut my question is if you go a bit further through Schedule 1, you will see at clause\u00A019, it\u2019s \u201CRequests under Official Information Act\u201D\u2014this is page 45. It says \u201Can application for an exemption under section 8C;\u201D. There\u2019s no \u201Cnew\u201D or \u201Cold\u201D in front of 8C, but then if you look down further to clause 19(2)(c) it says \u201Can application for registration of a trade name product under old section 27;\u201D. I\u2019m wondering why some sections don\u2019t have the prefix of \u201Cold\u201D or \u201Cnew\u201D, and is it because they are unchanged? That is the question there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, related to this, I\u2019ve got a question. If you go over the page again to 46, clause\u00A021(4) of Schedule 1 says, \u201CIn this clause, innovative application and non-innovative application\u201D\u2014that\u2019s a bit mean, isn\u2019t it; to call something \u201Cnon-innovative\u201D? But that\u2019s not my question. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de0825b048a5360015d7a58adfcaa8c6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: It takes all sorts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224aa2c03d6a35c8e9c1600860bd70fc84\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: It says \u201Chave the same meanings as in section 72(1) (as amended by the amendment Act)\u201D. But why doesn\u2019t that just say \u201Cas in new section 72(1)\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWhy have we got these defined terms of \u201Cnew\u201D and \u201Cold\u201D, but then sometimes they\u2019re not used and it\u2019s \u201Crefers as amended by the amendment Act\u201D, which would seem to be \u201Cnew\u201D; and then other clauses don\u2019t say if they\u2019re \u201Cnew\u201D or \u201Cold\u201D? Are those clauses with no prefix\u2014do they just remain unchanged and they\u2019re just, like, staying the same? Are they non-innovative? Is that the answer?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022ddb68317cbf27af77a3455a84ae77d50\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ddb68317cbf27af77a3455a84ae77d50\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Associate Minister of Agriculture) (15:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. In answer to the member\u2019s question: because they are not changing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u00222b299f09b76d6cdebc0a6e688fb93f69\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222b299f09b76d6cdebc0a6e688fb93f69\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (15:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I noticed also in Part\u00A02, clause 8 on page 40\u2014I appreciate Rachel Brooking with her skill asking questions about drafting decisions, so I\u2019m going to do similar.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThis specific change is preconditions and crossed out of the words \u201Cto granting exemption\u201D, and apparently added are the words \u201Cand requirements to publish reasons switched off\u201D. I don\u2019t understand what that means, and I wonder if the Minister in the chair could explain to us this term \u201Cthe reasons switched off\u201D? It follows on with \u201CThe Director-General may grant an exemption under new section 8AA that applies to any agricultural compound\u201D\u2014I won\u2019t read that all out, for the benefit of the committee, but I would love to have a greater understanding of what the necessity of that change is and what it means, and specifically understanding this term \u201Cswitched off\u201D. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00229a720b10fb6c2c546475b54b71e415c1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229a720b10fb6c2c546475b54b71e415c1\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (15:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. With this one, I want to check with the Minister in the chair\u2014this is clause 77, \u201CSchedule 1 amended\u201D in line 5 of page 40. Can I just check with the Minister on the interpretation of the expiry of this clause? Does the expiry of this clause refer to the commencement date of this bill, or does it refer to another particular expiry? Can I just check: the expiry of this clause refers to\u2014I\u2019m assuming the entire section, clause 6, which is \u201CExemptions in regulations continued\u201D, so everything in that clause, if that\u2019s the correct interpretation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMoving on to amended clause 9, so this is page 41 regarding \u201CExisting applications for registration\u201D. In the new subclause (3), it says \u201CThe application is to be notified\u201D. Can I just check if that is to interpreted as every existing application for registration would be notified in accordance with the new requirements under this bill, if any? I\u2019ll start with those two questions, and I do have follow-on questions for the other sections.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022d808d099bbac8aaced2c1582a3df1897\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d808d099bbac8aaced2c1582a3df1897\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (15:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Just a tiny question. Thank you, Minister, for answering my question that indeed those sections without a prefix are non-changing\u2014\u201Cnon-innovative\u201D, we might even call them\u2014but what about that one that I was referring to in the example in clause 21(4), where it says \u201Csection 72(1) (as amended by the amendment Act)\u201D. Why doesn\u2019t it just say \u201Cas in new section 72(1)\u201D? Why does it need that \u201Cas amended by the amendment Act\u201D? Wouldn\u2019t it be more consistent to have \u201Cnew\u201D? That\u2019s my big question for this part, Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00227ce6df2d79c9378af310cb6dd4794f18\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227ce6df2d79c9378af310cb6dd4794f18\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (15:06)\u003C/span\u003E: In that case, I do have a few more questions for this part and I\u2019ll go through at least the ones for Schedule 1 anyway.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of clause 9, one of the things I want to check with the Minister in the chair\u2014and this is in reference to new clause 14, \u201CApplications for registration that are called in by Minister\u201D. I would also assume that this is the Minister responsible for this bill? But also I want to check with the Minister: what is an application for registration that is called in by the Minister for Food Safety? Does it mean that the Minister is able to intervene in terms of granting a particular application that overrides the decision of a director-general? Or does it mean that the Minister themselves is able to make an application for registration for a particular compound that we\u2019re referring to here? I do want to check with the minister on clause 14.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMoving along to clauses 16 to 18, this is the area where we\u2019re looking at provisional registration. Again, we are looking at this transitional measure, which is a big part of this particular section. When we are looking at provisional registration but not decided\u2014this is what new clause 16 is referring to\u2014what then would be the notification for the applicants in this case to have clarity of a provisional registration to a final decision? Also, if the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind just clarifying how, then\u2014so we can have it on record\u2014would this new system and this new process affect a provisional decision to a final decision, if at all? I\u2019m assuming, based on my reading of this section, that any provisional decisions that are made, the final decision will be based on the previous or the old requirement, as opposed to the new requirement? Is that a correct interpretation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy last question for this particular section is around clause 19, requests under the Official Information Act (OIA) involving trade secrets. I understand why this particular section\u2014and I remember the Minister in the chair at the time mentioned confidentiality when it comes to trade secrets. But I do want to check how this would potentially interact with any Government funding that is given to something that potentially pertains to trade secrets. I guess the balance between what we\u2019re seeing in terms of the OIA versus what we often see in terms of the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ECabinet Manual\u003C/span\u003E for procurement and also in terms of what we\u2019re seeing in terms of trade secrets.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason I ask this is often in select committees, as the legislators, when we are scrutinising a particular expenditure in a select committee, a lot of the times we are being told, well, we can\u2019t disclose a particular aspect because of commercial sensitivity, etc., I do just want to check if this is something that is of a higher, even more stringent requirement than what we see normally through an Official Information Act process; or is it something that, essentially, currently exists around commercial sensitivity as well? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c5572fca3a94bbefdf9108d63a018347\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221b1694f55b37c225b7e50b5166ff3f48\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, Madam Chair. That was my last question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022b40fef7d5845aff09963cbcc7d18e31c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b40fef7d5845aff09963cbcc7d18e31c\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Associate Minister of Agriculture) (15:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. In regards to the question from Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2014what happens to existing provisional registrations?\u2014they continue under the provisions that are applied for before the new consent regime begins. They remain valid until they expire or otherwise are dealt with under the existing framework.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWith regards to the member\u2019s question around clause 14\u2014is this the ministry responsible for the bill?\u2014yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother question from Lawrence Xu-Nan: what does \u201Ccall in\u201D an application mean? The Minister for Food Safety has the ability to call in an application to make the decision, instead of the Director-General.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn response to the Hon Rachel Brooking\u2019s question around non-innovative applications: because section 72(1) of the principal Act is not entirely new, it is just being amended\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo Steve Abel\u2019s question around what does \u201Cswitched off\u201D mean, I refer him to new Part 2 in Schedule 1, section 8(2), inserted by clause 77 of the bill: \u201CThe Director-General is not required to comply with the preconditions set out in new Section 8AA(4) and (5) before granting an exemption under subclause (1).\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229906a54346eca9d9c6ff650e3853ce4b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m just not sure whether Mr Abel wanted a clarification for that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a60eb50930823109588b9a5f77d858ce\u0022\u003ESteve Abel\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, I\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221983f748c6a3c804ae33cf2a0725f8a9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I know you didn\u2019t stand up, but I\u2019m allowing you the grace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u0022e36dab6e0716bcffca8220586f3bbcd6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e36dab6e0716bcffca8220586f3bbcd6\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (15:12)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I really appreciate that. It is really just to understand in very simple terms the use of the phrasing \u201Cswitched off\u201D and why it\u2019s used in that context. If it\u2019s to simply articulate what the Minister in the chair said, which is that the director-general\u2014I think he said\u2014doesn\u2019t have to apply certain clauses, I wonder\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a4bf85b13c188c7806af0bf767612ab\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Perhaps the Minister wants to repeat that answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ced05d2c0eb744ee611448aae501814\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: I did hear the answer, but I\u2019m just not sure that that explained the use of the term \u201Cswitched off\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002284caa6b2ac125095de0a4c76c8f06c68\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, OK.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c291472ca487ea30078c4a301c06a933\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014because it seems peculiar and unnecessary, unless it\u2019s got a particular function.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022c7d7ab3bc2f951a7ba6703f30626b4a7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c7d7ab3bc2f951a7ba6703f30626b4a7\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Associate Minister of Agriculture) (15:13)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m advised that it\u2019s a drafting decision by the Parliamentary Counsel Office.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228caf5b7ce9b2fbf69f9a04cace52da1f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Steve Abel\u2019s amendment to clause 77 is ruled out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006295\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 99\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 32; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 17\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220dbf15e52560e26d098b4604d21b07a7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: We come now to Schedule 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that the Minister\u2019s amendment to Schedule 1 set out on Amendment Paper 793 be agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 1 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 99\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 32; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 17\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a173753276f4a1ff28a2253ee11a380f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Schedule 2 set out on Amendment Paper 793 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 2 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 99\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 32; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 17\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00228fcbb976a958548035504c9a887f2508\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00227e4abf656b0b40f7b12b9025dfc80cf4\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223b1e7d549b43f8358517ffb8f568cfdd\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to our final debate, clauses 1 to 3, the debate on \u201CTitle\u201D, \u201CCommencement\u201D, and \u201CPrincipal Act\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022c9a84c88a07c431f76ae97f0aa35b620\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c9a84c88a07c431f76ae97f0aa35b620\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (15:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m going to start with\u2014actually, I\u2019m only going to be talking about commencement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223aef7ec8a9d5eab5904f082927aabb74\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe74810768e69a1b46c25205a4e83c0c\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha! But there are quite a few questions around the commencement, and I guess I\u2019m going to ask the first sort of obvious question, which is, in 2(3): \u201CAny part of this Act that has not come into force 2 years after Royal assent\u201D\u2014can I just check the rationale around the two-year mark and whether those that are not in clause 2(2), which is the day after Royal assent, that two years is sufficient time to make any sort of changes or to have the ability to implement it fully?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy next question is\u2014and I\u2019m sure that others may have a few questions around this part. There are a lot of different sections\u2014currently clauses\u2014in clause 2(2). What I\u2019m not unclear on is why some of them have been included to come into force after Royal assent and some of them haven\u2019t. So to give the Minister in the chair an example: new sections 8AA and 8AAB, inserted by clause 10, around \u201CExemptions from registration\u201D, that is something that is coming into effect on the day after Royal assent. But, for example, in clause 12, which talks about the director-general listing the exempt substances generally considered safe, that, again, doesn\u2019t come into effect until potentially two years later or earlier by Order in Council.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut I would assume that over the next two years\u2014now this has come into effect\u2014let\u2019s say you\u2019ve the received Royal assent, and the director-general then went and exempted a particular agricultural compound or a class of agricultural compounds in two weeks\u2019 time, surely there would then be a requirement for that to be listed somewhere as opposed to waiting potentially up to two years for clause 12 to come into effect before that takes place, unless, when we\u2019re looking at clause 12, that\u2019s an exemption of a different nature.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I\u2019m just trying to figure out why some of them is the day after Royal assent and why some of them are up to a two years\u2019 period.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u0022a5f62df23a37c0d0a6c14aa0c29be13b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a5f62df23a37c0d0a6c14aa0c29be13b\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (15:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019ve got a couple of proposals around titles. I think one of the challenges with this term \u201Ccompound\u201D is that most people don\u2019t know what you\u2019re talking about. It even caused us some confusion at the select committee because there was an assumption, I think, that compound somehow didn\u2019t include agrichemicals, by which we mean the conventional idea of agrichemicals, the likes of pesticides and herbicides.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s been fortunate, today, in this process, that the previous Minister of Agriculture has explicitly articulated that, yes, this legislation covers both pesticides and herbicides. I wonder if, for the clarity of the public, the name of this bill wouldn\u2019t more correctly or more comprehensibly be named the \u201CAgricultural Chemicals and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill.\u201D Obviously, I would propose that we change the name of the actual bill to \u201CAgricultural Chemicals\u201D, just to be very clear to everybody what we\u2019re talking about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, not all chemicals are compounds, but all compounds are chemicals, so by giving it a broader, more familiar name to most people\u2014chemicals\u2014we capture compounds, but we also make it clear what the bill is. That\u2019s one of my amendments which is being rushed down presently; it hasn\u2019t quite reached the table. An earlier proposal for a title\u2014an alternative title, which serves the same purpose but is a little more wordy and I don\u2019t think quite as elegant as the one I\u2019ve just expounded\u2014is to change the name to the \u201CAgricultural Compounds, Pesticides, Herbicides and Veterinary Medicines Bill\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat just makes it super clear that everyone knows we\u2019re talking about pesticides and herbicides, not just veterinary medicines or this term \u201Ccompounds\u201D that I think, to most people, is not familiar. So those are my two proposals and they\u2019re very much in the tradition of, you know, Grant Robertson, as he said in his valedictory speech: say what\u2019s on the tin, or put on the tin what\u2019s in the tin. I think it would very much simplify the public understanding\u2014and even, I believe, this House\u2019s understanding and the members in it\u2014on what this bill is actually about, because it is to do with agricultural chemicals; it is to do with pesticides and herbicides, as well as veterinary medicines.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022e311c951aaf3df2f0cd93a03bb2db77c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e311c951aaf3df2f0cd93a03bb2db77c\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (15:22)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do think it would be useful for the Associate Minister of Agriculture to take us through the commencement clause\u2014clause 2(1), (2), (3), (4)\u2014because as we\u2019ve heard, Order in Council can set the date, but there\u2019s a \u201Chowever\u201D: a whole lot of sections come into force the day after Royal assent. Why is it that the sections listed in subclause (2) are going to come into force immediately? Why is it that all the other sections won\u2019t come into force until the earlier of either the Order in Council or the two-year backstop that the first question was about? I think it would be very useful for us all to hear the Minister speak on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EOn the title, it is interesting; it\u2019s unusual for me to be doing a title contribution when there\u2019s no brackets. This is simply the \u201CAgricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill\u201D; there\u2019s no brackets\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d839e70748034293b9dc7da14cde6c13\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225393367228c5b5c57df3c3260a3e7708\u0022\u003EHon Jo Luxton\u003C/span\u003E: Disconcerting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220c83d92cbec5960c5cd688e7663f4770\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Disconcerting. I think there is an opportunity for there to be brackets with some words in them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220fd108f00c2710eb7daf4ae8771d0aac\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I was hoping that would be the clarification; there\u2019d be some words in the brackets.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022541b5108e35cc4e2f1f1a8069bc0439e\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right\u2014some words in the brackets. I note that the Minister of Internal Affairs who was in the chair earlier was determined that the whole purpose of this amendment is to enable provision of safer products. That is what she said, and I asked her if she would consider something in the bill that said that or if she could\u2014you know, maybe there could be a purpose of the amendment, to do that, but we didn\u2019t get there. So now is the time to include \u201Csafer products\u201D in some brackets in the title, if that is really what the Government\u2019s intention is here. I wasn\u2019t on the Primary Production Committee, but I believe a number of submitters heard, and we\u2019ve had Ministers tell us, that there\u2019s a problem at the moment whereby some \u201Cold, nasty chemicals\u201D\u2014these are my words and I\u2019m paraphrasing somewhat: \u201CThere are old, nasty chemicals, but they\u2019ve been through the process, so they are legal. There are new, fancy chemicals that are better; there\u2019s better chemicals\u2014\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0d11310efef98fb091dafb0756f2875\u0022\u003ESteve Abel\u003C/span\u003E: Maybe.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022df9d67b29375b92927006801d8b393ce\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: We got a \u201Cmaybe\u201D, but this is the story. The story, the logic, is: \u201CWe\u2019ve got old, committed\u2014they\u2019re registered\u2014nasty chemicals. There\u2019s these new ones over here that aren\u2019t as nasty, that are hopefully better, but for them to go through the registration process is very time-consuming and overcomplicated and doesn\u2019t take the evidence that has been applied in other jurisdictions, so that is why we need to fix it.\u201D That is a compelling argument: that if we don\u2019t want something that is old and nasty and that can be replaced with something new and nice, we want to enable that, but there\u2019s no hook in this legislation that does that, that really spells out, \u201CWe\u2019re trying to do better here.\u201D That\u2019s the whole point of this legislation: it\u2019s to do better; to get those newer, not-so-nasty products into the system so we can get rid of those older ones and not use them anymore.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve got an opportunity here for a hook, and that is to use some brackets, so that this bill would be the \u201CAgricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines (Safer Products) Amendment Bill.\u201D That is the title that I would like the Minister to consider. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u002249c9bd216581e7ebc335d775fb0f33d1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002249c9bd216581e7ebc335d775fb0f33d1\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Associate Minister of Agriculture) (15:27)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. In response to the questions from Lawrence Xu-Nan about why there are different  commencements for exemptions, some provisions require delay to give time to make regulations or administrative changes. Regarding clause 10, only the heading comes into force the day after Royal assent. In regards to the question about rationale for two-year commencement: two years will be sufficient for implementation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe questions from Steve Abel regarding his suggested new title: we\u2019re happy with the title as it is, thank you. Chemicals would cover wider products than the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill covers; for example, pet food and surfactants.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254097982b6be6ce2b8de2bdbafc9e356\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: What is it? Tell us again. What was that word?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229cc6f82cb232601f754e1a5e7feb4824\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK\u003C/span\u003E: Surfactants.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022123df9c344e7fb5f92c6fa7f20b0752e\u0022\u003ESteve Abel\u003C/span\u003E: Surfactants.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f35bab2c4d3ae8eab33ce4cc26a5b70f\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: How do you spell it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c1deea2fa0f67dc81a6c93a0bb4aa20\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK\u003C/span\u003E: Yes\u2014come and see me later. The question from Steve Abel around \u201Ccompound\u201D as confusing: all compounds are chemical. The question from the Hon Rachel Brooking around why do some clauses come into force has already been answered; refer to my answer to Steve Abel\u2019s question. Rachel Brooking\u2019s question: why aren\u2019t there brackets around the title? The Parliamentary Counsel Office drafts the title.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u00224e185c8522675d0db4bf8c8b8733be90\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224e185c8522675d0db4bf8c8b8733be90\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (15:28)\u003C/span\u003E: I appreciate that and I do have only a quick question; you did give me a follow-up on that. I did, too, myself, state that all compounds are chemicals; yes, we all agree on that. I wonder, is there another piece of legislation which uses that term, \u201Cchemicals\u201D\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227045e9c0f951c4b2934fa5867129616d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Quiet please\u2014not Steve Abel; everyone else.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226fbc96ae49c758731a9165dd8f44ae25\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Is there another piece of legislation that uses that term \u201Cchemicals\u201D in the same context as this one does\u2014as regards to agricultural compounds and veterinary medicines, and my proposal that it would be chemicals\u2014that would cause a trouble for that? And where are surfactants currently managed? Is it in the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996, I presume? Therefore, I didn\u2019t get the Associate Minister of Agriculture\u2019s answer on my second proposal\u2014which, if he was concerned about the use of \u201Cchemicals\u201D because it was too broad\u2014whether adding in \u201Cpesticides\u201D and \u201Cherbicides\u201D would give sufficient specificity, without removal of the word \u201Ccompounds\u201D. It would make it a wordy title, but the \u201CAgricultural Compounds, Pesticides, Herbicides, and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill\u201D, I think, would make it more easily understandable. I think there was even confusion in the second reading of the bill today from some parts of the House as to whether this bill did include agrichemicals in the conventional sense, as they are known by those who work in the agricultural sector. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252fc77ac21746f7901680ea4cdcd4936\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Just waiting for a bit of advice on the surfactants in the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022ee4094f6af76e0c6dfbad078759733e8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ee4094f6af76e0c6dfbad078759733e8\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Associate Minister of Agriculture) (15:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. In regards to Steve Abel\u2019s question around chemicals in the title, no, salt is also covered by the bill, so \u201Cpesticides\u201D would be misleading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022 data-id=\u00222a2d547375e83865664ea3830f66a517\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222a2d547375e83865664ea3830f66a517\u0022\u003ESHANAN HALBERT (Labour) (15:31)\u003C/span\u003E: A point of order. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to clarify a previous vote, if I may, and seek leave on Part 1 standing part. Labour voted 32 votes\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022547c4445131df796438b843bf365505b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ll just seek leave. Leave has been sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? Are you seeking to correct a vote?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229739a3f7f26f8c19b5bbacbaff062ca8\u0022\u003ESHANAN HALBERT\u003C/span\u003E: Correct a vote, yep.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022141f6e8d57a28ebb2f3296880f102f80\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. Leave has been sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is none.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022223f24b642ce4dac279571552d53ebcc\u0022\u003ESHANAN HALBERT\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. To confirm, Labour votes 32 votes in favour for Part 1 standing part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd1881f98d5dd7c11c1e5b1c88be86b8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: OK, thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u00228293bb324e74b01e14a315c00cc4774e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228293bb324e74b01e14a315c00cc4774e\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Associate Minister of Agriculture) (15:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. In regards to the question around what regulations cover surfactants, surfactants are subject to both the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act and Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a6cc4808b94916d865376d227558633d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Steve Abel\u2019s two tabled amendments to clause 1 are out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that clause 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006361\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 99\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 32; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 17\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261465831a94a142ec52ef1d1297359a8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that clause 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat clause 2 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 99\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 32; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 17\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225dbc582e14d9e00aa221226d4b8c07b4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that clause 3 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006375\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 99\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 32; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 17\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill to be reported with amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d50dccf8f26caad6e7c77678961b2fd7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, the committee has further considered the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines 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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221b4cee739b9e86eefed1c3b7c6e283f9\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The bill is set down for third reading next sitting day.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fe15995902e18095534fd3a2cd265bd0\u0022\u003EPublic Works Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a9a606764f89f8dcf049a7b1e7809982\u0022\u003ELegislative Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u00226e8bb4bcce9c2fd9a13f76b1981b82fe\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226e8bb4bcce9c2fd9a13f76b1981b82fe\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (15:36)\u003C/span\u003E: I present a legislative statement on the Public Works Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214963f83f4d4c09be28af8de8676d749\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00227f9c6cafa1ff8cf83009830384dbd9ac\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022f7e382c45f80c51da48016f7a6327c39\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f7e382c45f80c51da48016f7a6327c39\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (15:36)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Public Works Amendment Bill be now read a second time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Public Works Act 1981 is an essential tool for addressing this country\u2019s infrastructure deficit and delivering public works which our communities depend on, including roads, schools, and hospitals. The Public Works Amendment Bill introduces targeted amendments to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and clarity of the Public Works Act\u2019s standard acquisition and compensation functions, while ensuring appropriate protections and processes exist for affected landowners. The bill also includes a new process to support restoration of public works damaged by severe weather and other emergency events.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs a reminder to the House, I will briefly summarise what this bill does. The Public Works Act 1981 allows land to be acquired for the Crown, local authorities, and network utility operators that are requiring authorities under the Resource Management Act 1991 and its replacement Planning Bill. The bill does not change the fundamental requirement that these entities must first attempt to acquire land by agreement through good-faith negotiations before compulsory acquisition may occur.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill includes a package of updates to acquisition processes in line with modern technology and practices, including surveying, public notices, use of electronic communication, and requirements to provide certain information to landowners. It promotes more flexible project delivery by enabling central and local government to coordinate and combine land acquisition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill doubles the minimum negotiation time frame before compulsory acquisition may occur from three months to six months for M\u0101ori freehold land with more than four beneficial owners. The Minister for Land Information will also require the consent of the Minister for M\u0101ori Crown Relations or the Minister for M\u0101ori Development for any compulsory acquisition of protected M\u0101ori land.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill introduces an emergency recovery process to support the timely restoration of public works that are damaged in severe weather and emergencies. Rather than developing bespoke legislation, as was needed after Cyclone Gabrielle and the Kaik\u014Dura earthquakes, the bill contains a new process that can be activated by Order in Council when needed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill updates and improves compensation settings for landowners, introducing an incentive payment of 10 percent of land value to a maximum of $100,000 where agreement is reached before a compulsory acquisition process begins.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d like to thank the members of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee for their consideration of the bill. To all the organisations and individuals who took the time to make submissions, thank you for your contribution to help shape this essential piece of legislation. As a result of the select committee process, several changes have been made to the bill. These changes were largely technical in nature or offered additional clarity and do not alter the overall policy intent of the bill. In closing, I want to again acknowledge the valuable suggestions made by the Transport and Infrastructure Committee in their report to bring the bill to this stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI consider that the bill honours this Government\u2019s commitment to deliver public works fairly and effectively. For that reason, I commend the Public Works Amendment Bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f91fb94e4692be6a8054200b3f8d681c\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The question is the motion to be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u00228c4f01c312b3e2523ca05c7a4ceb106e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228c4f01c312b3e2523ca05c7a4ceb106e\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (15:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I\u2019m at a slight disadvantage of having not been on the committee, but none the less have kept abreast and tended to, as Opposition spokesperson for land. Labour will support the bill. Labour does support the modernisation of what has been a reasonably fair and effective regime. Of course, as the Minister laid out, it is a long-standing principle of the compulsory acquisition of land, usually for infrastructural purposes. It has kind of worked\u2014and I\u2019ve worked with individuals who have been going through the process for roading projects. There have been more recently, of course, some more controversial ones where roads have gone right through farms\u2014divided farms\u2014and do create a real dilemma for landowners, going to the point of emotional stress and anxiety and concern. I\u2019d like to acknowledge that, for many people involved in the process, this hasn\u2019t always been ideal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe compensation process has been, on balance, I\u2019d say pretty fair, but, of course, if you don\u2019t want to sell, then there\u2019s no price that the Crown can pay for land that will satisfy your expectations. That, in particular, is true for M\u0101ori who have held land, who have been often allocated land or been given land back, of course, through a Treaty settlement process. Then along comes the Crown and says, \u201CWell, we want it back again.\u201D That, again, has created, I guess, some fear that this bill, in terms of the modernisation process, might be once again overriding M\u0101ori land rights. That is one of the things that I think the committee looked at. There\u2019s been general agreement that that would move forward, but there are still some issues, I think, that colleagues of mine might raise through the process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is, of course, right at the front-end here an incentive for landowners to cooperate and to trade off. That might not always deliver the fair outcome; paying them a bonus, effectively, does have unintended consequences, possibly, through land valuation. As I say, I wasn\u2019t on the committee to hear the submissions that went through that process. None the less, I guess it is fair enough that someone who is facing a compulsory acquisition order can move forward cooperatively; that they get paid a bonus for that land.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan I say that the provisions that align the Public Service Act and line things up\u2014I think that general modernisation process is sensible, as we go forward. One of the areas that the wider public might be concerned about is the allocation of rights, of course, to Transpower. That, when originally constructed and built as a network, was for the purposes of all New Zealanders. It still is, to some extent. But the way that the pricing for the electricity system\u2014it\u2019s now simply that Transpower value their assets, and then charge us accordingly. So the automatic right of access to land, the automatic right of expansion of the network and the increasing value of that Transpower network\u2014it means that we\u2019re going to pay for that. I would caution our Government, any Government into the future, that it doesn\u2019t just give Transpower the right to kind of go out and invest, particularly if this Government of the day now, the coalition Government, opens the door to part-privatisation of Transpower\u2014which I suspect might be on their agenda. If they were to do that and get money in from invest\u2014I don\u2019t hear any denial from over there. It\u2019s a very, very valuable asset, and so I wouldn\u2019t even actually trust a denial.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENone the less, if Transpower was indeed to be part-privatised\u2014because the National Government, in spite of their denials, did it last time. If they were to do that, then what, effectively, we would do is once again privatise the automatic right of return on poor infrastructural assets. I hope that members who were on the committee, who will have\u2014I hope\u2014considered this issue, can explain, and through the passage of the bill through this House, may try and hopefully convince us and reassure us that that won\u2019t happen. Because we have acknowledged that Transpower sometimes does have some challenges getting access to land and constructing some of their new pylons. It should be something that landowners have a right to say no in, up to a point, because they are ugly and they certainly do have impacts on land value. Yeah, they are ugly, Mr Speaker; they are shocking. I don\u2019t see you living in Christchurch underneath those pylons that go through the city. Indeed, it\u2019s an unfortunate passage. I don\u2019t want to get into a debate with you, Mr Speaker, but none the less\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d58c8c09a143493f939e3bf4ca34aca2\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Wise man.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002285352b0122db315c7e5a82d8ce59191f\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014the right for Transpower to acquire land for new pylons is a significant onus on landowners. Indeed, this piece of legislation needs to ensure that there\u2019s a balance between the right of the Crown to come in and take land, and the right of private landowners to negotiate fairly. I\u2019m not sure where ACT\u2014and they may in fact be opposing this piece of legislation; they\u2019re very pro-private property rights, and so I guess they probably assume that private property owners should have the right to say no. That\u2019s not the way that it\u2019s worked in the past under a more collaborative arrangement through Government, but none the less we have a coalition Government that thinks that private property rights surpass anything else that is important across this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThis bill is about the compromise that we need. It is about enabling local government or central government to move forward with infrastructural development. It brings up to date the necessary legislation, and it has, as I say, provided some processes in there that ensure that private landowners get rightful compensation. The Labour Opposition doesn\u2019t want to slow down the passage of good legislation. This, on balance, is a good piece of legislation. It\u2019s a little late in the piece from the coalition Government, but none the less Labour is here to facilitate the process of this bill. It will support the bill, and I look forward to, as I say, some of the questions being answered by the Minister and by other members\u2014particularly ACT\u2014to assure us that we\u2019ve found the right balance between private property rights and public acquisition. I support the bill, Labour supports the bill, and we look forward to the explanation from the Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022 data-id=\u0022f242a9a3f11f0aa596b3411b9bb1b4dd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f242a9a3f11f0aa596b3411b9bb1b4dd\u0022\u003EH\u016AHANA LYNDON (Green) (15:48)\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003ET\u0113n\u0101 koe\u003C/span\u003E, Mr Speaker. On behalf of the Green Party, I stand to oppose this legislation. The Public Works Amendment Bill is one that turns its back on the ability for wh\u0101nau and community to enjoy, without disturbance, their whenua, their homes, their forever homes\u2014because they will not have a choice, ultimately. The legislation says that it\u2019s there to improve land acquisition; to provide new ways of giving compensation, and some payments to speed up the process; relocation of infrastructure; empowering Transpower; and in spaces like emergency recovery. For myself, being someone from the coast who was impacted both in January and March, in Northland, I know that emergency recovery is really important. But when people commit to their forever home and lose the ability to go to the Environment Court to contest a Public Works Act taking of their private property\u2014that they have had for generations and committed to as a wh\u0101nau\u2014then on behalf of those impacted wh\u0101nau, we as the Green Party say no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe legislation says that it\u2019s there to modernise the Public Works amendment legislation. It is there to provide these\u2014I\u2019d say\u2014\u201Cinducements\u201D to support wh\u0101nau to get on board and agree to their land being taken. That the compensation payments are there to help wh\u0101nau to agree that their land should be given over\u2014and, in fact, the power of decision making is now removed from an independent party, being the Environment Court, to now Ministers. So where is the fairness in the process? These are concerns of the Green Party as we\u2019ve sat through submissions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, myself, I had a public works amendment member\u2019s bill looking to protect whenua M\u0101ori from this legislation that\u2019s been used as a patu on M\u0101ori landowners for far too long. But all for nothing, because the House didn\u2019t support my proposed member\u2019s bill to protect, at least, whenua M\u0101ori in this space.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe talk about advancement and progress and that sometimes, you just can\u2019t help it; that State highway has to go through your whenua, apparently. But when I think about the 26 kilometres of the four-lane highway to come through Tai Tokerau, from Te Hana to Warkworth, and then the proposed expansion all the way up to Raumanga, Whang\u0101rei\u2014Raumanga, Whangarei\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002227d19573a8ba4d8283b17374978c8ea2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224495d36522a30d9de415c9a4886f2c4c\u0022\u003EGrant McCallum\u003C/span\u003E: Yep, great news. Great idea\u2014great idea.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a722c7a54353e0a4914505b43d1e427f\u0022\u003EH\u016AHANA LYNDON\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and when I hear someone from the other side yelling at me, I think about the landowners of Raumanga; I think about the landowners in Waip\u016B; and even our own Whang\u0101rei district councillor Matt Yovich, whose 160-hectare family farm, which has been in their family for 100 years\u2014they\u2019re losing parts of their farm too.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd76b9261a4158040a6b68a1fe9ef93a\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: Maybe they want to be able to drive somewhere when they\u2019re not on their land.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b5d4b265e1c3d0ca575d7e8fa8f01bdd\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EDo you enjoy the motorway?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e7e4a61607801f19777d6b60e06b31d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s enough, thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022199873a55e30e3a1f56473b4520d5164\u0022\u003EH\u016AHANA LYNDON\u003C/span\u003E: So when you say that the 26 kilometres of whenua to establish this four-lane highway is so essential that we\u2019re going to spend $3.6 billion, the most expensive road in the country, you fail to address the Brynderwyns. You can have 26 kilometres of $3.6 billion of road from Warkworth to Te Hana, but if you can\u2019t get past the Brynderwyns, where are you going?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen I think about Auntie Lynda and their wh\u0101nau farm, their land, where their ashes are buried, where this is their forever home, who have been in the newspapers, who have said, \u201CWe farmed. We established orchards. We have planted natives. We are committed to this whenua.\u201D, they are losing their land for the purposes of a four-lane highway to Whang\u0101rei.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen I want to talk about Raumanga. This is coming into town, into Whang\u0101rei. While we\u2019re committing $3.6 billion to 26 kilometres from Warkworth to Te Hana, it\u2019s not even near Whang\u0101rei, but the landowners of Raumanga, in Whang\u0101rei, are now hamstrung. When I read their letters that the New Zealand Transport Agency have sent them, they are years off losing their homes, but they can\u2019t do anything because now they\u2019re stuck. Who wants to buy a house in Raumanga that could have a four-lane highway coming through?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Raumanga Medical Centre will be gone. The Raumanga Medical Centre has full books. They are deeply committed to community, and yet that road is going to take out the Raumanga Medical Centre. So don\u2019t act like this is some public good where you\u2019re going to actually come in\u2014why do we need extra lanes in Raumanga and \u014Ctaika? But they are being mapped right now and being told, \u201CTaihoa, wait a minute. We\u2019re going to take your whenua and we\u2019re going to enter into some conversations and it could be years\u2014it could be a decade, eh?\u2014before this comes through.\u201D But the wh\u0101nau in Raumanga and \u014Ctaika are now stuck; they are stuck in limbo of public works hanging over their heads.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet\u2019s talk about whenua M\u0101ori. Whenua M\u0101ori is not protected. It can still be compulsorily acquired through the public works amendment legislation\u2014the fast track of public works across general title and whenua M\u0101ori. Of M\u0101ori submitters, 97 percent said, no, they don\u2019t agree. In fact, when you look at it, we\u2019ve suffered enough as M\u0101ori; we\u2019ve given enough for towns, for rail, for cities to be established\u2014schools, quarries. We\u2019ve given to the infrastructure of this community in Aotearoa, and yet still we\u2019re expected, through this legislation, to give more. Why? That\u2019s the question right here. Not only are you going after general title, you still maintain the focus on taking whenua M\u0101ori. Despite the protestations and those objections from M\u0101ori who came before the select committee and offered submissions saying, \u201CNo. No more. Not one more acre.\u201D, they\u2019re going to do it anyhow. That\u2019s what\u2019s so demeaning about the veil of, \u201CThis is an improvement. This public works amendment legislation is there to speed up land acquisition and to help with infrastructure and for Transpower or for emergency recovery purposes.\u201D M\u0101ori have given plenty. Give us a break.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have general-title landowners with this heaviness hanging over their whenua just here in Kaipara, in Waip\u016B, all the way into Whang\u0101rei\u2014this noose hanging over landowners, saying, \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E\u201CT\u0101ria te w\u0101\u2014te w\u0101\u003C/span\u003E [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethe time will come\u003C/span\u003E]; when we come for you, you have no way to object.\u201D, because, ultimately, the Environment Court has no say. And then for whenua M\u0101ori, no, you\u2019re not clear either, because this is about the public good for everybody and, despite all you\u2019ve given, you still must give more.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo, as the Green Party, we do oppose this. We do worry about private property rights. We do worry about those\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d22f44a1b66082af0a1695612eb7c26\u0022\u003EHon Members: \u003C/span\u003EHa, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002283ddabab8500e454f43cd8fb2f336ce2\u0022\u003EH\u016AHANA LYNDON\u003C/span\u003E: When you lose whenua, then you\u2019ll know. When I\u2019m sitting with landowners right now who have this noose over their heads, and they are shedding tears of frustration because they have no avenue to fight this, it is all based on the Government\u2019s side. That\u2019s where the power sits. The landowner is disabled in the new system. I hope we really consider this, as members of the House, in terms of where the private landowner sits, let alone the tangata whenua who have already lost enough\u2014and yet this is, on balance, OK? Come to Tai Tokerau, and talk to our landowners. Come to Tai Tokerau and talk to hap\u016B and iwi. Talk to T\u016Bwharetoa, they\u2019ve already told us in the select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220838e5f9bac748d2a59aea595e5226a0\u0022 data-id=\u002274e52f3f5096cff08a9677b78ecd119a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220838e5f9bac748d2a59aea595e5226a0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002274e52f3f5096cff08a9677b78ecd119a\u0022\u003ESIMON COURT (ACT) (15:58)\u003C/span\u003E: ACT supports the Public Works Amendment Bill. I just want to reassure the member who\u2019s just sat down, H\u016Bhana Lyndon, that the Brynderwyn section of State Highway 1 is far more resilient as a result of work that has been carried out under this Government since the 2023 cyclones that hit the North Island. Around 55,000 cubic metres of potential slip material has been removed from above the road, which removes a significant risk and means that the road\u2019s unlikely to be closed in the way that it has previously. Three sections of road have been widened to three lanes of 12.5 metres wide, so that, in the event that material does come down two lanes can remain open. So I want to reassure the member that the Brynderwyns are much safer than they were, and many of her concerns have been addressed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, New Zealand cannot build the roads, the rail, the water networks, and the electricity networks, if acquiring the land to do so takes years. Compulsory acquisition, we must acknowledge, is one of the strongest powers that the State can exercise, so landowners must be treated fairly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis bill strikes a better balance. Authorities must make clear offers backed by registered valuations, and negotiate in good faith before compulsion is considered. Landowners who reach an early agreement can receive an incentive payment, recognising the disruption and the cost that they carry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill also gives Transpower a more practical acquisition pathway and clarifies that disputes over compensation belong in the Land Valuation Tribunal. It creates a faster process for rebuilding after emergencies, and with proper safeguards. Property rights matter; so does getting essential infrastructure built. This bill makes the process faster, clearer, and fairer. That\u2019s how we unlock New Zealand\u2019s potential. I commend the bill to the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022 data-id=\u002257e3f291a1c6473a1fda60ad83ebf754\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002257e3f291a1c6473a1fda60ad83ebf754\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (16:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I want to rise on behalf of New Zealand First and also as the chair of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee which considered this bill some time ago. First of all, I just thank the select committee for the work that they did, and the officials and the submitters. I also wanted to thank both the current Minister but also the Minister before who we spent a lot of time with, the Hon Chris Penk, working through quite a number of pieces of legislation, and this was one of those. I wanted to commend him for the work that he did over a long period of time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to respond to something that the ACT Party over here\u2014or was it the Green Party? I can\u2019t remember which it was because it sounded a bit like the ACT Party talking as the Green Party. They were talking about the individual as opposed to the collective. I got very confused by what they were saying because they were standing up for individual property rights, which was magnificent, but it was the Green Party who was doing it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis legislation is walking its way through the difficult thing, because land is precious. Land is precious to many people. Land is a place where people\u2014it is hopes\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EH\u016Bhana Lyndon holds up\u003C/span\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003E a visual aid\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c669cf98518748a3740b8df2c93f1fb\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Excuse me. Sorry. Don\u2019t wave the visual aid around like that again. It\u2019s fine when you have the floor, but not at other times.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022839534b01b6c6e6b1896d51b2938c2a5\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER\u003C/span\u003E: It is hopes; it\u2019s dreams; it\u2019s aspirations; it\u2019s blood, sweat, and tears that people put into that. Some of them will be M\u0101ori; some of them will not be M\u0101ori, but land matters to a lot of people\u2014a lot\u2014and so taking land is a really significant step. But sometimes\u2014and here is where I was a bit confused by the Green Party member H\u016Bhana Lyndon\u2019s speech\u2014the collective good overrides that individual good, and needs to override that individual good. That is why we have a Public Works Act. We\u2019ve had a Public Works Act for many, many decades. This piece of legislation is trying to make sure that that process is done as efficiently as possible and as fairly as possible. Part of that fairness is making sure that the person or the people whose land is proposed to be acquired are well aware of why that piece of land has been chosen to be acquired\u2014the options which were considered\u2014and saying, \u201CSorry, guys. It\u2019s got to be your piece of land that we need for this piece of infrastructure.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis legislation is about trying to make sure that we as a country become more productive, more efficient, and it is making this important part of our system more efficient. Here are just a few quick examples of that. Improving efficiency: the Environment Court cannot revisit designation decisions so we don\u2019t do the thing twice. It can\u2019t make valuation decisions. It makes it easier to re-site third-party infrastructure which might have been displaced by the original public work. It makes emergency recovery works easier. Just think about some of the storms we\u2019ve had. If a road slips, it slips into the neighbouring land, and you need to fix that road and sometimes you need a little bit of that neighbouring land. What is the problem? You have to be able to do that and you have to be able to acquire that land quickly and efficiently. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt allows for efficiency, too, through combining projects so we don\u2019t have two separate authorities needing to both go through the Public Works Act process for the same piece of infrastructure. It also allows for incentive payments to make it easier for someone to sell, to incentivise them to sell earlier on by giving them actually more money than they would otherwise get. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis retains the overall architecture of the original Public Works Act. That\u2019s the attempt to acquire by agreement then the compulsory acquisition. It does, from a M\u0101ori point of view, for that whenua M\u0101ori, mean that there is a longer process and they do have that objection process which other landowners don\u2019t. It respects that link to land.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe final thing just to say was that we examined, significantly, at the select committee process, the role of Land Information New Zealand as the gatekeeper. They told us very, very clearly that if a Government agency or acquiring agency hasn\u2019t done their job properly, they would be the gatekeeper and say, \u201CNo, no, you\u2019ve got to do it again better than you\u2019ve done it before\u2014the identification of options and so on.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso that issue which has been raised in terms of the ability to be able to exit land that the Green member raised\u2014I agree completely with that. It is something that if your land has a designation sitting over it, and somebody wants to acquire that land at some point in time and you can\u2019t move on. That\u2019s a real challenge and it is one that we do need to sort out because you put people\u2019s lives in limbo.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWith that\u2014oh, and the other thing just to say is that including Transpower makes complete sense because they are clearly an essential public utility\u2014possibly the most essential public utility in the land\u2014and it makes sense that they should be able to exercise powers directly through the Public Works Act. I thank everybody involved in this and commend the bill to the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1646f0f37004a3190a37ae07f2dbd3d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The next call is a split call. I call on Mike Davidson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u00220b46e6e5b460bbd17777d3b71e8912db\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220b46e6e5b460bbd17777d3b71e8912db\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (16:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of the Green Party to speak to this bill, the Public Works Amendment Bill. I\u2019d like to acknowledge the Transport and Infrastructure Committee, which this bill went through. While the Green Party does support the modernisation of bills, there are obviously aspects of this bill that we definitely do not support. Therefore, we will be opposing this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it\u2019s really important to start with the fact that when you have 0 percent of iwi M\u0101ori supporting this bill, and 90 percent outright opposing it, there are significant issues with a bill. This is part of the problem we have, and it\u2019s really important that, actually, we stand up for iwi M\u0101ori when they are obviously having their rights squashed. Therefore, one of the things that I want to mention in this call is a couple of comments that we need to be assured about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe need to understand the impact that we\u2019re having, because this is something that has faced iwi M\u0101ori for a long, long time\u2014generations, in fact. I even looked down in our area in Waimakariri and the impact of State Highway 1 through Ng\u0101i T\u016B\u0101huriri and the displacement that type of roading actually has on the hap\u016B, and even now when they\u2019re rebuilding a bypass and the potential that could have had to displace, impact the wh\u0101nau as well. It\u2019s such a shame that it continues to happen right until today when we know the impacts that it\u2019s had in the past and how it\u2019s driven M\u0101ori out of their communities into urban areas and has actually made it a lot worse for hap\u016B and iwi as M\u0101ori were forced to be urbanised. It\u2019s a shame that we don\u2019t seem to learn lessons from the past and we continue to make it worse. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s funny, when you look at Waimakariri, I say again, this seems to be the biggest issue they had\u2014the potential loss of a golf course in Pegasus for housing. I think they should remember, actually, who was there first and how they were removed from their land, which is a lot more significant than losing a golf course that was failing. I think, as a country, we must remember the damages that we have done to iwi M\u0101ori, especially when we look at how we acquire land. The Green Party does not support this bill because it flies in the face of what iwi M\u0101ori would like and it totally ignores the fact that 90 percent of iwi M\u0101ori opposed it and not one supported this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d just like to mention a couple of things in the time I have. A submission from the Law Association of New Zealand is concerned that the bill goes well beyond procedural streamlining and it introduces substantive changes that significantly affect the exercise, oversight, and accountability of compulsory acquisition powers. I think when we read that we should be very concerned about how far we are stretching and what we\u2019re actually doing and the impact this is going to have.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, aside from iwi M\u0101ori, I want to just quickly mention a submission from Dunedin City Council. They say the amendments to compensation provisions may create additional costs for local authorities\u2014another unfunded mandate. I think this is really important to note and so I\u2019ll quickly use my last 45 seconds to talk about this unfunded mandate. I think this is what we\u2019ve seen a lot of this term of Government\u2014and not just this Government but previous Governments. It is pushing more and more responsibility to local government, making them have to do more and more and actually without the funding to do it properly. They do it and they have to then spend ratepayers\u2019 money. And what happens? Government then blames local government. That is a significant issue we have, and, actually, if we want to be better, we have to work in partnership. We need to work in partnership between local government and central government and we need to work in partnership with iwi M\u0101ori.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b618b847a57b4afb94b76eaea9e042a5\u0022 data-id=\u002257ac33942ec54e275ff58bea52aafcd9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b618b847a57b4afb94b76eaea9e042a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002257ac33942ec54e275ff58bea52aafcd9\u0022\u003EDr CARLOS CHEUNG (National\u2014Mt Roskill) (16:09)\u003C/span\u003E: People have been complaining that it takes too long to build infrastructure in New Zealand. There is too much red tape and there is a lengthy opposition process which can delay important infrastructure projects.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThis bill is the second part of the process to modernise the Public Works Act. This bill  will make sure the land acquisition process is faster but also fair. This will see better outcomes for landowners and help to reduce the cost of building infrastructure. I commend the bill to this House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u0022ad2d2d5caa90fe2612c91f2a09dcfbc2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ad2d2d5caa90fe2612c91f2a09dcfbc2\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (16:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the call. The Labour Party is going to support this law, but I want to acknowledge the deep feelings that are being expressed in the House today, particularly by the Green Party, and I want to talk about that need for a balance between public good and private rights.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is an irony that we have the ACT Party supporting this bill when its members are constantly talking about markets and constantly thinking they should be unfettered and will balance themselves. Arguably, that says that all price gouging is absolutely fine and that the market price is what it will bear. And in fact in this case that would mean that owners of that property could reach for the sun, the moon, and the stars, and sometimes get it at the behest of taxpayers because that public good was necessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to talk about some of the mechanisms that are in this bill that I think are good. This bill will make acquisition fairer in the sense that more will be paid for those acquisitions, and there is an  incentive process which will allow a maximum of $100,000 to be given for a settlement that\u2019s reached in good-faith bargaining. I am a huge fan of good-faith bargaining. I think it is very much a recognition of power imbalance, and it puts people into the space where they try and do the right thing. I\u2019m not going into that process with rose-coloured spectacles at all. I\u2019ve spent most of my life in employment law where good-faith bargaining is part of the mechanisms used. It doesn\u2019t solve all problems, but it does put people into a position where they strive to meet the needs of each other and strive to do the right thing. So I\u2019m thrilled to see that mechanism.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to talk, not lightly, about that issue of balance between private and public good and the need to recognise private ownership, particularly in the case of M\u0101ori, and I do that with a lens to the reality of the history of brutal compulsory acquisition and, in fact, the stealing of land in this country, and the trauma that was involved in that. So I just want to record, in a really simple way, why we would take that into account.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn 1840, M\u0101ori basically owned all the land in New Zealand. By the 1860s and 1870s they had lost huge amounts of land, including the whole of the South Island, to Crown acquisition and European acquisition, and then in the 1890s to the 1920s there was such a massive wave of acquisitions that M\u0101ori land went down to 8 percent. By the mid-20\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E century, the Public Works Act was part of that story, and there was also compulsory acquisition of what was called uneconomic interests. So the amount of M\u0101ori land in M\u0101ori hands fell to 4 or 5 percent\u2014that\u2019s what was left.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere have been massive amounts of thought about this since, but M\u0101ori land at this time is only at 5 percent\u2014the estimate is 5.5 percent. That is how much land is left. That is a story of deep trauma, and it\u2019s an absolutely terrible story. When people equate it with other issues of private ownership, I think they do an injustice\u2014it\u2019s not the same. It doesn\u2019t mean that it isn\u2019t important to consider private rights, but it\u2019s really important that we tell that story and we remember that story.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHaving said that, the Labour Party is supporting this legislation because it\u2019s better than it was and because some of the mechanisms are an attempt to balance those rights, and the Labour Party has always had a strong hold on the need for public good. That is something that is a valid part of this discussion, and we do need to always think about the people in our communities and what\u2019s good for them in a public sense, rather than private interest.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to strongly contrast the deep irony of the ACT Party standing up in support of this bill when it is also creating bills in this House, in this term of Parliament, that are talking about private rights that don\u2019t even exist and then are attributing them to people and compensating them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a4b555a7fba45ca77a5f0d2d0e8eb72\u0022\u003ETodd Stephenson\u003C/span\u003E: They do exist. They do exist.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d5fd27c0c4c96abf41236b34ddd6bdc7\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: I will explain. I\u2019m being asked by the member for ACT what I\u2019m talking about so I\u2019m going to tell him. We have a situation where we had a bill that came into this House called the Regulatory Standards Bill, which said that when there is any consideration\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d45102c50100253c80e95147eb29ee9e\u0022\u003ETodd Stephenson\u003C/span\u003E: They\u2019re property rights.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f258a793b353bd0446c7ef97a6e8f166\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: They are not property rights.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a6a8a3f0401d0d7e49d46fa829d9a3a\u0022\u003ETodd Stephenson\u003C/span\u003E: They are property rights.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e5ee8694258f219a9ff44c93b20fd9bd\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: They are not property rights, and I will explain why. They are not property rights because they never existed. The community owned those rights. The only rights that property owner owned were the ones that were already recognised. That is what the nature of law is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002270e725b0adac01c6c8342403426c8695\u0022\u003ETodd Stephenson\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, Helen\u2014wrong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228cc66b9bf4f81be23b1c179e35ec7ba2\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and I will argue over a coffee later with my colleague, because that is true. That is absolutely true. They didn\u2019t exist before this Government had given them away for nothing, and now it has strung us all up so that we cannot use rights that we had before as a community because we will have to compensate others. So it is deeply ironic that the ACT Party washes over everyone\u2019s rights here but is not doing so when it desires an outcome that deeply privatises the very rich. It is giving rights to the very rich, and it is not considering cultural context.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo this is a situation where we have to be brighter than that. We have to be brighter and we have to be more considerate of that balance between what is public good and private good, and we have to consider the subtlety of who\u2014it\u2019s not that subtle\u2014it is that we are attributing those rights to. I would ask the people who are voting this year to consider that. Is the party they\u2019re voting for actually considering their good, or is it considering the good of a lot of very, very rich people who are probably taking their money overseas, because that is actually what I think is happening. I think we have a party and a Government that is absolutely captured by a love affair with the very wealthy and has turned that into a group that it looks up to, admires, and sucks up to. What we have is a discount of our own history, which we were putting right, and we have a discount of the humanity of the connection between us all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is so important that the parties that are voted for at the next election turn that around. We have a much better future before us than that. That is a morally barren but also a materialistically barren way of looking at things. It will get us nowhere. I would love to see that get turned around in this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Labour Party will always be a party that thinks harder than that and is prepared to consider the grey, is prepared to consider the public good, and isn\u2019t actually too worried about what giant international companies think. It cannot afford to do that because otherwise we end up where we are going, which is that we will own nothing and be beholden to a whole lot of corporate interests. We must be brave. We must have a future that belongs to us, and the kind of hypocrisy we saw today when the ACT member stood up is the sort of thing we need to consider. If the voters consider that as an issue, I invite them to go down a whole different course and look at which parties are providing adult leadership here and are committed to their interests. Most of us are not in the class of people who are looked after by the ACT Party, the National Party, and the New Zealand First Party currently. It is very, very important that you can see that the Labour Party supports this. They can understand why. They can understand that it\u2019s not because we are refusing to look at the complexity of the issues; it\u2019s because we\u2019re balancing interests and we\u2019re prepared to do things that make sure that we respect private rights and public rights and we balance those things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202157be06ee84f203d559f3c3b385118\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019d just like to say to members if you\u2019re selling tickets for that coffee, I\u2019d be interested in knowing when it is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022 data-id=\u0022f81f57d726d2c852c6cfc31327888ad2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f81f57d726d2c852c6cfc31327888ad2\u0022\u003EDAN BIDOIS (National\u2014Northcote) (16:20)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a pleasure to come back to the Public Works Amendment Bill. This is the second tranche of reforms, the first being the Public Works (Critical Infrastructure) Amendment Bill, to make the process faster and fairer, and I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fd69f39073dad57e0591fd013b416877\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: A split call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00220a96d1caeada930200ee9a869ac1eeb9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220a96d1caeada930200ee9a869ac1eeb9\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (16:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I\u2019m very interested in the member who\u2019s just sat down, his contribution there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5bcf037f3ddba3b64f3aa1ccb141918\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EYou can have a coffee with him too.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022199230c410a598ac810a0ce93a7dfb45\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m not offering coffees. That was my colleague. Although\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022867f280a73ba82887ab50a7a73706c1c\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think we might just calm ourselves right down\u2014be quite a good thing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c70aa66a28ec602a1facb40d2ad75725\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Although we are here to midnight, so perhaps a coffee at 4.20 is a good idea.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, as I was saying, I\u2019m very interested in the member who just sat down, his brief contribution where he was talking about those critical projects and that critical infrastructure, because that seems to be a key issue in this legislation before us, the Public Works Amendment Bill. It would be good to hear a bit more about that and how it works as a trigger.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI say that because I have not been on the select committee. We are here in urgency and we\u2019re going to go through with the committee stage of this bill very shortly. You, Mr Speaker, have stolen one of our members of the committee by making him an Assistant Speaker, so instead you get me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bdea571f9704e5a9fa6eb720068f4106\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EOh!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bdec34e56684885658ab1addfd54407d\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: I know everyone will be very excited about it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022554c215ef3efe8746a08dd7bdd78c336\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Barely able to contain myself, but anyway.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca97eedf6d5934f38160f22d730fe3ba\u0022\u003EHon Damien O\u0027Connor\u003C/span\u003E: She had to have a chance to speak.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d03b48c55b238e2246fe50a66b2113aa\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah. This legislation is really important, and I am excited to be here and talking about it, because in my previous life as a resource management and local government lawyer, I did a lot of work with the Public Works Act and had cases relating to where designations were put over somebody\u2019s land or a notice of requirement was on their land and it stayed there for a long, long time and it restricted what they could do with their property\u2014or, in this case, it was a leasehold property, but it restricted what they could do. Trying to pull the trigger on that\u2014the mechanism to then get their land, or their lease, in this case, actually taken\u2014was a big palaver for them. We commonly have referred to designations on someone\u2019s land as a blight, and that is because the blight is that you have hanging over you that one day your land might be taken, and that is a big deal. We\u2019ve heard particularly from the Greens about why that is a big deal and just now as well from my colleague Helen White.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EOf course, when I was in legal practice, we would make every one of our juniors watch that great Australian movie \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThe Castle\u003C/span\u003E, which, of course, deals with this topic very well and very beautifully. Somebody, they can have lived in a place, their family can have lived there for hundreds of years, or a family might have lived there for 20 years, and it is their home, it is their castle, so it is a very serious issue when they are made to abandon that property, even if they are compensated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1ccd688de1cb5b8907091718eb4845c\u0022\u003EHon Members: \u003C/span\u003EThe vibe!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022def98c0579862cac13d5c5bce2cec0dc\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right. That is a great movie. I\u2019m pleased that people opposite have seen the movie as well, and I won\u2019t be too distracted by the vibe, though I could. Now\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e1aee3e0841cc839d19eba625d6cab7\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: The Green Party\u2019s dug a hole. It\u2019s filling up with water.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223118897c65ad9e8767d27632795259f8\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s enough. Just leave it alone. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002247b21e6e48efd4567a1d39db948c7adb\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Anyway, the point is\u2014and I couldn\u2019t hear what that was, but I presume it was a reference. You know, go to the pool room and all that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, we\u2019ve been told that what this regime does is two things: it makes it quicker for land to be taken, on the one hand, but on the other hand, it\u2019s fairer with its compensation. That is very important that that balance is right. Like my colleague Helen White just said, it is very interesting that ACT, the party of private property rights, is so emboldened and enthusiastic about infrastructure being able to trump those private property rights. This is very different from the other legislation that we\u2019ve had in this House, particularly the Resource Management Act replacement legislation, which I will talk about in the committee stage, because that goes to designations and who can designate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022 data-id=\u002231b6b5f40360b09583996cae153657e2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002231b6b5f40360b09583996cae153657e2\u0022\u003ESAM UFFINDELL (National\u2014Tauranga) (16:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Look, this is a good piece of legislation that will make the process easier and fairer, with more clarity. I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002201f738f244724e5b8da066dba7a6a526\u0022 data-id=\u0022403a22f24655593671d6595249378f82\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002201f738f244724e5b8da066dba7a6a526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022403a22f24655593671d6595249378f82\u0022\u003EDr TRACEY McLELLAN (Labour) (16:26)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker, and thank you for allowing me to take a call on this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e11f007166824e5463ebd0da1b876d3\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, no problem. That\u2019s all right. That\u2019s fine.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002201f738f244724e5b8da066dba7a6a526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002272854fe71b46a08f4906f5eca03051ef\u0022\u003EDr TRACEY McLELLAN\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Very generous of you, Mr Speaker, as always. I expected no less. The Public Works Amendment Bill went through the Transport and Infrastructure Committee, and it\u2019s an interesting piece of legislation. It\u2019s one of those bills that is both not, well, straightforward but also incredibly complex because of the nature of the unit of analysis, I suppose. It\u2019s not just about land. It\u2019s not just about the cold, hard, sort of, geography of terrain and facts and infrastructure and utility. It is actually, as we\u2019ve heard in this House, also incredibly emotive, because it\u2019s about people\u2019s castle or whenua M\u0101ori or their forever home and all of the other aspects of life that ground us in this place. It\u2019s difficult, and achieving balance is also difficult.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut Labour does acknowledge that the Public Works Act that currently exists, that\u2019s been around for a while, is, by definition, in need of some modernisation. There\u2019s an aspect to this amendment that allows notifications via email, for instance. It does require some modernisation, which is not to say that it\u2019s not fraught and that it\u2019s not without a huge amount of consideration. When we have these conversations about improvements and improving efficiency and making systems more efficient, we should never lose sight of the fact that it\u2019s not just about efficiency. There are also many other, much more tangible and much more important considerations to be made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut it is nevertheless an important piece of legislation that enables infrastructure. It gives the Crown and local authorities significant powers, and with that come some significant responsibilities. But it does grant significant powers to acquire private land so public works and those infrastructure projects can proceed. Those powers, as I said, are significant, and the system therefore not only needs to be efficient but it also has to be fair, it has to be transparent, and, really, really importantly, it has to be in such a state that the public can have requisite trust about the system. That balance is therefore incredibly important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor an agency who are acquiring a property, for them, you can imagine a situation where this one particular piece of property may be just the last piece in a puzzle, or it may be just a very small part of the acquisition process to allow a much bigger project to be delivered. But for the people who are losing that property, obviously, it\u2019s incredibly important. For the person that owns that property, it could be their home, it could be their business, it could be whenua M\u0101ori or land that\u2019s been in their ownership for generations, so it\u2019s not something to be taken lightly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHence the fact, as several contributions have made today, that there is a perspective that we need to bring to this to make sure that we do get it right. When we talk about making public works faster and we talk about making the Act works better and more efficient, as I said, that can\u2019t be the only test. We do think that there has been some improvements made through this process, and I want just go through a couple of aspects of that now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen I said about modernisation, the bill allows\u2014as I said\u2014notices to be sent electronically, updates aspects of the land acquisition process to modernise that and make that a little bit better and clearer, and it provides some greater clarity around the different interests in land, because it\u2019s not always a straightforward process, in terms of ownership. It allows for better coordination where projects may involve multiple different types of public works. So you can imagine situations where that gets quite complicated quite quickly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat matters because many of those big infrastructure projects these days, they\u2019re not simple and they\u2019re not straightforward. So a road project, for instance, it may require utilities to be relocated or work done by several different agencies, sometimes in parallel, sometimes in sequence. Therefore, we do see a need for some better coordination so that, at the very least, we can limit some of the duplication that already exists and some of the unnecessary delay, which can also be hugely upsetting to people, as we\u2019ve heard today. Having something hanging over them, the impending acquisition of land, and that can be particularly frustrating when there\u2019s delays and the timeline just unnecessarily makes that even more disruptive.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo landowners do need clear information and they need to know why things are happening. This bill does, I think, require that some further information about the nature and the purpose of the work be provided. It provides an opportunity for there to be the acquisition process and the compensation available, alongside an attempt to negotiate, in good faith, earlier in the process. Those are all important. Again, we acknowledge the fact that compensation for something that you dearly, dearly don\u2019t want to have to lose in the first place is not really compensation at all\u2014but there has to be some way of negotiating some sort of conclusion, I suppose.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo imagine, I suppose, somebody receives a letter\u2014they get a letter, they say that their property is going to be part of something that\u2019s needed for a transport project, and they may never have had to deal with Land Information New Zealand before, they may never have had to have dealt with the Public Works Act before. It\u2019s not overly common that everyday people get to be in this position. They might not really know whether the whole property is going to need to be acquired. There\u2019s lots of things that need to be sorted, and some professional advice needs to happen and people need to know, right from the outset, what sort of services they should be engaging to make sure they are supported through this project and don\u2019t end up on the rough end of this deal. Ultimately, people just want to know that they\u2019ve been treated fairly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen we think about the connected public works, another practical change allows agencies, as I said, to coordinate some of that land acquisition better. It allows land to be acquired, in some circumstances, to reallocate third-party infrastructure that could be affected by public works. I don\u2019t think we need much imagination to see how some of those could really benefit not just the project itself, but some of those landowners as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELooking back on the submission process, we heard from Infrastructure New Zealand who, unsurprisingly, were broadly supportive of the bill and emphasised that the Public Works Act, whilst being an important enabler of nationally significant and regionally significant projects\u2014it argued that delays in land acquisition can actually be responsible for a fair proportion of those increases in prices that we have seen and some of the uncertainty that holds up over infrastructure delivery.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo the Public Works Act amendment is an essential\u2014well, the Public Works Act, full stop, the existing piece of legislation, is an essential piece of legislation in New Zealand. We do have to balance those rights, as we\u2019ve heard today, between private land ownership and public good. It\u2019s not easy. It\u2019s always going to be a little bit fraught. The best that we can do is put our mind to the things that we can do as a Parliament to make the process better, to make the information more clearer, to make the compensation more fit for purpose and understanding of the different ways where private land can be owned today and to make sure that there\u2019s requisite opportunities for people to be well ahead of this and not feel like they\u2019ve been dragging through something that\u2019s, essentially, traumatic and really unfair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo whilst we are supporting this bill, we absolutely acknowledge the fact that it\u2019s difficult. The committee of the whole House stage is coming up next. It\u2019s unfortunate that we haven\u2019t had a little bit of a gap in between those stages, because there\u2019s several things that we want to ask the Minister, but we will support this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002227d19573a8ba4d8283b17374978c8ea2\u0022 data-id=\u00224b3ecd1b1b2141de39b20ccf2295bfe3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002227d19573a8ba4d8283b17374978c8ea2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224b3ecd1b1b2141de39b20ccf2295bfe3\u0022\u003EGRANT McCALLUM (National\u2014Northland) (16:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the importance of this bill has never been demonstrated than by the most important new road that will be built in New Zealand in the not-too-distant future, and that is the one that will go over the Brynderwyns. The reason that the road over the Brynderwyns is so important is it will allow people to travel to the region that is miles above the rest, namely, Northland, and it is the home of the Ranfurly Shield, and I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022 data-id=\u0022809fcad6045c65945807cf703dc49453\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022809fcad6045c65945807cf703dc49453\u0022\u003EGLEN BENNETT (Labour) (16:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Kia ora, Mr Speaker. Thank you for the opportunity to speak in this House and reflect on the Public Works Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, 1981 is the year that we\u2019re going back to. I was reflecting on what I was doing in 1981. I know that I was protesting. I was out on the streets as a six-year-old, looking cute, making sure that I protected our people. But it was the Springbok tour of 1981, of course, was going on. There are some stories that probably can\u2019t tell because they\u2019re not my stories to tell. It is, it seems, like a generation ago. Kiri Te Kanawa\u2014I do remember this, strangely.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a6e0f43ee32d16c7260b904b99801fd4\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: This is all good, but we\u2019re on the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f5d3d5c594c7c515a9e878de81bcbfe8\u0022\u003EGLEN BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: Well, 1981, Mr Speaker\u2014I\u2019m just trying to create context around things must change, because times they are a-changing. I can sing it through if you want, but I don\u2019t have to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002243a1582e577c9e2236d7281be0258a75\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I thought you were heading down the line of my adventures in my HQ Holden the way you were carrying on there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bdc15854419816d532159d32975a3f48\u0022\u003EGLEN BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: I did own an HQ Holden, Mr Speaker\u20141972. Two-tone, three-speed. Anyway, back to the bill. I will focus.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETimes do change, and obviously, in this House, legislation does need to change or catch up, but also we\u2019ve got to be cautious and have checks and balances to make sure we get it right and it is fit for purpose in the 21\u003Csup\u003Est\u003C/sup\u003E century. In 1981, Mr Speaker\u2014I don\u2019t want to prolong this, but \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003ESmash Palace\u003C/span\u003E, you\u2019ll remember\u2014and you\u2019ll remember the story of \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003ESmash Palace\u003C/span\u003E, which I think is quite relevant to this piece of legislation and Bruno Lawrence and all of those things that happened.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs has been said from colleagues from my team, we do support this bill, but there are questions. It is about fairness. It is about transparency, and a big one that I\u2019ve noted is around trust\u2014trust in the Government and trust in the officials and the bureaucrats that have to administer any legislation that comes through this House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs I was thinking about what relevant stories, other than the 1981 stories that I have about the Public Works Amendment Bill, I consider Mount Messenger, which crosses from Taranaki into the South Waikato, or it takes us on the journey north, and there is a huge piece of work that is being done, the Mount Messenger bypass.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is a contentious piece of work. Not only is it expensive, it is about resiliency, but there is a real challenge for one family that is majorly affected, and they are affected because of the Public Works Act. And it is still going through the court system, it is still struggling through the process. From memory, it is maybe six years on. I have met with the family involved, and the word \u201Ctrust\u201D comes to mind. The breakdown of trust that they have had with NZ Transport Agency\u2014the lack of trust they\u2019ve had with those that have visited them. I think for them it was, \u201CHave we got a deal for you\u201D, but then, in many ways, this piece of land, which they have farmed for two generations, is now having, I guess, the carpet or the wool pulled out from under them. We need to make sure, as my colleague Dr Tracey McLellan mentioned, that it\u2019s around private land and private property rights, and it is also about the public good, and how do we actually figure that out and make it work properly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe support the improving of the process so that landowners know what is happening and why. Again, I think more information and more understanding, I would say generally creates a better outcome, because people understand. It might be hard, it might challenging, but we need to actually move forward on this. We need an effective system, we need a fair system, and we need a transparent system. It would be good to spend more time, as was said, to consider it before we move into the committee of the whole House stage, but we\u2019re in urgency, so we have to deal with the cards that are handed to us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn closing, we hope that we can find a 21\u003Csup\u003Est\u003C/sup\u003E century solution in moving forward, and we will\u2014not like MTV, that opened in 1981 and is struggling to survive, but that in 2026 we can move this forward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002258871990a4355fdebeae9cceae7144bb\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The question is, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments recommended by the Transport and Infrastructure Committee by majority be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006525\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 97\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 30; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 17\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Public Works Amendment Bill be now read a second time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 97\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 30; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 17\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 12; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f641e5e6bdad1defe5be9d5d9d361f3f\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: This bill is set down for committee stage immediately. I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Public Works Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022becea7d066eb6767ac9b438be6e1b7c5\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00227f180d79a9a3da98ee3e4ff6af4d3f30\u0022\u003EPart 1 Amendments to principal Act, and Schedules 1 to 4\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ef03c63828c12018cecd3a1f5325aefb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the House is in committee on the Public Works Amendment Bill. Members, we come first to Part 1. This is the debate on clauses 4 to 5, \u201CAmendments to principal Act\u201D and Schedules 1 to 4. The question is that Part 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u002271498eee26c1cf7b635f53c5d1fdabdf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002271498eee26c1cf7b635f53c5d1fdabdf\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (16:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and members of the committee. I\u2019m pleased to be able to present the Public Works Amendment Bill for the committee of the whole House stage. I\u2019d again like to thank everyone for their input in getting the bill to where it is now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThere is an Amendment Paper 792 that I\u2019ve put on the Table, and I\u2019d like to highlight one change that it would make to the bill. It includes a provision that allows consequential amendments to be made by Order in Council to the Planning Bill and Natural Environment Bill once enacted. Any Order in Council would follow the usual Cabinet and legislative processes. The provision could only be used for technical changes to update references and use consistent terminology between the Public Works Act and Resource Management Act replacement legislation. The provision will be automatically repealed six months after the bill is enacted. I look forward to the committee\u2019s consideration of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00223687feb5e3a6e1da19ccdaf270aa8b34\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223687feb5e3a6e1da19ccdaf270aa8b34\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (16:46)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I have a number of quite high level questions that I\u2019d like to start with, before moving through the legislation. I\u2019m sure colleagues have many specific questions. But my high level questions\u2014well, one that\u2019s just been stumping me as I\u2019ve been looking through the legislation, is this relationship with critical infrastructure. We just heard in one of the second reading speeches from a National Party member that there\u2019s been another piece of work on critical infrastructure. Then there is a definition somewhere in here that refers to a clause that I can\u2019t find regarding the definition of critical infrastructure. So if the Minister, Hon Mike Butterick, could point me to where that is, if it is in there somewhere. I think it was a section 39AAB, and I can\u2019t find 39AAB. Maybe it is already in some legislation, but if the Minister could tell us about critical infrastructure and how it relates to this Public Works Amendment Bill, that would be good. That\u2019s one high level question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother high level question is about this legislation applying to public works. Obviously, I have the 1981 very, very amended copy\u2014I don\u2019t know when it was last updated\u2014in front of me. But obviously public works and local works have been defined in the Public Works Act for a long time, and they have to be public. What I\u2019m interested in is there seems to be some provisions in this bill for things that might not be public works, if they\u2019re associated with a public work but they\u2019re not\u2014they\u2019re a combined work. So I\u2019m wondering if that is a fundamental shift or not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhere this question is coming from is the bills that the Minister just referred to in his Amendment Paper, the Planning Bill and the Natural Environment Bill, they shift\u2014and I think the language and the terminology changes somewhat\u2014who has the ability to make a notice of requirement. Where, in the olden days, the only people who could do designations or undertake notices of requirements were clearly public authorities\u2014so State, central government, or local authorities\u2014then in the Resource Management Act (RMA), there\u2019s been this ability for notices of requirement and you can become a requiring authority if there\u2019s a regulation that says that you\u2019re a requiring authority. Some of those bodies can potentially be non-publicly owned bodies. Then in this next round of RMA reform, it takes it even further in terms of bodies that are not public entities but are providing infrastructure that is very widely defined, can then go on to do notices of requirement and designations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo my question is\u2014and it\u2019s the high level question\u2014all of those changes that widen up who can do designations, how does that flow through to this bill? And I\u2019ve got specific questions as we go through, but at a high level, how does it relate? Regardless of changes in the RMA legislation, do the projects still have to be public? That is, owned by central government or local government, or is there a way in for these other projects to also be considered in this legislation? And why that is important is because, as we were just discussing in the second reading, this is a big deal when your land can be taken, and people can understand that if it is for a public good, a community good\u2014of course you\u2019ve got to balance it with appropriate compensation and fairness and everything else\u2014that\u2019s one argument. But for private companies who come in and make money out of something, that\u2019s a totally different logic that we\u2019d get to. So that\u2019s why I\u2019m interested in this designations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd then my third high level question for the Minister is that there\u2019s a special process in here for Transpower and he might want to talk to us about why that is. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022bbc8f373f4aaf1837e55d07c65e82dae\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bbc8f373f4aaf1837e55d07c65e82dae\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (16:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I want to start with clause 4, section 2 amended, around the interpretation. I\u2019m particularly interested in the definition that we have given here for M\u0101ori freehold land. The reason I pick up on this is that according to the background material and policy information document, Land Information New Zealand considered the Public Works Act policy proposal to be consistent with upholding Treaty of Waitangi settlement obligations. I think that might be a key word in terms of that this would only apply\u2014does it mean, first question, that this will only apply if land has been settled? Because we do know, for example, that a number of M\u0101ori land have not been settled.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, then, this brings me to the definition for M\u0101ori freehold land and to Te Ture Whenua M\u0101ori Act because in that Act, specifically section 129(2)(b) of the Te Ture Whenua M\u0101ori Act 1993, it says that \u201Cland, the beneficial ownership of which has been determined by the M\u0101ori Land Court by freehold order, shall have the status of M\u0101ori freehold land\u201D. So my first question, looking at the definition here, is how would M\u0101ori land that has yet to be settled\u2014M\u0101ori land that still currently in dispute\u2014be considered under this updated legislation? So if the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind clarifying that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022 data-id=\u002296ef81175082797b7d617ca4ef4e7d51\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002296ef81175082797b7d617ca4ef4e7d51\u0022\u003ELAN PHAM (Green) (16:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I just have a few preliminary questions about the interpretation section in clause 4, to the definitions, because I\u2019m aware that there were certain submitters who requested that there was deliberate working with the new resource management reform and the definitions that are in that. And particularly Water New Zealand noted this need, particularly when it comes to key water-related terms across the legislation. The only potential changes I could see were to network utility operator and network utility operation, and that was aligned with the Resource Management Act. Then there\u2019s a definition of \u201Cregional council\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EBut I couldn\u2019t see, and I\u2019m interested if the Minister is aware of whether there has been a response, I guess, and a deliberate eye put across this legislation and the resource management bills which we know are not yet final. They\u2019re also coming back for third reading next week. But whether there has been a deliberate oversight across those definitions, and particularly when it comes to water-related definitions, whether those have been taken into account. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022f7bbc03b1dc695c91ff3021f95a9f21f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f7bbc03b1dc695c91ff3021f95a9f21f\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (16:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I guess to follow on from my colleague the Hon Rachel Booking, and to focus on questions around combined projects\u2014because if I go back to my point around Transpower, and it might have seemed a little flippant, but the fact that we don\u2019t know whether the Government is going to privatise any more State assets, and then the issue of what is a requiring authority, and then what is a combined project. Because the combined project, as defined here in Part 1, means the two or more public works authorised as a combined project under section 27(b)(2). The Minister can maybe just go through the process of authorisation and whether a requiring authority under the new Resource Management Act changes is an authorising agent and the possibility that that is in fact not the State or the Crown or a local authority; that is a designated private agency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWe have many fast track developments, and in fact the issues go back to infrastructure. So questions of the Minister is: does this facilitate or open the door for acquiring land for private or joint venture projects which are effectively offering private benefit, or is it, as was intended under the Public Works Act, solely for public benefit? Because it is a significant shift if, in streamlining, which is what we have assumed this bill is doing. But as you look in here and you put it alongside the possible changes not completed and not passed through Parliament yet through to the Resource Management Act two bills, then are we just allowing the acquisition under this new Public Works Amendment Bill of combined projects that are authorised possibly by our requiring authority that may in fact be a public entity?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b75c87f120ef3b1b0fa4230761e66a22\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: Or not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a8d7d1e8b041797893ce32dbfd475e8\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: Is that? Yeah, and I\u2019ll leave it to my lawyer colleague here who\u2019s far more tenacious and detailed than I am. I\u2019m just a little kind of cynical because I kind of joined the dots here. There\u2019s a lot of money gone to political donations for fast track and other developments. There is a lot of money, and I\u2019m concerned that the assurances sought through Parliament were to ensure that we have a streamlined, \u00E0 la fast track process for the development of infrastructure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESo those are the questions to the Minister. Can you reassure me that firstly, we\u2019re not setting this up for approval for combined projects that are authorised, and the authority that authorises may in fact be a private entity? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9d87add36a5bf04b5679706b5054253\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9d87add36a5bf04b5679706b5054253\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (16:58)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. So at clause 20 there\u2019s a new combined projects cross heading inserted, and it says new 39AAJA \u201Ccombined projects\u201D. This is at page 31. It says this part applies \u201Cto a public work that is the whole or a part of a critical infrastructure project.\u201D I guess this goes back to my first question about can the Minister enlighten us about critical infrastructure projects? But the question is, also: how big does the part have to be? What percentage of the part? And this goes to the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor\u2019s questions and my original questions: are we letting in a whole lot of private enterprise into what is the Public Works Act? That difference is important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do note at clause 15, this is about land required for combined projects, and at new section 27B is \u201CAuthorisation of combined project\u201D and that talks about \u201CA responsible Minister\u201D\u2014so a public person\u2014\u201Cor local authority\u201D\u2014also public\u2014\u201Cmay agree with 1 or more other\u201D of these public Ministers or local authorities \u201Cthat 2 or more public works should be a combined project.\u201D  Is that the comfort we\u2019re looking for when I read \u201Cwhole or a part\u201D over at new section\u00A039AAJA? That is one of the concerns that I have. I can go back through as well, to some more specific questions, if that\u2019s useful. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew question, unless the Minister wants to answer? He\u2019s looking\u2014yes? Then I\u2019ll come back to my other\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022c994b1ccf34ffd0532c68f9d583751c5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c994b1ccf34ffd0532c68f9d583751c5\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (17:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. In relation to the question from the Hon Rachel Brooking about the relationship with critical infrastructure, critical infrastructure is defined in section\u00A039AAB of the Public Works Act (PWA), and it is \u201Ca project listed in Schedule 2A\u201D of the Public Works Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn answer to the member\u2019s other question\u2014why is Transpower in? Transpower has an ongoing need to acquire land and interests in land to maintain, upgrade, and expand the national grid. Part 2B, inserted by clause 23, gives Transpower direct access to the front end of the PWA process while retaining ministerial responsibility for compulsory acquisition. It replaces the need for Transpower to obtain preliminary approval under section 186 of the Resource Management Act, but otherwise this uses much of the ordinary PWA machinery, with modifications, to ensure that land is acquired, vested, held, and disposed of for Transpower works appropriately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EUnder the bill, Transpower will be able to acquire land by agreement without needing ministerial approval first. This will give Transpower similar access as New Zealand Railways Corporation\u2014another State-owned enterprise. Compulsory acquisition decisions will remain with the Minister for Land Information, and extending access to other network utility operators would go beyond the bill\u2019s targeted scope and would require further consideration of appropriate oversight arrangements and different ownership models.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022b065a45e4c51d31fffbae7f577075eaf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b065a45e4c51d31fffbae7f577075eaf\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (17:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I want to follow-on from my previous question around clause 4\u2014noting that we\u2019re not quite there yet, to clause 20, but we are going to get there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy first question for this call is on clause 8, with new section 4D. Now, considering that this is a new section, can I check that the standards and guidance that are issued by the chief executive, are they secondary legislation? Because I don\u2019t see there being explicit statements saying that anything in the new subsection (1) and (2) would be considered secondary legislation. I do want to check that, because that then potentially has a different set of questions that I might have around standards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to move on to clause 11. I want to start with section 18 replaced; I want to start with section 18(1) because it states over here that if land is required, whether it is the Minister or local authority. I want to check with the Minister for Land Information because we have heard, as a part of the select committee stage, concerns by local authorities around this particular bill and potential cost for local authorities. Can I just check with the Minister: what was the process for consultation? I know that my colleagues who are more well versed in local authorities may have other specific questions, but what was the consultation like? Because from what I see in the regulatory impact statement and the regulatory impact statement addendum, it seems like there was a panel that potentially has people with experience of local government, but I can\u2019t see an explicit consultation with local authorities. I want to check with the Minister, now that I\u2019m seeing this part in new section 18(1) around local authorities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy last question for this this call is still clause 11, \u201CSection 18 replaced\u201D\u2014section 18(4)(b)(i). I\u2019m still waiting for the response around M\u0101ori freehold land. But over here it says the applicable period when it comes to the invitation to sell if the land is M\u0101ori freehold land that is \u201Cbeneficially owned by more than 4 persons;\u201D. That would assume to me both natural person but also a legal person. But I want to check: would that legal person be considered a particular person who is chief executive of a particular hap\u016B or iwi corporation? Can that legal person or natural person be interpreted as a hap\u016B or an iwi? I\u2019m just trying to get some clarity around what that \u201C4 persons\u201D represents. Those are my three questions for the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022ae0f73a5c8dfceb5f1c878fbc5c6671e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ae0f73a5c8dfceb5f1c878fbc5c6671e\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (17:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. In answer to Lan Pham\u2019s question around definition of M\u0101ori freehold land, the definition in the Public Works Act is as defined in the Te Ture Whenua Maori Act, and the definition of protected M\u0101ori land is already in the Public Works Act, which includes land retained through settlements. That is not changed by this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ETo the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor about what is a combined project. The Minister for Land Information will authorise a combined project that may only be used by parties that have access to Public Works Act power under existing provisions. It does not expand the scope of parties with powers. This can include network utility operators that are requiring authorities under the Resource Management Act and have the approval of the Minister for Land Information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022e4c311aa4069e023d15966198b1f4e1d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e4c311aa4069e023d15966198b1f4e1d\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (17:06)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. And thank you, Minister, for your reference to the definition in critical infrastructure that has been in a previous amendment to the Public Works Act. That is helpful. I\u2019ve now looked at that schedule, which defines it project by project. I don\u2019t know how the schedule gets amended, but all of the projects on it at the moment look to be public roading projects. I understand that, but just that last part of your answer to the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor\u2019s question and my question about the parts of those critical infrastructure projects. I accept that they\u2019re all roads, but the Minister for Land Information just said that it could be a requiring authority or network utility operator under the Resource Management Act. That does go beyond necessarily being public, but is he saying there\u2019s another hook here to get into the Public Works Act that it has to be for a public work? If he can just clarify that the hook is still there\u2014that it needs to meet the definition of a public work or a local work under the Public Works Act. I\u2019m sorry, I\u2019m a bit out of date with the Public Works Act legislation. The book here that I\u2019ve got from the lobby is quite\u2014I don\u2019t think it\u2019s been updated for some time. I\u2019m back on my phone looking at that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESecond question. I\u2019m interested in going now to clause 12, and this amends or replaces section 23, which is the notice of intention to take land. I haven\u2019t gone back and compared it with the existing section 23, so this may not be a change. Before subsection (3), it\u2019s \u201CConsiderations for whether taking is required\u201D. The Minister for Land Information must have regard to\u2014and I\u2019m looking at page 14\u2014\u201Cthe objectives of the Minister or [their] local authority; and the \u2026 consideration [of] alternative sites \u2026 and\u201D\u2014and this is the important one at (c)\u2014\u201Cwhether, in the Minister\u2019s or local authority\u2019s opinion, it would be fair, sound, and reasonably necessary for achieving those objectives for the land to be taken.\u201D That is a fairness test.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut then it goes to (4) and says, \u201Chowever, you don\u2019t have to look at that\u201D\u2014oh no, I think I\u2019m wrong. I think you do still have to look at (3)(c) but you don\u2019t have to look at (3)(b), which is the adequacy of alternative sites if there is already a designation. If there is already a designation, then you don\u2019t have to consider the alternative sites, and I presume that is because the alternative sites process has already been gone through when you\u2019re having a designation. But you do still have to look at that fairness test, which is in (3)(c), which is importantly not part of the designation process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo in the designation process, you don\u2019t have to look at fairness, but you do have to look at alternative sites, and this is saying for\u2014so if you\u2019ve already looked at those alternative sites because you\u2019ve done a designation process, then you don\u2019t have to redo it. If the Minister could just confirm that I\u2019ve outlined that correctly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022db196d0218a478fa943fbfa9442133dd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022db196d0218a478fa943fbfa9442133dd\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (17:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. In regards to the question from the Hon Rachel Brooking around changes to requiring authorities and replacement Resource Management Act (RMA) legislation and expand who can use the Public Works Act powers, the ability to apply to have land acquired is limited as closely as possible to the same parties that can apply under the RMA.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ETo Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s question around standards issued by Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) secondary legislation, new section 4D, standards and guidance are not secondary legislation. This maintains flexibility and allows LINZ to update them as necessary. Another question from the member around consultation with local authorities: the expert advisory panel undertook targeted consultation with local government as part of their work in 2024.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u00221cf486614fc75c0759ac4131fd2ae5e9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221cf486614fc75c0759ac4131fd2ae5e9\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (17:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Mine\u2019s a really simple question, but it relates to clause 6. It\u2019s the adoption of the wording \u201Cdelivering, posting, or sending\u201D instead of \u201Cdelivering or posting\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe \u201Cdelivering or posting\u201D\u2014my guess is that what we were talking about there was the adoption of the postal rule, which means that when you post something, it\u2019s deemed to have been delivered. But this difference, from \u201Cdelivering, posting, or sending\u201D, does seem to change the game a little bit, because \u201Csending\u201D is not deemed to be \u201Cdelivering\u201D, so it\u2019s quite a different context. Was that the intention: that we move to a different standard where we just simply send something out and it doesn\u2019t necessarily get delivered? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBecause what I understand the overall purpose of this legislation is\u2014and a good one\u2014is that we are improving and modernising, and we are actually making sure that we are doubling down on the kinds of plain empowerment of people in this Act in terms of what they receive. But if, in fact, documents get sent and not received because they haven\u2019t been picked up, for example, in an email, that undermines that principle. So it\u2019s a genuine question. I never really understood why the postal rule was adopted in the first place, because delivery seemed to me the most important thing, and \u201Cposted\u201D, even, has always gone astray and is not necessarily\u2014it seemed to be a 19\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E century decision, rather than a sensible one. But modernisation would, for me, seem to be that we would focus on delivery, that we would ensure delivery, rather than adopting a much lower standard of sending and posting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPosting, by the way, at the moment, is atrociously unreliable in a way it never was seen as being. A lot of post is returned now. For example, if you have a postal box, even if you go to the right address, it will be returned to sender and it will not be received at all. Would that count in the present circumstance if, in fact, good faith, you sent it to the address that you\u2019re talking about, and the post service refused to deliver it and it came back? Is that enough? So it\u2019s a very practical question, in some ways, about the nature of a modernising and where that fits with the purpose of the legislation. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022 data-id=\u002273dc81355443187859d87083e160a908\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002273dc81355443187859d87083e160a908\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN (Green) (17:14)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019d like to follow on from my colleagues on clause 6 and explore this issue of \u201Cthe last known electronic address\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I don\u2019t know about other members in this Chamber, but some of us have several email addresses. Some of them are very old, and I hate to think how the mailboxes are. I\u2019m just interested that sending it to the last known electronic address might not be enough. Will there be account taken if it bounces back? Will there be account taken\u2014is it going to be sent with a \u201Crequire delivery\u201D receipt?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe overall aim of modernising and allowing email to be used as a mechanism, I think, is admirable. But I do think that the checks and balances about actually how that is managed and how we\u2014think of who here might have had a Paradise account once upon a time. There\u2019s a whole lot of complete email domain names that are not extant anymore.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think there should be a slightly tougher requirement on the agencies that use electronic addresses to make sure that they\u2019re valid. The question is, also, do they send it to the email address and post it, or is it binary, you do one or you do the other? So if you could address that area please, Minister, I would appreciate it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022 data-id=\u00226438657bc222cf64e48d1b91aed425b3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226438657bc222cf64e48d1b91aed425b3\u0022\u003EHon JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green\u2014Rongotai) (17:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m actually rising to question about clause 7. Clause 7 is about replacing section 4C, which is \u201CDelegation of Minister\u2019s powers\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe way that it is inserted here was not amended by the select committee. It states that this is about bringing it in alignment with Public Service Act 2020. My main question is, is this allowing for additional delegations or not from the Minister for Land Information to be able to delegate to chief executives of Crown entities? Or was section 7 simply catching up on the changes to the Public Service Act 2020 and only bringing it in line with that? That\u2019s my question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00222d074178fc55207b6caecf0b9f77f52b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222d074178fc55207b6caecf0b9f77f52b\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (17:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Just going back to this conversation I\u2019ve been having with the Minister\u2014and thank you for engaging, Minister\u2014this is my concern: that non-public works will be able to take people\u2019s private property. The Minister said in reply to my question, \u201CWell, it\u2019s not changing the Resource Management (RMA), who can be the network utility operators.\u201D That doesn\u2019t give me the comfort I\u2019m looking for. I\u2019m just asking if there\u2019s a hook, that to be able to take land, you still have to be doing a public work, rather than something that has got a notice of requirement under the Resource Management Act or its replacements\u2014that it still has to be a public work or not. If he could just explain that, that would be useful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMaybe why I\u2019m asking this is if we look at\u2014I\u2019m not actually sure what clause it is\u2014clause 15, over a couple of pages on page 24 and new section 27F, \u201CAcquisition or taking of land required to relocate infrastructure\u201D, it says at (2), \u201CIf the public work is a Government work,\u2014(a) the Minister may acquire \u2026 the land\u201D. But then it says \u201Cif the infrastructure is owned by a local authority\u201D\u2014this is at (b). So new section 27F(2)(b), \u201Cif the infrastructure is owned by a local authority or a responsible network utility operator,\u201D\u2014which is defined above\u2014\u201Cthe land acquired or taken for that purpose vests in the local authority or responsible network utility operator instead of the Crown.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m just interested in who that \u201Cresponsible network utility operator\u201D can be and if it has to be public or not; and what the assessment is of the changes in the resource management legislation; and if there\u2019s a widening of who can be a responsible network utility operator; and, if that goes to them being private operators, how does that work with something that is called the Public Works Act? That\u2019s what I really just want to make sure that we\u2019re not going somehow much further outside of that public works sphere. That\u2019s my concern.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGoing to a similar question, then, at clause 17, and this is the replacement of section 39AAH, which is the notice of intention to take land. The notice of intention to take land is an important step. What I\u2019m interested in is that at subsection (2), it says, \u201CThe Minister or local authority must also not do anything referred to \u2026 unless 1 or more of the following apply:\u201D\u2014and this \u201Cunless\u201D is important\u2014\u201Cthe project is allowed under the Resource Management Act\u201D, so it\u2019s permitted; or \u201Cthere is a designation for the project:\u201D; or there\u2019s \u201Ca notice of requirement\u201D under the RMA. What I\u2019m interested in here is paragraph (d): \u201Ca substantive application has been lodged under the Fast-track Approvals Act 2024 for a designation or an alteration to an \u2026 designation\u201D\u2014so the \u201Cunless\u201D applies. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, noting that \u201Ca substantive application has been lodged\u201D is different from there being a designation under the Fast-track Approvals Act\u2014the substantive application has to be in that fast-track process, so it has to have been referred or be on Schedule 2 of that Act. But it\u2019s still in the process. Is the rationale for (d) and the process still being ongoing because it\u2019s in some way analogous to (c), \u201Ca notice of requirement for the project\u201D\u2014that that might be the reason? I presume that is why there\u2019s also that reference in (e). So a notice of requirement not being the full designation, but the process starting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u00221fef5f4f426c308dd0a2e640930284b1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221fef5f4f426c308dd0a2e640930284b1\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (17:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. In answer to the Hon Rachel Brooking\u2019s earlier question about considerations when land has a designation, I confirm the member is correct. If land is subject to a designation, the court will no longer be required to inquire into the adequacy of consideration given to alternative sites, routes, or other methods of achieving the objective. This is because the statutory process to assess and determine the appropriate route has already been completed under resource management legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to Helen White\u2019s question about delivering, posting, or sending and sending to a last known electronic address, \u201Csending\u201D refers to the electronic transfer to enable emails to be sent. It does not change the legal requirements around posting. Operationally, this is intended to apply where a landowner has already provided an email address.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s question around local authority costs, funding arrangements for infrastructure sit outside the scope of the Public Works Act. The panel appointed for this review consulted local government representative groups.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022 data-id=\u0022d62eb344e166dd4066f48ea011d659ba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d62eb344e166dd4066f48ea011d659ba\u0022\u003EH\u016AHANA LYNDON (Green) (17:22)\u003C/span\u003E:\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003ET\u0113n\u0101 koe\u003C/span\u003E, Mr Chair. \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EHe p\u0101tai t\u0101ku.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EI have a question.\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m wanting to take the Minister to page 9. It\u2019s clause 8, new section 4D; clause 39, amending section\u2014there\u2019s a whole heap to it, but it\u2019s about the responsibility of the chief executive to issue standards and guidance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022560bcbf2edbbd0f7e1de2923bec5e47b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: What page was that again, sorry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228994ab3be28ad17e6e0eecf7e842f7dd\u0022\u003EH\u016AHANA LYNDON\u003C/span\u003E: That was page 9, and it\u2019s around the chief executive\u2019s ability to issue new standards and guidance. I\u2019m noting that many submitters did support the idea of new regulatory tools in the bill. There was still room for improvement. Considering what Te Matapihi, the Law Association of New Zealand, and others spoke to\u2014the need for an independent oversight\u2014while the chief executive may be empowered in this space, is there consideration around independent oversight and also the reporting, like inserting a mandatory reporting function? Ng\u0101ti Raukawa iwi, they spoke about the need for us to really consider the issue of standards and guidance in this part, in particular being explicit around Treaty obligations, Treaty settlements, iwi and hap\u016B engagement, and whenua M\u0101ori. I\u2019m wanting to understand what that looks like and in particular reflecting on the voice of Ng\u0101ti Raukawa and their concerns around being more explicit around Treaty compliance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other part that I\u2019d like to ask questions on as well, while I\u2019ve got the floor, is in relation to clause 12\u2014I\u2019ll flip over. Oh, no, it\u2019s right there. It\u2019s on the same page. Yeah, it\u2019s being replaced. It\u2019s clause 12 of the bill, inserting new section 23B; clause 11, replacing section 18. This one speaks about the Minister for M\u0101ori Development or the Minister for M\u0101ori Crown Relations, around the compulsory acquisition of whenua M\u0101ori. I want to thank colleagues who have asked further around the definition of what whenua M\u0101ori is but also those which are designated, so Treaty settlement versus Te Ture Whenua Maori Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m wanting to understand the clear decision-making criteria. What is the Treaty compliance test in terms of what is the baseline whenua M\u0101ori landowner engagement requirement? What is that test? Is there a measure? Is there a model or a framework? And then, like, how do you know that you have landowner consent? Is it as my colleague Lawrence Xu-Nan has talked about\u2014is it via a CEO of a land trust or an iwi grouping? What if the land is not managed, doesn\u2019t have a management structure, whether it\u2019s an ahu whenua trust, a whenua t\u014Dp\u016B trust, a kaitiaki trust, an incorporation, or anything? If it is unstructured and unmanaged, what is the baseline requirement for use of the public works amendment legislation on these landowners in order to get the \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003Ewhakaae\u003C/span\u003E [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Econsent\u003C/span\u003E] to take the land, to compulsorily acquire?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut then, also, with the ahu whenua trust, the incorporation, the whenua t\u014Dp\u016B, whatever management group that might be in place, how do you test that that group has shareholder agreement? It\u2019s one thing for trustees to agree to something; it\u2019s another to know that the landowners actually agree. Those of us who operate in whenua M\u0101ori might understand that, because you don\u2019t want an occupational protest on you when you go to actually start the work because the whenua trust signed off but actually the shareholders were unaware of what was to come.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think about whenua that could have been impacted by the Marsden Point rail spur and the way that that trust had a decade of public works hanging over their heads. Tribute to Mere Kepa as chair out on that whenua in Ruak\u0101k\u0101 and the way that they advocated for the voice, the concern, and how to utilise whenua M\u0101ori without that noose of public works on their heads.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022 data-id=\u002274cdfe363d5ee0b72987c1e4daa0b8f0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002274cdfe363d5ee0b72987c1e4daa0b8f0\u0022\u003ELAN PHAM (Green) (17:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. My questions are specifically around clauses 11 and 12, noting that these are, like, extremely significant powers that the Ministers hold with these bills. My understanding of the Ministers who can make decisions under this is either the Minister for M\u0101ori Development or the Minister for M\u0101ori Crown Relations. The powers go from everything to attempt to acquire land, the notice of intention to take land, but it\u2019s only, from what I can see, in new section 23B, which is actually the change in clause 12 on page 15, where the Minister for M\u0101ori Crown Relations is actually named, versus the other instances of \u201CMinister\u201D. What I\u2019m interested in is: is the reference to \u201CMinister\u201D with these powers specifically related to the Minister for M\u0101ori Crown Relations, and the M\u0101ori development aspect is only where the M\u0101ori development Minister is referenced here, or when \u201Cthe Minister\u201D is used, is that actually interchangeable?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe reason why I\u2019m particularly interested in that is that in theory, in an ideal world, obviously, the Minister for M\u0101ori Development and the Minister for M\u0101ori Crown Relations would be on the same page, but it\u2019s not a given, particularly when a lot of these projects, particularly when it comes to compulsory acquisition and serving notice and whatnot\u2014there may be very different opinions. So is that simply resting with the Government about who that Minister is, or is there actually an ability for both Ministers to be involved in these decisions, or is it simply a delegation? I raise that because a lot of the submitters thought that these provisions absolutely did not go far enough when it comes to protecting M\u0101ori land, and we had a number of really strong voices on that. So I\u2019m interested in what the delegations of the Ministers are and whether it is specific to where particularly the M\u0101ori-Crown relations or M\u0101ori development Minister are specifically referenced.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022766aec433e794585f5bfd05fd0116d1e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022766aec433e794585f5bfd05fd0116d1e\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (17:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. In answer to the question from Julie Anne Genter around \u201CWhy does clause 7 replace the delegations provision in the Public Works Act?\u201D, it aligns delegations with the standard process in the Public Service Act; it does not change who the Minister can delegate to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn answer to the question from the Hon Rachel Brooking around the scope of the network utility access to Public Works Act powers, under section 186 of the Resource Management Act (RMA), a network utility operator that is a requiring authority may apply to the Minister for Land Information for any project or work as if it were a Government work. Changes to resource management legislation may mean a broader group of entities may be able to apply, but the Minister for Land Information must still agree.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd then to the member\u2019s further question around clause 17, replacement section 39AAH(2)(d), \u201CWhy are substantive applications in the Fast-track Approvals Act included here?\u201D, it is because it is analogous to a notice of requirement under the RMA.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022 data-id=\u00222e1acd73e48d83c16c0fe6a1f5ce42b4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222e1acd73e48d83c16c0fe6a1f5ce42b4\u0022\u003EHon JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green\u2014Rongotai) (17:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and thanks to the Minister for Land Information for the answers to question so far. I also had a question with an element on clause 12. Clause 12 is pretty substantive, and I know some of my colleagues have spoken to it, but my specific concern is around this replacement section 23(3) and (4), particularly (4), and how, when a Minister is going to serve notice to acquire land, and they\u2019re making their opinion, the Minister or the local authority must have regard to \u201Cthe adequacy of the consideration given to alternative sites, routes, or other methods of achieving those objectives;\u201D. This is on page 14. Now there\u2019s a new subsection (4) that a \u201CMinister or local authority must not have regard to [that] matter \u2026 if, and to the extent that, \u201C(a) there is a designation for the part of the public work for which the land is proposed to be taken; and (b) the land is subject to the designation.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason I\u2019m asking about this is that in the explanatory note of the bill as it was introduced, it mentioned that, in a way, it was making it easier to acquire land when there is a designation on the land. I\u2019m aware of a case regarding Mt Messenger, where a landowner who was born on the land really objected to the land being taken and had significant concerns as to whether the transport agency had considered effective alternatives to taking the land and running a new highway through his land. He has challenged the transport agency over and over again over many years, and I think he\u2019s incredibly brave and right to do so. In the case of the Mt Messenger project, the transport agency actually went ahead and started construction and formed an alliance and started doing work before they had fully gotten consent for the project. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess, I\u2019m trying to understand how these changes in clause 12, inserting new section 23, are not going to allow someone to challenge their land being taken if there\u2019s a designation, and whether the designation process, which is going to be entirely under this new resource management reform\u2014or is it through the current Resource Management Act? I guess, my question is: the designation. It\u2019s the designation process that therefore would have to take into account\u2014so at the point that something was designated, a landowner wouldn\u2019t necessarily be following that. Are they going to be required to be notified when the designation process is going through, and to what extent is there a requirement to consider alternatives before placing a designation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022cfbd4306840a2f4d0918622a09311c7a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cfbd4306840a2f4d0918622a09311c7a\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (17:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Chairman. I do go back to the points that the Hon Rachel Brooking has raised, because it goes to the heart of, actually, Labour\u2019s support for this legislation thus far. She has raised a couple of points that connect back to the changes to the Resource Management Act (RMA), which, as was explained by the Minister, are quite relevant.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI then go to the other point that we have, of course, in the wings, proposals around local government amalgamation or changes. One of the points raised with me was around council-owned assets, council-controlled organisations (CCOs) having control over infrastructure assets. If they are forced to be sold or, for some reason, transferred through the amalgamation process, does the right to apply through this Public Works Amendment Bill apply to the private owners of that public infrastructure\u2014or once was public infrastructure? I think the intent of the Public Works Act was clearly to facilitate infrastructure development through our country, and we have to acknowledge our ancestors and the people who gave up land, got compensation, but it was none the less, as Julie Anne Genter pointed out, a very difficult process for many.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn supporting this piece of legislation, at the same time we are facing local government amalgamation, so those structures may change; forcing, possibly, the sell-off of CCOs; and then we have changes to the RMA which, as has been identified, you have designated authorities\u2014is that what the term is?\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222d8c524bdee3dd65181fe2c6d480a74\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: Requiring authorities\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221932300008eeb52ee70b63ab234e2a50\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014requiring authorities; can\u2019t keep up with all these terms\u2014then they can apply, then I don\u2019t think that Labour could support this bill on the basis that this is supporting public infrastructure for public purposes, because it\u2019s now coming into, as we see stated here in reference to the fast-track process. I\u2019m just thinking through a scenario down in Otago where a public road that the councillors controlled and, as possibly part of a big mining project, there\u2019s been an agreement to hand over the road at this point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, the issue of consultation is one that council is obliged to go through, but then if you go to the next step around relinquishing that land for a so-called public purpose or for a fast-track process, we need to look more carefully. I haven\u2019t had any assurances or any comfort from what the Minister for Land Information has said that says this bill is for public infrastructure for public purposes. I suspect that we\u2019re handing over a fast-track process through this Public Works Amendment Bill to a whole lot of private development, because my reading of the reference to the fast track here doesn\u2019t differentiate between fast-track projects for public purposes or those for housing development, let\u2019s say. Maybe the Minister can give us reassurance, if he can, but it does go to the heart of, actually, in my view, whether Labour should support this bill any further.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022da7d4c894b527b7315d987101395db87\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022da7d4c894b527b7315d987101395db87\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (17:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. In response to the question from H\u016Bhana Lyndon about any consideration of independent oversight and \u201CCould this look at Treaty compliance?\u201D The bill does not change the basic structure of the Public Works Act (PWA). The policy intent of the bill is not to provide a new oversight body. The bill\u2019s new annual reporting requirement is intended to support greater monitoring of the PWA so that more public information can be provided about its use.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn response to the question from Julie Anne Genter around considerations when land has a delegation: as I\u2019ve previously answered, if land is subject to a designation, the court will no longer be required to inquire into the adequacy of consideration given to alternative sites, routes, or other methods of achieving the objective. This is because the statutory process to assess and determine the appropriate route has already been completed under resource management legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo Lan Pham, regarding the question around the consent of the relevant M\u0101ori portfolio Minister, the Minister who must give consent for the compulsory acquisition of M\u0101ori land is determined by the portfolio that oversees that category of land. It is either the Minister for M\u0101ori Development or the Minister for M\u0101ori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti. For example, M\u0101ori freehold land is governed by Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993, which is administered by Te Puni K\u014Dkiri and the M\u0101ori Development portfolio.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00225aa1bae1a7e8945d708a555b5500ff3b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225aa1bae1a7e8945d708a555b5500ff3b\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (17:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I just have a few questions for the Minister for Land Information regarding clause 11, new section 18C. This is on the top of page 13, \u201CWhen compliance with section 18 is not required\u201D. This is an important section because it is, essentially, stating when we don\u2019t need to actually comply with section 18(1) to (3).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust a couple of questions regarding some of the definitions here, so that way we can have on record, for law students and future lawyers as well. Subsection (1)(a) states that after reasonable inquiry, if they cannot find the owner, either as an existing process or a new process or a standard or guidelines\u2014would the Minister be able to speak to what is considered \u201Creasonable\u201D when you\u2019re trying to find the owner of a land and it cannot be found, and therefore you are overriding section 18?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWith new section 18C(1)(b), inserted by clause 11\u2014noting that new section\u00A018C(1)(a) does specify areas around a period, etc.\u2014I do want to get a little bit more detail from the Minister regarding \u201Creasonable inquiry\u201D. For new section 18C(1)(b), this is the part which talks about the application to the M\u0101ori Land Court, if an order has not been made within six months. I do want to check with the Minister, in those kinds of instances, how often has this happened before, where an application has been made to the M\u0101ori Land Court and no order has been made within six months? How common is it? I\u2019m trying to figure out if this is something that happens quite frequently or infrequently, because I personally don\u2019t have a point of reference regarding the prevalence of the complexities around M\u0101ori land disputes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy final question is around new section 18C(1)(c) and (d), inserted by clause 11. I want to check with the Minister under what circumstances would the owner of the land have no power to sell the land. Also in paragraph (d) is a term that I cannot actually find a succinct definition to, which is what is considered \u201Clegal disability\u201D. The closest thing I could find is if a legal person is not of sound mind or is under age, etc. Is that what is the definition for \u201Clegal disability\u201D? It would be good, first, to know the definition, and then I potentially have more questions from there. But just to signal to you, Mr Chair, that those are my questions for clause 11. I\u2019m going to move on to subsequent clauses.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022 data-id=\u0022a0aa0756b7ef424caeac1abd6590b157\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a0aa0756b7ef424caeac1abd6590b157\u0022\u003ELAN PHAM (Green) (17:44)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I want to pick up on clause\u00A012 and clause 13, but particularly, firstly, clause 13 when it comes to the objection to be heard by the Environment Court. The reason why I\u2019m particularly interested in this is that the role of the Environment Court is absolutely critical in these circumstances, particularly where there is an objection to land acquisition. There was a really strong view amongst submitters that were in opposition to these changes, because they made it really clear that this was a narrowing of the scope of the Environment Court and the extent to which they can actually consider objections, particularly where there\u2019s a designation in place and there\u2019s compensation disputes about the acquiring of the land.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I\u2019m interested in, when it comes to this Environment Court process, is there were submitters who talked about how critical it was that the earlier consideration of alternatives in the Resource Management Act that would have had to take place is not really at all a replacement for the landowner\u2019s right to seek independent assurance that all reasonable alternatives have actually genuinely been explored. I think what\u2019s really clear is in some of these instances they need this right\u2014it is absolutely critical to natural justice principles in this space. I understand that the Law Association was really strong in this and recognised that designations can sometimes be quite broad and they held this view that this was a really important part to make sure the integrity of natural justice is upheld.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I\u2019m interested to hear from the Minister for Land Information, because I\u2019m noting that there\u2019s been a few changes when it comes to the redraft of the bill, but is he comfortable with where these provisions have landed in terms of natural justice, in terms of the Environment Court consideration being narrowed, because of the significance of these parts and how clear submitters were in expressing their concerns? Really keen to hear that response, thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022 data-id=\u002202eaf71e05c670344fe74ae1916cdcad\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002202eaf71e05c670344fe74ae1916cdcad\u0022\u003EH\u016AHANA LYNDON (Green) (17:47)\u003C/span\u003E: T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Mr Chair. I\u2019m wanting to invite the Minister for Land Information to join me on pages 22 to 23, looking at new sections\u00A027B, and\u2014oh no, page 21 as well\u201427A, please, inserted by clause 15, looking at \u201CLand required for combined projects\u201D. Just reviewing this section, I\u2019m wanting to ask the Minister around certainty\u2014certainty in terms of who is the acquiring authority. So if we\u2019ve got a project that\u2019s combined through a variety of agencies for public works purposes\u2014it might be a bit of local government; it might be Transpower, all sorts\u2014sometimes it can be not clear. Submitters also voiced, both as individuals as well as groups such as Upper Hutt City Council, about how the combined project parts of the legislation could raise uncertainties as to who is the acquiring authority. So in not being clear on who the acquiring authority is, would this open up the Minister to challenge in terms of the acquisition itself from impacted landowners?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELand Information New Zealand provided feedback where they said, \u201CAny uncertainty around this acquiring authority would be addressed through information requirements that would be provided to the landowner in accordance with replacement section\u00A018(2), inserted by clause 11.\u201D But I guess that\u2019s the clarity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd I\u2019m just really mindful of optics, as well as putting the Minister at risk\u2014that when you combine projects and you have multiple agencies coming at landowners, how are they going to be compelled to speak with one voice when engaging with the landowner? Or is there going to be one lead agency that will be the voice on behalf of the collective when there is a combined project coming at a landowner? I raise this from a whenua M\u0101ori perspective, I raise it also from an individual general title landowner perspective, because when you have a knowledge of a combined project coming on to your whenua with the prospect of taking your land, with the incentives to sell or to have the compulsory acquisition, how does the landowner know who is the acquiring body, and does the Minister have enough protections in place to protect the Minister and who the agency is who will ultimately seek to acquire this land?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022a316d826ea48fe9156cb43337118521b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a316d826ea48fe9156cb43337118521b\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (17:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. In answer to the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor\u2019s questions earlier about powers of entities if local government assets are privatised, CCOs or council-controlled organisations or other asset owners would need to meet the definition of \u201Clocal authority\u201D in the Public Works Act. This bill does not expand who can use public works powers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo the member\u2019s other question, do the changes mean land can be acquired for a non-public purpose? No. The Public Works Act (PWA) continues to only apply to the Minister or the local authority. There is the ability for network utility operators to ask the Minister to use the PWA on their behalf on a case by case basis. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s question earlier around replacement section 18(1), inserted by clause 11, when compliance with section 18 is not required, these sections have not changed and are replicated from the existing Resource Management Act. Whether an owner be found is assessed on a case by case basis. Efforts to locate must be reasonable and the ordinary and standard meaning would apply: a fair and sensible effort to locate. In making changes to modernise the acquisition process, the opportunity has been taken to update sections 18 to 23 with modern drafting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo the member Lan Pham\u2019s question around whether the Environment Court considerations have been narrowed in a way that is appropriate, yes, the bill does not prevent the decision maker or the Environment Court from considering whether the design of the infrastructure could be amended to better meet the requirement that the taking of the land is fair, sound, or reasonably necessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022fcda2940d0ed2e5eaa1c7deef8d8557e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fcda2940d0ed2e5eaa1c7deef8d8557e\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (17:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Chair. Thank you for those clarifications, but the question is around if you were to have a major fast-track application for a housing development and the council then has to expand the roading network, the question might be is the roading network development and the acquisition of land to service that new subdivision\u2014is it for public or private purposes? So the council, I presume, under your explanation, has the right to apply and acquire under the special legislation, as laid out in the clauses here, land for the council\u2019s infrastructure, because of the private sector development. Is that correct?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022b94cc4331d523d355c6f9e56d8d6213a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b94cc4331d523d355c6f9e56d8d6213a\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (17:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Further to that in the Minister for Land Information\u2019s answer just before about network utility operators, he started by saying that you still have to be a public work to be able to use this. That is good. But then he said that there is this route for network utility operators to utilise the Public Works Act. I think this is what he said. He\u2019s very welcome to correct me. However, for a network utility operator to use this legislation, it has to be signed off by the Minister for Land Information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHe also said, in an earlier answer to me, that the changes to the Resource Management Act legislation mean that network utility operators have expanded and there are more entities that could become network utility operators. In his answer to me, the Minister used \u201Cmay\u201D a lot. There are a whole lot of discretionary endpoints here, but it would be very useful for the Minister to clarify that network utility operators, if the Minister approves it, can get access to the Public Works Act, or can they only access the Public Works Act if they are also a public work? That\u2019s the first question. I think he said they can still access it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen the second question is can he expand on what the expansion of network utility operators is under the RMA replacement bill? We know that he has some tabled amendments to link in to the Planning Bill and the Natural Environment Bill\u2014the Planning Bill is the most relevant here\u2014and that that Planning Bill widens who can use these types of provisions. It\u2019s much wider than what has historically been allowed. If he could comment on that, because I know that\u2019s in a different bill, but he\u2019s made an amendment that now links to the other pieces of legislation. He has given this answer that it is expanded. Then we know what we\u2019re talking about. How many different types of projects might be able to use the powers in the Public Works Act that enable them to take private property? I would think that the ACT Party would be much more interested in this. Maybe I\u2019m overreaching and those network utility operators have to be doing a public work and so it\u2019s not an expansion. But the earlier answer from the Minister sounded like it very much was an expansion. That\u2019s the nub of the issue that I\u2019m interested in. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022955411b4c3f72ce8b7f2f2b802308e6b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022955411b4c3f72ce8b7f2f2b802308e6b\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (17:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. In answer to the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor\u2019s question around if you have a fast-track application and a roading development was required to make roads, can the council use the Public Works Act (PWA) to buy the land for roads? The answer is yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo H\u016Bhana Lyndon\u2019s question around how the bill applies to decision making for M\u0101ori land, \u201Cagreement\u201D under PWA refers to a person with authority to enter into an agreement. The bill does not change this. How shareholder agreement is required or reached for types of M\u0101ori land under Te Ture Whenua Maori Act is covered by that Act. The bill recognises that protected M\u0101ori land may have legal or practical constraints, so it allows the discretion to make incentive payments even if early agreement can\u2019t be reached.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo the member\u2019s other question, in combined projects, how does the landowner know who is acquiring the land? The information requirements in the bill will ensure landowners know who is acquiring their land in a combined project. This information must identify the project, the acquiring authority, and why the land is needed. When the Minister authorises a combined project, they must publicly notify that it is a combined project.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278c026fac1a68910df166a4c907229ec\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the time has come for me to leave the Chair for the dinner break. The committee will resume at 7.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 5.57 p.m. to 7 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba13389d2adf05edc6ca578ce4679486\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the committee is resumed on the Public Works Amendment Bill. Before the dinner break, we were debating Part 1, which is clauses 4 to 45, \u201CAmendments to principal Act\u201D, and Schedules 1 to 4. The question is, again, that Part 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u00223040f95d5fa6aa3b3fbc1148a7484431\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223040f95d5fa6aa3b3fbc1148a7484431\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (19:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Before the break, the Hon Rachel Brooking asked about network utility operator access to Public Works Act (PWA) powers. This is an existing mechanism under section 186 of the Resource Management Act (RMA). That\u2019s been in place since 1991. This bill makes consequential amendments to that section to provide for combined projects. These consequential amendments do not change the scope of who can apply under the RMA. Who can apply under those provisions in the Planning Bill is for that bill, not the Public Works Act. As I\u2019ve repeatedly said, this bill is not changing who can access the PWA.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f45b53ea3f5d24c9beb0cbeb84cbc8cd\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: OK, the Hon Rachel Brooking. Can you start off by just telling me where you think you\u2019re at in the process?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e05cd54947d089787e6e6ef9dd7fd8f\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EJust at clause 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d810c3febf590ececd4a6e3c43b9d96\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I know she\u2019s not there, because it\u2019s all marked off on here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022e41e132d2b8bbedcf22a92dd000e5d5a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e41e132d2b8bbedcf22a92dd000e5d5a\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (19:01)\u003C/span\u003E: I am at Amendment Paper (AP) 792, in the Minister\u2019s name, and at\u2014who knows what it is, but it\u2019s at page 4\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220c17b295380119512e5f7ee92a3ddf78\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Page 4 is close enough.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002220158f7bed8b615cdecb178e76e63523\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s in a box, new clause 13, and it says, \u201COrder in Council may make certain consequential amendments\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255bd326193a35aa685c7194bf6c0fd24\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: OK\u2014found it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d5339917b0a54cf061df963b4638c5f\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: This says \u201CThis clause applies if the 54th Parliament\u201D\u2014that\u2019s the one we\u2019re in for another couple of days\u2014\u201Cenacts 1 or more Acts to replace the RMA (an RMA replacement Act).\u201D And then it goes on about how \u201CThe Governor-General may, by Order in Council, amend one or more RMA replacement Acts\u201D, and this includes \u201Cto provide for the definitions of network utility operator, network utility operation, and requiring authority in section 2 of this Act to be replaced with the definitions of the corresponding terms in an\u201D\u2014because there\u2019s two of them\u2014\u201CRMA replacement Act:\u201D [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EPhone rings\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002282c6de0089308f29c96ba5fd76910a0e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s a fine!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221f125404dcc61ad0631d30dc923f4785\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha! So this is relevant to the answer that the Minister just gave because it\u2019s the link in to the change. So he\u2019s just told us RMA section 186 already says that if you can get to be a requiring authority under the RMA, then you can get into the Public Works Act process. However, what we\u2019re seeing here at this new clause 13 on the Order in Council is that the RMA replacements\u2014it will be called the Planning Act\u2014is going to be able to change definitions in this legislation to match that legislation. We haven\u2019t yet passed it in its third reading, but if we get to do that by next Wednesday, then it will apply.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd we\u2019ve heard from the Minister in an earlier contribution that the Planning Act, which is a mysterious RMA replacement Act, in fact enables many more different types of companies and entities to become network utility operators and get into what would be the section 186 process under the RMA. I think I see the officials talking there. That is our concern: that, whilst the Minister can say, \u201COh, well this Act isn\u2019t the RMA and this Act isn\u2019t the RMA replacement so we\u2019re not going to talk about the changes that will be coming through those RMA replacements, through that Planning Act\u201D\u2014as it is likely to become\u2014\u201Cwe\u2019re not going to talk about it.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s not useful, because I\u2019m really worried\u2014and my whole Labour caucus is really worried\u2014about the changes that are being made in this bill that, on the face of it, look like a nice bill that\u2019s trying to make the process easier and fairer for those who are having their land taken for public works. But what we\u2019re finding out now, and with this AP, is that it\u2019s going to be\u2014or I think it\u2019s going to be\u2014a whole lot more entities that will be able to use the Public Works Act provisions, which means that they can be non-public entities taking private land for a project that might be there to benefit shareholders. And that is not the historic scheme of the Public Works Act. You could argue that maybe there\u2019s been one or two instances where things that were Crown entities and turned into State-owned enterprises and might have part ownership became requiring authorities for some projects\u2014and I\u2019m thinking, in particular, Meridian Energy would have done this for Project Aqua\u2014that didn\u2019t go ahead\u2014in Canterbury, where I know the Minister grew up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo this is really fundamental. Like, please can the Minister tell us what are the other types of projects that will be able to get through because of this replacement resource management (RM) legislation that he\u2019s mentioned in his Amendment Paper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223cf5e15267b7da98b3ea5935ed2e7841\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The difficulty we have here is that we have\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002283c825521936ba47b2670551bc3703c9\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb2c818cf6be6e33473fca9dfd6ea8c9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m speaking. The difficulty that we have here is that this Minister is not the Minister responsible for the Resource Management Act. While I can understand the questions that the member is asking, we probably have a limited opportunity for this Minister to satisfyingly answer the questions that you\u2019re asking. Maybe after the committee stage. You\u2019re probably one of the most well-versed people in the House in terms of some of the committee stage legislation on that Resource Management Act, but I don\u2019t think it\u2019s fair\u2014for this Minister, he can only answer it to the extent that he can, because he\u2019s not the Minister responsible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002272041c8be9e4cd8f6c515c142a39b59a\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I do understand those points and that we have spent some time in our last urgency on the RM replacement bills where we didn\u2019t actually touch hardly at all on these types of provisions. I\u2019m happy to take responsibility for that, in part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220e2afe790af445af6bd7c739df3b6df6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The point I was making is that the member was well-versed in that committee stage. We just can\u2019t put that expectation on this Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022160b6cdb71466b5e3f3a536cfd9e7caf\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: And I take that point. I wasn\u2019t taking it in a bad way at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EBut the Minister did say earlier in this\u2014and I\u2019m not sure if you were in the Chair then or not, Madam Chair\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee6ac8dcd0a18e69caa139596910d628\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Not on this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b9b6d6b12e9989e864aa01401d507f7f\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: This Minister on this bill said earlier that the RMA replacement bills do widen the criteria and so it may be\u2014and I\u2019m paraphrasing; I don\u2019t have the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E in front of me\u2014that other things, not the word the Minister used, could come into the process if the Minister allows it. So maybe I\u2019m just asking\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f5951c45ae4297771101ffc466f7589\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: For clarification.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022663c23b92c34acff9b4be4db75223f8a\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014for confirmation again of that statement\u2014that I\u2019m right\u2014that what we\u2019ve got coming through is we\u2019ve had that RMA replacement, and those RMA replacements are now going to be put into this legislation through his AP, and that will widen the number of things that can then use the Public Works Act provisions, subject to the Minister approving it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u00223205abb6c52f0ab3dc66774e28132478\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223205abb6c52f0ab3dc66774e28132478\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (19:09)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. In the same vein, I guess, because there have been so many moving parts to this challenge\u2014to what we understood to be a well-intentioned modernisation. And now we\u2019ve got, as I say, changes to the RMA, we\u2019ve got the fast-track process, and we\u2019ve got local government amalgamation and what might come from that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo if I come back to clause 20 and its relation to section 39AAJA, \u201CCombined projects\u201D, \u201CSections 27A to 27D apply to a public work that is the whole or a part of a critical infrastructure project.\u201D Now, the point that we asked prior to dinner was the one of private benefit. A critical infrastructure project can be public and private, and a combined project is defined as one that has some public work in it, so it basically pretty much opens it up to anything, if you consider a public component. In which case, even private projects have a public benefit to them. We acknowledge that, but the intent of this is for public not for private. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe questions to the Minister for Land Information is just to go through that. So section 39AAJA(2), inserted by clause 20, says, \u201CFor the purposes of subsection (1), the public work, together with 1 or more other public works,\u201D\u2014right, so there might be a few involved\u2014\u201Cmay be authorised as a combined project in accordance with section 27B regardless of whether the other public works\u2014(a) are part of the same critical infrastructure project:\u201D, or whether the whole or a part of a different critical infrastructure project.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo it kind of opens it up to anything, and maybe the Minister can define the parameters that ensure or reassure us that what we\u2019re passing here is fast track\u2014that is, the right to impose over someone\u2019s private property rights the acquisition of their land for a public purpose. What makes me even more wary is that the ACT Party is enthusiastic about this. It\u2019s the first time I\u2019ve seen the ACT Party enthusiastic about imposing on private property rights, so it makes me very, very wary. They may have concluded, as I\u2019m starting to conclude, that the imposition or the acquisition of private property rights, which is what this does, for compensation\u2014I\u2019m not saying it\u2019s without compensation, but something that if someone\u2019s to say no, which they have done, this overrides that right. But ACT thinks that\u2019s OK. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWell, I kind of struggle with their philosophy. It\u2019s a consistent philosophy, I have to say, that private property rights are absolute. Unless they see that the private property rights and benefits accrue through this process, where a combined project, which is clause 20, where there\u2019ll be a small component of a public project or public work, as it is defined\u2014there\u2019s a small component\u2014but a large component of private, but this would be allowed under my reading of clause 20, Part 2. It even says where it may be authorised for the purposes of that public work\u2014a combined project might be authorised if \u201C(c): are not the whole or a part of a critical infrastructure project.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the Minister\u2019s had some advice and I look forward to getting that because it is important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ed0e4ccdc2f7cf99194beba55537961\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I think the Minister for Land Information can answer in his role as a Minister on behalf of the Government, for this piece of legislation, but no expectation that he can answer on behalf of the ACT Party or anything.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022954aaa976a8cc9b7f42829bdfaec6c22\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: No, I appreciate that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022f1b57ba3349f928c2a742c21465a3296\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f1b57ba3349f928c2a742c21465a3296\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (19:13)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. To the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor, to his question around whether critical infrastructure combined projects expand to private works: no. Critical infrastructure projects are a refined list of fast-track projects and roads in Schedule 2A of the Public Works Act. These are public works being undertaken by the Crown or a local authority.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022be2559ce0a3a8be42758376bdfad4eb6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022be2559ce0a3a8be42758376bdfad4eb6\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (19:13)\u003C/span\u003E: I appreciate that, and that\u2019s a nice bureaucratic answer, but if it\u2019s combined\u2014so you have a housing project that actually just happens to need some roads to go to it. So the roads are part of the combined project that will service the private project. My question is: if the council says, \u201CWell, we have to widen the road and so we will acquire the land to widen the road because there will be another 1,000 people living somewhere and we need to have infrastructure.\u201D, that is a public infrastructure. I accept that, but the combined project is one of the housing developments, serviced by a public infrastructure which is the roading or it might be the electricity. That\u2019s the point I\u2019m trying to make. I\u2019m not sure that the Minister\u2019s clarified that answer for me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00224cab4e578f930b679bd8a3812fef58c4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224cab4e578f930b679bd8a3812fef58c4\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a couple of questions for the Minister for Land Information, just noting that we are progressing through this bill. I want to touch on something the Minister said before regarding clause 13, section 24 amended, around the Environment Court. Now, I just want to get some clarification from the Minister. In the regulatory impact statement, paragraph 201 to 224, pages 58 to 65, it talks about possibilities or considerations around objection. The recommendation and the preferred option by the ministry here is around having refined ground for objection in the Public Works Act, but what the panel has suggested, which has a negative mark next to it, is option C3, which is \u201CNo right to object if RMA designation [is] approved\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan I just check, with clause 13, inserting section 24(8): \u201Cthe Environment Court must not undertake the inquiry under subsection (7)(b) \u2026 \u2014(a) there is a designation for the part of the public work for which the land is proposed to be taken;\u201D\u2014if that is option C3 or option C2 of the regulatory impact statement, because that is an important one to make. If it is indeed option C3, then how would the Minister rationalise the fact that in the regulatory impact statement, paragraph 223 on page 64, it says that the risk of adopting option C3, which is having no RMA designation process, \u201Cwould inadvertently slow down the designation process by including the consideration of land acquisition matters\u201D. So I want to check that clarification with the Minister. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan I also just check, further on to what the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor has said, and I\u2019m looking at clause 15, inserting new section 27D(3)\u2014I asked the Minister previously around local government consultation, and one of the things we heard in the Transport and Infrastructure Committee is that local governments worry about the cost that this would incur. We just heard, previously, from the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor that if there is a possibility that combined projects could be public and private, then here, in section 27D(3), local government then is the one that has to get accrued to them around \u201CAll costs and expenses incurred \u2026 in respect of actions taken\u201D by combined projects. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAre we then asking for local authorities to compensate for what potentially could be public combined projects undertaken by private companies, which then would be\u2014I think from a ratepayer\u2019s perspective, maybe that\u2019s not something they had in mind, or even for this Government what they had in mind, when talking about prioritising expenditure for local government. I want to check that clarity with the Minister\u2014so this is section 27D(3). I\u2019ll leave you with those two and I will move on to subsequent sections.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022 data-id=\u0022a5992817c194ee430c984311f7abffc9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a5992817c194ee430c984311f7abffc9\u0022\u003EH\u016AHANA LYNDON (Green) (19:18)\u003C/span\u003E: T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Madam Chair. I want to ask the Minister, in relation to representation of certain owners for the purposes of replacement section 18, inserted by clause 11. It\u2019s a clause that I just spotted, which I\u2019m a bit nervous about, in terms of representation. Representation of land owners, an individual or a group, has been used as a tool for alienation in the past. Now, submitters did raise the point that these agents who are appointed to represent land owners, a concern that, as an administrative process, having this agent appointed could actually accelerate the land loss and alienation of the group being represented.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn the clause we\u2019re it talks about also the M\u0101ori Land Court being able to deal with it through their own processes, they\u2019re the actual agents that I\u2019m concerned about, and I want to invite the Minister to provide comfort that somehow, magically, the M\u0101ori Land Court has improved its processes and magically will see some form of tighter reins on agents being approached and appointed to represent land owners.  Because for freehold M\u0101ori land owners, often these agents are appointed representing a small number of the land owners, not the actual collective interests of those who whakapapa to the block. While I know officials said, \u201COh, it\u2019s been a mechanism used for a long time in the M\u0101ori Land Court.\u201D, e hoa, it\u2019s a tool of alienation and we have to be really cautious with that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I\u2019m just wanting to seek some surety from the Minister that maybe there have been some improvements in the M\u0101ori Land Court, that the M\u0101ori Land Court will have capacity and capability to appoint agents who have enough of a tight leash on them to be accountable to said land owners. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFurther on this section here, talking about the Public Trust being authorised to represent an owner for this purpose too, there\u2019s a range of compliances put in place for the Public Trust to represent a land owner, and, again, there\u2019s nervousness in these agents being appointed because, for instance, the land owner hasn\u2019t engaged in some of a six-month period \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office]\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ffe7ef31e941ed4a26d6cf2d323f61d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just say that this particular Minister is not responsible for those appointments. So what is the question that relates to this piece of legislation that you\u2019re wanting to ask this Minister?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229936473b2302ecc3d1eba9f7eac909a4\u0022\u003EH\u016AHANA LYNDON\u003C/span\u003E: The issue is that when we\u2019re referring to different mechanisms to manage land interests and representation that this refers to, because it\u2019s ture whenua M\u0101ori\u2014so this is M\u0101ori freehold land being impacted\u2014and then Crown officials are saying, \u201COh, the M\u0101ori Land Court have got it sorted. They\u2019ve been doing this for years.\u201D This bill in particular has direct impact on M\u0101ori land owners, as M\u0101ori freehold land. So what improvements have we seen? Because this will require the M\u0101ori Land Court to act in a manner to appoint these people. Have there been improvements? Is there additional resource? Because this Act is coming through that the M\u0101ori Land Court will finally have some capacity and capability to appoint people who will have the relevant safeguards in place. I think it\u2019s very relevant to the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1624c91fcf9fa5e8d2d8bea751e6d17\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a relevant question to the wider picture, but I think in terms of this Minister\u2019s responsibility, he can answer for himself, but the M\u0101ori Land Court is not his responsibility.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002207904fd2791ed020c5bbc33ee714840e\u0022\u003EH\u016AHANA LYNDON\u003C/span\u003E: Then that\u2019s one of the issues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f43b7f2cd210f50269eb94f231cb6e2\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister\u2019s about to give an answer, but I think this is getting too broad.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022b8244665810f786d30eb00bd0f322330\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b8244665810f786d30eb00bd0f322330\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (19:22)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. In regards to the member\u2019s question, the appointment of an agent or Public Trust in new section 18B, inserted by clause 11 of the bill, is an existing provision in the Public Works Act. It\u2019s reproduced in the bill as the structure of the provision has been updated for modern drafting. The operation of the M\u0101ori Land Court is outside my portfolio.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThere was also a question earlier from Lawrence Xu-Nan around the regulatory impact statement, 201 to 224. It is not the panel\u2019s option, in clause 13. An objection is still able to be made if there is an investigation. The bill refines the grounds for an objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fab16e117168a108e75401213ff75b4c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Hon Rachel Brooking\u2014I\u2019m going to ask the member to see if there\u2019s any outstanding areas that she hasn\u2019t been to, to her mind. But what I\u2019ve done is read through all of the questions that were asked prior to the dinner break, and I\u2019m finding this whole debate either repetitive or out of the responsibility of the Minister. So I want the questions to be absolutely precisely to the Minister, excepting that some of the answers that the questioners are wanting answers to are probably not going to be what they\u2019re wanting to hear. OK?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022871d138627512bf477c56c836090fadf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022871d138627512bf477c56c836090fadf\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (19:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, thank you for that. I did ask for the Minister for Land Information just to clarify the answer that he had given earlier and in relation to his Amendment Paper 792.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESo I\u2019m still waiting for that, but I do have a precise question, and if you can just bear with me on the wording here. So, again, it\u2019s new clause 13 in the Amendment Paper. It\u2019s just at (2)\u2014this is just a wording issue; it\u2019s not a policy issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002276b74fd3b011fa97febec6ab501469bb\u0022\u003EHon Mike Butterick\u003C/span\u003E: Where is she, sorry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a362c761dd4f3688963eafabeb2cd49\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: 13.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d5033ec6d1a5fd9dbd8c9a1aac693556\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: At clause 13(2): \u201CThe Governor-General may, by Order in Council, amend 1 or more RMA replacement Acts\u201D\u2014I understand that, and the Planning Act, as it will be, or the Natural Environment Act\u2014\u201Cfor all or any of the following purposes:\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt might be my reading of it. This legislation is saying that that new legislation that\u2019s not here yet can be amended to provide for the following references in this Act to be amended. I just don\u2019t understand what\u2019s being amended there, because it says\u2014wouldn\u2019t it be the following references, and it\u2019s so that they refer to the corresponding provisions in an RMA replacement Act? I\u2019m just confused or not certain about which piece of legislation is being amended to reflect which other piece of legislation. Is it that, say, the Planning Act is being amended to incorporate the wordings that we find in this Act, or is it the other way around, that this legislation is being amended to reflect the new terms that will be in the other Acts? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI mean, amend the Planning Act to provide for the following references in the Public Works amendment to be amended so that they refer to the corresponding provisions in the Planning Act. I\u2019m finding that very circular and so I\u2019m just asking the Minister if he can explain what is meant by that. Again, as I\u2019m saying, it\u2019s not a policy one. I understand that there are different terms in the different pieces of legislation and you want to reflect it, and my concern that I\u2019ve already articulated is that the widening of what can be a network utility or what can be designated under the RMA replacement Acts is going to lead to significant consequences in the Public Works Act. But I have asked that question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen just going back to clause 20, which is this combined projects, and it is a question that\u2019s been asked before, but it would be useful for the Minister to just focus on that word \u201Cpart\u201D, because new section 39AAJA, \u201CCombined projects\u201D, says that the sections \u201Capply to a public work that is the whole or a part of a critical infrastructure project.\u201D So the concern is about the part. So if you have a public work that could now be something that\u2019s imported from section 186 of the RMA Planning Act extension into being a public work where this Act requires, and it\u2019s related to a critical infrastructure project, how much does that part have to be? Is it that the combined project is substantively the critical infrastructure project\u2014so those roads that are defined in Schedule 2A, I think, of the Public Works Act? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe message that I\u2019m concerned about is that the critical infrastructure project\u2014so the road\u2014could be a very small part, and then it imports all these other things to become a public work. So if the Minister wants to comment on that word or \u201Ca part\u201D, that would be a useful specific contribution. Thank you. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f1ba970fa4e3521af10b7cc603e1eb7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger) (19:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Just one moment. We\u2019re just waiting for an answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002234b404360d14c7c575a4edb112b4c842\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002234b404360d14c7c575a4edb112b4c842\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Madam Chair. As promised, I am going to move along from the previous sections. I am currently on clause 23. It is a big bit, so just bear with me. I\u2019m looking at new Part 2C, new section 39L, inserted by clause 23. The question I have for this is, in the event of an emergency, if there can be a secondary legislation made on the recommendation of the Minister for Land Information that this part is applicable for the restoration of public works following an emergency, can I just check, is there any potential that this then becomes a \u201CHenry VIII\u201D clause, where it will make changes to the primary legislation as a result of that secondary legislation? I note that new sections 39M to 39Y, state some of the specificities around the taking of land in the event of emergency recovery. But I do want to just check if that\u2019s going to be a \u201CHenry VIII\u201D clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI want to move on to clause 25, and I\u2019ll leave it at clause 25 for this contribution. This is the part that says compensation in relation to M\u0101ori freehold land will be assessed as general land. I want to draw the Minister\u2019s attention to the regulatory impact statement, page 40, paragraphs 131 to 134. This has to do with M\u0101ori interests, because my understanding is that currently M\u0101ori freehold land is not compensated at the same rate as general land. I\u2019m assuming that this part is taking up the recommendation where now they are being paid for by the same rate. But what I\u2019m not seeing in this part, and the Minister may be able to point me to the correct section, is that in paragraph 133 it says \u201CThe PWA does not recognise that multiple dwellings on M\u0101ori land can be separately owned. This means that where there are several dwellings, such as for papak\u0101inga, only one home-loss payment can be paid under the status quo.\u201D And the recommendation is to be able to split some of that up under this bill. Would the Minister just be able to point to me on which clause in this bill allows the splitting of some of that payment, which can\u2019t be done under the existing legislation? Those are my two questions for now. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227fe597d0b33747512510dd2b1b90e2ec\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ve just got some answers here from the Minister when he\u2019s ready.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u00223950c3c002ed89717a03c5e9518d58bc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223950c3c002ed89717a03c5e9518d58bc\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (19:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. In response to Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s earlier question about local government worries about the costs that could be incurred and the possibility that Crown projects are public and private. Combined works can only be public works. A private project cannot combine with the public work using the combined works provisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClarification for the Hon Rachel Brooking in regards to new clause 13 of Schedule\u00A01AA, added in Amendment Paper 792. The Planning Bill already includes consequential amendments that it will make to the Public Works Act. New clause 13 allows those consequential amendments to be updated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAn earlier question from Lawrence Xu-Nan regarding Order in Council and emergency recovery. New section 39L: Order in Council does not change primary legislation. H switches on the provisions in the primary Act for emergency recovery for the specific works listed in the Order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAgain for the member, section 72B, amended by clause 29, is the new provision for home loss payments on M\u0101ori freehold land.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022 data-id=\u0022f8e587223c1caac2b2f7755c44bd6543\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c96149a439844ecfa86967f9caf5f50d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f8e587223c1caac2b2f7755c44bd6543\u0022\u003EKATIE NIMON (National\u2014Napier) (19:33)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006713\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 46\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 67, Noes 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002285aa642cc7c641bab88d3727796d7455\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Part 1 set out on Amendment Paper 792 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006721\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 46\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1f00fecf817fe4c533c5fc97a6ac91d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Could you clarify your number that you voted in Labour?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d64d7d1a96fc8403abc1f534c37c837\u0022\u003EShanan Halbert\u003C/span\u003E: Toru tekau\u201430.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230eafe34905fe54740ded833eb2a1c93\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Just a question as to whether you had voted 32 in the previous vote, and is 32 correct for the previous vote and 30 correct for\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb5d307f4d08dd7e6d61d81a482347a1\u0022\u003EShanan Halbert\u003C/span\u003E: If we could correct that at 30, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a7061847e1713bf22fe5e54858bfb176\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. You need to seek leave.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022521d51c83f11bd8d73ec749195fe657d\u0022\u003EShanan Halbert\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to make a correction.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289fbaa5b13ef39d114da619d6b0790ba\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is none.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022077305b6831820add958657e8f70c25a\u0022\u003EShanan Halbert\u003C/span\u003E: To correct that vote at 30.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f4dfec4f929a8d03ce9a4ae4a7e5698\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. The record will be corrected accordingly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006736\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 46\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00228f2b646a42be171d4cbc5de31d114818\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022775df2f30793333e5cc1940e842f2b45\u0022\u003EPart 2 Consequential amendments to other legislation, and Schedule 5\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002237a3aa14801a3e75f2c8431655ab521b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to Part 2, which is the debate on clause 46\u2014\u201CConsequential amendments to other legislation\u201D\u2014and Schedule 5. The question is that Part 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022d5b25266349af6222af021a87af843b4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d5b25266349af6222af021a87af843b4\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (19:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Schedule 5 is \u201CConsequential amendments to other legislation\u201D, which I think you may have just said. I have a high-level question for the Minister for Land Information, and a more specific one. Can he direct us to any changes that are of a policy nature to these changes, or are they mainly what we\u2019ve already been discussing\u2014but made to work for the different provisions? Does my question make any sense there?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI see that there\u2019s a lot in here about the Transpower exception coming through into the Resource Management Act. That\u2019s on page 82 and it looks like most of the other changes are references\u2014you\u2019re just replacing a reference to one section that\u2019s now been amended and popping in the new section. Not a policy issue; it\u2019s merely technical. That\u2019s one question if he wants to direct us anywhere\u2014that it\u2019s not merely technical. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen at the Fast-track Approvals Act 2024, it says to repeal Schedule 12. Schedule\u00A012 of the Fast-track Approvals Act is \u201CModifications to process under Public Works Act\u00A01981 to take or deal with land\u201D. It\u2019s quite short. There\u2019s an interpretation, application of the section, and \u201CCourt must accept determination of panel about consideration of alternative sites, etc\u201D. I\u2019m just wondering why this needs to come out. I presume we had a discussion before in Part 1 about a fast track; a substantive application. Didn\u2019t they have to be determined that it was just a substantive? If the Minister could comment on the relationship between that substantive application under the fast track now being provided for in this amendment bill, and if that is the reason for taking out Schedule 12 of the Fast-track Approvals Act, if they are like for like.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022357b8b9489de2bb7c68b9534848cd6a2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022357b8b9489de2bb7c68b9534848cd6a2\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair, I want to start with the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 792, because in there, there are also added a couple of additional bits in Schedule 5 specifically relating to Land Information New Zealand (Fees and Charges) Regulations 2003. Now, just checking in terms of the explanatory note\u2014there\u2019s very little information that has been given for this bit in particular. I have two questions on this amendment specifically. One of them says, \u201CIn the Schedule, replace item 4(g) and (h) with:\u201D I\u2019m assuming different pricing. I haven\u2019t had a chance to\u2014because this Amendment Paper only was released on Wednesday. Will the Minister just let us know if this is two new items that are included or has simply the cost been adjusted? If the cost has been adjusted, what was the previous cost?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to check\u2014the next part, when it comes to fees and charges, again, if the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind just elaborating on that. It says, \u201Cdelete \u2018to a local authority\u2019\u00A0\u201D. Can I just check, does it mean that in this particular case, any sort of fees or charges\u2014I guess, the revenue from fees and charges; I will double-check that particular section\u2014cannot be paid to a local authority? I will double-check on that, but if the Minister has a response for it, that would be great.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI now want to move on to Schedule 5 in the main bill, noting that there are kind of two parts to this. I\u2019ll start with the first part. What I haven\u2019t seen, and I haven\u2019t seen it in the Minister\u2019s amendment as well, and I just want to double-check, is that it has been crossed-referenced in the Natural Environment Bill and also the Planning Bill with what we\u2019re seeing here regarding the Resource Management Act (RMA). \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cbb5828ac4cba0cb8503d62296390537\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EIt\u2019s out of scope.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217e25a3844fd8f60e28d199392c9d926\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it\u2019s not out of scope\u2014for example, when this bill comes into effect, if the other two bills don\u2019t include this particular amendment bill or amendment Act in their list, then does it mean that we have this weird anomaly where we have this bill that has a section on the RMA when the RMA no longer exists?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would have assumed that the Amendment Paper 792 by the Minister, much like, I think, the Te Here \u0101 Nuku (Nelson Tenths) Bill, would simply encapsulate\u2014unless it\u2019s in here somewhere; please correct me if it actually is in here, Minister\u2014that when the two replacement bills, the Natural Environment Bill and Planning Bill, come into effect, it will supersede the Resource Management Act in this Act. It might actually be in here, potentially. Can I just\u2014ah! Actually, on page 5\u2014can I just check, then, with the Minister that page 5 captures what I\u2019m referring to regarding the RMA changes? I think that would be helpful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ll leave it for the time being, because there are quite a few questions there, but just thinking of you, Chair, I do have further questions on Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u00229fa2d9fc0a6ae768923399fa34f209a6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229fa2d9fc0a6ae768923399fa34f209a6\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (19:44)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, I\u2019m working through, as I say, not having been on the select committee, a little bit flat-footed, but what are technical areas under Schedule 5 here, Part 1. Just to clarify the clarification from the Minister and to just have reassurance as to the meaning of it, \u201CIn section 186(1), replace \u2018A network utility operator that is a requiring authority\u2019\u00A0\u201D\u2014that will be replaced with \u201CA responsible network utility operator\u201D. \u201CRequiring authority\u201D and \u201Cresponsible\u201D, in my layman\u2019s kind of analysis, are two quite different overriding descriptives, so maybe the Minister can just give me a reassurance that what was a requiring authority as a network operator will still be effective in the same way as by being called \u201Cresponsible\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe next question I have here is on \u201CAfter section 186(3), insert:\u201D, and it\u2019s an insertion that says, \u201CThe Minister for Land Information must be treated as having control of the project or work for the purposes of the definition of responsible Minister or local authority\u201D under a section of the Public Works Act. Now, having control of the project, in my view, is different from having an approval for it to go ahead. \u201CHaving control of\u201D, I would have thought, manages the project until completion. Well, that\u2019s what I would say as a layperson if I was working on a project. Maybe the Minister can just explain what the significance is of the insertion of that in Schedule 5, because my experience as Minister for Land Information is that we don\u2019t have huge resources at hand so, therefore, taking control of a project is quite a significant undertaking. Maybe the Minister can clarify for me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAgain, we have kind of arrived at analysis of this bill with a little more suspicion than when we started out and when it was presented to us, and we supported this to select committee and through the select committee, but I don\u2019t think any of us were on it. So I\u2019m not being frivolous here. I am seeking some genuine clarification on some points that seem quite significant.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022ae3a626f0a408d53f8e2ce67bedc91b0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ae3a626f0a408d53f8e2ce67bedc91b0\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (19:46)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. In regards to the question from the Hon Rachel Brooking around the consequential amendment to the Fast-track Approvals Act (FTAA), Schedule 12 of the FTAA requires the Environment Court, when hearing an objection to the taking of land for a public work under the Public Works Act (PWA), to accept a determination made by a panel under the FTAA in respect of a designation that relates to the public work. New section 24B, I think that is, of the PWA has a similar effect as Schedule 12 of the FTAA and so makes the schedule unnecessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to the member\u2019s question around policy changes in Schedule 5, the policy changes relate to the application of the incentive payment where it\u2019s empowered land to be acquired or compensated under the Public Works Act. Where landowners initiate proceedings for their land to be acquired by Environment Court order, they do not receive incentive payments\u201485, 185 or 198 of the Resource Management Act (RMA). If the regional council or territorial authority uses their power under section 86 to initiate acquisition by agreement, the incentive payment applies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo the member Lawrence Xu-Nan regarding the Amendment Paper changes to Land Information fees and charges regulations, this just changes cross-references in the regulations. Fee amounts don\u2019t change. No fees are added.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn answer to the member\u2019s other question around changes to the RMA in Schedule 5, yes, the Order in Council in the Amendment Paper will align the new resource management legislation with the changes made to the RMA by Schedule 5 where applicable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022719e5bf5caf249551fbd251d894f7392\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022719e5bf5caf249551fbd251d894f7392\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Minister. That is really helpful. Can I just check\u2014I just had a quick check in terms of the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 792 around the Land Information New Zealand fees and charges. This is the top of page 7, the part about deleting \u201Cto a local authority\u201D. Now, in the original part that it\u2019s referring to, it says that this particular part is around an agreement under section 50 of the Public Works Act to transfer to a local authority all or part of an existing public work. I had a look at section 50 as well. Can I just check: is this simply the case of a duplication, or is it possible now to also transfer an agreement to someone other than a local authority? In this Amendment Paper 792, the \u201Cto a local authority\u201D part has been deleted\u2014so just if the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind clarifying that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy next question\u2014this is page 5, and I\u2019ve just had a look. I do appreciate the Minister\u2019s response around the changes we\u2019re going to be seeing to the Resource Management Act and how that\u2019s going to ensure consistency so that way we don\u2019t have this weird kind of gap or anomaly here in the Public Works Amendment Bill. That\u2019s really helpful. But in the new addition to the Minister\u2019s\u2014it\u2019s mentioned here in terms of replacement sections 185(8) and (9). Can I just check, for subsection (8)(a)(ii), it talks about a critical infrastructure project that is not protected M\u0101ori land.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to check with the Minister the definition for \u201Cnot protected M\u0101ori land\u201D. Is that the same thing as a M\u0101ori freehold land? Throughout this entire bill, our two points of reference have been M\u0101ori freehold land and customary M\u0101ori land, but not necessarily protected M\u0101ori land or not protected M\u0101ori land. I just want to make sure that I\u2019m clear on how some of that is consistent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo, yeah, those two are my two questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u00228bbe8cf9aa49a829c7c77722e842453f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228bbe8cf9aa49a829c7c77722e842453f\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (19:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just in response to the member the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor\u2019s question around the significance of having control of the project and responsibility, this is to line section 186 with the combined project provisions under Part 1 of the bill, where \u201Ca responsible Minister\u201D is defined as the Minister who is in control of a work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002243ed6e2b2c9206075f7275da1da8016e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ve just got one more question that we\u2019re waiting for the answer on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227dc46b9c1993f97ad7a65457a19f3878\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK\u003C/span\u003E: In response to the member Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s question around clarifying use of protected M\u0101ori land, \u201Cprotected M\u0101ori land\u201D is an umbrella term made up for a number of categories of land. Those categories are based on legal status or ownership arrangements. It includes M\u0101ori freehold land and land returned or purchased under Treaty settlements. It does not include w\u0101hi tapu or sites of significance, unless otherwise protected M\u0101ori land. The Public Works Act uses the definition from the Infrastructure Funding and Financing Act 2020.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022dfc89a5956c08ac49604c509b67bea3e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dfc89a5956c08ac49604c509b67bea3e\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:52)\u003C/span\u003E: A very short question\u2014that\u2019s really, really helpful; thank you, Minister. I was asking about the \u201Cnot protected M\u0101ori land\u201D part; what is \u201Cnot protected land\u201D? But I\u2019m happy, Madam Chair, if it\u2019s OK with you, if the Minister\u2019s getting some advice, the Minister can answer that, or if we\u2019re moving on to title and commencement, as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002283544cc98376164f3cc5a5a8c61ba8fa\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: OK, no, that\u2019s fine. Oh, here we go, the honourable Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u002268e2b88d873158c058020f2851fdfb51\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002268e2b88d873158c058020f2851fdfb51\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (19:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. It just means any other land.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022fd7d5f3472bccb4fe5e18450e5dc7764\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fd7d5f3472bccb4fe5e18450e5dc7764\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (19:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Just relating to the question on the controlling Minister and the question I asked before around\u2014they were projects that could have a public objective but could possibly have a private component\u2014does that mean that the Minister is still in control of what I put up as a likely scenario of a public works connected to a private project, and whether they are considered one or two projects, and whether the Minister would be in charge of both of those?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022825a7c98d770f5e61589cc7311278726\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022825a7c98d770f5e61589cc7311278726\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (19:53)\u003C/span\u003E: The combined works are only for public works, not for private works.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006774\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 46\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220fae599037f354a10a59b88be498b9d0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Schedule 1 set out on Amendment Paper 792 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006781\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006784\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 46\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 1 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 46\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 2 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 46\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 3 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 46\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 4 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 46\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 4 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bffa24dd54ebdfb56b5097b6daa52516\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Schedule 5 set out on Amendment Paper 792 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006812\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 46\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006817\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 5 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 46\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 5 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022efad426a8ebc0735601dc3472c6ef007\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00225c9aa262b286aeb6c447c5621480cd43\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006826\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022087008181706feb23ca16b4ed9fa67a3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to our final debate. Just before we do, I\u2019d just like to acknowledge the changes that are currently going on with bills passing before other bills. Actually, I can still see there\u2019s some frustration with the Opposition, but accepting that we couldn\u2019t take that much further because we didn\u2019t have a Minister here responsible\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f27d1a74d018aee959bf54c961040c9\u0022\u003EHon Damien O\u0027Connor\u003C/span\u003E: That frustration\u2019s been here for three years, Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d54fb0bc2f85fa46bb48c9d8d2236051\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I won\u2019t solve that for you tonight, but I just wanted to appreciate the fact that there are lots of moving parts going on and it just wasn\u2019t possible to answer all of the questions that you wanted the answers to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe final debate now is on clauses 1 to 3. It\u2019s the title, commencement, and principal Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u00229f628c3420395533a394022e64cd8142\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229f628c3420395533a394022e64cd8142\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (20:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278c9c37ca6d697d18771169aae54a4b5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, I meant to say that the question is that clause 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0fd5cbd45a29935c0e1ecabeba36d14\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Clause 1\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228b3fd0a2d90b0dee714b4c05a2bc99d6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: No\u2014no. That\u2019s all right. I\u2019m sorry. I just jumped ahead of myself. Go.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006834\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022102ad9ff7c957dc910de92a99516d91d\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair, for acknowledging all the moving parts here. It\u2019s tricky, and, of course, when we keep being in urgency and when we\u2019ve kept having extended sittings throughout the term and then missing select committees and stuff, it\u2019s not a good way to make laws.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006835\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAnyway, the commencement clause at clause 2: most of it comes into force on the 28\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E day after Royal assent, and assuming that we\u2019re going to do the third reading very shortly\u2014although I would advise the Government just to take a little pause and not do the third reading today so you can consider all the things that we\u2019ve been saying and bring it back next week if you need to. However, if you don\u2019t do what I suggest, which is what normally happens, then the 28\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E day\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb1065584660dbf9cf68f9516d6ed4c9\u0022\u003EHon Mark Patterson\u003C/span\u003E: Good reason.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e2371450888e886fd0869bc513a91ff4\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014after Royal assent is likely to be close to the election. I wonder if the Minister for Land Information wants to comment on whether or not that\u2019s a good thing to be happening, that right on the election, you\u2019ve got new legislation coming into effect. Then if the Minister could also comment on why subclauses 2(2) and 2(3) have later commencement dates.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThen I\u2019m interested, from the heckle that just happened from the member from New Zealand First who said that he didn\u2019t want to follow my suggestions for good reason\u2014well, it\u2019s interesting that that member can\u2019t even follow his own suggestions, because he tables amendments and then he untables them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229446248997a0d01cc22d20236328258d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I think that might be out of scope of this bill. I think that happened before.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006840\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f4d3411a2ebb84d02b1df2a87e0cf482\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Maybe, but the heckle still came. There we go. Anyway, I also want to talk about the title of this Act, which again, feels like d\u00E9j\u00E0 vu. I was just here speaking with you about the title of an Act that didn\u2019t have brackets. Again, we\u2019re bracketless, so we could, of course, put some words in those brackets. This Act is the Public Works Amendment Act 2025, but I want to suggest some words for those brackets after \u201CPublic Works\u201D and those are the \u201CPublic Works (Sneaking in Private Projects) Amendment Act 2025\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006841\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis also relates to other legislation that has been in urgency that we did not debate in committee stage. We know with the Planning Bill there is a whole Schedule 5 that we did not touch on that has to do with designations. It has in it a definition which is core infrastructure. We had some discussion earlier in the debate about how network utility operators\u2014there\u2019s going to be a change in this new legislation and that change could enable more projects to be able to get themselves into the Public Works Act scheme, if the Minister agrees. \u201CCore infrastructure\u201D is the term in Schedule 5 of the Planning Bill, which sounds a little bit like critical infrastructure, which is the term used in the Public Works Act, but critical infrastructure is defined project by project under the Schedule, whereas core infrastructure is defined by types of things, and it includes a pipeline of natural or manufactured gas, petroleum, biofuel, or geothermal energy. The transport of petroleum is now, it seems from the Minister\u2019s answers, something that the Public Works Act could apply to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006842\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENot only that, but inland ports are included. We also have something that is in the New Zealand School Property Agency in relation to any education property as defined in section 10 of the Education and Training Act 2020. I think\u2014and I haven\u2019t double-checked that, but I have some recollection that private early childhood centres could be included in that. Excuse me if I\u2019m wrong on that. It\u2019s also anything else that\u2019s included by regulation. Airports are included as well. There is this widening in the Planning Bill and that will flow through to this legislation. That is why when we\u2019ve been in committee stage, we\u2019ve wanted the assurance that I am wrong, my concern is wrong, and it should not be called the \u201CPublic Works (Sneaking in Private Projects) Amendment Act\u201D, but I have not had that comfort, and for that reason we are now not voting for this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u002224b6537ccb915d20a2a1b01b830adfb5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006843\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002224b6537ccb915d20a2a1b01b830adfb5\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (20:06)\u003C/span\u003E: I just want to stand and support my colleague the Hon Rachel Brooking, who has again brought a wealth of legal knowledge through her phone, which is amazing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006844\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022194c5936d67681e4c02092c80898a11d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: And her mind.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006845\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b56b6964d67c8fff6779ff61944709f1\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: You don\u2019t need to go to a lawyer these days; just get a lawyer with a phone. There are many implications of this piece of legislation which we supported into the parliamentary process on the basis that it was a modernisation, and I guess we thought the title was appropriate, but I would have to say that it should perhaps have been the \u201CPublic and Private Works Amendment Bill\u201D, and, as I say, 2025; it has now moved on. It has been sitting around, and I\u2019m not sure whether the date of the bill will be changed or whether the Minister for Land Information\u2019s intending to do that. We\u2019ve had the fast-track process. We\u2019ve had a number of pieces of legislation rushed through this House, as my colleague said, that have changed the foci of many parts of this bill, in our view, and the possible implications of its roll-through.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006846\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAs my colleague said, on that basis, Labour cannot support the bill because we would rather have scrutinised the bill for longer and gone back. It\u2019s been passed through urgency, which is of concern. It has been to a select committee process\u2014we understand that\u2014but actually we\u2019ve exposed and asked some questions tonight. The Minister has, to be fair to him, answered them as best he can, but the implications across to the Resource Management Act and to fast track are more than we can analyse in the short time that we have here in the committee stages of the bill. For that reason, without radical change\u2014and we don\u2019t know whether that would be right either because we haven\u2019t done the proper consideration\u2014we can\u2019t support the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u0022274f6fddf6266c59942620b6c87ed0a2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006847\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022274f6fddf6266c59942620b6c87ed0a2\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (20:09)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just in regards to the Hon Rachel Brooking\u2019s question around commencement, 28 days is to provide for implementation, for example, with negotiations that are under way. Sections 23 and 41 are brought into force earlier because they relate to the emergency recovery process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006848\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006849\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006850\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006851\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 46\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006852\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006853\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006854\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat clause 2 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006855\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006857\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 46\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006858\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006859\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006860\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006861\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006862\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006863\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 46\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006864\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 30; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006865\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006866\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill to be reported with amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006867\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHouse resumed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006868\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002213867ea2160143bce798302a9ddc9e4e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, the committee has considered the Public Works Amendment Bill and reports it with amendment. I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the report be adopted\u003C/span\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006869\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006870\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006871\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216f069a9ff84807bf46a529a8ccf86b8\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: This bill is set down for third reading immediately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006872\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00228c48e2f8e188de1a29de3cf082a81244\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022 data-id=\u00223ee9f1a69b364f979340016df56e7378\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006873\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022beb91839dc784d58b7c846dc39ac3831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223ee9f1a69b364f979340016df56e7378\u0022\u003EHon MIKE BUTTERICK (Minister for Land Information) (20:12)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Public Works Amendment Bill be now read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E The Public Works Act is an essential tool for delivering the roads, schools, hospitals, electricity infrastructure, and other public works that communities rely on. This bill includes a package of amendments to streamline and update land acquisition processes in line with the delivery of modern infrastructure needs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006874\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAgain, I would like to thank the members of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee and all those who took part in the submissions process for their role in helping to refine the bill we see in the House today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006875\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAt this final stage, I\u2019ll briefly set out the principal reforms the House has been asked to enact. The bill makes targeted improvements for efficiency, effectiveness, and clarity. It retains appropriate protections for affected landowners and establishes a new process. It supports the restoration of public works damaged by severe weather and other emergencies. Importantly, this bill contains key protections for landowners\u2019 rights. It does not change the fundamental requirement that Public Works Act users must first try to acquire land by agreement through good-faith negotiations before any compulsory acquisition may occur.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006876\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt streamlines land acquisition processes. It better enables a joint approach to project delivery. One Public Works Act user will be able to acquire land for another when their projects are connected. The bill makes targeted improvements to objection proceedings in the Environment Court. It improves compensation for landowners, introducing an incentive payment as part of the standard process, and it increases the existing additional compensation payments for home loss and land loss.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006877\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill ensures that the Public Works Act is better able to support communities to recover from emergencies, as it creates an accelerated land acquisition process to restore public works damaged by weather and other emergency events. It also makes improvements for owners of M\u0101ori land. It introduces a requirement for consent from either the Ministry for M\u0101ori Development or the Minister for M\u0101ori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti before protected M\u0101ori land may be compulsorily acquired by the Crown.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006878\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn closing, I thank members across the House who have contributed to the scrutiny and improvement of this legislation. This bill provides a more modern, workable, and balanced framework for acquiring land for public works. It will help infrastructure providers to deliver the works New Zealand needs so we can build for the future. It improves readiness for emergency recovery and provides a clearer and fairer process for landowners. I commend the Public Works Amendment Bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006879\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225551fe821cdc7339b70eb001e32d54a1\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022655ea8ed60dcb5f508c712cabbd64034\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006880\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220b60f3de86f94cdcba16d6caa82b94e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022655ea8ed60dcb5f508c712cabbd64034\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Labour) (20:15)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. The devil is always in the detail, and I have to say that this is quite a technical bill, and it\u2019s looking to reform what has been a longstanding and reasonably effective, if not sometimes frustrating, piece of legislation, because it gives the Government the right to take land from the private land owner. We are very mindful of those rights, unlike the ACT Party, which seems to be quite happy to have this bill ride over them. We\u2019ve been cautious all the way through of making sure that any amendments to this bill don\u2019t go too far or indeed open the door to what we see as a  coalition Government agenda\u2014and they\u2019ve been at it for 2\u00BD years\u2014to move to privatise parts of the Public Service, and to open up opportunities for many of their mates, and sometimes that comes at the expense of the wider public.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006881\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo we supported the bill into Parliament and to the select committee on the basis that, of course, any piece of legislation can probably be modernised with the changing technology, and we\u2019ve been aware of things like Mt Messenger, where there have been major conflicts, I guess, over farmers\u2019 rights to hold on to their land when they have the Crown drive through and put in place a bit of core infrastructure that was necessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006882\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo these are major dilemmas and major points of conflict. Any piece of legislation has to find the right balance, and not having been on the select committee but having read the report back, the commentary on the bill, I see that there were changes made that the select committee judged were necessary to bring a fairer balance. That is, that the bill as introduced was pretty gung-ho. It was really determined, or the intent of it was to drive through efficient taking of land from private land owners, and the committee said no and that we had to put in place a few changes and a few protections and slow some of the systems down. We had to make sure that dispute resolution and compensation payments, which were part of the original bill, would be rolled through with good intent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006883\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen the bill came back into the House\u2014and I acknowledge the Minister; he\u2019s done as good a job as he can. I also acknowledge Chris Penk, who was the first Minister in charge of the bill, who brought the bill in with good intent. But this is a coalition Government with a number of different kinds of plays. The ACT Party wants to privatise everything, the New Zealand First Party just wants to privatise some things, and, in the middle, National doesn\u2019t know what it wants to do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006884\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut it\u2019s all done under this kind of so-called drive to efficiency. We\u2019ve had things like Cyclone Gabrielle, where there\u2019s been a requirement to take land for the realignment of a bridge or road or whatever, and so the emergency recovery provisions in here were sensible proposals. We\u2019ve had electrification of our economy, so the pressure on the Transpower network is growing, and so the idea of actually facilitating their ability to put more pylons in the ground is probably sensible as well. However, we\u2019ve also had Invest New Zealand going out around the world\u2014and New Zealand First has supported this\u2014and knocking on the doors of trillionaires to bring money into the country and to sell off our assets, particularly infrastructure assets.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006885\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s what the objective of Invest New Zealand is. New Zealand First has supported it, ACT is ecstatic about it, and National is quite happy with it. We\u2019re not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006886\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOur concern as we went through is that this bill, which is public-good legislation, opened the door to private benefit. We\u2019re not saying that private benefit is not part of our economy and shouldn\u2019t go ahead, but we shouldn\u2019t have legislation that overrides other people\u2019s property rights just so some private people can get all the benefit. We\u2019ve seen many, many proposals around the country\u2014fast-track proposals, in fact. The fast-track proposals have been supported and put forward by people who have been happy to actually support the Government of the day\u2014or the three parties in Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006887\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo what has made the Labour Opposition uneasy about this is the level of political donations that have come into political parties in Government, many of them linked to fast-track proposals. We believe that that kind of pressure and influence is dangerous.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen you have a core piece of legislation like this\u2014it\u2019s bad enough to have fast track, that kind of pushes aside the environmental obligations. But you know, we had a fast track, with environmental obligations, to try and facilitate housing. So we understand the objective. But when you take away some of the safeguards and the handrails and you just drive it through, and then you pass a piece of public works legislation, then it\u2019s all set up for people to railroad through what could be huge private opportunity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo we\u2019ve been a bit wary of it. As I say, we\u2019re not trying to say we can\u2019t improve the process and ensure that fair compensation goes to people who will have to give up their land\u2014and sometimes with huge emotion attached to that. We are saying that we need to develop better infrastructure across our country, and we have to do it in a collaborative way, and in a way that is actually non-partisan\u2014that is that we have to agree across the House what infrastructure is needed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006890\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u201CRoads of National Party Significance\u201D are not always needed. Road maintenance across the country is needed. Renewable electricity generation is needed, and some of those projects are sensible. But what concerns me is the judgment on which one should go into fast track\u2014the judgment of that made by parties and Ministers who are the beneficiaries of political funding and donors. And you just say, \u201CJoin the dots\u2014follow the money.\u201D [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] Well, I\u2019m sorry\u2014ask the public out there. They are concerned, and I\u2019ve been around here for a while: I am disturbed and concerned about democracy in our country. So this piece of legislation, which, in normal times, would be supported by the Opposition because it\u2019s helping infrastructure move ahead, our question is: for who? Because it\u2019s not all for the public.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006891\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETake a scenario of a large\u2014let\u2019s call it Winton\u2014property development somewhere in the country. It could be Queenstown; it could be up in Auckland. They go and build a few thousand houses, or propose to, but we\u2019ve got to get a road to it and we\u2019ve got to get some drainage to and from it and some other infrastructure. So, yes, that is public infrastructure, but it\u2019s actually done for a private purpose, done by the public\u2014that is, by the council.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006892\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo we\u2019re concerned that that cute alignment is not the intent of the Labour Party when we supported this bill into Parliament. Time has moved and so has some of the fast-track applications, so has the ongoing increased donor generosity to the ACT, National, and New Zealand First parties. And so I\u2019m having to say that the alignment is something that we are concerned about. We are talking about millions and millions of dollars. We should not, in this Parliament, be here for private purpose; we should be here for public purpose.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis piece of legislation says, \u201CPublic Works Amendment Bill\u201D, and that\u2019s good. But what we\u2019ve discovered is that the opportunity for private investors and infrastructure promotors to piggyback on that, in our view, is too great. I think that will be the reality.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006894\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe members over there look a bit uneasy. They should\u2014they should look uneasy, because look at the political donations and look at the fast-track applications. We in Labour are not prepared to support this piece of legislation that is likely to put in place core infrastructure for those projects. That\u2019s why we oppose this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022 data-id=\u00228974e85796902f48ff037f7cf621406d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006895\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228974e85796902f48ff037f7cf621406d\u0022\u003EHon JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green\u2014Rongotai) (20:25)\u003C/span\u003E: T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Madam Speaker. T\u0113n\u0101 koutou e te Whare. I\u2019ll start by saying that during the submissions on this bill, the Law Association of New Zealand said they were\u2014and I quote\u2014\u201Cconcerned that the bill goes well beyond procedural streamlining and introduces substantive changes that significantly affect the exercise, oversight, and accountability of compulsory acquisition powers.\u201D My guess is that the ACT Party didn\u2019t look too closely at this bill because I think it would really be concerning to their usual stated values around respecting the rights of landowners.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006896\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s a couple of things. Firstly, I\u2019m just going to talk about and give a shout-out to Tony and Debbie Pascoe who, through 20 legal battles, fought to not have a highway go through their land. Tony was born on that land in North Taranaki. I went and visited him with Celia Wade-Brown and he showed us the land and we looked closely at the proposal and everything about the Mt Messenger bypass project smells fishy\u2014like everything about it. And that carried on under successive governments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006897\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut what we\u2019ll find is that this project was totally not the right project. And this landowner\u2014the Crown has tried to acquire the land and failed. They don\u2019t have money. They don\u2019t have professional lawyers. They had volunteers and wh\u0101nau and self-taught people just showing up and helping them because of the passion they had to retain the land he had been born on and his absolutely astute recognition that it\u2019s not a good place to put a highway. It\u2019s actually an absolutely ridiculous place to put a highway.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006898\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI invite every member of the Government parties to go visit Tony Pascoe and look at what\u2019s happening with this Mt Messenger bypass project. It\u2019s absolutely disgraceful. There is a tiny percentage of vehicles using that road every day. There could have been a much more moderate proposal that didn\u2019t take new land.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006899\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe only people who benefited from this are the contractors who were working on the project, who deliberately pushed the most expensive, complicated project possible. The Public Works Act, the way it was drafted, actually did enable people to stand up to the power of the State that was trying to do something ridiculous, which I mean, frankly, the project is going to cost over a billion dollars by the end of it\u2014and it\u2019s only 6 kilometres.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006900\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt should be an embarrassment to anyone in the National Party or the ACT Party that they\u2019re supporting that project, that they\u2019re using public money to pay for an outrageously expensive, unnecessary project that is going to struggle, it\u2019s going to suffer from slips, and, on top of it, they tried, but they failed, to take the land from Tony and Debbie Pascoe.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006901\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo through 20 legal battles, in the end, in a landmark Supreme Court case, the court found that Land Information New Zealand had not followed appropriate procedure. I guarantee you that is what this this bit of legislation is about. There\u2019s a couple of other streamlining things in it that are totally fine. But this bit of legislation is going to make it possible potentially for the New Zealand Transport Agency to go back and take the land, which is really horrific, from my point of view.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006902\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd, actually, I\u2019m entirely certain that ACT Party Minister Nicole McKee went and visited these people when she was in Opposition and claimed that she was going to do something to help them. Well, she\u2019s a Minister in Cabinet that\u2019s approving this legislation that is going to make it easier for the Crown to take the land.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006903\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI can\u2019t imagine what they went through. The proposed highway is going to cut their family farm in half, so it impacts 155 hectares of their land. In the Supreme Court battle\u2014a landmark decision\u2014the Supreme Court ruled that Land Information New Zealand and its officials had failed to follow proper statutory processes by outsourcing good-faith land negotiations to external private consultants rather than conducting them directly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006904\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Crown has withdrawn its specific notice of intention to take land, but the Government has maintained its objective to ultimately secure the land to finish the highway project that never should have been. And Waka Kotahi\u2014totally complicit in a very bad process. I\u2019m sure that the Mount Messenger bypass project is one of many that have been subject to external audit reviews because of irregular budget control, because contractors were totally taking the proverbial\u2014don\u2019t want to get in trouble with Madam Speaker here. I\u2019m trying to think of a\u2014I\u2019m just struggling to think of\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006905\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022054d5d79d1d3c588475a5fabf8349c40\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Taking the mickey.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006906\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221335014d2e5ae6e7976bea6e7b6b19d2\u0022\u003EHon JULIE ANNE GENTER\u003C/span\u003E: Taking the mickey\u2014thank you, Arena. Taking the mickey. So we\u2019re really concerned.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006907\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENot only that, there\u2019s another issue with this, which is that, although many submitters supported the idea of having an incentive payment where the Crown would have to pay\u2014or the local authority would pay\u2014up to 10 percent extra to acquire the land quickly, the reality is that this is increasing the financial burden on councils at a time when this coalition Government is taking away the ability to raise revenue. Local authorities could be out by quite considerable amounts of money and, with the rates cap legislation that\u2019s been put forward by this Government, it\u2019s going to be more difficult for them. Because it will make projects more expensive, the land acquisition will be more expensive.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006908\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, maybe that would be OK. We understand the idea of having these incentive payments. The main issue there is (1) the rates cap, and (2) the fact that central government isn\u2019t just devolving more funding to local authorities, which it really should be. I completely agree with my colleague the Hon Damien O\u2019Connor in his speech. I welcome the Labour Party\u2019s vote against the bill. I think that\u2019s a wise change. I hope that we are, in short order, after this horrific term, which has actually been a total assault on the whole idea of democracy, where we\u2019re here constantly month after month\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006909\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227256eabaaf90b42132e64bdd4833a7ea\u0022\u003EAndy Foster\u003C/span\u003E: What do you think the last Labour Government did?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022496aefad6c69a3689ffc88e7ecb96d0c\u0022\u003EHon JULIE ANNE GENTER\u003C/span\u003E: No, actually, Andy Foster, go look at the record of how much urgency was used in this term versus last.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006911\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273a8e32952297957d857dc89b7376150\u0022\u003EAndy Foster\u003C/span\u003E: Look at the record of the last Labour Government. It was a shocker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006912\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022982ff70ebf167991e13e31936faabd95\u0022\u003EHon JULIE ANNE GENTER\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I have. There is no term in Parliament\u2014oh yeah, well, there was also a pandemic with lockdowns. You have no idea what you\u2019re talking about, Andy Foster. No\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006913\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278a837d2a6e93ec1b0ceb12dc675c61e\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: This is not a debate across the Chamber. You are addressing the Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006914\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227631cd7fa95d97a8e0628013d2314bee\u0022\u003EHon JULIE ANNE GENTER\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, this term of Parliament has seen more use of urgency than any previous Parliament. There\u2019s not been a single actual disaster that merited the use of urgency. There hasn\u2019t been a Christchurch earthquake. There hasn\u2019t been a pandemic with lockdowns. The Government parties may tell themselves the story that the previous Government abused urgency and it is not\u2014it pales in comparison.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere was actually a reason for using urgency under the last Government. Under this Government, the reason is that the people in power believe that they can ram their agenda through with less scrutiny and they actually do no longer respect democracy. Any member over there who believes that their Government is upholding the normal rule of law and democratic principles needs only to consider the amount of submissions that have been presented to select committees. I know there\u2019s a lot of first-term MPs over there. I think they should wake up to the fact that they are complicit in a Government that has been the least democratic since Robert Muldoon. They should be ashamed of themselves. They say it all the time\u2014they say it all the time\u2014that they care about localism. What a joke\u2014what a joke. This is the exact opposite.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006916\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey supposedly care about property rights, and, yet, here they are, supporting a change to the Public Works Amendment Bill that\u2019s all about making it easier to take land from people for inappropriate projects so that the court, the Environment Court, doesn\u2019t have to consider whether sufficient alternatives have been considered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006917\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s who these people are. They\u2019re little Trump-adjacent, fascist-adjacent, ignorant people who believe that they\u2019re doing stuff for the best interests. Maybe they really believe they\u2019re doing stuff for the best interests of New Zealand, but I\u2019ve been here 15\u00A0years and I can tell them they\u2019re the worst Government I have ever seen. Not only are they perpetuating overseeing absolute destruction to the New Zealand economy while they claim to be good for the economy, they\u2019re all about taking away power from ordinary people and giving it to those who have the most power already and overseas corporate interests, because that is the hierarchical society that they support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006918\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey are the new feudalists. We all need to bow down and worship to the landowners who already have the most, who are going to keep acquiring more. They\u2019ve changed the enrolment rules for totally cynical reasons. Talk about copying the American Republicans. We cannot wait to see the end of this pathetic, power-hungry, abusive Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022d2d26fa07286deedac083608424b3af1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006919\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d2d26fa07286deedac083608424b3af1\u0022\u003ETODD STEPHENSON (ACT) (20:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise to talk on the Public Works Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006920\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWow\u2014gosh, I don\u2019t really know where to start. I mean, tonight we\u2019ve been lectured by the Greens on democracy\u2014wow. I don\u2019t think they actually understand what democracy is. Then, we\u2019ve now got the Labour Party taking an interest in property rights. I\u2019m really pleased that the Labour Party is taking an interest in property rights. I\u2019d like Rachel Brooking to actually help out some of her other members so they can actually understand that regulatory takings is actually affecting a property right, but I\u2019ll let her worry about educating her other colleagues later.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006921\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELook, in ACT, we\u2019re about unlocking New Zealand\u2019s potential. From time to time, there is a need to use the Public Works Act to get projects going. My colleague Simon Court sat on the select committee, has been over this legislation, and is happy about how it actually manages to balance private property rights, the right to fair compensation, those being recognised against important public projects.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006922\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019re very pleased to be supporting this bill, which is, really, updating the Public Works Act, bringing it into the modern era, and making some very sensible changes. We will be commending it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022 data-id=\u002252550167701ed2cbe7bb9437057587a3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006923\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002252550167701ed2cbe7bb9437057587a3\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (20:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, thank you. As I said in the second reading, taking land by compulsion is a big deal, but this is about trying to make sure that we actually have a more efficient, more effective way of doing that, rather than the way which we\u2019ve had in the past. I\u2019m really disappointed to hear what I understand is Labour\u2019s about face on this particular piece of legislation. They haven\u2019t supported it through the select committee. The Hon Damien O\u2019Connor seemed to me to be really struggling to find this private benefit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006924\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf I can just illustrate one thing\u2014because I think public works have been clearly defined for a long time and understood for ages\u2014the big difference here is that we\u2019ve included Transpower, which is a public entity. If you think New Zealand First would ever support the privatisation of Transpower, hell would have frozen over before that would have happened.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf you look at the report back from the select committee, we did have quite a number of utility operators that said, \u201CWell, if Transpower, then why not us?\u201D\u2014why not the lines companies and so on\u2014but, if you look at this, we said \u201CEnabling Transpower to use some aspects of the PWA will meet its specific need to build and upgrade a large amount of electricity infrastructure. Network utility operators have a range of ownership models,\u201D\u2014range of ownership models, and some of them private, some of them are public\u2014\u201Cand we think that extending land acquisition powers to them would exceed the targeted focus of this reform. We do not recommend that the bill be amended to expand access to PWA powers by other network utility operators.\u201D We thought about that, we heard submissions, we thought about that and we said, \u201CNo, we won\u2019t do that.\u201D So I think you\u2019re making things up, Labour Party, on that particular matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006926\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe speech by J-A-G, the Hon Julie Anne Genter\u2014O-M-G is all I can say. That was a piece of fantasy about the last Labour Government in terms of anti-democratic behaviour. That was the ultimate anti-democratic behaviour. What they did and the lives they destroyed, and some of those are still\u2014people are still trying to put those lives back together again. Julie Anne Genter, we were there. We saw the impact of what\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006927\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d61110124b2f57989e3d3f7cd1436e6f\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Order! I\u2019ll turn your mikes off if you don\u2019t behave, please. Andy Foster, continue, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006928\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1189ecbb9eb8e815102bbc0710a9052\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006929\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba89a3a1a97cdcabdb258cdc79cffe52\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re addressing the Speaker. No one else in the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006930\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022abf528f7bb32472935a1a5871526fc10\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I just want to finish off by talking about the Mount Messenger project. That project could have been sorted out years ago, had the then Minister of lands made a decision to actually activate the Public Works Act and actually allow that project to go ahead in a much easier way. What they\u2019ve had to do is build amazing structures to actually get over the mountain and cable-car the construction material down into that area. The Minister of lands at the stage, who could have saved this country hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars, was the Hon Eugenie Sage. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022 data-id=\u002278afedfaa93f5bcc5bec360dd3b43da2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006931\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002278afedfaa93f5bcc5bec360dd3b43da2\u0022\u003EH\u016AHANA LYNDON (Green) (20:40)\u003C/span\u003E: T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Madam Speaker. It\u2019s my pleasure to stand in solidarity as the Opposition and oppose this legislation, opposing it and knowing that our communities have very real impact in the North. We have impacts in whenua M\u0101ori, and we have impact in general title lands. Now, we\u2019ve tried to litigate, interrogate, and discuss this legislation, and yet we never got a chance to fully dive into the detail. Yet, we\u2019re at this point now where we can see that no matter what arguments we have put up, it\u2019s going to be pushed through the House. That\u2019s the disappointment that we have on this side of the Whare, because what we know is that Public Works amendment legislation should not be fast-tracked. That\u2019s what this bill is doing; it\u2019s speeding up the process. Landowners should have the ability to come to the table with adequate support, technical and legal, to have a fair negotiation. That\u2019s not necessarily guaranteed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006932\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen we were here in the committee of the whole House, trying to discuss with the Minister in charge, I was getting passed around, saying, \u201COh, that\u2019s not my part. That\u2019s another Minister.\u201D\u2014te mea, te mea. That\u2019s the problem, Public Works covers so many different ministries. We\u2019ve got Land Information New Zealand; we\u2019ve got just Justice, for the M\u0101ori Land Court; we\u2019ve got M\u0101ori Development, for whenua M\u0101ori; we\u2019ve got the Treaty negotiations Minister; we\u2019ve got Crown-M\u0101ori negotiations; and we\u2019ve got the one Minister who has this big kete all bundled up in what is the Public Works Act. It\u2019s a wrecking ball of raupatu whenua once again. The fast-tracking actually undermines the ability for whenua landowners to sit at a table fairly and have a discussion/negotiation\u2014without carrots being dangled in front of them\u2014to discuss whether we can find a middle ground. If we don\u2019t find that middle ground, we\u2019re then forced into a process whereby you can\u2019t go to the Environment Court.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006933\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s what I heard really clearly from wh\u0101nau who are impacted right now by the four-lane highway coming into Te Tai Tokerau; it\u2019s that they\u2019ve been sitting there for about a decade now with that sitting over their land title. They can\u2019t leave. No one will purchase their house or whenua because of the designation on their title. That\u2019s a lot of landowners\u2014that\u2019s a lot of landowners. That\u2019s what we have in the North right now. We have 489 landowners left in limbo because of the awesome four-lane highway coming into Te Tai Tokerau. People are continuing to talk about it and ask for time with members of Parliament to express their deep concern. This isn\u2019t just general M\u0101ori landowners, this is just average community members. In talking with them\u2014and then they\u2019re bringing out their papers and they\u2019re showing me their letters\u2014they feel completely handicapped and undermined in being fairly addressed as the landowners who are impacted in a very material way. That\u2019s the issue. They don\u2019t have the skills, they don\u2019t have the technical ability, to enter into conversations fairly. Where is the justice and where is the fair process? Where is the resource for them to come into conversations with Crown officials and know that someone\u2019s got their back? It\u2019s not happening.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006934\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EM\u0101ori, we\u2019ve done this before. We have to acknowledge our aunties and our grannies who have come before, like Patricia Grace, who in 2014 came and she fought the Public Works for her whenua in Waikanae for the K\u0101piti Expressway. Patricia Grace had to go through the Environment Court and suffer for years trying to fight to retain their whenua. We\u2019ve tried, as the Green Party and members of this side of the House, to amend legislation. Catherine Delahunty, in 2018, tried a petition to work a new system of Public Works to protect whenua M\u0101ori; Te Ururoa Flavell tried it himself, too. I\u2019ve tried it in my member\u2019s bill, but still we are just mainstreamed; we are just pushed into a system. It\u2019s apparently meant to be a modernised system here, but we were told quite clearly by the Minister that it is still the same standard as it was in the previous Public Works Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo what\u2019s changed? What\u2019s changed, particularly, for the whenua M\u0101ori space? The M\u0101ori Land Court is still an instrument for alienation if we don\u2019t have our representation sorted, if we don\u2019t have the resource and adequate support into the M\u0101ori Land Court to help the M\u0101ori landowner and ensure that all the landowners who are going to be impacted have informed consent. When we oppose, we are undermined. That\u2019s the issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b618b847a57b4afb94b76eaea9e042a5\u0022 data-id=\u002207835cf05ac9b42662dde305d37642f7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006936\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b618b847a57b4afb94b76eaea9e042a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002207835cf05ac9b42662dde305d37642f7\u0022\u003EDr CARLOS CHEUNG (National\u2014Mt Roskill) (20:45)\u003C/span\u003E: After I listened to the Labour Party and Green Party contributions, now I understand why New Zealand ranks near the top of the OECD on infrastructure but ranks nearly at the bottom for delivery, efficiency, and value for money. They are the primary obstacle preventing our country from moving forward. All they want is to tax and punish hard-working Kiwis. On this side of the House, we are fixing the basics and building the future. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022ad448aedb595a44dca47c35c33db9da4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006937\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ad448aedb595a44dca47c35c33db9da4\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (20:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks for letting me speak about\u2014I can assure you that I don\u2019t want to punish the hard-working Kiwis; I want to do exactly the opposite. I want to make laws for the many, not the few. My worry here is that this law is for the few, for the mates of this Government, because that is just typical of their lawmaking approach.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006938\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, we came to this bill in good faith. You look at the Transport and Infrastructure Committee report, and it says: \u201CThe bill would amend the Public Works Act \u2026 The changes are [intended] to modernise [the PWA] by creating an improved and fairer land acquisition and compensation system. They are aimed at making it easier for the Crown and local authorities to undertake public infrastructure projects.\u201D That sounds great. We\u2019re all for that, totally, because that will do better for the many, not the few. However, we have had a lot of other legislation going through the House in urgency recently. Well, in fact\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006939\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002294015df099103de55043b30c78444491\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EWhat would that be?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006940\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022226481851468505689ebb4da83bd2886\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Well, there\u2019s too many to talk about. The whole term of this Government has had all-stages urgency, or urgency like this when you\u2019re going from one reading to another to another, or a huge amendment is dropped in the committee stage. That is not good lawmaking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006941\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the urgent pieces of legislation that we have looked at recently has been the Planning Bill. Now, we were in the committee stage of the Planning Bill and I was in the Chamber for 30 hours of debate on that bill, and the other related bill, the Natural Environment Bill. I might have escaped during some voting, but otherwise I was in the Chamber, and I do not believe that we debated, in the committee stage, Schedule 5 at all. Government members voted to close the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006942\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, that is important, because we\u2019ve had an Amendment Paper here today that will try to mirror the changes in that Planning Bill with this Public Works Amendment Bill. That can sound innocuous on one level; the Resource Management Act and the Public Works Act have a long, long relationship, and it\u2019s been well understood. There haven\u2019t been concerns that somehow, via things being designated in the Resource Management Act, that was somehow leading to works that weren\u2019t public works being able to use the provisions of the Public Works Act to take land. That is important, and we thought that this would be a continuation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, one of the answers in the committee stage from the Minister was that there is a widening in the Planning Bill from the Resource Management Act, and that means that there is a potential for a wider range of projects that may not be being presented by public authorities, to then get into this Public Works Act process. That\u2019s important for a number of reasons. We\u2019ve discussed in the other readings how taking somebody\u2019s land is a big deal. I was surprised that the ACT Party was so enthusiastic about this bill when it seems to be making it a bit easier to do some of that taking of an individual\u2019s private property rights, but then I asked this question in the committee of the whole House stage, and it appears that these \u201Cother ventures\u201D are going to be able to take via the Public Works Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006944\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt appears to me, my analysis of the ACT position is that, whilst they talk a lot about private property rights, if some of their big mates are going to have the ability to maybe do a private-public partnership or maybe just do a private initiative themselves, that they\u2019re more for those big guys being able to take the little guys\u2019 land than they are about their so-called principle of defending private property rights. That\u2019s interesting\u2014interesting indeed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006945\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat goes back to the National speaker before me, Dr Carlos Cheung, saying something about \u201Chard-working Kiwis\u201D. That is exactly who I am interested in. That is exactly who the Labour Party is interested in. It is certainly not what the parties over there are interested in.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006946\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, let me tell you about the kinds of projects that might be able to come in via the amendments\u2014via the Planning Bill that is not yet enacted, but somehow, in this bill, there\u2019s going to be some Orders in Council that change both bills somehow. I don\u2019t understand the language of it. It doesn\u2019t seem to work very well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006947\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Planning Bill talks about core infrastructure. I mentioned some of this in one of my contributions in the committee of the whole House stage\u2014but it includes the distribution of petroleum, and it includes some other things that we would think of as public infrastructure. What is interesting, then, is that the Minister may approve core infrastructure operator is designating authority and this is for a particular project and it\u2019s got to be done through regulations and there is some sort of public interest test, but that doesn\u2019t mean that it has to be a public project. It says a project is not precluded from having a significant public benefit just because the operator charges a fee for access or obtains a commercial benefit from it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006948\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019re clearly talking about commercial benefits to private providers here, and then the different things that can be considered as other infrastructure that can become core infrastructure and include facilities used to process manufactured gas. That makes me think of what this Government\u2019s trying to do for a few of its mates. That is an LNG terminal. That was probably a facility used to process manufactured gas, so are we going to see this Government used the Public Works Act to take land to do an LNG facility that they are going to make consumers pay for? Those little guys that I was just told they care about, but we know they do not\u2014we are caring about the hardworking Kiwis.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006949\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, there\u2019s some others. There\u2019s aerodromes, there\u2019s navigation installations, there\u2019s all sorts of other things in this list, and these are things\u2014many of them I\u2019m sure are benign or they\u2019re good things to have. But they are not the sort of thing that we would imagine that in New Zealand\u2019s political situation or political history\u2014they are not the type of activity where you can say, \u201CThis justifies overriding your private property rights. This justifies the State coming in and saying we\u2019re going to take your house. Sorry about that, but we\u2019re going to take it.\u201D That power, I think it\u2019s an important power that the State has\u2014that the Crown has\u2014but it should only be used when it really, really needs to be used, one, and for things that are public things and that are for the public benefit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006950\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe were given no comfort by the Minister in the committee of the whole House stage that these amendments to another piece of legislation, and I acknowledge that the Minister is not the Minister for that other piece of legislation, but his amendment has incorporated those changes that are coming in another piece of legislation, and that seems to have the ability that if Ministers want it to apply, then that could apply to our Public Works Act. That is a significant change. It is a surprising change, because it\u2019s not what\u2019s in the tin.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006951\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou know, what was on the tin was the Transpower changes. Yes, that seems like a sensible change. We agree that Transpower meets those criteria that I was just talking about. We saw that the compensation criteria have been updated. That\u2019s a good thing. Nobody is complaining about that. What we are complaining about is this sneaky ability for this Government to do things for its mates, to do things for the few and not the many.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022 data-id=\u00226b582c2dd902d2e6572fa748622485d4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006952\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226b582c2dd902d2e6572fa748622485d4\u0022\u003EDAN BIDOIS (National\u2014Northcote) (20:56)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a pleasure to be at the third reading of this bill, which has been through a full select committee process and is based on a previous law around critical infrastructure. It\u2019s pretty much a carbon copy, albeit a minor change through the committee of the whole House, but it\u2019s great to be here. It modernises how we acquire land. The incentive-based payments is going to go down well\u2014very well\u2014with our communities. I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u002293e019b66835e26a087e384af894396b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006953\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002293e019b66835e26a087e384af894396b\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (20:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker, for the opportunity to take a call on this, the third reading of the Public Works Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006954\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn 26 August 2025, Chris Meehan, the CEO of Winton Land company gave an update to his investors via a call. He welcomed the investors to his meeting and explained the strong earnings for the company. He then went on to say that the Mill Road upgrade was fully funded by Government and described this as a great thing for us. The best thing about the investors meeting was the news that the Government had taken on the full cost of the Mill Road upgrade and had consented it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006955\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWinton now has fast-track approval for 3,854 homes in an area which is flood-prone and will result in flooding in the Manurewa electorate that I represent. A 47,000 square metre industrial and business park, a 7.7 hectare town centre, and other commercial developments have been approved in that. The approval specifically includes 19.4 hectares for the Mill Road stage 2 upgrade, paid entirely by Government and bought from Winton\u2019s investors with public money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006956\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPublic works should be for the public benefit. This is a public works acquisition which the Government was forced to do by legislation which all in this House opposed except the coalition parties who have taken donations from developers, including Winton Land. This is an example of developers directly benefiting not only from planning law changes but from money paid by Government for land which has been publicly acquired.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006957\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENot only that, South Auckland landowners and homeowners have had to give up their homes for the expansion of Mill Road. They did not want to, they did not ask to sell their properties, but they were forced to by the Public Works Act taking laws in this amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006958\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is unfair, it is unjust, it is a misuse of the legislative process, and it is something that the National Party will have to wear in the electorates. Because all around the country, not only homeowners are affected by this, where the National Party will take your home when you do not want to sell with new powers\u2014but they will also benefit developers who are not the little guy. They\u2019re not the mums and dads who are buying houses to make six or seven town houses. They are not even the middle-sized developers who are looking to make 10 or 20 homes in their communities. They are the big end of town where Steven Joyce sits on the board and collects millions of dollars in payments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is an example of a Government that is not afraid to use the legislative process for gain for some and not for others. The Public Works Act should be something which is supported by all in this House because it is one of the most sensitive pieces of legislation we have. Governments should be very careful about taxation and they should be very careful about public works takings. We should be able to do both of those things for the public good. We need hospitals, we need roads, we need schools, we need libraries. That is what those powers are for.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006960\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Public Works Act should be about enabling communities to live together well, because only Government can provide things like roads and bridges for them. Ordinary developers and consumers together cannot group up to be able to offer those things to the communities and to the generations that come after them. Only Government should have the power to be able to acquire the land and to build those things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006961\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut if we don\u2019t have provisions in law which everyone respects and which everyone can get behind, where there will be some losers and some winners in any of these public decisions, then what are we? What kind of country won\u2019t provide the basics of life for communities on a fair basis? What kind of country will give private developers tens of millions of dollars overnight when they pass legislation which is deeply opposed by the community? What kind of Government will put up with the use of the legislative process which punishes ordinary homeowners by taking away their homes for the benefit of one of New Zealand\u2019s most profitable and largest development corporations? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006962\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is wrong. That is why we oppose this bill at this last third reading. Let it be known: New Zealanders can vote in a Government that will stick up for them this November. They must vote out National. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022 data-id=\u002289d9142895c6defae8bd90cb165710f5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006963\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002289d9142895c6defae8bd90cb165710f5\u0022\u003ESAM UFFINDELL (National\u2014Tauranga) (21:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It\u2019s good to be able to rise and speak on the Public Works Amendment Bill. It is going to make the process of acquiring land much more efficient where we have challenges. It\u2019s also going to make it fairer with better compensation. This is a positive outcome for New Zealand. I\u2019m disappointed that the Labour Party and the Greens, in particular, are in a completely different space on it, but our Government wants progress. We want to make this a better country, and we need to get things built. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u002270289c7c46d9b0db57359eef0bd687f8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006964\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002270289c7c46d9b0db57359eef0bd687f8\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (21:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. It\u2019s been a very interesting process, this piece of legislation going through. I stood up in the last reading and Labour was supporting this piece of legislation. We went through a committee stage where there was some inquiry under urgency that significantly unsettled the Labour Party. I want to go through that situation and how we got there, because it comes down, fundamentally, to a values issue. As Damien O\u2019Connor stated, the devil turned out to be in the detail on this one. We had to unbury that kind of detail.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006965\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe first thing is the Labour Party was supporting this bill because we would agree with the purpose of modernising this bill and increasing compensation to people and incentive schemes. That involved negotiation in good faith. All those are good things. Nobody is going to mess with that. Those things are good things to have, and the Labour Party supported the idea of a Public Works Act where appropriate for public purpose, because we believe in the common value of things to people and the common ownership of many things to people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006966\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou would have heard that I had a rather interesting dialogue in the last reading on this with one of the ACT members about my worry that the ACT Party, which is supposed to be all about private property rights, was, in this situation, very enthusiastically supporting this piece of legislation. I talked about how there was another piece of legislation, which was the Regulatory Standards Bill, where in fact there was a real attempt to\u2014in fact, there have actually been a few different pieces of legislation go through where there has been a consistent attempt to suggest that people have property rights they\u2019ve never had before and then compensate them if the public messes with these new rights they had. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006967\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are a lot of things I was suspicious about when I saw the support of this piece of legislation. My colleagues did a valiant inquiry into what was going on here. We\u2019re really unsettled and New Zealanders should be too, and consequently, we are changing our vote tonight. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006968\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, we are changing it because of the basic value that is instilled in the Public Works Act, or it has been until now. That is that it is the public benefit that is the reason why we will override people\u2019s private rights, and it is in very limited circumstances. What was apparent, actually, when we looked\u2014I think Julie Anne Genter talked about the Law Society\u2019s submission. They were raising a warning bell. They were saying that it does more than that\u2014it\u2019s expansive in a way that you don\u2019t understand. It is not just a modernisation in that way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006969\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen what we had is an examination of the Minister for Land Information, and the Minister has not\u2014I think it was described as \u201Cgiven us comfort\u201D over the things that we were concerned about. There is a really simple example that we will have heard repeated tonight several times, which is the example of a big developer like Winton who are rich-list people. They\u2019re not people in the mum and dad investor category. If those big developers are doing a development which is going to bring in a lot of money to them\u2014it\u2019s going to make a lot of money\u2014they are going to be able to get a road built by the public authorities and it\u2019s going to actually exponentially increase their profit. They will make big money if they are allowed through that door.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006970\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we are going to have from now on in this piece of law is the right of the Minister to make a decision about that and suggest that it should come in here and people who are our ordinary owners of property are going to have their property right overridden because it benefits the Winton owner. If it benefits the Winton business, they will have to give up their land. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006971\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, that\u2019s a really interesting scenario and New Zealanders will have to make up their minds whether they agree with that. But that\u2019s a big difference. They will make huge amounts of money out of the use of this law and it wasn\u2019t possible before. Who is protecting property rights in this House? Who is protecting private property rights of ordinary New Zealanders? Actually, it\u2019s the Labour Party and the Green Party tonight. That is who is protecting property rights for private people. Do you know why it is that that is going on? That is happening because we know what it\u2019s like to have built a connection to land and to just have a limited amount. We know that it\u2019s important to people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006972\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I want to take a minute to talk about the discussion that came from the Greens, the passionate discussion that came from the Greens about M\u0101ori land. I want to remind the House that this is also an issue that needs to be put into the balance because what was already in play from the Green Party early on and the reason they were opposing it was that issue over M\u0101ori land and the connection to land. What I talked about in my last speech was the fact that we had gone from 100 percent M\u0101ori-owned land in this country in 1840 to, at the present time, 5.5 percent at best of the land in this country. There is trauma and economic disadvantage\u2014huge economic disadvantage\u2014in what was confiscation after confiscation after confiscation. The State took the private land and the consequence of that is huge amounts of poverty, huge amounts of trauma. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006973\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is not a good thing to take people\u2019s land. It doesn\u2019t work. There are consequences. It is a very complementary argument. The argument that has come forth in the committee stage is a new one, but it is complementary. It is about taking seriously the property of people in New Zealand\u2014taking it seriously, not giving it to your mates, not giving it to people who are already on the rich list, not using the mechanisms we have here to actually feather the nests of people who don\u2019t need their nests feathered. I\u2019m sure that is based on a very old-fashioned trickle-down theory that we\u2019ll all somehow be much better off if Mr Winton has a superyacht, and we won\u2019t. We won\u2019t be better off if we do that. We\u2019ll be better off if we are respectful of people\u2019s private property and the limited resource they have and we work with them, and sometimes we will be better off when we balance that with the needs of our community, because we are our community.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006974\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe are a community of people with limited resources, and they are our resources. We have seen far too much legislation come through this House which has stripped that resource from ordinary people and sent it to the super-rich. That\u2019s what we have done this term. That\u2019s what the Government has done. It has sent huge amounts of our hard-earned property, our hard-earned capital, off to people who already have way too much already. It is time to turn that around in this country. It is absolutely a critical time for New Zealanders to look at something like this, take it seriously, know what has been uncovered tonight, and to change things in the next few weeks when they have a chance to vote. It\u2019s not too late, but I am very fearful of another three years of this. Because once you start pulling apart all the blocks\u2014and this is not the only law we\u2019ve seen this in.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006975\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223adb0d027ff9f5d4677cb0a13bf859ab\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, I won\u2019t be doing that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006976\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee2383c72040ebdc21bfa6d86a677e00\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, sir. Once the process has started of dismantling all the things that protect the ordinary people of this country and look after them, once that process has been dismantled for some pie-in-the-sky trickle-down theory where maybe one day they\u2019ll get to be rich too, and yet they\u2019re not\u2014once that\u2019s dismantled, it\u2019s really hard to put back together. We need to make sure that we change this Government now. We can\u2019t afford to wait any longer. We need to go back to first principles, which is to make sure people have enough to eat, they\u2019re not going to food banks, and they have decent jobs. Thank you. I do not commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022 data-id=\u0022f09f82bc6e70b558f77ed56ad2dd7536\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006977\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f09f82bc6e70b558f77ed56ad2dd7536\u0022\u003EDr VANESSA WEENINK (National\u2014Banks Peninsula) (21:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. This bill, believe it or not, is actually about building roads, building the transmission lines, and being able to compensate very adequately, if they choose to do so, at an early stage the landowners on which the imposition is being put. So let\u2019s get real about what this actually is, and just understand that this is another way that National is fixing the basics and building the future. I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022 data-id=\u00220cb92b4c494ea867022527ac4286b718\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006978\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220cb92b4c494ea867022527ac4286b718\u0022\u003ESUZE REDMAYNE (National\u2014Rangit\u012Bkei) (21:12)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006979\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff2ec7de103e3a42a582f7aff9c3bf53\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006980\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d90edd4e05aa2015e0f9bbf8d7c31ea2\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ve used up all our slots, by quite some distance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006981\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226073ba7a65f1f75d61261d3aedb7ccb4\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: The calls are entirely at your discretion, Mr Speaker. I thought perhaps you might want to give me one, seeing as the National Party didn\u2019t really use their time and I have something to say.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006982\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228b0fbeeaf54535c6c3b7607e12bf058b\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Is that a point of order or are you seeking leave?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006983\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d941b182d3ccf9d0dd9036bb29f59cc1\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: No, I\u2019m asking for you to exercise your discretion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f80b54efc1f8c03d059b0769923293ff\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, I\u2019m not going to step outside Standing Orders. Are you seeking leave?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006985\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228fc35d7e2b5d32c6e6ef04e983a88ab7\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. I seek leave to make a call on this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006986\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253331cce8f21d7d30264dd5787121795\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006987\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212374768c90d478a455032bca0dd69b6\u0022\u003EHon Members: \u003C/span\u003EYes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006988\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Public Works Amendment Bill be now read a third time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006989\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006990\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006991\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006992\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006993\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006995\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225deceaf696f90f1b24d1189f2655f315\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Pae Ora (Healthy Futures) (3 Day Postnatal Stay) Amendment Bill and the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006996\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00227d043bc51df421a7b4746ebe65142983\u0022\u003EPae Ora (Healthy Futures) (3 Day Postnatal Stay) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006997\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d034cd3bba069a1f29b231f83a679f91\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006998\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d0e3e8f2e254b4cfef9fa81da1f506f5\u0022\u003EClause 1 Title\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0006999\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224929c80d9c9e398a1c9f8f4889a0186\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the House is in committee on the Pae Ora (Healthy Futures) (3 Day Postnatal Stay) Amendment Bill and the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill. Members, we come first to the Pae Ora (Healthy Futures) (3 Day Postnatal Stay) Amendment Bill. Clause 1 is the debate on the title. The question is that clause 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u00225cb30bae74ec778accfd743460ebdfc3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225cb30bae74ec778accfd743460ebdfc3\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health) (21:15)\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to have all clauses heard as one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229aedb9129360e19bbddc9f0db4e0af31\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ffdbaa2add776e1c72d3ac63504a9cde\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: I just thought it might be useful to open this discussion to put some context around the background of the bill and what\u2019s occurred here. As you know, this bill was a member\u2019s bill in the name of Catherine Wedd MP, and the Government adopted that bill. As a result of the Government adopting that bill, there is a significant Amendment Paper 647, which is relatively standard for a bill that has gone from a member\u2019s bill to a Government bill. So a lot of the components that we\u2019ll be talking about will also be addressed through the Amendment Paper, just for the committee\u2019s information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022 data-id=\u0022954a3ce6f233ad5b3367299a11a78fe4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022954a3ce6f233ad5b3367299a11a78fe4\u0022\u003EHon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) (21:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. It\u2019s a pleasure to have this bill back. Of course, we\u2019re seeing this bill now after the Budget, which included some provisions for the implementation of this bill and, also, after Budget documents have been released. So I guess the interesting thing about this bill is that it\u2019s creating a new entitlement for women who have delivered babies to have a three-day stay. I have to say, most of the debate that we have previously had about this bill relates to the issue of whether or not the provisions in it can actually be implemented. The main issue here is the real challenges with resourcing that exist in maternity wards across the country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Government sought to address that with some funding for increased beds in the Budget, but since then we\u2019ve seen Treasury documents released that show considerable concern from officials about whether or not this actually can be achieved. For that reason, I think my question to the Minister is: what confidence does she have that this three-day stay can be delivered for women in the time line that the Government\u2019s set out for implementation? What advice has she had on the feasibility of this implementation pathway? What steps need to be gone through to achieve the number of beds needed to realise this? Where will the places in the country where this can be achieved quickly be? Where are there places where it will take some time to achieve this new entitlement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve discussed this bill many times by the time it reached committee stage, so it\u2019s no surprise that everyone is in support of it, but the issue really is about what work the Government has done, while this has been part of the Government programme for some time now, to make sure that it can be achieved. It would be very troubling if some of the concerns that the Treasury noted in its advice to the Government before the Budget were still held and, therefore, we\u2019d like to know\u2014especially with there being an important election coming up shortly\u2014that everything is tickety-boo with the implementation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022 data-id=\u0022f6028474c63569a3595267dee7c0f8f5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f6028474c63569a3595267dee7c0f8f5\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour\u2014Dunedin) (21:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I believe we\u2019re on clause 1, which is the title\u2014looking at you, Mr Chair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c62fd8d95e312507369b64ce0049702\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022649c5073f44ffa36fcef0304fb03c3e6\u0022\u003EHon RACHEL BROOKING\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. Just given my colleague the Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u2019s comment there about the Budget and the beds, my question related to that\u2014and I won\u2019t repeat what she said\u2014is just if the three days should still be in the title. That links to the questions that she was making, so that\u2019s my question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022 data-id=\u002240fe3c69f2c6208b6dbba684e9fdc095\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002240fe3c69f2c6208b6dbba684e9fdc095\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY (Labour\u2014Taieri) (21:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019d just like to thank the Associate Minister of Health for drawing our attention to Amendment Paper\u00A0647. Although we have been in this House and through the Health Committee with this bill\u2014this very well-intentioned bill, which we do support in its intentionality. It\u2019s news to us to see the Amendment Paper, and I\u2019d like to flag that there are going to be questions about why the entitlement and the information that patients are given about their entitlement to the three-day stay seem to be the subject of such a large Amendment Paper which has just been dropped on to us outside of the select committee process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat does bring me to clause 1, the title, because we\u2019re talking about the \u201CHealthy Futures (Pae Ora) (3-Day Postnatal Stay) Amendment Act\u201D. I\u2019m seeing that the name of that suggests that there is a right, and we have been told consistently in the Health Committee, through the process, that this is about enabling new, I\u2019d say birthing parents\u2014and that\u2019s another question we\u2019re going to come to about the nomenclature of who has given birth, because there will be political differences, but there are also medical and clinical differences about who gives birth. But the title really captures this right to give the birthing parent this three-day postnatal stay. Given that we now have an Amendment Paper that is questioning whether people are entitled to know about their right\u2014because that is the Amendment Paper\u2014I\u2019m wondering if the title needs to perhaps better reflect something that says \u201Cunless they don\u2019t know about that right\u201D or some other kind of words that capture the fact that birthing parents will be assumed to have knowledge about this if they want to be able to assert this right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is a small technical question. It\u2019s not one I had anticipated to ask, and I can see the chair of the Health Committee, Sam Uffindell, looking quite amused about this, but it\u2019s not amusing to have an Amendment Paper dropped on to the Table after the select committee process and after the many submissions from people that suddenly limits what we thought was going to be something that was universal. As my colleague the Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall has mentioned, we are supportive of the intention. What we are sceptical about is the resourcing. If we draw those threads together, there is a cynical element to the Amendment Paper that might perhaps be a cost-cutting measure that if women are not told or birthing parents are not told about their right, then perhaps that is going to save some expense.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe will be having questions about the modelling that has been done. We will have questions about the fiscals. We will have questions about the ability of this Government to deliver on something that is aspirational that we support in intention. But we don\u2019t want to make promises that we can\u2019t keep. My question to the Minister is whether she believes the title still accurately reflects the name of the bill, given the new Amendment Paper that changes people\u2019s knowledge and assumed knowledge of what their rights are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022738b018a9e3eb1cc132c0ae1ee6dfcd6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Just before I take a call, I would note the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper was tabled on 25 August, so was not tabled in just the days up to today\u2014a significant period of time in advance. Members did have time in advance of today\u2019s committee stage to consider the bill for this evening.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022419cd7abb9160a455b72056a847f5782\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I\u2019m sure the Minister could make that point, but it\u2019s hardly the point of a Chair to debate whether or not an Amendment Paper\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ae6837ab3a2e1c8ef22ae91088a11232\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Webb. I wasn\u2019t making a debating point; I was simply stating the facts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u002220f56e6229bdab427e5a7d1bffda6344\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002220f56e6229bdab427e5a7d1bffda6344\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health) (21:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just in response, although we haven\u2019t got to that clause yet. In terms of the confidence and the implementation, in the first two years, Health New Zealand will use existing capacity where it can be, acknowledging that there was approximately $34\u00A0million from the Budget allocated to achieve this where it can be\u2014so in the first two years, Health New Zealand will use existing capacity where it can be safely supported, including through community partnership models where targeted workforce support can be helped to utilise the capacity. Health New Zealand\u2019s modelling indicates that some districts such as Whanganui, Nelson, Gisborne, and Whakat\u0101ne have relatively more existing capacity, while larger urban areas are more constrained and will require additional commissioned capacity. In parallel, Health New Zealand will look to commission additional capacity from the provider mix that best meets the needs of each community. I\u2019m very confident in the delivery.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn terms of the questions in relation to the title: yes, the title is accurate, and reflecting the three-day stay is important because that is the guarantee\u2014that the three-day stay in maternity care will be delivered. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022 data-id=\u002278adc65a734551b40e5a8c242467dbb3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002278adc65a734551b40e5a8c242467dbb3\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY (Labour\u2014Taieri) (21:26)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, for the Associate Minister of Health\u2019s fulsome answers. I\u2019m wondering if the Minister can please let the committee know why three days specifically was given for the purposes of this bill? Was that a clinical decision? Was it based around resourcing? What was the rationale where three days was considered to be the optimal amount of time for birthing parents to be able to have this entitlement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u002277480d12ccbb9087f6a23ead50a3ad77\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002277480d12ccbb9087f6a23ead50a3ad77\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (21:26)\u003C/span\u003E: Just to clarify, are we just on\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223017cb68ecafd4afb4f0f1f7be29707b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: We are just on the title.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002294e7865685c1ba8f6d0259e6387bbe55\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: Clause 1, title. Sorry, my question\u2019s about clause 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273854fa028f6daaa325e7faa689e4b82\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendment to clause 1 set out on Amendment Paper 647 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022291683ca3277018c8d99b34b296ed18f\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ec2bf5448f245539cce22a717f775e63\u0022\u003EClause 2 Commencement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229543dd874396f3062166e31623b877e9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we now come to clause 2. This is the debate on commencement. The question is that clause 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u00221ffa853559ea381100522eb7d6c6c855\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221ffa853559ea381100522eb7d6c6c855\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (21:27)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, thank you. Sorry for jumping the gun. I want to know about this clause. In Amendment Paper 647, we\u2019ve got a movement from six months after the date to an immediate application of this clause. While that always sounds good, the reality is we were already worried about an overstretched health system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d like to know what the Minister of Health did to check out that our midwives and our nurses, particularly\u2014we know numbers of nurses are down, but I also represented midwives for many years and I know that they were chronically short-staffed and there were real issues around safe staffing numbers. I\u2019ll just give you one story about why that was so bad. The midwives couldn\u2019t strike, because when they tried they breached the safe staffing numbers every time because they did not have any staff to cover those shifts. They couldn\u2019t just take even one person off shift because they were already under those numbers. That has been an issue for many years with midwives. We have nurses where we know that\u2019s been a really serious issue in our health system now for a while. We just simply don\u2019t have nurses. We also have problems with other people in our health system and we have health facilities which are really overwhelmed. You walk down corridors and it says \u201CNo beds in the corridor\u201D etc., because that\u2019s where the beds are going. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I want to know is: if we\u2019re moving this time frame from six months to immediately, is that a political stunt or is there some reason why you are satisfied that people can cope with an additional requirement? Because it is election year and it is quite close. Is it so people can tick the box and get up and say this is done and there\u2019s not enough time to see what has happened next? Because there is a lot of pressure on our health workers. Can I know what the Minister has done with regard to finding out just how people will cope with this movement forward in time? Because usually we give people a bit of time to adjust their rosters, etc., so that they can cope with this. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u0022b339c21994f945b1aad8f3f74f2a3970\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b339c21994f945b1aad8f3f74f2a3970\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health) (21:29)\u003C/span\u003E: In terms of the member\u2019s questions around capability, as I just mentioned in my previous response, this Government secured $34\u00A0million for the delivery of this programme of work. As I\u2019ve said, Health New Zealand is confident around its existing capacity. That is why we\u2019ve shifted the commencement to \u201Cimmediate\u201D. I think that makes a really good, positive step for mothers who would like that extended care. I\u2019ve been confident about, as I\u2019ve outlined, the capacity issues, and the budget is already in place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022 data-id=\u0022c00c192531d2f59c08be3d4b8a0cdbb5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c00c192531d2f59c08be3d4b8a0cdbb5\u0022\u003EHon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) (21:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, I appreciate that you\u2019re taking us through the bill step by step, but some of these issues about start dates relate to other parts of the bill, so I\u2019ll take this opportunity to build on my colleague Helen White\u2019s question, because it is clear that, in clause 2, the commencement of the bill is immediate, but it appears, if we look at the Schedule, that the provisions in the bill don\u2019t apply until 1 July 2029.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMinister, is it the case that immediate commencement of the bill is possible, because the provisions aren\u2019t coming until we\u2019re well into the term of the seventh Labour Government? The budget really doesn\u2019t kick in until the third year, either. This is the challenge, isn\u2019t it\u2014that really, what would have been, under the original bill, something that would have had to come into force in six months is actually\u2014I mean, 1 July 2029 is when Part 3A comes in; so two years of the bill not really having any effect at all, and then, in the third year, women will be able to expect to have the three-day stay.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d just like to understand from the Associate Minister of Health why those decisions about timing were made. If she could stitch together both the issue about commencement of the bill and then the delay that comes in later.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u00227ca92da2924e28f2d1bc4eff27eca81b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227ca92da2924e28f2d1bc4eff27eca81b\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health) (21:32)\u003C/span\u003E: I appreciate the member the Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u2019s questions around the concerns. As you can appreciate capacity, which is what I outlined in my previous answers, we will start off immediately, using existing capacity, and then the July 2029 position is that it will be fully implemented.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThat is ensuring that we have the ability to build in a sustainable way, that we optimise safety, that we\u2019re not creating an expectation that isn\u2019t able to be delivered. This is building capacity over that period of time, so that by that\u2014so the delivery of the service, as the commencement date outlines, is that we will commence the service immediately, with full capacity being delivered by that date.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022 data-id=\u0022c8f5464433b467cddae70b413e1b7ea2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c8f5464433b467cddae70b413e1b7ea2\u0022\u003EH\u016AHANA LYNDON (Green) (21:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Just following on the line of questioning that I\u2019ve heard from my colleagues, and the response from the Associate Minister of Health, when examining the commencement date and hearing that we\u2019re going to grow capacity of the system while it\u2019s starting immediately\u2014and there\u2019s $34 million allocated to it but it won\u2019t be in full swing until 1 July 2029\u2014submitters raised with us concern around equity and enabling better access to care for rural, for low-income, and for first-time parents. The question is around, OK, if we\u2019re going to be using existing capacity from within the system, what is the plan for implementation via the existing capacity? And what role will equity have in the decision of where we will apply the focus if we take a staged approach? Soft hands, start straight away, and build up to full steam ahead by 2029\u2014as submitters have raised, how do we ensure that the staged approach gets resourced in the right places at the right time? That is my question. Kia ora.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u0022c914901eb925965af074fb2568294ac5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c914901eb925965af074fb2568294ac5\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health) (21:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you for the question. That is what I referred to previously\u2014that, in parallel, Health New Zealand will look to commission additional capacity, from the provider mix, that best meets the need of each community. This may include public, community, NGO, or private maternity units, or private provision. As you\u2019ll be aware, the Nga Hau Mangere Birthing Centre is one of those examples with capacity. As we\u2019ve also identified, some districts do have capacity at the moment: Whanganui, Nelson, Gisborne, and Whakat\u0101ne. This is the opportunity, but Health New Zealand is commissioning additional capacity as we move, and that\u2019s, as you said, safe hands to build the capacity and working with the existing networks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022 data-id=\u002221d2b2635217292895832921dc376838\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002221d2b2635217292895832921dc376838\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY (Labour\u2014Taieri) (21:35)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m really glad that the Associate Minister of Health is answering our questions around capacity, because, obviously, there is a willingness across the whole House to see the ambition of this bill. There are some really big questions around the unintended consequences, and the questions that I have relate to how much work was done and what modelling was done to anticipate the resourcing requirements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI say that in the context of submissions that we received, where we heard from the College of Midwives that they were concerned that women who genuinely need longer than three days could be discharged early to free up beds for those who had an entitlement. That would involve hurting people that the bill is meant to protect. I\u2019m thinking again\u2014 without questioning the Amendment Paper, because that\u2019s coming later\u2014if those are the vulnerable women who don\u2019t even know about their entitlement, that puts them at even further disadvantage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe also heard in the select committee that the Ministry of Health itself warned that, without more beds, other women\u2019s health services, like gynaecological and high-risk antenatal care, could be deprioritised. I\u2019m sure that is something that none of us in this House would like to see. As much as we would like everybody to receive their entitlement for this antenatal care, it would not make any sense at all to have people who desperately need gynaecological services suffering in the way that we have seen in parts of the North Island, where some of those women\u2019s health services have gone by the wayside, mainly because of the very workforce issues that the Minister herself has raised.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e662acefc059d07306b580b23b7cf890\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll just say to the member: if we could just come back to clause 2, which is focused specifically on the commencement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221931412f54928b1df3d3cad16395a351\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY\u003C/span\u003E: Sure. This does relate very directly, and thank you for that guidance, Mr Chair, because it relates very directly to the fact that, in the first two years, there\u2019s only about $1.6 million a year\u2014hardly enough for set up, and certainly not enough for a single bed to be implemented. As my colleague the Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall has said, there\u2019s a lot of things that are going to apparently take place in 2029.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat can the Minister tell us about the workforce capacity and the resourcing that is going to change between the commencement date and the implementation of some of those things. It can\u2019t all just happen at the last minute in 2029. There\u2019s got to be a graduated absorbing of the extra capacity that is going to be needed. The Minister herself has raised that different geographical parts of New Zealand have different levels of capacity and also different levels of need.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is: because we did not see it in select committee, what modelling has been done around that? What is the year-by-year budgeting that she sees? And how is that going to work, resourcing-wise, to ensure that we don\u2019t end up with these unintended consequences around women\u2019s health, which will disadvantage some of our most vulnerable and also mean that people who desperately need gynaecological care are not paying the price for the additional entitlement that some women will have to their maternal care\u2014post-antenatal care?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u0022e76fd79215cf93c1cb722a23b56c4595\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e76fd79215cf93c1cb722a23b56c4595\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health) (21:39)\u003C/span\u003E: As I\u2019ve said repeatedly, this is about building capacity. This is why we have the date of full implementation by July 2029 starting immediately. We\u2019ve talked about using existing capacity and the commissioning process from commencement. That is exactly what will be done. Those decisions that you have outlined aren\u2019t part of the legislation. It is about getting the legislation so that we can drive this piece of work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a09b8286f9783c4346f711e27ff52a6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll just remind members that we are on clause\u00A02, the commencement, so I\u2019m looking for questions related to the commencement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022 data-id=\u002203d0c7e3f9b60a2de04474a7c6a52ab3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002203d0c7e3f9b60a2de04474a7c6a52ab3\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY (Labour\u2014Taieri) (21:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Absolutely, and also picking up on material that the Minister in the chair herself, the Associate Minister of Health, is bringing into the debate. She is providing assurances that there is going to be capacity, but I don\u2019t believe I\u2019ve heard any answers to the questions I\u2019ve asked about what budgeting and resourcing have been provided. In fact, in her previous answer just now, if I heard the Minister correctly, she said that work would begin once the legislation had passed. Could the Minister please clarify whether that work is under way or whether it is going to start once this bill comes into effect? That would be useful to know.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002284165655020a9ccd5ceecc093f143bd0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendment to clause 2 set out on Amendment Paper 647 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002219084228382a35c76dd61a5b649956ec\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f280dcd65c76bcd7695d3772d05eb088\u0022\u003EClause 3 Principal Act\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b4a5f4eee82d08368df44d7774fb6a26\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we now come to clause 3. This is the debate on the principal Act. The question is that clause 3 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022 data-id=\u00222f3bdf5fbbfc12ec6515ddf5c66b2e14\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222f3bdf5fbbfc12ec6515ddf5c66b2e14\u0022\u003EHon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) (21:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. This is an excellent moment at which to reignite our favourite debating topic in our Health Committee: why does the Pae Ora Act need to be renamed the \u201CHealthy Futures (Pae Ora) Act\u201D? \u201CPae Ora\u201D is a beautiful concept. It is so much more meaningful than \u201CHealthy Futures\u201D. \u201CHealthy Futures\u201D is the most banal title for an Act I could ever have thought of. Who wants a \u201CHealthy Future\u201D? Almost nobody. It sounds so boring. What we want is a much more encompassing concept, and that\u2019s exactly what \u201CPae Ora\u201D is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThis is the most stupid, pedestrian use of the English language I have ever seen. \u201CHealthy Future\u201D\u2014way to put people off. It is so boring. It is so managerial. It is something that AI thought of. I don\u2019t know why anyone would want to name a bill \u201CHealthy Future\u201D. There have been so many efforts to make the language in this bill more interesting. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227df48af26053325555d6dd4747cf345d\u0022\u003ESam Uffindell\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CHealthy Futures\u201D\u2014plural.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002293ba672b81a2f1d1848be8f035cf24f6\u0022\u003EHon Dr AYESHA VERRALL\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, \u201CHealthy Futures\u201D\u2014Sam Uffindell, is that your point? It\u2019s like \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EEverything Everywhere All at Once\u003C/span\u003E. We\u2019re living in a parallel universe where we could have multiple different futures. Well, I don\u2019t think, even in that situation, it is particularly interesting at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is the most boring name for a bill ever given. I\u2019m sorry, Minister, but we need to make this point again: why is it that the Government felt it was so important to not once, not twice, but thrice pass legislation that makes the M\u0101ori name secondary to the English name? Nobody was hurt by having the English name second. Everyone knew the name of the bill. Where was it that the health system came unstuck because some person who didn\u2019t understand te reo M\u0101ori couldn\u2019t find the legislation and one day did an operation wrong? No, that never happened, because there is nothing wrong with a M\u0101ori name for a bill governing the health system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYet, here we are in Parliament again, having to see all these petty little changes as M\u0101ori names are taken out of things. It\u2019s really just rubbing people who like te reo M\u0101ori and M\u0101ori themselves\u2014rubbing their nose in the dirt, isn\u2019t it? Making them go second\u2014\u201CGet to the back of the bus. Your name isn\u2019t important.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI hate this. I absolutely hate it. It seems to me to be such a waste of time and a waste of the power of Government to be doing something that is so petty and small-minded. So, yes, I am quite determined to take up the remaining two minutes of my time to talk about how disgusting it is to take a M\u0101ori name out of a bill and give it the indignity of going second. \u201CPae Ora\u201D had so many more aspirations than the National Party has for healthcare. \u201CPae Ora\u201D was a concept that was inclusive. \u201CPae Ora\u201D had a view where healthcare had to accommodate the needs of everyone. The inclusion not just of M\u0101ori but also of rural, of Pasifika, of women, of people with disabilities. Having their own visions for the health system was part of the \u201CPae Ora\u201D vision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose strategies and the work that was done and the consultation with our communities are all sitting on the shelf. Then little bits\u2014little bits\u2014of focus group initiatives to help one part of the community get brought up by the Government from time to time, but an encompassing view of what our health system could achieve is dead under this Government. It\u2019s a real shame, because there could be so much more to healthcare. It could be something that supports all of us to live the lives that we want to live. Instead, we have this banal name for a piece of legislation, just as a reminder of the racism and of the anti-M\u0101ori direction that this Government takes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI can\u2019t think of anything more symbolic of a health system that is just trying to grind M\u0101ori aspirations for their own better health into dust than what this Government has done to gut the Pae Ora Act. Let\u2019s remember that this Act is the same Act that had a M\u0101ori Health Authority, that had a voice for M\u0101ori, that had a Treaty clause in it, that had iwi M\u0101ori partnership boards that actually had a role in setting local health direction, and it also had a hauora M\u0101ori committee that also had power and wasn\u2019t just advisory. That was a good bill that would have improved the healthcare of New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u0022b362342b08ba1aa61af445737f73fdd4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b362342b08ba1aa61af445737f73fdd4\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health) (21:46)\u003C/span\u003E: The naming of the bill is to align it. It\u2019s a Parliamentary Counsel Office drafting convention to align the name of this to the principal Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022 data-id=\u00227fd1d0d559c9e2ca806792b07ff190e3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227fd1d0d559c9e2ca806792b07ff190e3\u0022\u003EH\u016AHANA LYNDON (Green) (21:46)\u003C/span\u003E: May I stand in support of addressing the change in the name from \u201CPae Ora (Healthy Futures)\u201D to now \u201CHealthy Futures (Pae Ora)\u201D. I give tribute to the Minister of the day who brought this kaupapa to life with the vision and the aspiration in the hope of what Sir Mason Durie gave us in the Pae Ora legislation. It spoke to the wider system and the way that people, communities, and environments could be healthy, vibrant, and thriving.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u201CPae Ora\u201D is a fulsome way of looking at what health is in Aotearoa New Zealand. It\u2019s not just Western science; it\u2019s also underpinned by m\u0101tauranga M\u0101ori. When we think about the opportunity that we had in mauri ora, healthy lives and lifestyles for people, for wh\u0101nau, for wh\u0101nau ora, to be healthy families together, and waiora, healthy environments, it\u2019s looking at the entire ecosystem of social and wider determinants of health. That was the intention of the vision\u2014of what Sir Mason Durie gave us as a gift, underpinned by Te Whare Tapa Wh\u0101. The whare that is a whare whakaruruhau, a whare haumaru, a safe place for all, that recognises the wellbeing and the diversity of what we are as people and our place within families and communities\u2014that is the lost opportunity here when we take such a narrow patient focus and not look at everything that impacts the health and wellbeing of our people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELanguage is important. Language is absolutely important in the way that we frame how the health system is to operate. That\u2019s the great thing about this legislation\u2014that it\u2019s thinking about the parent and it\u2019s thinking about the baby and it\u2019s putting them first in the way that they can provide and be supported, and the best start to life. Those three days in h\u014Dhipere, or, if we want flexibility, three days of intensive support in the home or other environments, is a beautiful gift. It\u2019s a tribute. That\u2019s a part of what the \u201CPae Ora\u201D gift was. Unfortunately, when we change it around because of some type of political ideology in seeing that somehow te reo M\u0101ori could be harmful to the health and wellbeing of the system at large, we actually undermine what this legislation looks at. It\u2019s not just the baby; it\u2019s also the parents. It\u2019s also the wh\u0101nau. It\u2019s the ability to access the health workforce and a supportive environment. That is \u201CPae Ora\u201D. That is the purpose of \u201CPae Ora\u201D\u2014look at the environment, look at the wh\u0101nau, look at the workforce and what is needed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question to the Associate Minister of Health is going back to the naming and really wanting to understand why this change is being made when, actually, this is \u201CPae Ora\u201D. This is a beautiful thing if we resource it well, if we start it right, if we have an equity focus and we think about all the communities that are vulnerable in the system, and we power up the system to actually give effect to what \u201CPae Ora (Healthy Futures)\u201D and what this three-day stay could actually be for the parent, for the child.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e5b6ca12da55a63212fb1b6680f46519\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, just before I take a call, I have given the Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall and H\u016Bhana Lyndon the opportunity to debate around the change that occurred. I would just note that the title of the principal Act was amended by a previous bill and it\u2019s not a matter of debate here on this one, because it was changed in the principal Act. I am looking for other questions relating to clause 3, which is on the principal Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022 data-id=\u0022b9aac005ef268be79cae169bafa06d34\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b9aac005ef268be79cae169bafa06d34\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY (Labour\u2014Taieri) (21:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Are you wanting a call, Dr Verrall?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225aecaee7c3aceddb7e8c8ded539d26c3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m just looking in that direction.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d1710c2ab568e766f8a94c24c56c6c7\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY\u003C/span\u003E: No? I\u2019ve got a small but important question, and that is because the Associate Minister of Health herself has mentioned in this debate, I believe\u2014and we know from the Health Committee\u2014that this was originally a member\u2019s bill. I want to congratulate, actually, the member who brought this bill, Katie Nimon, for the work\u2014sorry, Catherine Wedd. My apologies, it\u2019s because I was looking at the member sitting there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be43a8cfbf7864ac873ac990397776f6\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EIt\u2019s not the first time that\u2019s happened.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223974c3c9be58b18bc99f956bc6832262\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a frequent occurrence that occurs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c964e48d7b8a60c336cf2a0dc2df043d\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right. I do apologise to both of them. It\u2019s really great to see a member\u2019s bill that has been adopted by the Government, and that\u2019s a good thing, and therefore we are here at clause 3 with a Government amending a principal Act, which is the now Healthy Futures (Pae Ora) Act 2022.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question I have, really, is whether the Minister could tell us why it was such a priority to make it a Government bill when we\u2019ve also had another member\u2019s bill, which is the Modern Slavery Bill, that is also related to a principal Act, which is the India free-trade agreement Act, and that was actually part of an agreement that was made in order for Labour to support that legislation. This is very much about this principal Act; it is very much a question for the Minister to answer. Why has the Government decided to prioritise taking this on as a Government bill to amend a principal Act when it was a member\u2019s bill in one case, where there was no agreement made with any members of the House, versus a different situation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhile we all think it\u2019s great for antenatal services to be available to women, we need to understand the priorities and the choices of this Government and also the House time available to us prior to the House rising next week and not being able to get other things through the House. An understanding of the priorities and choices that lead us to this point this evening, where one of these important bills is ignored and the other one is taking up House time, would be incredibly useful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u002241162cb1cfa088397b8ba384e2e1f895\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002241162cb1cfa088397b8ba384e2e1f895\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health) (21:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Not that it\u2019s specific to the title of the bill, but this was also a coalition agreement commitment between National and New Zealand First.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256db8ec43f162285f519c0af4921a4f1\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Ingrid Leary\u2014and I would note to the member that I\u2019m looking for questions on the principal Act, which is clause 3.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022 data-id=\u00222b0328a51b2c25a987379d1406104c85\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222b0328a51b2c25a987379d1406104c85\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY (Labour\u2014Taieri) (21:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Sure, and I would seek your guidance that, when the Associate Minister of Health herself brings things into the debate, it does call them into question. I\u2019d like the Minister to explain how a coalition agreement, which is a political document, can be used to justify an executive decision, because that is a really interesting proposition. I\u2019d really welcome the Minister to please explain that. It is not, certainly from my work around I Am Hope funding and the coalition agreement that was used to justify procurement, which the Auditor-General said was not a satisfactory reason for executive decision-making. Is the Minister saying that in this case it is, and, if so, could she please explain how that works?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022508ca5f25521c29876b85825a99c52af\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendment to clause 3 set out on Amendment Paper 647 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fec0c29965ab5b718f23a8fb6cced2ff\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u002295efc0f85f003458ce6b7c0a0c9ef07e\u0022\u003EClause 4 Section 4 amended (Interpretation)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1ac1b8aea5eb5abdc4f0a9a84d97728\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we now come to clause 4. This is the debate on \u201CSection 4 amended (Interpretation)\u201D. The question is that clause 4 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022 data-id=\u00223c11a67e2b0146d0d6fe0608d18150bd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223c11a67e2b0146d0d6fe0608d18150bd\u0022\u003EHon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) (21:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Clause 4 includes an amendment to the definition of \u201Cinpatient postnatal care\u201D where the only change from the original member\u2019s bill is that \u201Ca woman and baby\u201D is changed to \u201Ca mother and baby\u201D, and I\u2019d like to ask the Minister\u2014I\u2019ll just keep my contribution brief so that there\u2019s an opportunity for some follow-up questions on this. I was wondering if the Minister could explain why \u201Ca woman\u201D was changed to \u201Ca mother\u201D and if this has any relationship to a desire not to be captured by amendments under way to the Legislation Act to define a woman?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u00227298ec20821cabe59d6e5c38c1d4165b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227298ec20821cabe59d6e5c38c1d4165b\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health) (21:55)\u003C/span\u003E: The term \u201Cmother\u201D is used throughout the bill, and this is consistency of terminology.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022 data-id=\u00223fe6e32718ce0d474819a95b30ebcc9f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223fe6e32718ce0d474819a95b30ebcc9f\u0022\u003EHon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) (21:55)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks to the Minister. The term \u201Cmother\u201D wasn\u2019t used in the original bill, so I\u2019d like to understand the rationale for changing from \u201Cwoman\u201D to \u201Cmother\u201D in the Minister\u2019s amendment, please. I\u2019m aware that there\u2019s a lot of debate about the use of the word \u201Cwoman\u201D in legislation, so I\u2019d like to understand why\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002201e2877f444e0bec42afd960be2c70b6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Just a bit of quiet on my right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220db1855d51db4af8b01dfcc49cf418f6\u0022\u003EHon Dr AYESHA VERRALL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014that was so important that now \u201Cwoman\u201D is being removed from legislation and \u201Cmother\u201D put in instead.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022 data-id=\u0022d71691ebe3ce3a3e9deaa2e5db1b2b76\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d71691ebe3ce3a3e9deaa2e5db1b2b76\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY (Labour\u2014Taieri) (21:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019d like to turn now to the words of \u201CSection 4 amended (interpretation)\u201D. Consistent with the initial bill, where we were talking about \u201Cfor the purposes of post-birth recovery\u201D, I\u2019d just seek some clarification from the Associate Minister of Health about whether that has any limiting effect on new Part 3A, section 93C, where it looks to be fairly\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022caaaefc29964a217b12cb70fe6351125\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s in a separate clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242d0eb6d0cc95118321f62175897f4da\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY\u003C/span\u003E: It is, but I\u2019m talking about the nexus between these two clauses. In section 4, in the interpretation, it speaks very clearly about \u201Cfor the purposes of post-birth recovery\u201D, and yet, in new section 93C, there seems to be an absolute entitlement that isn\u2019t dependent upon a specific purpose\u2014in other words, the fact of labour and the fact of birth enables that entitlement. It does not have to be for the purpose of recovery; it is just assumed that there is an entitlement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI really just want to seek the Minister\u2019s clarification about whether, in the interpretation, those words could be confusing and whether perhaps we could just cross out \u201Cfor the purposes of post-birth recovery\u201D and just say \u201Cprovided to a woman and baby\u201D\u2014or \u201Ca birthing parent\u201D would probably be better words. I wonder if the Minister would entertain that, given that there are clinical implications of using \u201Cmother\u201D\u2014if we stop the words after \u201Clabour and birth\u201D so that we don\u2019t confuse the requirement of a purpose of recovery with what seems to be a more absolute entitlement in the subsequent provisions of the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u0022a159be6c61b7fae512facf345f7892c5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a159be6c61b7fae512facf345f7892c5\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health) (21:58)\u003C/span\u003E: To clarify, using the word \u201Cmother\u201D, it was a drafting decision by the Parliamentary Counsel Office to ensure the language in the bill is consistent and has a plain, ordinary meaning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022 data-id=\u002201e9b65ea4ac466ad49019db3c6d1d91\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002201e9b65ea4ac466ad49019db3c6d1d91\u0022\u003EHon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) (21:58)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I do have questions about the choice of \u201Cmother\u201D, and the reason being for a couple of reasons. Sometimes the non-birth parent is also a mother\u2014that\u2019s what happened in my own family, actually; so it\u2019s not as clear as you might think. The second thing is that often it\u2019s argued that the word \u201Cwoman\u201D should be used because a woman is a person beyond just her role as a mother, and while she might be in hospital because she is a mother, she has her own rights, ability to make decisions, thoughts about how she should be cared for, health concerns that may not be relevant to the health of the baby, and she deserves to be recognised for those things that are relevant to her.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIf the change is purely at the behest of the Parliamentary Counsel Office, it seems to me that there is a potential loss of important emphasis on the woman as a full person by describing them merely as a mother, and I wonder if the Minister, who in other debates in this House has stuck up for the need for women to be called women, would on this occasion consider \u201Cmother\u201D to be replaced with \u201Cwoman\u201D as was in the original version of the bill. In my view, calling a woman \u201Ca mother\u201D is reductive and sees them only as related to the needs of their baby, when they in fact have needs of their own.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022 data-id=\u0022778cdaebfa0964608ac485f4658bb9d6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022778cdaebfa0964608ac485f4658bb9d6\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY (Labour\u2014Taieri) (22:00)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019d like to ask the Associate Minister of Health, following on from that, if the Minister can please tell us whether \u201Cbirthing parent\u201D was considered as one of the ways of describing that function. The reason I ask that is because there has been other legislation at the Health Committee where we have considered \u201Cbirthing parent\u201D and it has actually been New Zealand First members that have had a problem with it. I think most New Zealanders would like some consistency across our legislation that captures not only the fullness of the people that my colleague has described but actually the clinical implications of what\u2019s being described as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, it is not outside the realms of possibility for a birthing parent to not necessarily be a mother. Are we going to have to come back at some point in the next 10 years and amend the legislation because we\u2019ve confined ourselves to words that don\u2019t take into account the advances in medical technology? Could \u201Cbirthing parent\u201D be a more accurate and efficient way of ensuring that the legislation is futureproofed?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat includes, as my colleague the Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall has mentioned, the Improving Arrangements for Surrogacy Bill. In fact, we did spend hours discussing this in quite a frustrating way, because on one side we are trying to consider the best use of the resources of Parliament to make the legislation fit for purpose. On the other side, there seems to be some kind of weird moral identity argument about using words that appease particular members of the public that are going to have quite far-reaching implications and could conceivably make us come back to this House in the future to have to amend the words because they do not cover the scope of what might be technologically available to result in a birthing parent and somebody who needs to have post-birth recovery.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f0d31505882949b1a768aad60863fba9\u0022 data-id=\u002280a59d72a36f09585f2a833ceec6f739\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f0d31505882949b1a768aad60863fba9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002280a59d72a36f09585f2a833ceec6f739\u0022\u003EJOSEPH MOONEY (National\u2014Southland) (22:02)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007103\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 32; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022edd24bb30070a028db0687681d864a9d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendment to clause 4 set out on Amendment Paper 647 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 4 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00221762418d9f63bc4b40a07986b47e2915\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00222a674f524d2b5337a2a7b024e5e7ad14\u0022\u003EClause 5 New Part 3A inserted (Access to inpatient postnatal care)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d57cf78c7d6afca01fb3d9d0e99b92b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to clause 5. This is the debate on new Part 3A inserted, \u201CAccess to inpatient postnatal care\u201D. The question is that clause 5 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022 data-id=\u00228dfbd8580c9cd1f5c68731604e4e1dc6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203a9a78995df41d999aa5550770febd3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228dfbd8580c9cd1f5c68731604e4e1dc6\u0022\u003ELAN PHAM (Green) (22:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Given that the Associate Minister of Health wasn\u2019t addressing any clarity around the questions that have been asked by my colleagues in the previous clause, I\u2019d really just like to ask a direct question about the use of the term \u201Cmothers\u201D. I\u2019m noting\u2014although personally I fundamentally disagree with the fact that it is being changed from \u201Cwomen\u201D to \u201Cmothers\u201D, but I can accept that the Minister and the Government may not be in a place to change the language. What I\u2019m really interested in, and I think New Zealanders deserve just a very clear response about, is checking that although the bills use these gendered terms, that the intent of the bill is actually inclusive. Is it inclusive? I\u2019d like to hear directly from the Minister. Is it inclusive of all people who are giving birth? It would be really great to get that confirmation. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022705bc0c7dd97b5e93567b32680457752\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022705bc0c7dd97b5e93567b32680457752\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (22:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m just interested in a relatively technical aspect of this bill, but an important one. It\u2019s not something I\u2019ve been deeply involved with, but I appreciate there will be costs associated with this. In the new section 93A(2), inserted by clause 5, it says, \u201CThis Part applies despite anything to the contrary in any funding agreement or other instrument.\u201D I\u2019m aware that there are funding agreements with, essentially, hospitals run by the Crown but there are also funding agreements in particular or other agreements, contracts with private providers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt just strikes me that this appears to create this entitlement\u2014an entitlement that we in the Labour Party agree with. Then you\u2019ve got these agreements with maternity providers and birthing facility providers who to date have been under contract to provide these services in a particular way for a particular period. I don\u2019t know the details of them, but to date they have discharged the birthing parent when it has been appropriate, and it might be straight away. They might be great and off home they go or it might be after a week, but it\u2019s been on the basis of clinical decisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow that clinical decision has been deferred till three days. Now, if you look at it, the part applies despite anything to the contrary, any funding agreement\u2014which I kind of get, because it\u2019s probably Crown-related and we can manage that\u2014or other instrument. If we\u2019ve got a contract with a private provider and you\u2019re saying the clinical decision which we have funded previously is being displaced and at minimum you\u2019ve got to give this 72-hour period regardless and that\u2019s not what\u2019s in the contract for service, that\u2019s actually quite a radical thing to do, because there\u2019s no framework there for saying \u201Cand the Government will pay for the additional period where you\u2019re required to have a bed available and the clinical staff available and so on.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m really interested in this, because the Government, and particularly the ACT Party part of this Government, has been very keen to make sure that where there\u2019s a framework, there\u2019s essentially no taking. This appears pretty much in I don\u2019t know how many words\u2014maybe 12 or 15\u2014to be saying, \u201CYou are required to provide 72 hours of maternity care, despite anything to the contrary in any funding agreement or other instrument.\u201D Now, it may be that the Government intends to go back and revisit its funding agreements in other instruments, but that\u2019s certainly not what the legislation says. It\u2019s quite unusual for a Government in this House to start rewriting contracts. I\u2019m very interested to know whether it\u2019s the intention of the Government and this House in passing this legislation probably tonight to rewrite contracts, or whether in fact the intention is to say, \u201CWe don\u2019t intend to do that. That\u2019s not quite what we meant, although it\u2019s drafted a bit awkwardly. We\u2019ll go back and we will actually pay everyone for the services we\u2019re demanding of you.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut whatever it is, whether it\u2019s one or t\u2019other, it\u2019s pretty messy, because clearly if you\u2019re a private provider\u2014on this side of the Chamber, we\u2019re not huge advocates of private provision of medical services; we understand there\u2019s a place. But if you\u2019re a private provider and you enter into a contract with the New Zealand Government, you\u2019re entitled to expect that the terms of that contract will be adhered to and not rewritten unilaterally here. I\u2019d be very interested in the comments on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u0022f50d372fdfa7c1e50da17b77ab6bad62\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f50d372fdfa7c1e50da17b77ab6bad62\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health) (22:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Just in response to the Green Party member\u2019s question: yes, I\u2019m confident that this bill will provide the care for the birth of babies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENext, in response to the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s question, this clause was in the original member\u2019s bill and guarantees three days of stay\u2014even if future Governments underfund maternity care.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022 data-id=\u0022718778c8e3dd356e9128b51bd72f68d8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022718778c8e3dd356e9128b51bd72f68d8\u0022\u003EHon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) (22:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I am looking at new section 93B in Part 3A, which is when does the clock start. The 72-hour period starts at the latter of the time of delivery or the time of admission to inpatient care. You\u2019d hope not many people were in the situation described in subclause (b) there, because that\u2019s pretty rough\u2014having the baby before you\u2019re admitted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EBut let\u2019s talk about (a), the time of delivery. I\u2019d like to know: when is the time of delivery? Is it when the baby is delivered or is it when the placenta is delivered? Under normal circumstances, the placenta can take an hour to come, and that hour might make a difference. I\u2019m just wondering when delivery is said to occur: at the conclusion of the second stage of labour, when the baby is out; or at the third stage of labour, when the placenta is out?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022 data-id=\u002287b46d1b6ae6c063824cf2bbaf422984\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002287b46d1b6ae6c063824cf2bbaf422984\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY (Labour\u2014Taieri) (22:12)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. We come now to the part of the amendment that I have the most concern with, really, and that is the struck-out new section 93C regarding the requirement to provide information regarding the 72-hour minimum.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason I say that is because if we look at new Part 3A, inserting \u201CAccess to inpatient postnatal care\u201D. Then we look at the words of new section 93A, \u201CPurpose of this Part\u201D, and it talks about providing mothers and babies with access to a minimum.  Then at new section 93B, we hear about mothers and babies being entitled to be provided. When we sat on the Health Committee, it was very clear to us that this was being championed as a new right: a new right that was going to empower women, mothers, the birthing experience, and that it was all about universality.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYet what we see now in new section 93C struck out is the requirement to provide information regarding the 72-hour minimum. That means those privileged people who are aware of this brand-spanking-new law will no doubt be entitled to their entitlements\u2014to quote somebody in this House\u2014and will put their hand up, whether they need that extra care or not, and make sure they get every cent worth of their publicly funded care so that they can have a good and important and bonding time with their baby.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut those who are more vulnerable and who do not know\u2014so they do not know what they do not know\u2014they won\u2019t know that they\u2019re entitled to that. And if somebody doesn\u2019t tell them that they\u2019re entitled, and if somebody leans on them because there\u2019s a hospital bed that\u2019s needed for some other reason or there\u2019s bed block because there\u2019s a workforce shortage or there are people in the corridors getting treated\u2014which happens so frequently in our hospitals these days. How was it that the access that is written into this legislation and the entitlement that is written into it and the purpose and everything about this bill and the way it was sold to us by Catherine Wedd and championing this entitlement in this new set of rights, it was going to take us into this new era for mothers and women. How was it that that can occur and that the requirements of those words can be met if there is no requirement to provide information to people? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is a very genuine question\u2014I\u2019d also actually like to ask why the words were struck out, like what was it? Was it a funding question? It must have been, because there can be no other reason.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second question is: what are the consequences if somebody doesn\u2019t get the care they\u2019re entitled to? What are the consequences if somebody cannot, for whatever reason, be looked after for 72 hours and they get kicked out of their room and they have to go home? What if there is a catastrophic clinical event? Because we know jurisprudentially that laws can only work when they have consequences attached to them and people understand what the natural flow and logical flow of events is that will happen if the law is transgressed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut we don\u2019t seem to have this here. If we do, I apologise, but I haven\u2019t seen it. We have an entitlement where there is no requirement for everybody to know about, and then we have an entitlement that is silent on what the consequences will be. It might just be that somebody goes home, they get kicked out, they don\u2019t get to use the 72 hours. They might not even worry about it; they may never know about it. But what if they go home and something happens and they have a haemorrhage or some other catastrophic clinical event? Then it turns out when they go to the Health and Disability Commissioner, they did not receive their entitlement\u2014either knowingly because they could not be given the 72 hours, or unknowingly because they did not know about it and therefore could not access their entitlement? All of that is written in this legislation and yet there seems to be huge gaps in what the legislation speaks to about what will happen in those circumstances. Could the Associate Minister of Health please let us know?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u0022ad04688d69d6b807fe579bdf06be9eda\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ad04688d69d6b807fe579bdf06be9eda\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health) (22:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Just to the Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u2019s questions about the 72 hours\u2019 start line. That is a clinical decision around when the 72 hours will start, and I have full confidence in the clinicians to make sensible decisions in that space.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs to new subsection 93B(2)(b), I think it is quite common\u2014I know of several instances where people didn\u2019t quite make it to the hospital to have their babies or those that have chosen home birth and need to come in for care after that. Both clauses are relevant.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn relation to the removal of the informing clause, as you\u2019ll note in the original clause, it talks about the lead maternity carer providing advice. As you know, it\u2019s not always a lead maternity care that gives the care. Amendment Paper 647 removes the provision that the lead maternity carer has to inform. It does not remove a mother\u2019s right to be informed about their entitlements relating to maternity care or their options available to them. The Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers\u2019 Rights requires practitioners to give sufficient, accurate, and understandable information so women can make informed choices about their care. This is legally enforceable. If a person believes their rights are breached, they can make complaints. This has been highlighted in the Amendment Paper and that\u2019s why it has been removed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022 data-id=\u00229e0779eda4b1bb2ce719f2c82c8c00b4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229e0779eda4b1bb2ce719f2c82c8c00b4\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY (Labour\u2014Taieri) (22:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much for that fulsome explanation, Minister. In the event when the Associate Minister of Health talks about a legal requirement, that probably isn\u2019t a significant issue until such time as there is actually a breach of somebody being informed of everything they need to be informed of. And then if there are severe medical consequences, suddenly there is a question over who is culpable and there are different accountabilities in the health system. How does the Minister propose that that is going to be worked through if the law is vague and uncertain on whose duty it is to provide that information regarding the entitlement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223539ccdebe441d08b77b943afda4a3ab\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to clause 5 set out on Amendment Paper 647 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 5 as amended agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022375bffff7e6a9b45840a775cce2deb7d\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u002272ec06c03bac26b40b7e7b4df4ad2e99\u0022\u003ENew clause 6 Schedule 1 amended, and the Schedule\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231ed630b930141e8fa015ccd5140a1c5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to the debate on new clause 6. This is the debate on \u201CSchedule 1 amended\u201D and the Schedule. The question is that clause 6 as inserted by Amendment Paper 647 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022 data-id=\u0022a80721e4cdfb36da37f67c67d2a1eb54\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022db2ea575110f43e6b325fc2758d0d15b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a80721e4cdfb36da37f67c67d2a1eb54\u0022\u003EHon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) (22:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, this is probably the biggest change from the original bill. It\u2019s a change that pushes the start date out to 1 July 2029, which I suppose is\u2014you know, we\u2019re no longer writing science fiction about 1 July 2029, but it still is relatively far in the future. It seems unusual to pass a bill about an entitlement that we can\u2019t yet operationalise, but here we are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think the point that really is relevant to this Schedule is to understand from the Associate Minister of Health is how she has sought assurances that this can be delivered. Really, what I would expect in terms of an answer here would be about what service planning is under way. We\u2019ve seen the budget as it relates to this. The substantial funding really only comes in in the financial year that starts July 2029. Our new primary birthing unit is being commissioned, does that require new building? Are any of those private or are any public? Has an assessment been done of maternity ward capacity in the public system, and any need for expansion there?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, not everyone would be well enough to be cared for in a private centre outside of a hospital. So presumably there are some implications for maternity wards in hospitals as well. So it would be good to hear an explanation of how these entitlements will be realised in 1 July 2029.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022 data-id=\u0022716b6b76f31e92a591389c1db919e080\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022716b6b76f31e92a591389c1db919e080\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY (Labour\u2014Taieri) (22:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m looking at the planning, and I think a lot of new Part 5 of Schedule 1, inserted by new clause 6, looks at implementation. It talks about, at new clause 55, the \u201CPreparation, approval, and publication of inpatient postnatal care plan\u201D. I don\u2019t see anything in here about consultation. I\u2019m really worried about that, because it sounds like Health New Zealand is just required to come up with a plan\u2014maybe interview its typewriter, as we sometimes say. That could be monocultural. That could be focused around a major city\u2014Auckland or Wellington\u2014that may fail to take into account the kinds of things that need to be included in good planning to ensure that care can happen in other communities. When I say other, I don\u2019t mean to other those communities, but in our rural communities, my electorate in Taieri; in M\u0101ori communities and ethnic communities and disabled communities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf we think about the very special context of our disability community and having babies and the type of planning that needs to go into that and the type of care. How is that accounted for in a bill that does not have anywhere, from what I can see, a requirement to consult. It doesn\u2019t even have secondary legislation in there, which we\u2019re so used to seeing in this House from this Government, where it\u2019s kind of, \u201Clet pull the substance out do it via regulations, and then we don\u2019t have to debate it in the House\u201D. It\u2019s not in there at all, so there\u2019s these very strict assumptions and deadlines that completely fail to connect with the reality of the front line and what birthing means to particular communities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo is there going to be consultation with clinicians? Assumedly, there will be. What about with parents? What about in the different scenarios that I have suggested? One of the worst things I think we could see is that a health plan, a post-natal care plan is provided for that completely straitjackets clinicians and the medical providers and is completely inappropriate to the parents that it is supposed to be helping. I think about my own birthing experience and what an incredibly special time it, what an important time it is for bonding with the baby, and that was very much what we heard was motivated by Catherine Wedd. That was what motivated her to want to bring this initially as a member\u2019s bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat could go horribly pear-shaped if the planning wasn\u2019t done properly. People say, \u201CNothing about us without us\u201D. We see it all the time happening in this House through the disability legislation changes. It looks like we might be seeing that again unless the Minister can reassure me that there is some other place that this consultation will happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe impact of that is very real as well. We have some of the worst suicide statistics for post-natal mothers, post-natal parents in New Zealand through mental health issues. This care in the planning and the ability to actually include really strong mental health supports and to identify vulnerabilities and to be appropriate and culturally appropriate\u2014even though the health Minister himself won\u2019t acknowledge cultural factors as a clinical factor and neither will Vanessa Weenink, apparently, when I spoke on a panel with her the other day. Nevertheless, most clinicians\u2014in fact, all clinicians\u2014do see that, and that is completely absent from this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo could the Minister please tell us: have they considered whether they\u2019re going to consult? Where is the requirement to consult? How is that going to be mandated? How is anyone going to be accountable to that? And what will happen if something goes wrong and somebody is given a post-natal care plan that does not take into account their specific needs? These are very real consequences of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u0022a4e097fc2c78d10fc3cf4d4535d10d6e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a4e097fc2c78d10fc3cf4d4535d10d6e\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health) (22:26)\u003C/span\u003E: Just to the Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall\u2019s questions, in terms of the planning process, as I said, this will be a system that is commencing from the commencement date of the bill and running through to 1 July 2029. So it definitely isn\u2019t waiting until 1 July 2029. The clause requires Health New Zealand to prepare an annual in-patient post-natal care plan for the three-year transitional period. That plan must be approved by the Minister of Health. Once approved, Health New Zealand publishes that plan on its website. So that creates the visibility this is about developing, and, as I\u2019ve said in my earlier answers around this process, using existing capacity and building on commissioning tools to add additional capacity, and that is with a provider mix that best meets the community needs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn terms of Ingrid Leary\u2019s questions regarding the consultation process, does Health New Zealand have to consult with these communities, Health New Zealand has a range of planning and consultation requirements under the healthy futures Act\u2014for example, the code of consumer engagement. These obligations also apply to planning for maternity services.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u00226a2a0a3b87fb986ff6ff0e151e3dda2e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226a2a0a3b87fb986ff6ff0e151e3dda2e\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (22:27)\u003C/span\u003E: I want to ask a few questions in this part. One is stymied a little by not being able to find in the earlier part what the Associate Minister of Health assured me was true, which was that there is still an obligation to inform the mothers of this right but that is not the lead maternity carer\u2014that\u2019s what I understood that she said.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen it comes to a plan, I\u2019d like to know what she intends to be in that plan. I\u2019d love her to tell me where in the legislation that remains, because I can\u2019t find it. It seems to have been all crossed out. Is the plan envisaged to have that level of quality of detail in it? Will it say, \u201CThis is how we\u2019re going to tell people that we\u2019ve got this right. This is who is going to make sure that we\u2019ve got this right\u201D? Will it have an articulation of the level of support that they will get. Is that envisaged? Because when resources are squeezed, it\u2019s very likely that people will find creative ways to call something \u201Cin-patient support\u201D but it might be at a lower level than people are envisaging. It\u2019s obviously critical in those few days that it\u2019s a high-quality level of support. So there is that issue. And again, I think that that is critical that a plan would involve that kind of thing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is not a committee that I sit on, but I did come in and sit for a little bit of time on submissions. One of the things that came up that I thought was  really interesting\u2014it was a debate around the issue over whether a hospital might incentivise people leaving early by carrots. So things like giving people nappy nanny services or giving them bonuses, basically\u2014things that they could take home if they left within that period. Is there any guidance going to be given about what is inappropriate in a plan when predicting numbers\u2014for example, of people? Is that a problem for the Minister? I\u2019d really like that on the record, because I think it\u2019s very important that, in the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E, the Minister says it\u2019s not appropriate if she considers it not appropriate. And, if she does consider it appropriate, we\u2019d like to make that very clear too. It\u2019s a reality out there\u2014this kind of incentivisation\u2014that, if you go home now, you\u2019ll get all these things. It does put pressure particularly on families without a lot of money to go home early.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI know we all get tempted to tell our own birthing stories, but I actually went home well within the three hours with my second baby. I didn\u2019t even stay three hours. It\u2019s a really critical time for making sure that this is a real right for people and that the plans themselves create that real right, rather than it becoming something that becomes just exclusively for people who articulate or have money. That\u2019s obviously a huge deal for our party. I\u2019d love her answers on that. What\u2019s the detail in the plan? What is she expecting out of the plans, and how does that guidance get made? Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u00220b0e1020e44ad909bce2bdfe0a508a86\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220b0e1020e44ad909bce2bdfe0a508a86\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health) (22:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry for the confusion for the member. The part that we\u2019re talking about is in the Amendment Paper, so it\u2019s not part of the substantive bill. It\u2019s part of the Amendment Paper, which is this new part\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ae8508cae6b0f3375c2ffc957bc71b1\u0022\u003EHelen White\u003C/span\u003E: Could you just point to where?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e58dba4a4fbb37fef607f8800d17dc7\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s Schedule 1, new Part 5, clauses 53, 54, 55, and 56. In that part, you\u2019ll see that this is the plan that Health New Zealand has to produce around building capacity. The plan must set out how Health New Zealand will progressively increase maternity services to meet obligations. Health New Zealand must submit the plan to the Minister for approval as soon as reasonably practicable, and Health New Zealand must publish the approved plan on its internet site. That has outlined the positions that we\u2019re talking about. In terms of that quality of care within that 72 hours, I have full confidence in the quality of care that our clinicians provide.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e36df7abb1b29b52fe705b0bfd6aa4f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments set out on Amendment Paper 647 inserting new clause 6 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f597610f5b93ad80be340063ea7d365\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendment set out on Amendment Paper 647 inserting the Schedule be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill to be reported with amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e12e8109d1fdd646c3790e52fc7ea5ba\u0022\u003EBuilding (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c3bb49b97a150150acba1b62941be33b\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00227d14328670894ea38f4c5ca086d1e4f5\u0022\u003EPart 1 Amendments to Building Act 2004, and Schedules 1 and 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a8dcd0f40bb7666de078678228d168dc\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the House is in committee on the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill. We come first to Part 1. This is the debate on clauses 4 to 13\u2014Amendments to Building Act 2004\u2014and Schedules 1 and\u00A02. The question is that Part 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u002265dd807f3c6b5ec7f9f47ef08cc47c10\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002265dd807f3c6b5ec7f9f47ef08cc47c10\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (22:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and congratulations to the Minister, the Hon Simon Watts, on his first outing as the building and construction Minister. It is an important portfolio, and I wish him well in the discharge of his important duties around this bill, which, as you all know, Labour supports. We support sensible rules to remediate buildings that pose the greatest risk to life and safety, and maintaining affordability is one of our primary concerns. As you will also know, the previous Minister, the Hon Chris Penk, had amended the bill after it came back from select committee, and so most of my questions to him will be about that Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 702. I am going to ask him some specific questions about that as we move through Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor context, Minister, we have at all stages in this bill opposed the exclusion of Auckland as a specific provision. We have registered those concerns at the select committee and in the first and second readings. What has been designed here is a legislative framework which is meant to identify the buildings themselves\u2014the individual buildings that are the highest risk to life and limb\u2014but here we have an exclusion of an area as well. This is a sort of add-on which has come from a particular position. At all stages, we tested this with officials. We couldn\u2019t get an answer about, \u201CWell, if you have a system, essentially, which is designed for individual buildings, but then you exclude a number of those individual buildings which might be the highest risk, how does the rest of the system work together?\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAre we saying that a high-risk building in Auckland, which is technically lower risk than a low-risk building in Dunedin, is out of the system, and what does this mean for the building in Dunedin\u2014that was a question that we couldn\u2019t answer. That\u2019s, basically, the question that I want to understand from each amendment. For our continued support for this bill, the test will be about: given that we have these specific concerns around Auckland\u2014that Auckland contains around 1,400 earthquake-prone buildings, which is the majority of earthquake-prone buildings\u2014are we now making even more exclusions which limit the number of buildings which will be recorded, and end up having an area which is arguably highly vulnerable to seismic activity\u2014not earthquake activity\u2014without any sensible protections?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second question, which I\u2019m going to ask him in a different way, as it comes up in these amendments, is about the shifting goalposts of time. I guess, the moral hazard which is created here is: how is the Minister amending those provisions which will be very important to homeowners who are still within the regulatory net but had a deadline that has passed now that the Government has extended it and that now the Government is giving itself more powers to continue to extend? Really, it\u2019s whether any of these amendments have any further impact on those reasonable expectations that homeowners have\u2014and I\u2019m particularly interested in homeowners, although the commercial owners are, obviously, included in the net. For those homeowners who will have to do remediations which they cannot afford, now or in four years or in six years, what is the effect on them?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose are the broad questions that I\u2019m going to ask. The first question is around his amendment to clause 2 so that only section 12 is relevant in that, inserting the transitional provisions. There are a number of different transitional provisions in here. I would say the biggest ones are around Auckland, because on day one, under the old formulation, the Minister was proposing that Auckland would be excluded from day one, but now there are transitional provisions which apply to Auckland. In this clause 2, it brings in the Schedules and removes those Schedules because\u2014firstly, the question is: are they just redundant, or are they replaced by another clause? How the transitional provisions work would be a good place to start.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00227c0cc7a882f6cbe10493bee76b283b9c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227c0cc7a882f6cbe10493bee76b283b9c\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (22:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I think, while the Minister for Building and Construction ponders on my colleague Arena Williams\u2019 question, I just want to signal to the Chair that there has been a significant Amendment Paper released\u2014Amendment Paper 702. While the Amendment Paper has been out for a couple of weeks, this is the first time post - select committee that we have had a chance to engage with the Minister directly on what looks like quite substantial changes from the bill as reported back from select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it\u2019s important for us to be able to check with the Minister on some of the changes that we do see here\u2014noting that there is no departmental disclosure statement or any supplementary analysis report attached to the changes that we\u2019re seeing in this Amendment Paper, as well. With that, I want to start by asking the Minister a few questions. Now, we see that there are significant changes to clause 4 regarding the addition of new definitions. I do want to touch on those definitions as they come up in the relevant clause. While others may have questions for those, I\u2019m actually going to move on to clause 6 as a starting point. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOver here in clause 6, amending section 115(2)(b)(ii), amended by Amendment Paper 702\u2014this is on the top of page 8\u2014there is what I would consider a significant change here compared to the previous phrasing. Over here, \u201Ca former register-only EPB that ceased to be an earthquake-prone\u201D previously said \u201Cafter undergoing\u201D, which is a process. It doesn\u2019t necessarily state that the cessation of the status to be an earthquake-prone building is complete, particularly when it comes to the fa\u00E7ade risk mitigation. But now it has changed to \u201Cbecause the building\u2019s fa\u00E7ade risk mitigation was complete\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow we\u2019re looking at a completed action as opposed to \u201Cafter undergoing\u201D, which could also, I would say, imply a duration or in the process of completion. I want to check with the Minister as a starting point: what was the reason for this change? As a part of this change, how many buildings then would this include or exclude as a result of the change of status?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u00224f706c5b905784dcb39b8be20d75c414\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224f706c5b905784dcb39b8be20d75c414\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (22:42)\u003C/span\u003E: A couple of questions then for the Minister for Building and Construction as he considers my question around clause 2, to clause 4, which is the definitions section. He\u2019s added three new definitions, which I want to ask him about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe first is just defining the term \u201Cremediation\u201D. Minister, within the Act, remediation is used several times. It is not necessarily to mean the words given to it by new section\u00A0133AZAA(4) as amended by Amendment Paper 702. \u201CRemediation\u201D has a natural meaning in the Act as it is, and it also has a meaning in the Building Act. Surely we don\u2019t mean to define \u201Clittle r\u201D remediation in that way. Could he help me to understand how that defined term\u2014that\u2019s now being defined by a section further on in the bill\u2014could possibly mean only that definition and not the natural meaning of the word?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy other question is about the earthquake-prone building (EPB) warning signs. Again, this is a new way of working for those low-seismic-risk areas. Auckland now has a system that officials advised us was more similar to that of California, where signs and disclosures are used rather than remediation rules. I want to ask him: in defining \u201CEPB warning sign\u201D in this way, does he only mean that there are EPB warning signs which are regulated in those low-seismic zones and in the new way that these are intended to work? Or is he also intending to regulate the signs which already exist in a number of other areas?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECouncils like Wellington and Christchurch use signs to disclose information about earthquake-prone buildings all the time, and disclosure obligations for commercial buildings already exist. They don\u2019t exist for residential, say, homeowners, for tenants\u2014you don\u2019t have to use signs if you\u2019re a landlord, but you do have to use signs in a commercial context to give people who are using your buildings the kind of warnings which the Minister is setting out. But again, this is the definition about the way that those would work in the low-seismic zones. I just want them to clarify. There are some EPB warning signs which are regulatory and some which he doesn\u2019t intend to capture. Or does he intend to capture them all and to have a sort of national level of consistency?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to ask him about the targeted retrofit meaning here. Previously when targeted retrofit was undefined, that might have been a useful term to describe basically the works that were for things like unreinforced masonry\u2014I\u2019m going to have to say that a lot in this committee stage\u2014where we were talking about the walls, but no other structural work. Now it is being defined, so it only means this particular kind of retrofit, which seems to me to unnecessarily limit what the legislative intent is trying to get at, which is that building owners would mitigate the risk in the way that they see fit. It would be helpful if the Minister could clarify those before we move on, especially to the unreinforced masonry discussion that we\u2019ll have also in Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022745710f7ee5829d723cb71ee56e5d0f7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022745710f7ee5829d723cb71ee56e5d0f7\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (22:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Chair. Thank you, members, for the opportunity to work our way through what is a very, very important bill. That will derive about $8.2 billion of benefits to the New Zealand economy, $4.5 billion of which in Auckland alone, once this bill is passed into law. I\u2019ll work my way through the questions\u2014helpful, members, if you do refer to the clause. It just helps me be a bit faster in my ability to answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to clause 2, the question raised by the member is related to a drafting change. The words are the same as those at select committee\u2014it just looks different. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3\u2014and I didn\u2019t pick up the member\u2019s point around the clause, specifically around remediation requirements. However, listening to the question, it looks to be the same as the one around 6(3), which was the detail of the risk mitigation and therefore the remediation requirements are both part of the earthquake-prone building methodology. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother question outlined which\u2014the response is around what proportion of buildings are removed. About 55 percent of buildings will be removed around this change. This is about applying a proportional risk-based assessment to buildings. It is about ensuring that that proportionality is balanced to protect loss of life, but also acknowledging that before these changes came through, the total cost on the economy to remediate the buildings was in the range of just under $12 billion. As a result of that, $8 billion will not be required. That sounds like a good thing for the New Zealand economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022666a81a0a591084f5411f1c815bda264\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022666a81a0a591084f5411f1c815bda264\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (22:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, just seeking your clarification because the Minister for Building and Construction has just widened the scope of this debate to talk about billions of dollars of benefit when it comes to the economy. But if the Minister is going to be disclosing certain numbers, it will be important for us to know where the numbers came from, particularly $4.5 billion of benefits to T\u0101maki-makau-rau, Auckland. How is that derived?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EBut from what the Minister was saying previously, is it a benefit or is it a reduction in the liability when it comes to the building? Because it seems like not fixing the building is not necessarily\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220838e5f9bac748d2a59aea595e5226a0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228bd5c10a667ec000a815231f171add75\u0022\u003ESimon Court\u003C/span\u003E: You should have been at the select committee, mate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a4d523a3234f98963dcf96ce599b8e36\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: I mean, please, again, I\u2019m keen to hear the Minister\u2019s clarification. Not fixing the buildings or having buildings exempted isn\u2019t so much better the economy as in it means that people don\u2019t need to\u2014in some ways, for a lot of property owners, they don\u2019t need to spend the money fixing it. But at the same time, as a starting point, the Minister talked about numbers and I would be keen to know where the Minister got those numbers from.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EQuestion to the Minister. I am moving on to clause 7, noting that clause 7 is the substantial part of this bill. For clarity, Madam Chair, I will be referring to the new section numbers instead of the clause number\u2014because I think about 30 pages of this bill is the same clause. I will be referring to new section 133AB as a starting point. This is the 76bottom of page 9\u2014again, noting that others may have questions elsewhere. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn new section 133AB(4), inserted by clause 7, there is also a change and I couldn\u2019t find it in the explanatory note, so if the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind elaborating. In Amendment Paper 702, there has been a change that changes the way an earthquake-prone building is registered to now an earthquake-prone building (EPB) registered immediately before 1 July 2027. I want to check with the Minister, why has there been an extension to the middle of next year when it comes to this particular part that wasn\u2019t part of the select committee?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I want to ask the Minister, and again, I acknowledge there are people in this House who are far more skilled than I am when it comes to understanding building construction and material. But looking at new section 133AB(6)(b)(ii) and also (c), we are also seeing\u2014OK, I\u2019ll start with (6)(b)(ii), because (c) is quite substantial. New section 133AB(6)(b)(ii): \u201Ctall building built using heavy materials\u201D. There is also a specific change\u2014and I won\u2019t talk about the EPB methodology yet, but I just want to check why has there been a change in this case? I would have assumed that the previous wording, as those concepts are explained in the EPB methodology, would actually be sufficient to address the same idea. Why has there been, I guess, additional clarification given in that instance?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor new section 133AB(6)(b)(iii)\u2014Madam Chair, this is my final question here. It has changed. New words have been inserted: \u201Cto be considered\u201D. Who, then, is responsible for doing the consideration? Previously it just said it\u2019s a tall building but now it has to be considered a tall building. Clarification for that would be great. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u0022c1a0fceaa630e383021888491e9e08f0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c1a0fceaa630e383021888491e9e08f0\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (22:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. First of all, I\u2019m just interested\u2014the Minister\u2019s obviously stood up and was very proud about all the money that\u2019s going to be saved. My thoughts, actually, are on people\u2019s lives, especially when I look at Christchurch where I\u2019m from and the 185 people that died there. It\u2019s actually really important that we take this really seriously, because actually it\u2019s people\u2019s lives with this type of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are just a couple of things that I want to talk about in the first couple of clauses. In clause 4, there\u2019s a change there where \u201Cengineering assessment\u201D has been repealed and it has been replaced with \u201Cengineering evaluation\u201D. It appears to me that when you look through this, one of the main changes is the word \u201Cassessment\u201D has been removed. In the interpretation in the Act, when it talks about an engineering assessment, it actually mentions in the interpretation that there is an assessment. When it goes into this new\u2014and I\u2019m working with your amendment to the amendment bill. It just talks about an evaluation. I just want to get some clarity, I guess, about what that actually means when we\u2019re moving away from it being an assessment, an engineering assessment, to just an evaluation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason why I say that is because after the September 2010 earthquakes and before February, there were a lot of evaluations being done on the buildings within the CBD. We had red stickers put on and yellow stickers put on and green stickers put on. Obviously, February happened and then buildings that were evaluated with green stickers collapsed and people died.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt concerns me when we look at this and it just says, \u201Cevaluation\u201D. I\u2019d hate it if we\u2019re actually lowering the standard of the assessments that we\u2019re doing on buildings through this. I\u2019m sure that won\u2019t be the case, but it\u2019d be great to get some clarity on that to make sure we\u2019re not lowering the standard of engineering assessments that we\u2019re doing on buildings to determine their status.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI then just want to pop across new section 114A, inserted by clause 5B. I just want to double-check, because I understand that there is no change of use for earthquake-prone buildings (EPB) until the remediation is complete. I wasn\u2019t on the Transport and Infrastructure Committee so this may have been addressed, but what if the actual change reduces the risk to people? Maybe fewer people are actually going to be in the building or around the building. My question is are we therefore potentially not reducing risks if actually they could change it to actually have less risk?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy last question in this call is on clause 6. It\u2019s just down the very bottom of the page where it says a register-only EPB. In the interpretations of the amendments in the Act, every time it has \u201CEPB\u201D, it\u2019s like there\u2019s EPB methodology, EPB notice, it has an interpretation of this. This is the only place I can find where it has EPB but no interpretation, so register-only EPB, but there\u2019s no interpretation of it. I\u2019m just wondering why this is, because everywhere else it will have \u201Cearthquake-prone building\u201D and every time it uses \u201CEPB\u201D there\u2019s an actual interpretation with EPB and the word that goes with it. I\u2019m just curious about what that is and why that\u2019s like that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey are my three questions. The first question is on actually the interpretation of \u201Cengineering evaluation\u201D and whether that\u2019s a lower standard to an engineering assessment. What would happen if, actually, a building owner wanted to change the use of an earthquake-prone building to something that actually would reduce the risk to people? Also clause 6 where it talks about a register-only EPB, there is no interpretation to that. I\u2019m just curious about what that actually refers to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00226689b608b51186866a24867229952b8a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226689b608b51186866a24867229952b8a\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (22:57)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, Madam Chair, and thanks, members, for your questions. I want to make it very clear for the member\u2014I don\u2019t think he was necessarily implying that my reflection of the cost savings didn\u2019t take into account the reality of the loss of life incurred across this country. I don\u2019t think he was implying that I wasn\u2019t being empathetic about the reality, because we all know that that was significant, and it absolutely is something that is that. The reality of the numbers that I was articulating though were provided through the expert consultants in the context of before and after the change, which I think is an important perspective in regards to what impact this has from that regard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe changes are proportionate to the risk which is in play depending on the region of New Zealand and the questions raised around evaluation. It\u2019s fair to say that the evaluation is less intrusive than an assessment phase. It does not require the same level of work to identify any deficiencies and it is a more a cost effective. So there is a point of difference between those two points.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe member also asked question regards to clause 4, the detail of the engineering evaluation. Again, as noted in regards to the question answers previously will be described in the earthquake-prone methodology which was set by the CE.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA number of other questions in regards to the date, the clause of which I think was 113AB(4)(B)(ii)\u2014just reflecting I was listening\u20141 July 2027. That is the date for building within the scope of the bill and that\u2019s relating to tall buildings and the tall buildings heavy construction drafting change is also based on advice from experts at the Parliamentary Counsel Office. To be fair, as was noted previously to another answer, it\u2019s just better wording to reflect the policy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u0022a9c9bcd36a21bd994c3dd1104b7d3501\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a9c9bcd36a21bd994c3dd1104b7d3501\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (22:59)\u003C/span\u003E: First to the Minister, he gave a percentage of the buildings that will come off the register as 55 percent and then gave an explanation about why those are coming off and out of the regulations as that there is more proportional to the risk.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMinister, I want to clarify and understand what you\u2019re saying there, because most of those buildings will be the 1,400 or so in Auckland which has yet to be remediated but are coming off the list anyway. That is a change which at no point in the official advice, we\u2019ve had advice that those are buildings which are low risk.  Instead, we have this new part of the regulatory net which is an area that is deemed to be low risk. Is what you\u2019re saying that it is still proportional to the risk to take those off? Because that\u2019s not my understanding. My understanding is that that\u2019s a decision which has been made, that is expedient, that takes a number of buildings out of the system, recognising that it is difficult and expensive to remediate, but not necessarily because those are low-risk buildings at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to ask the Minister about clause 6 of Amendment Paper 702, but this is a different question. It\u2019s not about the words; it\u2019s about the buildings which are being built in Wellington now which are apartment conversions from commercial builds. This is something that we tested at the select committee reasonably robustly. A number of submitters were particularly interested in this. It\u2019s not a big industry. There are a few developers who do this. Generally, it\u2019ll be one guy who has been in the building industry for a long time and has put his entire capital into buying a commercial building to do the conversion in, so these remediation costs are very important to them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is: have you made it less permissive, in a bill that is meant to be much more enabling of development work? It\u2019s meant to be pro-developer, pro-commercial property, and large residential landlord-owner permissive. Is this one of the changes which actually seems to be worse for those people who are in the process of going through remediation to those buildings, which will need their status to be converted after they\u2019ve finished? Often the commercial-to-apartment conversions only happen in a change of use at the end, because the works happen while they are commercial buildings. This change will affect some of those buildings, like the one that is opposite Stats House, just down the road from here, where the developer has undergone remediation but he hasn\u2019t necessarily completed that remediation. He has a building consent, but he will need his final consents and approvals for each apartment. He still has a sign-off to go from council. It\u2019s not like he\u2019s finished once he\u2019s gone through the process for undergoing the work, so this needs to say \u201Ccompletion\u201D, because the council still does have a stage where they can check completion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELook, it\u2019s not many cases\u2014there are, like, five of these probably\u2014but, for the people who have undertaken them, it will be the difference between whether they need to sell their apartments for, say, $600,000 or for $620,000 to recoup the costs. It is a relevant consideration for those people who are undertaking their work, and it does represent a number of affordable builds in, say, Wellington and in Christchurch that are going on at the moment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022e3bf8e2c333475468a266ee003e46792\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e3bf8e2c333475468a266ee003e46792\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (23:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, Madam Chair. Thanks to the member Arena Williams for the question. To add further context in regards to the risk question and the point, the bill does, through its focus, really focus the remediation requirements on the most highest-risk buildings across the country, and as a result of that, that is expected to increase compliance. Also, the reality there is that the focus, equally, is through ensuring that the focus is on the higher seismic-risk areas, and those buildings that are in zones that are considered low-risk are going to be removed, because their risk is relatively lower.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to the other aspects around questions on risk, the low-risk definition portion is informed by the national seismic hazard model, which is, obviously, updated as the science becomes updated and available. The earthquake-prone building question, in regards to definitions around section 133C: the building has to be evaluated first, before it can be under the earthquake-prone building and in terms of that determination as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u0022c17c7e9585c7364ff6a2f8d0f6006048\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c17c7e9585c7364ff6a2f8d0f6006048\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (23:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Can I just acknowledge the Minister for Building and Construction for his responses. I actually think that the Minister holds portfolios\u2014a suite of portfolios\u2014that are equally associated with these issues, in terms of building and construction, but also local government obviously has a really important role here; and as Minister for Auckland, given our view around where Auckland should sit, or not sit, within this. That\u2019s clear in the select committee report back. I want to acknowledge this: the fact that the Minister has a number of hats that are relevant to what\u2019s happening tonight.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing is that, with Ms Williams, I sat on the select committee that dealt with some of these matters, and back in February, I think, of this year was when we heard the submissions as part of that process. What we do have in front of us at the moment, Minister, is your Amendment Paper that is much more recent than that. The select committee, despite its report back, hasn\u2019t actually had an opportunity to tease out some of these issues that you have identified. One that I do want to ask the Minister about is the proposed change in new clause\u00A05B. This would insert a new section 114A. In essence, what we see that this does is it requires the owner of the building to not change the use of the building until the seismic work is, effectively, complete or under way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, we\u2019ve heard a little bit from the Minister this evening around the economics of not doing this stuff and also doing this stuff, but there is one part in there which relates to, I guess, the assessment of the impact this might have on the provision of two things. One is on vacant land, which is often in urban city areas, and not necessarily huge swathes of vacant land\u2014areas where there might be parcels of vacant land nearby and some buildings that are subject to new seismic requirements. The other is, as the Minister will know, particularly in some smaller towns, often there are town revitalisation projects that are under way or part way through a process where there is a requirement where the use of the building is, effectively, subject to a freeze until the seismic work is complete. I\u2019m just trying to get a handle from the Minister, if he\u2019s able to, around what the kind of value of that side of the work is, in terms of not doing some of that stuff.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs Arena Williams has said, we do support this legislation, although we\u2019ve had a track record tonight already where we have supported a bill and a late-landing Amendment Paper has effectively changed the position of the Labour Party. It would be helpful just to understand from the Minister some responses to those issues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00222735c6f562ad0eae425ff0cb9fc04518\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222735c6f562ad0eae425ff0cb9fc04518\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (23:08)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member Tangi Utikere for the question. The question in regard to new clause\u00A05B, new section 114A, noted the points around the change of use, which is a defined term and defined in regulations. Basically, what that\u2019s looking at is changing the use of a building from one to another, but only in circumstances where the change to a new use, which is in effect, in this case\u2014that\u2019s the point which triggers more onerous building code requirements, and it\u2019s that trigger point that that the definition is referring to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u0022b2f6ad6abdad55add861f251ebafc2b0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b2f6ad6abdad55add861f251ebafc2b0\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (23:08)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I must say, before, when I asked the question around \u201Cregister-only EPB\u201D, I must have been getting tired, because it\u2019s quite late at night, because, as soon as I sat down, I did see the interpretation on the other page. Apologies for that question, Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to move to clause 7 of Amendment Paper 702, new section 133AB(1)(a). I have a couple of wee questions on this part. The first bit is around a building that is used wholly or mainly for residential purposes. I just wanted to understand, I guess, what the interpretation of \u201Cmainly\u201D is. I know that, through the earthquake Act itself, that caused a lot of issues when they\u2019re trying to decide whether a building was commercial or residential, and it was an ongoing issue for some time. I\u2019m just wondering what is considered \u201Cmainly\u201D? Is it over 50 percent of the time it\u2019s used for residential purposes, or over 50 percent of the buildings used for residential purposes? Or is it a higher bar?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, further down, at new subsection (2)(b)(i), I\u2019m just curious where it talks about \u201Cis a hostel, boardinghouse, or other specialised accommodation;\u201D. Specialised accommodation\u2014does that also include short-stay accommodation like Airbnbs? Or are they not actually part of specialised accommodation? They\u2019re just two quick questions I\u2019ve got on that around what is the definition of \u201Cmainly\u201D for residential purposes and whether \u201Cspecialised accommodation\u201D would include short-say accommodation like Airbnbs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002273f490a97f056806581be38ec6ab142b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002273f490a97f056806581be38ec6ab142b\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (23:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for your response to my questions, Minister. I want to move on to new section\u00A0133AB(6)(c)\u2014this is a new section, and this is the bottom of page 10 and top of page 11. This is where the definition for the \u201Cunreinforced masonry building\u201D has been narrowed, I think particularly with the inclusion of paragraph (c)(ii). I want to check with the Minister for Building and Construction, first of all\u2014again, the explanatory note doesn\u2019t actually say what the rationale is for narrowing the scope of \u201Cunreinforced masonry building\u201D\u2014whether there has been any modelling that has been done on, again, how many buildings will now be excluded as a part or, like, a percentage, or how many will be excluded, because of the narrowing of the criteria. That\u2019s my first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy second question, when we are looking \u201Cat least 1 of those exterior walls\u201D needs to face\u2014previously, it just needed to have one exterior wall that was built of unreinforced masonry, but now it has to face \u201Ca public road, footpath, or other thoroughfare\u201D. We have seen, understandably, that there is a human life and health and safety component when you are looking at including the criteria for a public road and footpath. To give you an example, there is a line of buildings that is on Newton Road in Auckland\u2014for example, because that\u2019s where I travel quite frequently\u2014where if there is an earthquake, that whole wall will fall on the footpath. So I see why this is included, but what I don\u2019t understand is by narrowing that scope, what modelling has been done in terms of the potential human life lost or injured if you have an exterior wall of unreinforced masonry that falls on another building?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf the definition is a \u201Cplace where people congregate\u201D\u2014I want to move just to new subsection (7)(a). Again, other people may have other perspectives around this. It does give a definition of \u201Cplace where people congregate\u201D, but what about, for example, if you have an evacuation point? An evacuation point in the event of an emergency is neither a place where people intended to gather\u2014as far as I know, because it doesn\u2019t fulfil the example that\u2019s given here, like a bus stop. You\u2019re also not otherwise likely to gather on a regular basis, because it\u2019s an evacuation point. You don\u2019t normally congregate there until you need to congregate there. But in the event of, potentially, an earthquake etc., for example, is an evacuation point captured by this? I would assume that an evacuation point does not meet the requirement of a place where people congregate, in which case the narrower scope will not capture these sort of buildings and therefore these buildings will presumably be excluded from the definition of \u201Cunreinforced masonry buildings\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to check with the Minister if my interpretation is correct and if my example is an accurate example of what could be considered \u201Cplace where people congregate\u201D. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00221624c86b8cda154a8a1f783916b2d633\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221624c86b8cda154a8a1f783916b2d633\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (23:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you for the questions. Just in regards to the question on new section 133AB(2)(b)(i) in regards to Airbnb, technically, yes, if there were two or more storeys. However, it would also then come into the detail in regards to specifics around fire evacuation purpose, duration, and all that. It really depends on the detail, the nature of that operation\u2014but technically.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u00223db76157d3eee8bc8c4e5a6d1eb98f2f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223db76157d3eee8bc8c4e5a6d1eb98f2f\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (23:15)\u003C/span\u003E: I just want to come back to my question to the Minister on clauses 5B and 6 about change of use. This was something that was examined reasonably carefully at the Transport and Infrastructure Committee, so I want to make sure we get it right. I\u2019m not confused about what a change of use is. What I wanted to know was whether for the conversions of commercial buildings to apartment buildings which are ongoing now, the provisions which he has proposed, which are even more, I guess, prohibitive or strongly worded than the ones that the select committee proposed, are too strong for those ones?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is\u2014there are a few of these buildings which are going through at the moment, and the original wording or the provision had to be that that remediation was, basically, ongoing. There\u2019s no suggestion in the old words that it wouldn\u2019t have been completed by the time that the council had completed its final sign-offs. But what this new wording says is that at the point of the change of use, the remediation has to have happened.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is whether that is unfairly prohibitive for those commercial building owners who are undergoing conversions now, in a way that is actually more prohibitive than what the old rules\u2014which this Government has intended to make more liberal\u2014were, even before. Under the old rules, all of the examples that I have talked about would have needed to get up to 67 percent\u2014the magical number\u2014compliance earthquake strength. That doesn\u2019t apply anymore. It is more case specific. But now we\u2019ve got this problem of having to do that before you apply for your conversion. For some of them, that will create an extra unknown in the way that they have sequenced their developments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is: is that the intention, when it just doesn\u2019t seem to be fitting with the Government\u2019s policy intent to make things simpler for building owners who are upgrading their\u2014because the intention here is that upgrading your earthquake standards in a building shouldn\u2019t then also trigger a number of other features which mean that you have to spend even more money to bring your building up to a code of compliance standard which is not like-for-like. If you had a perfectly safe and serviceable commercial building for the purposes of the earthquake rules and you\u2019re using it now for apartments, there should be some similarity of those rules across the two uses in a way that makes sense to the ordinary person on the street and doesn\u2019t require a much higher burden. Is this consistent with that policy goal is the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00222b35febd9e18a96abc74d9711f03c825\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222b35febd9e18a96abc74d9711f03c825\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (23:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, Madam Chair. Just in regards to the points raised by the member there around the change of use requirements, it\u2019s important to recognise that those requirements are based on and fall off the back of the recommendations from the royal commission of inquiry after the Canterbury earthquakes in 2011-2012. That is the basis for where those come from, and the context around transition from one type to another follows from that underlying basis.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe question before also around\u2014I didn\u2019t get the clause, but the evacuation point one?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022abf83c3b56d5958b2097c3ecc0239fa6\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, it\u2019s (7)(a).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da8bc2221cd8a2849c205c36ded3d84a\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: The short answer on that is that it\u2019s a technical matter that, again\u2014and I\u2019ve used the same answer for multiple, but it goes back to the earthquake-prone building methodology changes that will be defined by the CE through secondary legislation. That\u2019s where that will be included.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u00224c62f8e0528bd40a163786089102c49a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224c62f8e0528bd40a163786089102c49a\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (23:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Can I ask a question of the Minister for Building and Construction in relation to clause 7. Quite helpfully, I think Dr Xu-Nan\u2019s suggestion of referencing the relevant new section is probably easier for people to follow. So this is the proposed new section 133AB(6)(C)(ii)(A) and (B). This is, in essence, a replacement as to the definition of \u201Cunreinforced masonry building\u201D. What is clear in the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 702 is that the definition is extended quite significantly from what was there. So Minister, you are suggesting, effectively, a strikethrough of two provisions there and, basically, expanding that out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe two components there that relate to at least one of the exterior walls\u2019 actions, as such: one is the facing of it on to a public-facing area or pathway or footpath or road or what have you. This goes to Lawrence Xu-Nan\u2019s point around where people congregate. There\u2019s a question there around who decides that component as opposed to a specified\u2014I think the member said bus stop or frontage or what have you. It would be important to understand who actually makes that determination.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second part there is around it being considered close enough to that public-facing component there. But there goes on to be a further one in new paragraph (d) that references this issue of an urban centre. Now, if we root down in new subsection (8), there is a definition there as to what an urban centre is\u2014which is helpful, I think, because is it an urban centre, is it an urban area; what is this?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut of interest is that it\u2019s referencing a Statistics New Zealand kind of documentation classification there\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022459b20875e83498b0a1881643fc5355c\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Didn\u2019t have that one at select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aa36e656d0228606db15fed168f37b2b\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE\u003C/span\u003E: No, we didn\u2019t actually, and this is why it\u2019s jumped out a bit, because what we did have in the Transport and Infrastructure Committee is a map of New Zealand that identified Auckland, the Chathams, and whole parts of other areas in the country shaded representing the sort of seismic risk of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESo why is it that now we have a reference to a document issued by Statistics New Zealand or an approach by Statistics New Zealand which might on face value be helpful, but in terms of its usability being constructive, where a diagram might be perhaps another option rather than\u2014or a list, as opposed to another reference. Obviously, the Minister is seeking to introduce that, so it would be helpful to understand why the reference is not consistent with other approaches previously in front of the select committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022c4070d302ce86bdfb2f8027a1973fd86\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c4070d302ce86bdfb2f8027a1973fd86\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (23:23)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for the question. We\u2019re referring here again to new section 133AB(6)(c)(ii). This comes off the back of the Cabinet process and the Amendment Paper, which was in effect the narrowing of that definition around the unreinforced masonry building so that the regime, in effect, better targets the exterior walls that pose the life safety risk. That\u2019s the whole purpose around the definitional change that was made around that\u2014at the same time, though, as is noted, the expanding and refinement of the anytime pathway to identify any relevant buildings after the ordinary identification deadlines and then adding some risk mitigation exemption pathways as well in there alongside the five-year period where an exemption is revoked after the seismic work deadline.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo all of these elements included within that are in effect to ensure that the focus of that definition is more targeted in the areas around the risk, which goes back to that opening statement around the purpose of this as around ensuring that the focus of the broader legislation is focusing on the area as opposed to highest risk.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regard to the question in regard to the mapping point\u2014and I get the point, and I\u2019ve seen the old map and the new map. What was acknowledged is that many territory\u2014and this goes back to the local government portion of the overlay, that a number of local governments across the country are moving to digital map publication and have quite detailed mapping aspects. So this in effect provides a transition period, acknowledging that, you know, we\u2019re trying to get the best available information data to make best-informed decisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002239928fdd2aa36fc8483e8443d2838205\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002239928fdd2aa36fc8483e8443d2838205\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (23:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for your response as well, Minister Watts, but just noting that I think for some of these, like you said, Minister, the additional flexibility that is offered by the earthquake-prone building (EPB) methodology might actually be stated in some areas, but sometimes if it\u2019s not inconsistently stated or highlighted, it is actually helpful for the Minister even just to say that this is something that will be considered later on as secondary legislation. Again, I\u2019m trying not to discuss the EPB methodology because I believe it\u2019s proposed new section 133AZI, so it\u2019s right at the end of where we\u2019re going to discuss.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut I\u2019m going to move on to new subsection (8). I do appreciate the Minister\u2019s response around urban centres. My only question for this part is why is it so specific to the date and also the specific volume potentially or publication by Stats NZ around the functional urban areas. I guess I\u2019m assuming it could have been done in a way that is more generic, because now if Stats NZ updates its methodology and classification, presumably then we now need to change this particular piece of legislation as well in response.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m going to move on to new section 133AD on page 12. Again, this area has the two definitions for required remedial measure\u2014you know, with facade risk mitigation, but also targeted retrofit. But I\u2019m more interested in the new addition in new section 133AD(2), which again talks about the EPB methodology. But what I\u2019m finding, and maybe the Minister is able to explain, is now we are giving more kind of flexibility around how regional or local councils or regional jurisdictions\u2014additional ability to add or include additional things for the EPB methodology. Would that risk inconsistencies between different areas, or is the secondary legislation going to be encompassing not so much the whole country\u2014because I know certain areas are excluded.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m just thinking that if, for example\u2014maybe Auckland is a bad example, but if, let\u2019s say, Wellington decides to do something that\u2019s different through EPB methodology, then Palmy doing something that is different in EPB methodology, how then would people know what was required when it comes to facade risk mitigation or targeted retrofit?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I\u2019m not entirely clear on why this additional part with the additional requirement and the EPB methodologies need to be added in for the purpose of 133AD.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u0022c55319f15173a0baa3b142f0107678b6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c55319f15173a0baa3b142f0107678b6\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (23:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a question and it\u2019s around new section 133AB, because when you read through this, it obviously defines what an earthquake-prone building is going to be in and it does reduce the amount that there currently is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2013d1a6ae3c93524c6c8e2c8075079\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Was that AB?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a0986c3d3a77542e6a229bbc47c4aed\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: AB. I just wanted to know: was there any analysis done on the buildings that did collapse in the Canterbury earthquakes that did result in loss of life? Would they have been captured and deemed as earthquake-prone buildings under this new bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI guess this is one of my concerns that I\u2019ve had with this bill. Unfortunately, I wasn\u2019t in the Transport and Infrastructure Committee, and it may have been spoken about, but it\u2019s just ensuring that, as we reduce it\u2014and we understand the reason why we need to reduce the amount\u2014actually we look at the past as well and see what happened there and ensuring those buildings that did collapse would have been captured if they were still standing if this regime was in place. So I\u2019d be good to know if there was any analysis done on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u002289f814f84752e4396eacded5392e87ef\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002289f814f84752e4396eacded5392e87ef\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (23:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. On to reinforced masonry at the end of page 10 and top of page 11. The narrowing of the definition of unreinforced masonry (URM) is something that I thought carefully about, because we do support this bill; we want to make this a workable regime.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I want to clarify with him\u2014firstly, these are pretty narrow conditions. The \u201Cover three storeys\u201D would be one that I could then guess how many buildings are actually still on the register. But because it\u2019s one exterior wall now, I can\u2019t. So first question is: how many buildings will be on the URM register that was part of the Royal commission of inquiry after the Canterbury earthquakes? There\u2019s a special register for URM buildings, and now that we have this condition set out at (ii)(b), it\u2019s quite unclear what will then be on the list of those buildings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor instance, something like the Newtown Hotel\u2014formerly, the Ascot Theatre, which Wellington members who are interested in this bill know about\u2014is something that probably meets the criteria for the exterior walls. It might meet the criteria for a publicly facing area where there are people going past, but doesn\u2019t meet the criteria for the three storeys. Some of these very well-known buildings with issues which have been flagged and then quite publicly debated. And their history\u2014they are well-known to the residents. This is one, I think, which is still ongoing after the 2018 special funding that was made available to the Wellington City Council to remediate some of these buildings. So there are buildings like that. Another one is the T G Macarthy building at 58 Cuba Street, where it is unclear to me\u2014and I follow this closely\u2014whether those will still be included in the definition. That is important, because: is this now a definition that is so close that it only really captures things like the Kennedy Building, which are tall, or does it now exclude many of those buildings which have been subject to a pretty fierce public debate?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to ask him about\u2014there are plenty of areas that are outside of Wellington, say the Manawat\u016B District Council and Feilding town centre, which are particularly affected by the concentration of these URM buildings. Government did say specifically the intention of the policy was to make sure that some of these small towns weren\u2019t crippled by the costs of remediating their town centres. But there will still be well-known public buildings where the people in those towns who were the most vociferous advocates for a more permissive and more liberalised system still know that there are some buildings that will need to be remediated. Because there is a public risk, because they are exactly in the town centre, overhanging the main street. Those are in, but there are other buildings in which it is unclear to anyone who has a public interest in this, whether they will be remediated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is really the point here, is that this was meant to be\u2014after the Canterbury earthquakes\u2014a regime which also created a public interest in the remediation of buildings that formed a partially public function. Whether it was the library building in Wellington, whether it was the cinema in Wellington\u2014which has people going through it all the time who are not going to read signs on the door about remediation requirements before they decide whether to go in or out. I have been someone who has taken my children to the cinema in Wellington when there has been an earthquake, and it is very scary because you know roughly in your head that it is an earthquake-prone building but you don\u2019t know quite what the risk is. That there is a public interest is part of the how the regime is intended to work. His new definition has made it very hard for people to even determine whether some buildings in their town centre which they walk past every day on their way to work will need to be remediated or not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo this goes to my question: how many buildings has he excluded by now changing the UMR definition, which was a key part of the findings of the Royal commission after the Canterbury earthquake, to something which is much, much narrower and seems to only apply to tall buildings going forward?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00229508181097217b97b6b3c2d6d945ef38\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229508181097217b97b6b3c2d6d945ef38\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (23:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks very much, Madam Chair. Thanks, members. I think this is an important point in the context that the majority of loss of life in the Canterbury earthquakes were as a result of people that were injured and killed as a result of the URM, or are the unreinforced masonry, aspect collapsing and/or heavy concrete buildings. So the member\u2019s point and question around assurance that the recommendations from the Royal commission inquiry in regards to that were taken on board around this and were taken into account as part of this legislation. Those buildings specifically have been included in regards to this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to the, I think the member mentioned the Macarthy building and the Kennedy Building. I\u2019m not an expert on what they\u2019re made of particularly, but on the basis that they are URM or concrete, then they would be remediated because they were in a medium or high zone. All of the specific detail in regards to that will be in the earthquake-prone building methodology consultation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227257241bf4f126e38945168e9b4f829f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan. I just want to check, is everyone ready to move past page 12? Is there anything prior to page 12? We\u2019ve done quite a bit on those first few pages.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022fb2a656f6b914a7d680fc5432a11b2c3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fb2a656f6b914a7d680fc5432a11b2c3\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (23:36)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve actually got one question just on the last bit of the remediation method, but that\u2019s on page 13, that\u2019s (2)(c), and then I\u2019m going to move on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de8a2f90a51e30a6c29c5466eb344dda\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Seeing you\u2019re on your feet, you do that question\u2014you do your question now. But then if Arena Williams has something that she wants to go back to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e975e55b0342f005af275506fc0066d\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Of course. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to check, because the new insertion here of 133AB(2(c) allows for the ability for a building to be determined to have more than one required remediation measure. I also think that\u2014I will be interested to know from other members of the House of how they feel about this particular part. But I think I\u2019m more interested in if a building is determined to have more than one requirement, would that also be reflected in the way they are notified, that more than one requirement is needed. And they will be detailed\u2014in terms of whether the requirement based on the tall building or using heavy materials or unreinforced masonry buildings\u2014it will be detailed to the point that they are able to say that this is the required mediation measure, this is what it is, and you will need to have facade risk mitigation or targeted retrofit. Just want to check that. That\u2019s also going to be able to be spelled out for whoever is, I guess, responsible for that particular building\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI am going to move to\u2014and again, I know that my colleagues Arena Williams and Tangi Utikere and Mike Davidson may have additional questions, but I wanted to check with the Minister this new insertion on page 14. So this is 133AEA. I like the fact that it\u2019s been taken out from what looks like the previous 133AE(2) and it has been given its own individual section and it has kind of elaborated on the requirement for the chief executive to publish and maintain a map. But can I just check: has there been any thought, since I believe that, particularly\u2014(2)(a) is added, and I think (ii) is added. I just want to check with the Minister if there\u2019s been any considerations of other things that could also be included. And not seeing any sort of exclusivity or exhaustive language being used for 133AEA(2). I\u2019m assuming that while (2)(a) and (b) are required, that it doesn\u2019t preclude the chief executive from including other things on the map as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u00220bd76fcc9db3e2c9c980adf07e773dc3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220bd76fcc9db3e2c9c980adf07e773dc3\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (23:39)\u003C/span\u003E: I just wanted to follow up. My question was in the context of the Wellington buildings, and the ones that we are talking about there are really around public roads, they\u2019re public buildings in some cases. But in the context of say the Hawke\u2019s Bay or the West Coast, the committee considered a number of buildings which were not like that. It was put to us by one submitter who was very much in favour of this change\u2014he was advocating for a particular small church on the West Coast that was only used for things like weddings and for people who were celebrating that particular building because of their family history.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESo, very few uses in a year, and I think what the Minister for Building and Construction is telling us is that something like that would fail for every criterion but for new subsection 133AEA(2)(b)(ii), inserted by clause 7, which is then set out in regulation. I guess my question to the Minister is, in those areas like the Manawat\u016B and like the West Coast where we\u2019re not talking about the big public buildings, we\u2019re not talking about the tall buildings, and we\u2019re also not talking about the town centre\u2014so the ones that are a risk for people because they are going past it for work\u2014but those buildings which are rarely used, and the risk to life and limb, if they are happening to be used, say, by a wedding at a time when there is an earthquake in the context of, say, something like the West Coast where we are talking about areas near the Alpine Fault and the Buller fault systems, and there is a pretty broad seismic risk there, is it the case that the regulations will decide whether a group of 30 people at a wedding who might or might not use it on any given day is an adequate risk for that building to need to be remediated? Because I think that is the answer, and that does seem to be a pretty big departure from what the old rule was.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002257770d9905ca770f7659074542e46fdd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002257770d9905ca770f7659074542e46fdd\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (23:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, Madam Chair. Just to the point there, no, it isn\u2019t a significant departure. Again, it\u2019s really down to the specifics of the individual building. I think the question before was around churches, and again, remediation is going to depend on location, height, construction type. Again, that\u2019s applicable to any of these circumstances. Again, height is noted as to that point. There was a question previously, and this is where we\u2019re sort of jumping ahead, around notification of requirements\u2014all of that is set out in future new section 133AU(2), inserted by clause 7, on page 29, which is well ahead of where we are at the moment, but just to the member\u2019s points around that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to new section 133AD on page 12, the follow-up, just to the other member\u2019s question in regards to that, is this is so the earthquake-prone building methodology will apply across the medium and high seismic zones. It will also depend, as I\u2019ve noted just before, on the specific building, not the region. Therefore, the question was asked previously around, well, what happens if there\u2019s inconsistencies between local government in that aspect? The reality is that territorial authorities should apply that consistency across the board.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022 data-id=\u002254dd160aaf77832b7c9c89a507ed83bd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226710095aa1204b3793448571c208ccd4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002254dd160aaf77832b7c9c89a507ed83bd\u0022\u003EHon JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green\u2014Rongotai) (23:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. This is my first contribution in this debate and I\u2019m just intervening here at new section 133AF, inserted by clause 7, and I\u2019ll speak to some of the tabled amendments. One of the tabled amendments my colleague Tamatha Paul has moved, and it\u2019s about the need for a cost-share scheme to provide financial assistance for the completion of seismic work, particularly on multi-owner residential earthquake-prone buildings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen we spoke to the previous Minister about the changes, there was always, I think, an understanding that in other jurisdictions, when they lift the seismic code, there\u2019s usually some form of financial assistance. In this case, while a significant number of buildings are no longer going to need remediation, there\u2019s a large number of multi-residential buildings in Wellington, in my electorate and my colleague\u2019s electorate, that are going to have to remediate the building in order to meet the new rules, and I\u2019m just wondering if the Minister for Building and Construction\u2014I mean, so far in this legislation, I know there\u2019s other ways to do it and it doesn\u2019t have to be done through legislation, but what work, if any, has been done to consider what financial assistance could be available to the owners of homes in those buildings?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy colleague has tabled a number of amendments. Both she and I have a large number of constituents who\u2019ve reached out to us who, unfortunately, are not any better off, I guess, as a result of these changes, because they are not going to be able to borrow in order to complete the works. Could the Government at least be considering some sort of loan scheme, if not a grant scheme? I think a combination of grants and loans would be super helpful to enable those buildings to be remediated and compliant with this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022229bb9829c24e023077dfa6fae308523\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022229bb9829c24e023077dfa6fae308523\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (23:45)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll come back to that. No, I\u2019ll answer that directly. The reality is that any financial assistance, or potential financial assistance, is out of scope for this bill. It is a matter for Government to consider in the context of whether they are willing to get involved in that or not, but it is their role and not part of the scope of the bill. I\u2019m acknowledging that is a matter and is an issue for your constituents, but for the purposes of this, that\u2019s where it sits.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u00221210179fb62a77003f589ffcaf3d3d82\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221210179fb62a77003f589ffcaf3d3d82\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (23:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. The bottom of page 13, this is the reference into schedule 2A, which, as we know, is that kind of static image that we\u2019re all familiar with, the colours there\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHolds up map\u003C/span\u003E] But what we see is the Minister for Building and Construction\u2019s Amendment Paper 702 basically striking out the reference in subclause (2) and then reinserting it in a much more elaborate fashion as the new section 133AEA, inserted by clause 7. One of the changes, Minister, that you are seeking to make is to remove the map that shows the boundaries of each territorial authority\u2019s district. Now, that is not replicated in your new proposal in new section 133AEA. Is this sort of because of the Head Start process in terms of not wanting to have current boundaries for territorial authorities? Oh, there\u2019s a smile coming through, so maybe that is the case. There\u2019s non-verbal confirmation perhaps. That\u2019s the first part of my question, that that has been removed and it is not inserted anywhere else; that is a change, so why is that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe second question is that the new section 133AEA talks about maintaining the digital version of a map, so that implies to me that there is still going to be a static image of a map somewhere. OK, that\u2019s good, because I was going to say, well, where is that going to be? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289ad6b654902d0fb035aec1bf5de88b7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: So that\u2019s a yes?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224499bbabd3892844febb86240dd60053\u0022\u003EHon Simon Watts\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274c92f6c720f2fa8a4b3667ec5df6c5d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: OK. I\u2019m just trying to capture for \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E because a nod doesn\u2019t quite get captured.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229947dd2bc377d4d453ee9200ab2ce3a7\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, right. Verbalise that, thank you. Member holding up static image; placing down static image; three colours on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe other question that I have is that one of the things that the Transport and Infrastructure Committee did think about was the\u2014and we\u2019ll accept that it doesn\u2019t have very often, but from time to time there can be some geological change that might alter some aspects of the seismic zones and some of the maps, not wholesale, but there might be a few tweaks from time to time. Now, the digital version is seeking to allow a zooming in of an individual property, so an individual property, you can understand exactly what that looks like. Is the intention that, in digitising it, if there are changes, that those changes would be automatically updated? And if so, how does that align with the static version of the map? Or is it intended that, over time, there would only be a digital version?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00227de8c3ab05383a649c6ed1246781a722\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227de8c3ab05383a649c6ed1246781a722\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (23:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, we\u2019re back to new section 133AB(6)(C)\u2014oh no, are we? Anyway, short answer is that maps are going to be digitally available online and you\u2019re going to able to zoom in, so there\u2019s no conspiracy theory around Head Start or any of that, I can assure the member. You\u2019ll be able to go in and zoom in and you\u2019ll be able to see the boundary and that aspect. In regards to the updating of that, I think, as you\u2019d appreciate, there is a process for it to be updated on a regular basis, but I wouldn\u2019t go as far as saying it\u2019s sort of real time or anything quicker than that, but there\u2019ll be process and procedures to ensure that this is as up to date as possible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ad9e9dd3a6b4e1c962dc6fd33168f00\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a63e48ed78b92de8e349d313386aa7e\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair. Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222dc0ccce68e0ad24201d8a6ac80fcb49\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll let you get away with that trick.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225709173bbda5ed31410aeb3a7a5ae1ac\u0022\u003EGlen Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: She was stretching. Staying awake.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002209f5bd75098cc2892f1d2d499484421c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I\u2019ll let you get away with that trick at almost 11.50 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u00221335495ad025de1c5b5a66b599e41c2a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221335495ad025de1c5b5a66b599e41c2a\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (23:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, I do have a funny hip. I want to ask the Minister for Building and Construction a relatively simple question, I think. In new section 133AF, at the top of page 15, his definition here is a bit different to the old law. That might be because of what has already been done, though. Under the old formulation, the definition of \u201Cpriority building\u201D was much, much broader. It included certain hospitals, for instance, emergency management buildings, shelters, and the kinds of things that you might want to be fully functioning as public buildings in the event of an earthquake. Those were also prioritised for remediation. Specified education buildings were also included in that. The first question there is: is it because they\u2019ve been done, because a number of the hospitals, say, have already fully been completed, or is that a change in policy? That is the first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe other question is\u2014and it might relate to this, or it might not\u2014where the role of the territorial authority includes identifying which buildings might impede a transport route, is it looking for those buildings which are also outside of its control? Is it expected to nominate public buildings, or can it also notify private building owners of the risk here? The question is about those strategically important routes which are affected by public buildings, say, in Wellington. That is a key consideration of those buildings, like the Stats NZ building, where there is also a bit of hazard around, say, a territorial authority needing to identify its own buildings for priority remediation, which attaches to it the shorter deadline of the 7.5 years. I\u2019m also asking there whether there is any form of independent check as well, if territorial authorities are not identifying those buildings, which most affect their balance sheets\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022e48b8acece85c9fd4c78c5ee4643a041\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e48b8acece85c9fd4c78c5ee4643a041\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (23:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I think that my colleague Arena Williams\u2019 questions are really interesting, and I would love to hear the response to that. I am going to ask a couple of questions around new section\u00A0133AF(1), at the top of page 15. Can I check with the Minister because, again, we\u2019ve now seen an insertion, and previously we saw a definition, of \u201Cmedium seismic zone\u201D that was previously an area of low seismic risk. But, over here, we have \u201Cpriority building\u201D. With this new addition\u2014and I think my colleague Arena Williams just pointed out the questions around \u201Cpriority building\u201D\u2014it is important for us, I think, to know, with that, again, narrowing of the definition, how many buildings would not then be captured as a result of that updated definition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EBut also, since we\u2019re discussing seismic zones and low and medium and high seismic zones and apparently you can determine something that is now a different zone to what it was previously zoned, this might be a really basic question: who determines seismic zones, and how often do they get updated?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253fec82c7877ea52920c8e3b06eae44c\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: There he is. Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2c4b89f88a64c75066666ae2ae460d8\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister is just getting some advice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223d27ad421ab69c64f3afff0b5a171b9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: OK, that\u2019s fine. No, I\u2019m just looking at the time, wondering if you wanted to wrap for the night.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227910021cc7d743cd16a2a3cc98a966bc\u0022\u003EHon Simon Watts\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e6ef171f10c0476c2314843715a95755\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: OK\u2014Arena Williams.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u0022ff6ba1168a0ba1f5c356e11477001707\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ff6ba1168a0ba1f5c356e11477001707\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (23:53)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019d love to wrap up, Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216f90012cff0fcb8c3b5b45245284b3f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: You want to wrap up?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227edf4119e84b0888010242158649e5fb\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c6d35722e0bda8b028cc7a439e21ce8a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: That would be great.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022465283513a4f237d98c4b088f0cd75c5\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a quick question. It is a very good point that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan raises, because the insertion here of \u201Cmedium\u201D in the definition of the seismic zones here\u2014how many are there? This is something that I\u2019ve asked the officials several times. Are there any priority buildings that would otherwise be priority buildings but for the exclusion of Auckland? I\u2019m sure there are. They won\u2019t tell me. Why won\u2019t they tell me? Are there buildings in Auckland which are unreinforced masonry, which may be a risk to the public, which, but for the political exclusion of Auckland, would otherwise be priorities?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00221f6ef1c4ebd0f36a5501e540ab7666af\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221f6ef1c4ebd0f36a5501e540ab7666af\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (23:54)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s only because there was the anticipation. I was actually wanting people to come back tomorrow morning so they could hear the answer. But, anyway, I\u2019ll answer it now. In regards to the question around the hazard models, so the national seismic hazard model is managed by GNS\u2014I think there probably might be a new name now, but anyway GNS; we\u2019ll call it that\u2014and the new map includes\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002225ab7d044e16733abfbcf2c4c71a9d08\u0022\u003EGlen Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: Call it whatever you want.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c9cbe3c705b039edb27b0f59efc85b37\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, it\u2019s 11.55; my apologies\u2014includes the latest science. Just in clarification to the point before around the maps and the updating of the maps, it is only Parliament that, actually, can make a change in regards to those, and that\u2019s because of the certainty of where those boundaries are. I just want to clarify the way in which I answered the question before.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b05832e7c088e004f0f053d48c414dc3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the time has come for me to leave the Chair. The House is suspended until 9.00 a.m. tomorrow.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 11.55 p.m. to 9 a.m. (Saturday)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002220c8c4c63f16ffb2dcace0c6c0ca12cb\u0022\u003EUrgency\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002200db187371ebf5c4b30f28dfaeff22ab\u0022\u003ESaturday, 19 September 2026\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e655f7168b3a9f484055548a0cf90ed3\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00225e63718975d2b13907d77ba0a927c9f2\u0022\u003EBuilding (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00228495157b7a281f106dff67e45575b63b\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007312\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u002293c12ed14f2a3c4db490e5a49970b88e\u0022\u003EPart 1 Amendments to Building Act 2004, and Schedules 1 and 2 (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea4291290ee272ee8af04b4ab975ffed\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Good morning, members. It\u2019s good to see you all here, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed. When we suspended last night, we were considering the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill and we were debating Part 1, the debate on clauses 4 to 13, \u201CAmendments to Building Act 2004\u201D, and the Schedules 1 and 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor members\u2019 information, there has been about an hour and a half of debate on this part. There has been significant debate on clause 7, and I invite members to make contributions on new section 133AG onwards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOnce again, the question is that Part 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022992751c2faf49656b1f7127b47b0d30c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022992751c2faf49656b1f7127b47b0d30c\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. A very good morning, everyone. I just wanted to provide a few answers for questions at just the closing hours of last evening, and I\u2019m sure many of you would have slept on those, as did I.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere were questions in regard to the Auckland priority buildings as we ended. Those have not been identified at this point. There were also questions in regard to the ability to change the map. I want to be clear that only Parliament will be able to change the maps. However, on the digital maps, you will be able to zoom in and be able to see the boundaries, which was the question asked last night.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere was also a question in regard to urban centres and what is in and what is out, in effect. That is defined by Stats New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u0022dc815e1cb6625bcc223cd2191889b126\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dc815e1cb6625bcc223cd2191889b126\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (09:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. It\u2019s useful for the Minister to have provided those answers, and I thank him. The follow-up question to his answer in relation to new section 133AF is: can there be an Auckland priority building if they haven\u2019t been identified, as his new definition excludes all buildings that would otherwise be a priority building but for the fact that they have been excluded by the decision to exclude Auckland?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also asked the Minister a question in relation to new section 133AF(3). He was taking advice at the time last night, so he may not have heard me. The current law\u2019s definition of priority buildings in broader. It includes certain hospitals, shelters, emergency response buildings, and specified education buildings. Has he excluded those simply because they have already been remediated, or is it the case that this is a policy decision in which those buildings that will be needed in an emergency response to an earthquake have been left out of the meaning of \u201Cpriority buildings\u201D under this bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow I turn to new section 133AG. This is the interaction between the councils\u2019 new power to identify any road or footpath which is at risk of having a building or a facade falling on to it. This is a good part of the bill. This is something that we support because in the exercise of identifying the most at-risk buildings, obviously, it\u2019s not just about the foundations or the construction of a particular building; it\u2019s also about the risk to people who are interacting with it. And arguably the most at risk and the most at need of protection are those people who could not have any idea of the risk to the building that is near them because they are outside of it. They\u2019re not owners, they\u2019re not renters; they\u2019re people who are on the street.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I want to ask him about this provision. Firstly, it seems that he has changed the way that the council will be required to identify the building with the special consultative process to one where they don\u2019t necessarily need to undertake this if there is a reasonable expectation\u2014the word is \u201Cno reasonable prospect\u201D\u2014of the kind of risk that is being envisioned here to people who are walking past or using the street frontage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI asked last night about a situation where, under new section 133AF(1)(b), a territorial authority had the wrong sort of motivation and there was moral hazard here because they might be identifying their own buildings that affected an important transport route of strategic importance to the country. But this is a different question, and it is more concerning here, where, if you have a territorial authority with its own council buildings that might impede or fall on people who are walking past, it is also up to the council to make a decision that they don\u2019t need a consultative process now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019re moving from a system which would have required the council to remediate that building, and now it\u2019s up to the council whether they remediate that building. In some situations, you have territorial authorities which are being led by mayors like the Auckland Mayor, Wayne Brown, who has been a vociferous advocate for fewer regulations around earthquake-prone buildings. He has put that case very strongly, but the fact is that he will not have the motivation that is envisioned in this change to lead from the top and to remediate those council buildings which may pose a risk. And it is up to him in the new system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo my first question is: what is the check and balance at the start to make a council authority begin the consultative process? Surely there should be a positive obligation on councils to at least begin to identify those streets which may be affected very early on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd in the transitional phase\u2014this is a question about how the transition now works, because all of the transition for Auckland is very different from what it was at the Transport and Infrastructure Committee\u2014we\u2019ve gone from a system where there was a positive obligation to remediate to one where the council will now need to take some time before considering what streets are high risk. Minister, are we talking months? Are we talking years? Are we talking decades before people around the country would see their streets registered as streets which will be high risk and anything overhanging them will need to be remediated under this format?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd then my next question is: why will an earthquake-prone unreinforced masonry building that could collapse on to a public footpath also be included in this when the footpath\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022557577b22ea9866245f0eb84813dab39\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\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=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022841011121fe8be5ee1a629ad0cac67e5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022841011121fe8be5ee1a629ad0cac67e5\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Just in regards to the member\u2019s questions related to Auckland, the answer is no because it is a low zone. Priority buildings are defined. The member should reference new section 133AF.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to the questions in regards to transition, it is fair to acknowledge that, while some buildings have already been assessed, there still will be others to do so. There will be a period that\u2019s outlined in the legislation in terms of duration of that. The reality is that, again, in the case of Auckland, this is a low-risk zone. The whole purpose of this legislation is to ensure that those buildings that have a higher risk, in the context of risk to life, are prioritised in the area in which a remediation occurs. Auckland is a low zone.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u0022aae3bde930eb1c62275fe07d1d1c998a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aae3bde930eb1c62275fe07d1d1c998a\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (09:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I just actually have a very quick question, and it\u2019s a follow-up from Arena Williams around the priority buildings. As was noted, a number of the buildings that have come\u2014for example, hospitals\u2014are Crown-owned. I\u2019m just wondering: what are the cost savings to the Crown from the removal of all Crown buildings that would have been on the priority list previously?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00228dbe1a4c4a4be3966de9a390df0f1ba1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228dbe1a4c4a4be3966de9a390df0f1ba1\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:08)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, it is acknowledged that there will be Crown assets, including local government assets, that sit across the country that will be impacted by the legislation that we\u2019re passing this evening. In some instances, as a result of that, the requirement to remediate will be different to what it was previously, before the Act. That may result in a change in cost of works that are under way. However, it will be on a case by case basis.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe prior member also asked a question in regards to new section 133AG(3)(a), around the consultative process. I\u2019d refer the member\u2014that process is outlined in the legislation, which will provide substantive overview in regards to the questions she was asking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u00225314a9ab5dfe1d5ea7ff4e64291fb6cb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225314a9ab5dfe1d5ea7ff4e64291fb6cb\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (09:09)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning. I thank the Minister for Building and Construction for his answers there. I just wanted to pick up on one response that he gave, which was a slight change to the answer that he\u2019d originally given me last night\u2014and then we suspended last night with an answer and he\u2019s clarified that this morning. It\u2019s about the Schedule 2A map, because originally it wasn\u2019t known that Parliament had the only authority to change the map. So I do thank the Minister for that and understand that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat does raise a question though. I assume that\u2019s because the likelihood of changing the seismic situation is often so rare that that\u2019s why Parliament needs to do it, and the legislation allows for that. But the follow-up question is whether or not the Minister thinks that there was an opportunity, perhaps through this bill, to have a subsequent amendment around the ability of Parliament or, in certain circumstances, for that responsibility to not sit with Parliament but what was the former GNS Science\u2014I think the Minister said last night.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s the first part of the question. I\u2019ve got another one, but I think it looks like he wants to answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022e0cb3fe65491ba10063c8134080540b5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e0cb3fe65491ba10063c8134080540b5\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Just in response to that question, the assessment the member has outlined is correct in the context of the map. The purpose here is that the movement, potentially, of that boundary does have very significant implications, and so it was deemed that that scale of potential change needs to be through a change in the law to ensure that all parties\u2014including in this House but outside\u2014have the mechanism to be able to be involved with that consultation process. That is a conservative position, and I think it\u2019s a reasonable position.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u0022f840363e6e7680b81d02ad87f63ca759\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f840363e6e7680b81d02ad87f63ca759\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (09:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to ask the Minister for Building and Construction about new section 133AH, inserted by clause 7 of Amendment Paper 702. I\u2019m at the bottom of page 16. My question there is around the council\u2019s powers now that they have a narrower scope of buildings to consider. Really, the thrust of the question is: if they include buildings which were previously included within the definition wrongly, arguably\u2014according to the building owner reporting to the developer who is in charge of, say, the street frontage or the precinct that the building is within\u2014is that now open to legal challenge?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI ask because the formulation of this one is pretty different from the old situation, where that couldn\u2019t have arisen. You couldn\u2019t have had a legal challenge to council for identifying what was in and out wrongly, but of course there is a real motivation, and it is financial, for developers to have their buildings excluded from the list of buildings that a territorial authority considers to be potentially earthquake-prone.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s the first question, and whether there are challenges, then, that also arise from the special consultative process. That\u2019s a process which, as the Minister knows, is for gathering the public\u2019s views and is a pretty prescribed set of public input requirements. It\u2019s not designed, necessarily, for what would be a reasonably litigious and evidence-based inquiry into whether or not a building did meet a certain engineering threshold via the earthquake-prone buildings methodology to be included by the council.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat relates to the previous point around new section 133AG. What I\u2019m really asking is: now that the council has a new discretion to begin the consultative process or not under section 133AG, how many people is few enough for the Minister to consider it appropriate for the council to not begin that consultative process? Under the old system, that wasn\u2019t really what was at issue\u2014you wouldn\u2019t have had the beginning of a consultative process in this way. But what we might see here\u2014and I gave the example of the Mayor of Auckland, because he is the highest-profile mayor with views that called for liberalisation of these rules, but there are others: high-profile councillors in Dunedin come to mind, who ran a very outspoken public campaign on these issues. There will be councils around the country\u2014territorial authorities around the country here\u2014that do not want to engage in a consultative process where the outcome might be the protection of more streets and more roads, and yet that seems to be a carefully designed mechanism within this Act for the Government to assure itself that there is a reasonable amount of protection where we have liberalised the rules around which buildings are in.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA key protection for ensuring that the risk is spread sensibly is that, if you\u2019re going to have higher-risk buildings which do not require remediation, we must catch the ones in that category that might be falling on a large number of people\u2014or, indeed, one or two people\u2014because the risk in that situation is different for a church on the West Coast, where people are walking past outside and might be affected, to one building that is far from anywhere, where only the landowner or only the building owner is affected by the risk. Yes, in both situations there is a risk to life and limb, but one represents a situation where people cannot know, and could not even find out, if they proactively wanted to, about the risk. This is why I\u2019m asking the Minister what sort of risk he anticipates he is introducing into a system with those territorial authorities that we already know will not begin a consultative process unless there is something in the system which motivates them to do so beyond their electoral mandate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00228b9826b2637dd37615979067dff22879\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228b9826b2637dd37615979067dff22879\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:15)\u003C/span\u003E: Just in regards to the question around key protections, particularly around section 133A\u2014anyway, the answer to the question around what the challenge or review process is: if the member goes forward to page 29, the answer to her question is in new section 133AZB. Again, I know the member has read the bill, but for the question she\u2019s asking, the answer is further ahead of where we\u2019re talking at the moment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to the question on new section 133AG, it\u2019s always been the case and up to territorial authorities to decide on using that special process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso the question in regards to\u2014oh, no; I\u2019ve answered that. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u0022bfe01c650394cdcb8c2c0e9bccf75233\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bfe01c650394cdcb8c2c0e9bccf75233\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (09:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to ask the Minister for Building and Construction some questions on proposed new section 133AI\u2014this starts at the bottom of page 17 of his Amendment Paper. This is around the territorial authority potentially identifying buildings after the applicable time frame has expired. Now, this is, I think, very relevant to a number of areas. I know my colleague the MP for Rangit\u012Bkei over there, Suze Redmayne, knows that the Manawat\u016B District Council are very active, actually, in this space, and they have been very active through the select committee process as well. This is about the steps that need to be taken by authorities like them who actually have a number of buildings that fall within this particular remit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the changes, Minister, that you are making is you are, effectively, striking out and replacing subsection (1), which is around identifying what that section applies to. Now, what the select committee did have was a component there that related to the design of buildings on or after 1 January 1976. Now, your Amendment Paper has, effectively, removed that requirement, which is a new change. What has been replaced there is just simply around the buildings and construction completed before 1 July 2027. The construction component still exists, but the design one doesn\u2019t, so it would be very interesting to understand why it is that the design component is no longer part and parcel of that particular section, given we\u2019re looking at this section by section.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat you\u2019ve also done is you have introduced a new subsection (1A) that was not there previously, and this is actually where the section doesn\u2019t apply. Originally, as it stands at the moment, the select committee sent this back saying, \u201CWell, let\u2019s actually look at the circumstances within which this applicability outside of the expired time frame would apply\u201D, and that was it. You\u2019ve modified that slightly around the construction\u2014sorry, the Minister has modified. You yourself, Madam Chair, will be very familiar with this sort of stuff as well. I should have acknowledged that. The Minister has also included where the section will not apply. He has been very specific around that. That\u2019s not something\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cad77897eec5151d41dd0b61ea6da6c3\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve got questions about that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235beae0794b7593724c68dcd8844c29e\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE\u003C/span\u003E: OK, my colleague has questions around that. I am just very interested in\u2014the first part is amending the design brief; the second part is introducing a whole new section where it is quite specific as to where the section would not apply.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022ae32593854cf8821123633216a81d2ad\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ae32593854cf8821123633216a81d2ad\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:19)\u003C/span\u003E: In short, it goes back to the additional protections, which I know we in this House are all concerned about, and we want to make sure that the protections are in place. Some buildings inadvertently could be overlooked, and that\u2019s why the definition is being widened slightly to preserve the safety in that regard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u002298ccebb33bef5e042fc3438c699889e4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002298ccebb33bef5e042fc3438c699889e4\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (09:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question on new section 133AI is a bit broader than that. I can see what the Minister for Building and Construction is doing here. I think this is a sensible change in some respects\u2014to give us a provision which is \u201CWe missed one and we want to include it\u201D\u2014because there will always be a risk, when you\u2019re talking about the built environment, that you cannot know every single building. Even though we have been going through a period of identification publicly and raising awareness about these issues since the Christchurch earthquakes, there is still a chance you will need to identify a building which does pose risk to life and limb. The problem\u2014the problem\u2014is: why did he limit this power to those buildings?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EEffectively, he\u2019s prevented a council from reconsidering a building under this pathway if it has had previous consideration. The problem with that is that he\u2019s completely missed a group of buildings; not only those that could have been genuinely missed since the Christchurch earthquakes\u2014that\u2019s one\u2014but there\u2019s a second category in there, which is that the understanding does change. We are changing this bill on the premise that the science and the understanding of the engineering has also moved forward and that we have a better way of identifying, through science advice not only to the Government but to building owners\u2014and the availability and the cost and affordability of that engineering assessment has also come down. Why wouldn\u2019t it be the case that not only would this extra information allow building owners and councils to downgrade the remediation that\u2019s required but, in some cases, there would be upgrades to the remediation that is required? Why is it that, in a case where even the building owners are going to the council and saying, \u201CLook, we\u2019ve had another look. With the better information that is available to us, we think there is a higher need for remediation, and we would like to update the information that the council holds about this building\u201D, they cannot then do that? They seem to be prevented from that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is a very real concern, because it\u2019s not just up to the building owners; the point of having a public register is that, if that building owner who has taken a long-term view of the risk to the people who are in the building\u2014and this is happening all around the country, by the way. This is not just the most publicly minded building owners. There are plenty of, say, employers who want to make sure that the people who come to work every day in their buildings leave safely. What if they then sell the building? The whole point of the Government\u2019s interest in their building\u2019s remediation is that the next owner is also held to the same standards and is required to observe the same information that they have gathered, at their expense, about the building\u2014for the preservation of life and limb, not only for those people who come to work every day but for the people who use the building and do not know and cannot know the information about that. Is there a pathway for those buildings where the information changes and they go up in risk?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00223d8d01981eb761687f18598ce0a94568\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223d8d01981eb761687f18598ce0a94568\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:22)\u003C/span\u003E: Hopefully, this works, in terms of back and forth. In regards to the question on transition, it\u2019s the period of time it takes to do the transition. Just to be clear, everything will be in force on 1 July 2027\u2014so, from Royal assent until that point. In regards to the question around the design date, it has been removed to open up slightly\u2014to identify at any time what that pathway will be, and so that was the purpose in regards to the design date change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022cdc25ccb31f8c3d3b2079bf70c51394c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cdc25ccb31f8c3d3b2079bf70c51394c\u0022\u003ETODD STEPHENSON (Whip\u2014ACT) (09:23)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e29731b9fd4b9ee8120302880d27b921\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003E:\u003C/span\u003E I think there\u2019s a little bit more that we could explore.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f988bc72b5e47b8856ba70e41dfbbaf\u0022 data-id=\u0022f0b2199e2d63b6d93e83d49f5d14be67\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f988bc72b5e47b8856ba70e41dfbbaf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f0b2199e2d63b6d93e83d49f5d14be67\u0022\u003EGEORGIE DANSEY (Labour) (09:23)\u003C/span\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003E:\u003C/span\u003E I wanted to ask a question around\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] Goodness me!\u2014section 133AH, just because this wasn\u2019t addressed when we were speaking about this section. It\u2019s about the applicable time frame and the territorial authority identifying that applicable time frame.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m specifically looking at subsection (4), paragraphs (aa), (a), and (b), and I have just a couple of questions for the Minister for Building and Construction around the advice that he received around these time frames. Why is it \u201C3 years\u201D, \u201C2 years\u201D, and \u201Cevery year\u201D for the different levels of seismic zone that were applied in subsection (4)\u2014those three paragraphs (aa), (a), and (b)?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, a second question, just around the change the Minister has made to paragraph (aa), from \u201Cnew medium seismic zone\u201D to \u201Cmedium seismic zone that was previously an area of low seismic risk\u201D: could he please explain why that change was made, and why it will now only apply to medium seismic zones that were previously an area of low seismic risk, as opposed to others, and whether he looked at what other areas could be taken into account to have the three-year applicable time frame in that space. Thanks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u0022d28f14c29ba4cc99dad41172fdce2433\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d28f14c29ba4cc99dad41172fdce2433\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (09:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a question for the Minister for Building and Construction on section 133AJ. He\u2019s getting the vibe that I am very nervous about unreinforced masonry (URM), not so much the tall buildings. My question about this one is: why doesn\u2019t it apply to the URM buildings?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn this section, the council identifies a pre-1976 tall heavy material building as potentially earthquake-prone under the previous section, and then it must require the owner to provide an engineering evaluation. The corresponding requirement for the URM buildings is \u201Cevidence of the information\u201D\u2014so you don\u2019t have to give it over to the council if you\u2019re that kind of building owner. I want to ask him whether he considered making both requirements the same. I think this is an exclusion for smaller-building owners, but then that\u2019s what it should say. In the situation with the tall buildings, they will be large office blocks, civic buildings, and hotels, all things that have an owner who should be large and sophisticated enough to provide that kind of reporting in a fast way for council if they are identified\u2014and probably to already have it, to be honest. Pretty much every building that\u2019s a tall building that we\u2019re talking about here will be able to provide that to council, but is the exclusion because the URM buildings are a bit different, where they might not be able to provide that to council?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen we get into a situation where not only is there no motivation for the public disclosure to the council, which is not to everyone, but this is meant to now be a system where the information disclosure and information transparency does some of the heavy lifting of the risk management. We don\u2019t even require the URM building owners who are caught by the council\u2019s new regulatory net to make that information public to the council, so it does seem to be either an oversight or an exclusion for certain types of building owners, who don\u2019t necessarily fall into a risk management sense, in that their buildings are any lower, but they will be smaller and less commercial operators. Is that the case? Shouldn\u2019t we be making an amendment to make section 133AJ also apply to URM buildings?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022dc03343dbf7c04168d1ffd80ae906304\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dc03343dbf7c04168d1ffd80ae906304\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:27)\u003C/span\u003E: In regards to the question on section 133AI, on page 18, the question was in regards to whether there is a process to challenge an assessment. Yes, owners can challenge whether a territorial authority has correctly identified buildings in scope. Again, if the member Arena Williams goes further into the Act, the answer is there in new section\u00A0133AZB(1)(a).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022520963cebe7969520111f015872a5994\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022520963cebe7969520111f015872a5994\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (09:28)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m going to move along to new section\u00A0133AK\u2014this is on page 20\u2014and I\u2019m going to touch on new section 133AM, on page 21, as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of new section 133AK, on the obligation of owners on receiving requests for engineering evaluation, I\u2019ve got two questions for the Minister for Building and Construction. It says over here: \u201CIf a territorial authority asks the owner of a building \u2026\u201D. What happens if the buildings are apartments? Are they treating each individual owner of their apartment unit as individuals, or is there someone who owns the entirety of the building? And, if the owner may apply for an extension in those kinds of circumstances, again, how would apartments work in this case?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy second question is: if the building itself is owned by the Government, who then is the owner of that building, and who will be responsible for responding? Is that the chief executive or is that the Minister responsible for that particular building? I think my colleague Arena Williams yesterday mentioned Stats NZ being one example.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy final question for the time being is on new section 133AM, and I\u2019ll start by this: must request information\u2014the request must be in writing. Can I just double-check that writing can be electronic as well as physical. What happens if the owner of a building is overseas or is an overseas owner of a building? I want to check those three questions with the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002234bb17d0ff96b3c1f2264b7d393213db\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002234bb17d0ff96b3c1f2264b7d393213db\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:30)\u003C/span\u003E: In regards to the question on section 133AK, on page 21, the assessment of the risk is on the building, not on the owners of the building\u2014in regards to the question around apartments by the member. And, yes, as consistent with other aspects of legislation, the means in which digital is available, in the context, in addition to written form.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022 data-id=\u0022141da776ea9cc215f744592ae05e824b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022141da776ea9cc215f744592ae05e824b\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN (Green) (09:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question really applies to several of the new sections, 133AH, 133AI, and so on. I\u2019ll be very interested in the Minister\u2019s understanding of the relationship between the requirement for territorial authorities\u2014there\u2019s a lot of \u201Cterritorial authority must identify\u201D, which I don\u2019t have any disagreement with, I think it\u2019s important\u2014but what I want to know is: how is this Government going to either help or ensure that it\u2019s done? Do you see there being a process of audit? Supposing they just picked the obvious buildings and miss out several others because of financial constraints, or maybe they have other priorities, how do we actually make sure that all of the buildings are identified by local government? I mean, back in the day, after 2010, we made a big push to identify all the buildings in Wellington and it\u2019s not cheap to inspect buildings and to arrange inspections and so on. Some of it\u2019s going to be pretty quick, you know, for those high seismic zones\u2014the two years and six months. I\u2019m just trying to think about how that ties in with the term of local government. Is this something that you would expect to be reported on or is it going to be legal change that local government must report on these things? Because some are great, some are not so great at these things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00223ae4df4d0b1ebb4050340caff7bc07f2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223ae4df4d0b1ebb4050340caff7bc07f2\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Just again, the question previously, from the member of the Greens, in regards to the apartments and \u201Cdo persons with an interest in a building\u201D and that process, the answer to that is in new section 133AU(3). So it\u2019s, again, ahead in this section, but the answers to the questions are in the legislation. So I\u2019m not sure I\u2019m adding value by reading out the legislation that is in this part that we just haven\u2019t got to in the sequence of this committee of the Whole House stage. But again, I\u2019ll just say that for the last time, that\u2019s where the answer to that question is at.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u002288b05981662f26856d30dd1aaed45923\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002288b05981662f26856d30dd1aaed45923\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (09:32)\u003C/span\u003E: I understand that it is late in the urgency, but this is one of the most significant pieces of reform which has achieved cross-partisan support because of the way that we have been able to access officials to understand the impact that this will have on people. There are a number of members in this House who have given speeches representing their local communities\u2014Christchurch and Canterbury, for instance\u2014who represent families of hundreds of people who have been affected by serious earthquakes. And so it is important that we move through clause 7, in a reasonably careful way, to understand the impact on people\u2019s lives, and that is what we are attempting to do by moving forward methodically.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ll bring the Minister\u2019s attention to new section 133AL and 133AM. My first question is about how two councils could conceivably treat identical circumstances differently with regard to an application for an extension of time for the information being required by councils. I pitched the Minister before a question around whether this is in here simply because we actually think that all of the tall buildings that he is trying to identify, in this case, have already got that information, but he\u2019s allowed for a pathway, here, where there\u2019s a 12-month requirement to provide the information and then councils get to extend for another 12 months. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo essentially, what we\u2019re talking about here is once the information comes into effect, then the council goes through the consultative process\u2014that\u2019s a special consultative procedure and they have to nominate to do that; so that might add another six months and then another 12 months\u2014then notifies a building owner that they have to provide the information. Even if they already have that, they can have up to 12 months, and then the council can give them another 12 months. So we\u2019re talking about sort of 2030 as the ballpark time frame for an owner of a tall building in a public place to need to provide their engineering evidence to council. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question isn\u2019t whether that\u2019s the appropriate policy decision\u2014that is the Minister\u2019s prerogative to make the decision\u2014what I\u2019m testing here is whether, across the country, those time frames will be very different. Two councils might decide, under his provision, that, say there is qualified engineer shortage, which was the case in the example that the former mayor of Wellington outlined in her term as mayor; if an owner might need that extension because of a delay in the availability of engineers, why is it that one council might take an approach which takes us out to 2030 or 2032 and another council, in the same seismic sone, might demand that information be provided in 2027. I\u2019m asking him about what his message to councils is, in the sort of relativity here, because that\u2019s not a part of the old law; it wasn\u2019t the case that councils would have been able to extend time frames of that sort of provision of information to such an extent as he is proposing in his amendments today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002236630a50afa9cf7113b7bd31318d5b13\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002236630a50afa9cf7113b7bd31318d5b13\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:36)\u003C/span\u003E: I mean, the simple answer to that is because we want to ensure that there is appropriate protections for the specific buildings that are being assessed\u2014there may be circumstances where additional time is required to get a further assurance to get comfort that the decision is accurate. So you\u2019re not going to have a situation where two councils are necessarily dealing with the same building, because the building sits in either one boundary or the other. So that\u2019s not a scenario that is going to be the reality, but the timing allows flexibility.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to the question around new section 133AJ, it was around the notice around tall buildings: territorial authorities can issue a notice that a tall building might be an earthquake-prone building\u2014this was around how that assessment process works\u2014and then the owner evaluates that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022368ac660d58472665906e15d177d1517\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022368ac660d58472665906e15d177d1517\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (09:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for your response, Minister. I wasn\u2019t sure that if a new section 133AU was applicable 133AK, because 133AU was talking about territory authorities giving earthquake-prone building (EPB) notice to a owner, whereas 133AK was around the request for engineering evaluation. But it\u2019s good to know that regardless of what kind of document is being given, that the relationship between the territorial authority and the owner\u2014and if it\u2019s an apartment, multiple owners\u2014or anyone with an interest in that, that is applied consistently. That\u2019s helpful to know. Thank you, Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to move on to 133AO\u2014this is 133AO, new subsection (3). This is something that, I know, seems pedantic, but it\u2019s not something we often see being drafted in legislation in this way, which says the \u201Cterritorial authority must promptly\u201D\u2014normally we see the phrase \u201Cmust immediately\u201D, and I just want to check if, in this case, and I think it\u2019s also for the clarity of territorial authorities when they are determining EPBs, that \u201Cpromptly\u201D has the same meaning and as \u201Cimmediately\u201D. So that would be helpful just to clarify. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, Minister, my final question for this contribution is around the deletions that we see in your Amendment Paper 702. I just want some clarifications on why clauses 133AP, 133AQ, 133AR, 133AS, and 133ASA have been deleted in the Amendment Paper. I\u2019m just checking to see and I can\u2019t, at least at this stage, see that it\u2019s being moved to other locations, unless I\u2019m wrong. So if the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind just clarifying the deletion of those four new sections.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00229b624a01dd2d1f2966e467af1d01634c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229b624a01dd2d1f2966e467af1d01634c\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just in regards to new section 133AO(3)\u2014the member asked around the word \u201Cpromptly\u201D\u2014\u201Cpromptly\u201D is defined as \u201Cas soon as reasonably practical.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to the question on 133AX, which is probably page 31, maybe further\u201432, 33; I\u2019ll keep going higher\u2014owners can request an extension if reasonable progress has been made\u2014up to 15 years. And so it\u2019s just acknowledging that there may be circumstances where the complexity of the building assessment requires more time to do that work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u00228c0d6fa69bd5b2337978b941964add86\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228c0d6fa69bd5b2337978b941964add86\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (09:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Just a quick question about the new section 133AM rules, inserted by clause 7 of the bill. Why is the engineering evaluation mandatory but this evidence only requires the information, and why is it six months, when those two things seem to be relatively similar?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd a question for the Minister; I\u2019m genuinely wondering what happens when both requirements are put on to a building owner? If they have a tall building and a suspected unreinforced masonry building, are they required to give an indication that the information does exist about the unreinforced masonry? Why wouldn\u2019t they also be required to provide the information, in the same way that they are required to provide the information about the tall building?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to ask him about new section 133AM. This is also another discretion for unreinforced masonry buildings to spin out the timing for councils. And where you have a situation of unreinforced masonry buildings, this is even more acute, because councils that are in the same seismic zone\u2014like, say, your main street in Feilding versus Cuba St\u2014are going to get very different treatment from the councils around the provision of information, because the sorts of building owners in one situation are highly commercial, and are able to provision themselves with expensive and timely engineering advice, and in the other situation they\u2019re not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo you will definitely get a difference in timing and a difference in approach between those two, but the risks are the same. What is the justification in terms of the unreinforced masonry buildings for that delay in small towns, where you have business owners who will not be able to comply in that timely way, in an affordable way, but there is still the same sort of risk to loss of life?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen my question about new section 133AO: this is a provision which punishes owners of buildings for not providing information. It was always going to be a necessary part of the regime, but, really, the thrust of my question to the Minister is: can he confirm that an owner cannot avoid having their building determined earthquake-prone, simply by failing to provide the engineering evaluation or the other information that\u2019s required by council? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt seems that there is no end point to the information-gathering powers that council has. So if you have a building owner who is obstinate in that way, it is worth having a power where the council can also provision their own information. It\u2019s one thing where the council is not going to implement those kind of consultation rules, and that we\u2019ve discussed with the Minister first. Be it on them. They will face the ballot box because of that. But it\u2019s a completely different thing where there is no recourse for the public, if a building owner who poses risk to the public will not provide information to the council. It\u2019s a different question. I\u2019m not saying they\u2019re avoiding that, or they\u2019re avoiding their legal obligations here, but the Minister has created a pathway, it seems to me, that can go on indefinitely, and that will be in a grey area of legality. That\u2019s a question which is reasonable for this committee to ask: can things go on and on but there be no punishments associated with that? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002239ace836d24e2a4f4c43c24a57520036\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002239ace836d24e2a4f4c43c24a57520036\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, members. I just want to provide some feedback in regards to a number of amendments that are on the Table in the name of Celia Wade-Brown, particularly Amendment Paper (AP) 656. The Government will not be proceeding with these amendments; I\u2019ll give you a brief explanation on why.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn particular, I will provide feedback on AP 656, which relates to fire access. In effect, what is being proposed here is to revert back to old obligations relating to fire and access. The new information available, based on events that have occurred subsequently, indicate that those changes of reverting back to the old obligations would be significantly too costly, and would not deal with or address the underlying risks which are available in the context of what is being proposed here in the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7eeb490f6fc542d54a84dd7db0d2077\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I take another call, can I just say we can have scenarios about consultation provision of information, but we can explore those ad infinitum, so I\u2019m encouraging members to move on from that phase of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u0022bde656d5acdec380becf7ddb0988dfb9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bde656d5acdec380becf7ddb0988dfb9\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (09:44)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for that guidance, and I think, certainly, the approach\u2014I\u2019ve been here from when we started this last night\u2014has been to work through the provisions section by section, given the alphabetical approach. I\u2019m up to new section 133AO, inserted by clause 7, in the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 702. This is about the nature of the information and the broad brush of information\u2014not just the evaluation of evidence but, basically, any information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is around subsections (2) and (3), which identify the time frame or the expectations around which the territorial authority must notify the building owner. I\u2019m just reflecting on the earlier question to the Minister about it not spanning more than one authority. There are circumstances where provision through regional councils will\u2014well, they do\u2014overlay into other areas as well, so there is that context. But the word used here is \u201Cpromptly\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I\u2019m interested to understand from the Minister what his expectation is. It\u2019s very clear, and I think it\u2019s correct, that what we have in this provision is: once information, evidence, or the evaluation is received, that then leads to a council determining that they must act. There is a duty to act on behalf of the local territorial authority. The question therein lies: what is the expectation from the Minister around \u201Cpromptly\u201D? What is going to guide that decision? This is a process of considering the information that\u2019s placed before the decision makers\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a535ae15d2344e2dd78d0d164457cdfb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I interrupt the member and say that question has just been answered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b31d8b24ae1d3858a2d8850dcbe59235\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I think the answer was around the assessment, rather than actually the requirement\u2014we have not touched on this element of the word \u201Cpromptly\u201D in terms of the council\u2019s response.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0ec89683272723fdaa1b0b12950949d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: We just did it. It was a question from Lawrence Xu-Nan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0994349770d242e16f95ae94bc5053a\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE\u003C/span\u003E: In terms of 133AO?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a22a9cfbf30ff35593a36fce7f195c0\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: It was the first one of the day.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c62133237663fd6aec8daa22d8f0f90\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9c04687bea1901beb80f91dd4697627\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE\u003C/span\u003E: The issue here is around the Minister\u2019s expectations around response, but I\u2019ll leave it there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022eb0cf85602040281758ffa800a0a1bd1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022eb0cf85602040281758ffa800a0a1bd1\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Just closing off the Amendment Paper (AP) tabled by the member Tamatha Paul in regards to new section 133ASB, inserted by clause 7. That AP, particularly, is looking at and considering financial assistance. As noted last night, financial assistance is outside of the scope, and therefore we will not be proceeding with that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f988bc72b5e47b8856ba70e41dfbbaf\u0022 data-id=\u0022e668392618e75a6e2a96a3460c10ce95\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f988bc72b5e47b8856ba70e41dfbbaf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e668392618e75a6e2a96a3460c10ce95\u0022\u003EGEORGIE DANSEY (Labour) (09:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. My questions are around clause 7, inserting new section 133ASB, \u201CTerritorial authorities must determine and update earthquake status of buildings in medium and high seismic zones\u201D. I just wanted to ask, again, around the timing of this. There\u2019s a requirement under subsection 1\u2014133ASB(1): \u201CAs soon as is reasonably practical after, and within three months of, 1 July 2027,\u201D. However, over the page at subsection (7), it details what happens if a territorial authority runs out of time, and says that they \u201Cmust finish doing those things as soon as possible after 1 October 2027.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESo my question is, really, around \u201Cas soon as possible.\u201D That seems to give an infinite amount of time in order to conclude that. I wanted to know from the Minister why that decision was made. There was quite a specific one as to when the question needs to be asked initially about determining the earthquake status of buildings in medium and high seismic zones, but if they run out of time, \u201Cas soon as possible\u201D seems like a very loose term as far as timing and getting that done. My concern would be that that could be interpreted as: any length of time that it might take to fulfil that obligation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022317065f0bf330ab62073dca1418371e6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022317065f0bf330ab62073dca1418371e6\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:49)\u003C/span\u003E: As I noted in a prior question in regards to this, there is a process for extensions which is outlined in the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002279a42c0fe4f8715dd6c412c8e0e3350b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002279a42c0fe4f8715dd6c412c8e0e3350b\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (09:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I am going to move ahead, just on new sections 133ASB and then 133ATA. The only question I have for 133ASB is\u2014again, for a lot of this I\u2019m mainly looking at the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 702\u2014on the new insertion, subsection (8A), in Amendment Paper 702. This is at the top of page 27. It states, \u201CWhile a building\u2019s status as an earthquake-prone building is continued under subsection (8), the building\u2019s existing deadline for completion \u2026[would] continue to apply.\u201D I want to check with the Minister if that means that if the seismic work continues to apply and the work is completed\u2014does that mean that the building now will meet the requirement, and what happens then when there is a notice of an EPB but then it exceeds the requirement for the current seismic work that is still ongoing? In that case, would that also be notified to the person asking how the seismic work is going? I just want to check how one should interpret new section 133ASB(8A) in clause 7.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EOn to new section 133ATA, and, actually, also new section 133ATB. Noting that both of these are new insertions, as well, I want to check this with the Minister. This comes down to some of the conversations we have had previously around areas that are designated low-seismic zones, which is Auckland\u2014let\u2019s use that as an example. In those kinds of cases, if there is any other seismic-zoned building that is not considered an EPB, would there be any notice that has been given with what\u2019s in new sections 133ATA and 133ATB? Would that notice potentially be changed, and, if it is changed, how would the territorial authority then notify it? If a building is not a priority building, you would have that as a notice, but would that notice itself include things like a caveat that just because it\u2019s not an EPB now, that doesn\u2019t mean that they\u2019re not going to come back and check it in a couple of years\u2019 time or a couple of months\u2019 time? I just wanted to check from a building owner\u2019s perspective what reassurance it has for the duration of a notice if it\u2019s not a priority building, or if it\u2019s deemed not to be in scope.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00227e68f9808e87681de59f3d606f220471\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227e68f9808e87681de59f3d606f220471\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Just in regard to a prior question on new section 133AO, in clause 7, this was a question in regard to where the person or the individual does not provide information, and whether that provides them with a mechanism not to be able to comply. The answer is no; the building owner could, technically, not provide the information. However, if that was the circumstance, then by default it would be considered to be an earthquake-prone building and, therefore, it would be within the requirements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u00224c972fb8cc3f7bbc61d4c696066c81a8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224c972fb8cc3f7bbc61d4c696066c81a8\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (09:53)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s helpful. I\u2019m just wanting to clarify with the Minister for Building and Construction that his answer applies to the unreinforced masonry buildings and not the tall buildings, because I think that that is the only one that requires the council to, basically, have a guess. It has to guess whether there\u2019s unreinforced masonry and then ask them within six months, and so I just wanted to clarify that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAt new section 133AT in clause 7, Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan has identified that that section is interacting with the previous section new section 133AO(8A) and (4). Basically, you\u2019ve got the substantive decision already in new section 133ASB in clause 7, and new section 133AT is meant to operationalise it. The question in simple terms for the Minister is: where a building ceases to be an earthquake-prone building (EPB) solely because it no longer is within the new statutory scope, will the public register contain any record that the building was previously assessed as being earthquake-prone and it hasn\u2019t been strengthened, in this case?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to ask him specifically: what happens if a council like Auckland Council wants to retain a degree of public information about those buildings which were deemed to be earthquake-prone by an engineer? I\u2019m not talking about the statutory scope; I\u2019m talking about those buildings where there is an engineering report from professionals where they found and identified a risk to life, not within the EPB rating, but within their commentary or their professional findings which recommended remediation for specific parts\u2014like, say, bridges between two tower buildings, or malls where one parapet might pose a specific risk of falling on to a civic space.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose will now be excluded from the statutory regime, but the question is: if a council wants to maintain a public register of those buildings which have a specific risk that the council has been at odds with the building owner over, will they be able to retain that or will they run foul of the Act? Is it open to, say, judicial review for the council to publish the information with regard to the building owners that they are specifically pursuing right now for remediation because it affects a civic space, and, if they disclose that, is it defamation? Is it defamation if the council says that a developer has been at odds with the council for the last six years over the remediation which it has required from them, and, but for the Minister\u2019s decision to exclude Auckland, it would still be going after them?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022acd8cf92b1e27753e1039fa630dd27b6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022acd8cf92b1e27753e1039fa630dd27b6\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (09:55)\u003C/span\u003E: In regard to the question on new section 133ATA in clause 7, once a building is deemed not to be within the scope, it cannot re-enter the earthquake-prone building system. The purpose of that, at the end of the day, is to ensure certainty in the context of the classification.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022f150bd7a156fc2da9a291b80bab49cdf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f150bd7a156fc2da9a291b80bab49cdf\u0022\u003ERIMA NAKHLE (National\u2014Takanini) (09:55)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221610c76e11615db3725f04f0aaf0419d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m very tempted to take a closure motion. We\u2019re not making a lot of progress here, but I will take another question from Lawrence Xu-Nan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022cba463d6b6139c67fe9d1daba9085bb5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cba463d6b6139c67fe9d1daba9085bb5\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (09:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m just noting that my colleague Celia Wade-Brown has an amendment for much later in this section that she would like to speak on, but I am going to move on and\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022737eb01a1215d0be254981af70dd2fb0\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: Pay attention, Tangi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022621f905a4b31b4c23131b307a877361c\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254d3db630137f19051aef47be942ab66\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Don\u2019t debate across the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022919780cb9947925bba1ea530a47729b4\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: OK. I am going to move on and just check this. The Minister for Building and Construction has just mentioned the certainty, and, thank you, Minister for that clarification around the certainly. I think that is really important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just wanted to check in terms of the relationship between something that is deemed, under new sections 133ATA and 133ATB in clause 7, no longer a priority building, or it\u2019s not within scope. But I wanted to check that in terms of how that interacts with, for example, a building that has been exempted. We do see that there are exemptions for a requirement to carry out seismic activities, but in new section 133AWA and also new section 133AZ, can I just check this with the Minister? For example, when you have the exemption for carrying out a seismic work and the exemption is revoked, unlike what we saw before in terms of the priority buildings and out-of-scope buildings, which have the certainty\u2014I\u2019m assuming that the owner of, let\u2019s just say, a particular building will be notified in the initial notice that there is the likelihood or the possibility of an exemption being revoked. Would that also be on the notice as part of the exemption in\u2014I just want to double-check\u2014in new section 133AWA? I can\u2019t see it there, and so if the Minister wouldn\u2019t mind elaborating on new section 133AWA.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m also noting that we\u2014Madam Chair, I\u2019m just checking, because we\u2019ve also got the schedules, as well, but I\u2019m happy to kind of wrap up a few other things. I know that my colleague has a few remaining things on clause 7, but I think I\u2019m happy to move on. So I\u2019ll wait until others finish with clause 7, and then I\u2019ll move on to the schedules.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u0022d780d3166228a9694549a0255e474851\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d780d3166228a9694549a0255e474851\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (09:58)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is also about new section 133AW in clause 7, though, just drawing on what the Minister for Building and Construction said in response to my question in the last part, I want to ask him this in relation to new section 133AW. Will an earthquake-prone building notice tell the public what type of a seismic risk is being disclosed there: either an unreinforced masonry or a tall building risk?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn new section 133AW, the revocations regime wasn\u2019t a big part of the old rules because it didn\u2019t need to be, but under his new regime it probably will be a more operative part, and there seem to be two very different outcomes, depending on when the revocation happens. In the first situation, if the original seismic work deadline has not expired and the owner falls back on the ordinary regime, they can then apply under new section 133AX in clause 7 for the extension, but I want to ask him about the situation where it has already expired, and that\u2019s covered by the new section 133AZ in clause 7, which we\u2019ve talked about a little bit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt will ordinarily give the owner a fresh five years to complete the seismic work. That\u2019s the five-year period that can\u2019t be extended, but the exception seems to be that if it was revoked because of an act or omission of the owner\u2014the Amendment Paper gives failure to maintain the risk mitigation measures as an example\u2014then they don\u2019t get the extra five years. In the other situation, where the owner is not at fault, is the revocation going to then give you a pathway to the full five years? Is that because we\u2019re allowing for situations where the council is at fault, or are we also allowing for situations where the information has changed\u2014in which case, it seems to be better to let your exemption run out its time and then apply, which doesn\u2019t seem to be the right way round for that to be formulated?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022119e403fee18ec7459c83f80bf73c2c6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022119e403fee18ec7459c83f80bf73c2c6\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (10:00)\u003C/span\u003E: In effect, that\u2019s providing flexibility to allow certainty for both sides of the equation to know where they stand and to be able to make assessments and plans in regards to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022 data-id=\u0022c5ff479be3f01ed2ee4b3e02bd7f8168\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c5ff479be3f01ed2ee4b3e02bd7f8168\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN (Green) (10:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I\u2019d also like to thank the Minister for addressing my amendment about disability access and fire escape. I understand that the Minister\u2019s amendment, as also came from the Transport and Infrastructure Committee, did add, at least, \u201Cas nearly as reasonably practicable\u201D, but I wondered if the Minister would give his interpretation of \u201Cas nearly as reasonably practical\u201D. Is that if the cost is 1 percent more or 10 percent more or what?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe evidence that I\u2019ve heard is that the disruption to adding those things later\u2014I mean, you\u2019ve just done the earthquake strengthening, you\u2019ve painted the building, you\u2019ve added whatever embellishments you want to that suit the purpose of that building, but you have chosen not to do the accessibility. Then it won\u2019t happen until the whole building needs some more refurbishment 20 years down the line or something like that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe heard that usually the extra cost is around about 5 percent, and sometimes it\u2019s not very much at all. I think we had one of the Wellington developers, Eyal Aharoni, stating that, well, of course he\u2019s going to do it anyway, because he wants his buildings to be for all people, and I thought that was a really excellent response.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf the Minister could address that matter. We will still be putting forward the amendment that says it should comply, because I think there is already an exception in the existing legislation which says something along the lines of \u201Cunless it\u2019s unduly onerous\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022 data-id=\u00228a0b35a6866da898c165feb3b37b0b08\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228a0b35a6866da898c165feb3b37b0b08\u0022\u003ERIMA NAKHLE (National\u2014Takanini) (10:03)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222cb366f1ce82157e7961cd6d1332356f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I just want to say that we are so far in the weeds on this. This has had a full select committee process, and the detail\u2014I would imagine, because I have faith in the select committee process\u2014has been explored. I\u2019m looking for substantive questions for the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u00225dae3431546317c2936dafebe536ce57\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225dae3431546317c2936dafebe536ce57\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (10:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I was a member of the select committee that explored this, but what we have in front of us is an Amendment Paper with changes that the Transport and Infrastructure Committee did not explore and did not have any information for.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to look at one of the issues which hasn\u2019t been touched on yet, and that is around the warning signs\u2014the actual physical placement of signs that will be placed on the buildings. This is not something that has been touched on. It\u2019s on page 39 of the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 702. There are really only two reasons as to why an earthquake-prone building sign would be affixed to a property. One is it doesn\u2019t have one and so it needs to have one. The other is that, actually, the circumstances have changed, and there is a sign, but it needs to be updated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question for the Minister is\u2014the first one of that, OK, that seems to me to be very clear. It didn\u2019t have a sign; now it does. The alternative option is where there is a change in circumstances. Does the Minister believe that the nature of that signage, though, for the second part needs to incorporate the fact that there has been a change in circumstances? That\u2019s actually not clear in the Amendment Paper. It just says that if circumstances have changed that now lead to a change in, effectively, the rating, then there needs to be a sign affixed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut the purpose of the sign\u2014and this was discussed at select committee, Madam Chair\u2014was a very clear signal to anyone who is using that building as to the status of the building. Now, someone who might be visiting from a different part of the country may not know that there\u2019s a change in the criteria there. My question, very directly, to the Minister is: does he believe that the notice itself should, for the second part, indicate that there is a change of circumstances?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022d7f3e7444537519d8f6de515009b5d57\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d7f3e7444537519d8f6de515009b5d57\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (10:05)\u003C/span\u003E: In regards to the questions around the notices in section 133AU, the notice includes all details set out\u2014again, the member will refer to subsection (2), which has all the details about everything that the owner will need to know in regards to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to section 133AZ, and this was in relation to the five-year period, in effect, you can imagine a circumstance in which a building owner has a seismic work exemption, that exemption is therefore revoked, they haven\u2019t done any work to remediate because they\u2019ve got an exemption, and then technically they are in breach. The five-year period then comes into play to practically give them time to do that work because their circumstances have changed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u00221f76952ad22b983e480f0c31029ca968\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221f76952ad22b983e480f0c31029ca968\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (10:06)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to ask the Minister about his changes. This is a bill where the Opposition have worked closely with the Minister and his officials on the detail of this, and it\u2019s something we support. But the reason for going through the changes is that we have not had a chance to ask officials what they mean. Some of these changes are big policy decisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAt section 133AX, for example, at the bottom of page 3, the change here is to the longest period an earthquake-prone building could legally remain unremediated once the extensions available under section 133AX are taken into account. This was a matter which the Regulations Review Committee wrote a letter and an opinion to the Transport and Infrastructure Committee on\u2014about the number of extensions that were available in the legislation and in the regulations. There are \u201CHenry VIII\u201D powers that arise here because of the way that the extensions work in regulation. This is another extension period, and when we\u2019re talking about the timing, that materially impacts the costs and the risks to the building owners themselves and to councils.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen we\u2019re talking about the timing here, I want the Minister to answer, under section 133AX, is it the case that it\u2019s the 7.5 years plus the 7.5 years plus six months for the consultative period plus 12 months for the extension, then an unidentified time period of the extensions, which might be five years? His answer to me was that this is proportional to the risk\u2014as I understand it, and I hope I\u2019m not paraphrasing him incorrectly\u2014and that his policy rationale is for flexibility. But, Minister, what you\u2019ve allowed here is, in some cases, a 15-year remediation period for buildings which, under the current regime, needed to be remediated two years ago.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe problem here is that the timing is everything. We have a Government that has already kicked the can down the road and an Opposition that has supported that because of the need for flexibility and affordability in the system, but another 15-year extension is not something we would have supported. So I\u2019m asking the Minister: does section 133AX, under his new formulation, first, include those buildings which are being remediated now and are the ones we all know about and are the ones we know that need to be remediated, and then what is the longest period that those buildings could legally remain unremediated under the new formulation under section 133AX?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002220cf5d0f860069438df68c4e6ea7b66d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002220cf5d0f860069438df68c4e6ea7b66d\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (10:08)\u003C/span\u003E: In regards to the question that\u2019s just been asked around section 133AX, as noted, the owners can request that extension, and the test here is that if reasonable progress has been made in regards to that remediation. One has to envisage a complex building which has, potentially, a large degree of heritage\u2014you know, just look outside around this building; you\u2019ll see a number. The time it takes to remediate does take a long period, so the time period is up to 15 years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00229a5aba6e309242fe6d46f738320256fd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229a5aba6e309242fe6d46f738320256fd\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (10:09)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. As I said before, I am moving to the two schedules, so this is clauses 12 and 13. I want to start with a question on clause 13, which inserts Schedule 2A. This is the map of the zones. I thank the Minister for Building and Construction for his response on how those seismic zones are determined and who determines them, but I just want to check something. In here everything above Waikato is  considered to be a low-seismic zone, but I know there have been changes. But since the reporting back from the Transport and Infrastructure Committee, there has been new data and new evidence to say that Auckland is on a fault line that has the potential for seismic activity. So with that information emerging, is this seismic zone map still current? That is my first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am going to move on to Schedule 1AA, inserted by clause 12, and this is about transitional arrangements. I think a lot of the things from the bulk of the bill, in clause 7, have now been moved to here. My understanding is that everything we see between is looking at the transitional period between when this bill comes into force, the day after Royal assent, and 1 July 2027. So we\u2019re looking at potentially an eight-month period.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan I just check with the Minister that in relation to 20A to 20\u2014actually, not even 20A to 20D; 20A. So I want to check that in relation to 20A those transitional provisions would be able to be met by territorial authorities before 1 July; and for 20B would be able to be met within three months of the start of the transitional period, which I presume is three months from the day of Royal assent, if that is the correct interpretation. So I just have those few questions on Schedules 1 and 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022904ef8aa941aa0f05da066e8c67f51f1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022904ef8aa941aa0f05da066e8c67f51f1\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (10:12)\u003C/span\u003E: In terms of the question in regards to the impact on Auckland, Earth Sciences New Zealand, which is the new name for GNS Science, has prepared that information. It doesn\u2019t change the overall zone, which remains low.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe member asked a question around new sections  133AZA and 133AZB, in clause 7. It was around signage. Signs applying to all earthquake-prone buildings are required to be in plain language and therefore easily read. There was also a question in regard to Schedule 1 as well\u2014clause 25. This lets the owners complete existing seismic improvements so that they can carry on whatever relevant work has started before the bill, and the member can see that within the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u00227eb7e6b9adcdefdc0f75f17d5283d709\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227eb7e6b9adcdefdc0f75f17d5283d709\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (10:12)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m going to new section 133AZF, in clause 7. Just in relation to the Minister for Building and Construction\u2019s answer, though, about Schedule 2 and the way the transitional provisions work for Auckland, it would be really helpful if the Minister would just explain what the main difference is between having those provisions come into effect on day one under the Act versus the new transitional provisions which weren\u2019t examined by the select committee. That would be really helpful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESection 133AZ is about\u2014the select committee examined this carefully\u2014the  provision that earthquake remediation work itself shouldn\u2019t trigger the usual requirement to upgrade the building in terms of fire and disability provisions. The Greens disagree with that. I\u2019m asking the Minister, because Labour supports that\u2014that is a sensible change but it is a controversial change, and what he seems to have done between us having some tolerance for this approach, which doesn\u2019t put a developer who\u2019s trying to do all the right things for seismic remediation on the backfoot because they then have to comply with other parts of the code, is that at subsection (3) since the select committee considered it, he has made an alteration to the effect that instead of alterations that are only necessary for seismic work, he has gone to alterations that include building work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think that the Minister here has gone from a relatively narrow category of buildings where the developer through no fault of their own has a building where they need to remediate, say, masonry, and so they are diligently spending perhaps $100,000 on masonry changes and at the same time would be hit with, say, the upgrades to the lift, ensuring that there is a second fire escape that complies with the rules, and new source of smoke and fire prevention would perhaps add on more coasts, and we didn\u2019t want that. But what he now seems to have changed in one simple word is that anyone who had an earthquake-prone building and is also doing any other sorts of alterations will not need to comply with fire and disability changes. That is not the point of this bill. The change shouldn\u2019t be that if you have an earthquake-prone building and you\u2019re doing any alterations, you get a special pass not to comply with the disability requirements and the fire  requirements. The intention was not to speed up alterations to buildings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMany of them we would think favourably upon, like conversions from commercial buildings to apartment buildings, because the requirements to upgrade fire systems and disability systems are onerous, but that is not the point of this bill. The bill that we have debated and considered carefully he considerations around how and when those applications should be made, were about the remediations to earthquake features. Why has he extended it out like this? You can hear me being nervous about it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022c588d92a0a44a2c0c59e1c65cbf39c19\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c588d92a0a44a2c0c59e1c65cbf39c19\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (10:15)\u003C/span\u003E: I appreciate the member\u2019s question. The answer to the member\u2019s question is outlined in our explanatory note on Amendment Paper 702, page 9, paragraphs (2) and (3). There is a detailed explanation on exactly the question the member has asked.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022 data-id=\u00220d0a94a88dcf546fe25f39a76f4afb69\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220d0a94a88dcf546fe25f39a76f4afb69\u0022\u003EDAN BIDOIS (National\u2014Northcote) (10:16)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007456\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 41\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 25; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e54493dbe698a254c0ec62d76e67ed1d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The  question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Part 1 set out on Amendment Paper 702 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007463\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 41\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 25; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002258b21234b38f2713395a4b590d697a21\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 7, new section 133AF, inserting a new subsection is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 7, new section 133ASB(3), inserting new paragraphs (c) and (ca) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007471\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 41\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 25; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002295c0438620ead96a6388a9440c82e255\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 7, new section 133AY(1), inserting new paragraphs (aa) to (ac) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007478\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 41\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 25; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227f4bb57ed0c43c256bff8bb224fffe55\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 7, new section 133AY, inserting new subsection (2) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007485\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 41\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 25; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a830431b5896cb316bd7ef9bd25ae877\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 7, new section 133AZE, inserting new subsection (2) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007492\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 41\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 25; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c8f8918a43fc793c6bcced43d54f09c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Celia Wade-Brown\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 7, new section 133AZF(2)(a), deleting \u201Cas nearly as reasonably practicable\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007499\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 41\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 25; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c4c1c7230115b7876ea42373d02834b7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Celia Wade-Brown\u2019s amendments to clause 7 new section 133AZF deleting the crossheadings above subsections (3) and (3A) set out on Amendment Paper 656 are out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Celia Wade-Brown\u2019s remaining amendments to clause 7 set out on Amendment Paper 656 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007507\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 41\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 25; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022089c6c3429965e7b5fd1eae4f8acf391\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022237a6440a8c20d302131fdd26f1dad82\u0022\u003EPart 2 Amendments to other legislation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bdf8578f6ca80c03fcf436fd870eda00\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to Part 2. This is the debate on clauses 16 to 24, \u201CAmendments to other legislation.\u201D The question is that Part 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u0022424a7397903506aa916b65276c4dbff8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022424a7397903506aa916b65276c4dbff8\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (10:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I will take the Minister through all of my questions to the changes to the regulations at once because I do not want him to miss the questions. Regulations 7 and 8 are being revoked by his changes. That takes out the definitions for moderate earthquake and ultimate capacity in the earthquake rating categories. I assume that\u2019s because they\u2019re no longer operative because of the change away from the existing new building standard percentage and rating framework, but particularly around moderate earthquake. Surely, that is still part of the methodology, and is he otherwise defining that, is the first question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ERegulation 9 is being revoked. That\u2019s the prescribed earthquake-prone building (EPB) notice forms. Is that just because the new regime merged to the simpler warning sign and plain language definitions, which he has spoken about, or is he comfortable with the select committee\u2019s findings that the existing notices that contained the legal information, that legal information was publicly available still elsewhere? It seems to me that with some of these situations like revocations and where the council has asked for unreinforced masonry information that what the select committee was considering is no longer the case. So why the select committee recommended that regulation 9 be revoked was that that dense information that was being currently provided on the notices\u2014I think this was a change which was suggested by Andy Foster, the chair of that committee\u2014was that it was being held by councils anyway, but under the new formulation and the changes that information might be nowhere. So can he assure the committee that regulation 9 is being revoked but that information doesn\u2019t leave the public record?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ERegulation 10, the exemptions: the existing exemptions regulations are meant to now work under the new section 133AW that I was asking him about moments ago, including removing the references to earthquake-prone parts. But that is something that I want to return to as a more substantive question about how the interacts with the Health and Safety at Work Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ERegulation 11, substantial alterations: I\u2019m annoyed about this. It is the fire and disability access issue in new section 133AZF, and the formula has changed from referring to the cost of seismic work to the broader \u201Cbuilding work [that is] necessary to complete the building\u2019s remediation\u201D. So there is his protection around \u201Cnecessary to complete the remediation\u201D. But I am still unclear; it is not set out in his explanatory note whether a developer can undertake work that is tangential to the remediation of masonry and still get away with not applying the standards of the fire and disability access work. I disagreed when I heard the contribution by the member Celia Wade-Brown the first time, but now I think that assessment is right, that we will have developers here who are investing significant amounts of money in building work, not remediation work, and yet will get a free pass through the system to not do the fire and disability work. That will be on this House. That will be on every member of this House when we change the legislation, because of this Parliament, that there will be developers out there who have done significant remediations, but when it came to a fire that might result in the loss of life, they haven\u2019t needed to upgrade it because of this provision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 3 being revoked is another one that I would like to seek the Minister\u2019s justification for. Is that simply because we are moving away from the EPB notice forms, or is it the case that that information is now not public information?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, the substantive question I have is about the Health and Safety at Work Act\u2019s change, and so does the amendment that has an effect on section 37 of the Health and Safety at Work Act from an earthquake-prone building to what it was under the old formula, which was building or a part of the building, to now just an earthquake-prone building, reduce the existing health and safety duties in relation to the dangerous part. So where you have a bridge like the Christchurch City Council example, where the council had to move its workers out of a part of its building because the bridge was the part that was deemed by its engineers to be a problem\u2014have we now got a situation where if the building as a whole is identified as not meeting the criteria, the Christchurch City Council wouldn\u2019t have done that? That seems to be the wrong outcome from a Health and Safety at Work Act point of view. It seemed to be the right outcome to leave the obligations for employers, even when the building owners were getting a different obligation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002218d6f01abdd31b5f3fbe920676b747d7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002218d6f01abdd31b5f3fbe920676b747d7\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (10:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Well firstly, I want to thank the member for asking questions in all but 4 clauses in this part. I will work my way through answers on all of those clauses. Starting with clause 13A and B relating to health and safety, the updates that are in there reflect a carve-out position, particularly around ensuring that the definitions within the earthquake-prone buildings Act are the same as the meanings within section 7(1) of the Building Act 2004.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to clause 19\u2014specifically, this was around regulation 7 being revoked\u2014these are consequential amendments to remove, as the member noted, the new building standard - related concepts from legislation. Those regulations are now redundant.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe member asked a question in regards to \u201Cmoderate earthquake\u201D. The word \u201Cmoderate earthquake\u201D was part of the prior old regime and is no longer relevant, so that\u2019s now being revoked. In regards to the member\u2019s question on clause 20, again, in select committee, changes relating to that were the revoking of the earthquake rating category, because the replacement regime no longer uses earthquake ratings for the statutory system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to the member\u2019s question on clause 21, again, the purpose of those changes\u2014again, by the select committee\u2014removes prescribed forms of the earthquake-prone building notices from regulation. The member asked about plain language: that is correct. I answered that in the prior part, with the replacement regime instead providing for earthquake-prone building notices and warning signs in the Building Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to the member\u2019s question on clause 22, which was revoking regulation 10, again, that is in regards to updating exemption-related references so the regulation aligns with the new provisions and the priority-building framework.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to the member\u2019s question on clause 23, regulation 11, the committee changes were consequential updates in regards to aligning the \u201Csubstantial alteration\u201D regulation with the new alteration provisions, the earthquake-prone buildings Act, and the removal of parts of the building references. The Amendment Paper 702 that I have on the Table, in regards to new subclauses (2A) and (2B), updates the definitions of that and also replace references to \u201Cseismic work\u201D with \u201Cbuilding work that is necessary to complete the building\u2019s remediation\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELastly, in regards to the question asked by the member on clause 24, revoking Schedule\u00A03, committee changes are again noted here, revoking Schedule 3 rather than replacing it, reflecting the removal of prescribed earthquake-prone building notice forms from the regulations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229dd4a81a6b90c7f7ad458b46c67620cd\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: There is not a lot of room left for questions, but I will entertain one more.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u00224f919d8b4d3da82a1c2199eaa8f29c5b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224f919d8b4d3da82a1c2199eaa8f29c5b\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (10:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, I\u2019m seeking a back and forth with the Minister for Building and Construction on his excellent answers. Regulation 11, which relates to new section 133AZF\u2014he knows I am passionate about this. I have two questions for him. Can the Minister confirm that an owner cannot add unrelated renovation work to an earthquake remediation project and thereby obtain the fire safety and disability access exemptions in section 133AZF for that additional work, on his new wording?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESecondly, why? What is the policy rationale for the Government changing regulation\u00A011 from seismic work to the broader building work? My question isn\u2019t whether he has changed that; my question is, has he consulted on that? Has he been asked by developers to provide that in this bill? What sorts of buildings are intended to be covered by this? This is something we support that is unusual for us. It is not within the scope of ordinary Labour politics to allow developers a faster way to enable them to do developments cheaper at the expense of people\u2019s safety in a fire, or people with disabilities who live and work in those buildings. I want to ask him what the rationale is, and who has asked for this change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00225f2a3dff761ddc7f3016d7c4b1cf3c6c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225f2a3dff761ddc7f3016d7c4b1cf3c6c\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (10:33)\u003C/span\u003E: The rationale in regards to clause 23, regulation 11, is primarily to ensure that regulation and the alterations in the provisions align with the new section in the prior part, new section 133AZF. As I noted before, the new subclauses in the Amendment Paper that we have tabled, clause 23(2A) and (2B), include the updating of definitions in regards to regulation\u00A011 and replace references to \u201Cseismic work\u201D with \u201Cbuilding work that is necessary to complete the building\u2019s remediation\u201D. There will be points of difference in regards to seismic work versus building work. This is allowing for a mechanism for that work to be undertaken on a practical basis.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022 data-id=\u0022d1d695815a7cf07b4f260e74fb82d00a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d1d695815a7cf07b4f260e74fb82d00a\u0022\u003EDr VANESSA WEENINK (National\u2014Banks Peninsula) (10:34)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007535\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 41\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 25; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222cd08f78ce63fafd5d4faf56fba8fefe\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Part 2 set out on Amendment Paper 702 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007542\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 41\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 25; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229dc0d921c7606b0a47e721fe40e90797\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: We come now to the schedules.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Schedule 1 set out on Amendment Paper 702 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007551\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 92\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 25; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 16\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00228e8b48607bdc4a6cbd5417f1591243a2\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022bdb1bb4c4370f8cd5823780813149ead\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d748ce39c4e0ca0c0ab9494f894ec27\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come to our final debate. This is the debate on clauses 1 to 3, \u201CTitle\u201D, \u201CCommencement\u201D, and \u201CPrincipal Act\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022 data-id=\u0022f353820a0ac5eaeca4a09ebe3644c00e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f353820a0ac5eaeca4a09ebe3644c00e\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY (Labour) (10:38)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Thank you, Madam Chair. For the benefit of the committee and for understanding how you intend to conduct the remainder of this committee stage, could you please explain the grounds on which that closure motion was agreed to?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242a9418e82023e8249f8e02847b7cdfa\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Because I received it and put it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200b16beebff0b25a2f4fb2e9826c984d\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to that, then, Madam Chair\u2014I was hoping for a bit more of a fulsome response to that. It was a genuine request, and I think it did warrant further explanation, on the basis that our spokesperson indicated that it was her intention and hope to have her back to forth, which is outlined as the desirable approach for committee stages. It was indicated that there were detailed, relevant, and non-repetitious questions to come. My concern is that, given there was, essentially, one question and one follow-up, it serves as a disincentive for members to seek a back and forth when that is indicated. It is not often able to be had in a committee stage, despite that being the stated intention, and that was cut off. So, on the basis that as long as\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022676a6e7dc1b81f3ecdcebd8f00e44a39\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: I understand\u2014I understand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7464cb2547b2eacf9d60334e32d0022\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah. I\u2019m just seeking a genuine explanation, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022114d90eb2a11d7cd998c15be2fab0df7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: For your information, in response to that question, there were six parts in that first question, which was, as the Minister pointed out, almost all of them. There was a follow-up question. That area\u2014Part 2\u2014was covered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ebdb69857aef168164880264a42b8f36\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208e50a477fe70b6427dacf7179b4fae3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: No, no, I\u2019m not going to entertain a debate on this. I\u2019ve received the closure motion, I\u2019ve put the closure motion\u2014end of debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022 data-id=\u002208c15610a3a2b79cecd45ed94e1527c6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002208c15610a3a2b79cecd45ed94e1527c6\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY (Labour) (10:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I\u2019m not trifling; I have a genuine question. It is related, but it is not trifling with you. Is it your view, as a presiding officer, that if a member asks more than one question in a contribution, that then prevents them from a follow-up?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229932b891df8bf9fcb71582112cf30108\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1815ee09d7deef51c08911876d5af57\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY\u003C/span\u003E: So, if they were to ask one question per contribution\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bc19385bfa82e1a6778d67b99ad90ffc\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: There was a follow-up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e22dba12dc70cc99a95b99bdee68450\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY\u003C/span\u003E: OK. It\u2019s useful to know. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022121d46f1d878c979cb501602c182f662\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022121d46f1d878c979cb501602c182f662\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (10:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I just want to provide a little bit of a high-level explanation in regards to clauses 1 and 2. The title provided in the bill is the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act, which is representative of the legislation which we\u2019re discussing. In regards to clause\u00A02, around the commencement, a little bit of background: as noted, it provides that, for most of the Act, it comes into force on 1 July 2027.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe Amendment Paper provides that clause 12, which inserts transitional provisions into Schedule 1AA, which we\u2019ve discussed in prior parts, comes into force on the day after Royal assent. Clause 13 and the new Schedule 2A map, which we\u2019ve had discussions in regards, now come into force with the rest of the bill, on 1 July 2027, with early digital map publication, as we\u2019ve also discussed, dealt with in new clause 20C of Schedule\u00A01AA.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u0022f27485ad3e64467596b84609ee7d6800\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f27485ad3e64467596b84609ee7d6800\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (10:42)\u003C/span\u003E: I want to ask the Minister for Building and Construction about clause 2, the commencement, particularly subclause\u00A0(2)\u2014and no other part of clause 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe problem we have here is that we have a number of building owners who have complied and done everything that the Government asked them to do. They took on the significance and seriousness of the findings of the royal commission after the Christchurch earthquakes. This applies to most Cantabrian owners, who have now undertaken significant works at their expense. Yet now, the problem is that the Government has provided a regime which is almost never ending, as was established in the committee stage, where owners who drag their heels and do not wish to comply with the legislation, because they think that they can get away with it under this new Government\u2019s formulation, will continuously not spend the money that is required to be spent in order to protect life and limb of the public, who, in some cases, do not know the risk to them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question on clause 2(2) is about the political tension here. On one side, we also have owners who, by the Minister\u2019s extension of the rules that apply to Auckland, have immediate relief. Let it be on the record that this Government chose a group of owners who, almost immediately after Royal assent, will not be subject to any of these rules. There is a special group of building owners who are completely exempt, and that special group of building owners is completely exempt because, in the opinion of the Minister and the Mayor of Auckland, they should be completely exempt. Then, there is another group of owners, who from 1 July will need to start complying with the new set of timing obligations. This set of owners are not special and are not exempt, because they are not as politically important to the Minister\u2019s decision making. That group will, also, then be subject to a system where they can apply to their council, and potentially convince their council, that there should be a specialness applied to them\u2014that they should be considered special by their local representatives. These extensions and revocations should take their remediations into 2030 or 2032. That is also, then, a special category. And then we have another set of owners, who have done everything that\u2019s been asked for them and they already comply with the highest standards, because that is what was asked of them six years ago. Do you get the point, Minister?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe point here is that the timing is critically important and that your commencement at subclause (2) allows for certain types of owners who can game the system, who can approach their elected representatives, who can approach the most experienced engineers, and argue against their council\u2019s determinations, to perpetually fail to undertake remediations that everybody knows need to happen. That is unfair, and that is a feature of the timing provisions in this commencement part of the bill. What should have happened is a clear outline of the 7\u00BD years as the extension, and then by that time, because of the risk of moral hazard, it should have come into effect. Instead, we have a Government that has elected to kick the can down the road, not only in the primary legislation but at the regulatory level, and with councils too. It is a shame that there is no single date which the Minister could tell me\u2014no single operation or process which would set out the date which people needed to comply by\u2014and we now have a system which incentivises the most well-resourced business owners and the most well-resourced engineering companies to perpetually play out the clock and make sure that they do not need to comply.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose costs of compliance are high, but the costs of not complying are high too. The reason why we have these rules is that the potential for loss of life in our town centres\u2014where people could not know, and do not know, that there is a risk\u2014is very high. That is unfair, that is not the right decision, and that is not the right decision for the commencement date provision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00221458879204b5620698629ff003327eb0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221458879204b5620698629ff003327eb0\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (10:46)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member Arena Williams for the question. I do not agree with the underlying premise that the member is making: that this legislation is about owners. This legislation is about the buildings. That is the focus of the legislation, and the risk of those buildings in terms of risk to life. The ownership of that\u2014and we talked about that in regards to apartments\u2014is not the defining point. The point is in regards to the building, and the structure of the building, and we\u2019ve talked extensively around that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe purpose of what we are doing around the commencement is to give the buildings the certainty in regards to what requirements are required. The intention of the overarching bill is, obviously, that buildings, in areas of risk to life, are required to be remediated to prevent and reduce that risk. There is a degree of priority given to high risk, medium risk, and low risk across the country, and that by no means takes away or provides some sort of benefit to the owner. The building defines that. That is the substance of where the legislation is targeted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00220fab8d0d6846ab43803b160ac92e8230\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220fab8d0d6846ab43803b160ac92e8230\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (10:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to start with the commencement, and then I will move on to the title afterwards. I\u2019m hearing what my colleague Arena Williams is saying, and what the Minister is saying as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do think that, in terms of the commencement, while there is this transitional measure which is in clause 12, and it does make sense to have a transitional measure, I do want to acknowledge and also support my colleague Arena Williams\u2019 concern around the fact that what that conditional measure would also mean is that the day after Royal assent\u2014as soon as this gets Royal assent, which could be Monday, at the latest Tuesday\u2014there will be a group of buildings and owners of buildings that are immediately exempted. If this is what the Government is referring to when they said it is beneficial for the economy, that is of genuine concern, because it\u2019s actually not so much a benefit; it\u2019s allowing those people who are able to have that kind of connection or close relationship or who are able to have a conversation with either the Minister or local council to be exempted. It\u2019s not so much a benefit for the people of Aotearoa New Zealand; it allows them to alleviate or remove some of their liabilities, which they themselves should rightfully address in order to prevent the loss of lives. This is the concern that we\u2019re seeing as we go through the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 702.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is where I want to come down to the title. The title is \u201CBuilding (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill\u201D. I\u2019m deeply concerned that that is quite misleading now, because they\u2019re not actually about buildings that are genuinely earthquake prone, but buildings that get special carve-outs, that gets special designated powers. The Minister talks about how this allows the designation of \u201Chigh risk\u201D, \u201Cmedium risk\u201D, and \u201Clow risk\u201D. The Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper, Amendment Paper 702, changes the very criteria that designates whether they are going to be high risk, medium risk, or low risk.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to draw attention, again, back to new section 133AB(6)(c), where \u201Cunreinforced masonry building\u201D has had its scope and criteria narrowed, which means that more buildings will be exempted as a result. I do worry that the title of this bill, with \u201C(Earthquake-prone Buildings)\u201D no longer represents buildings that are genuinely earthquake prone.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fd066d437ce885894bceabb89b5d0f79\u0022\u003EDan Bidois\u003C/span\u003E: Frivolous.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226dc7f37228e752ef8e6dd65fa4ff1468\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: If the loss of our lives, Mr Dan Bidois, is considered \u201Cfrivolous\u201D, I have genuine concerns for the priorities of the current Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe things is, as we\u2019ve heard as a part of this debate\u2014the example that my colleague Arena Williams gave, in terms of a Wellington cinema and actually experiencing an earthquake and being there with her kids. I want to check with the Minister\u2014and the question to the Minister is: I want to ensure, in those kinds of instances, that the people of Aotearoa New Zealand, when they step into a building, whether it is a private building or it is a public, Government-owned building, they can be assured that that building is going to stand up in the event of an earthquake because that building has ticked all of the boxes in considering what is considered an earthquake building.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we don\u2019t want to do is come back in a year\u2019s time and then be like, \u201COh well, we could have done better. Thoughts and prayers.\u201D We could have actually made those genuine changes right here\u2014to be able to have things that strengthen the legislation in a way that doesn\u2019t allow these sorts of exemptions and doesn\u2019t change the rules on the spot\u2014because we are the people who are making the rules right here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to check with the Minister if the Minister genuinely believes that, with this title, \u201C(Earthquake-prone Buildings)\u201D, every building that is earthquake-prone will be covered by that\u2014that the Government has done everything they can to ensure that, in the event that something like this happens, there will be no loss of lives, or it will be kept to a minimum; that they are not going to be marginalising or further punishing particularly those who are disabled communities, as a result. Again, we\u2019ve heard some of the changes there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022b3a776f9f4d5e5469ad953e50737f131\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b3a776f9f4d5e5469ad953e50737f131\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (10:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, just to provide assurance to the member Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan, I do believe the title of the bill is an appropriate title for the bill, and I have no intention to change that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to the questions around the commencement date and the fact that these changes, when they come into effect, will have impacts in regards to particular buildings, and as a result of that there may be circumstances where a building will not be required to have remediation undertaken to it, versus the status quo\u2014as a result of that, the outcome will be, in effect, the non-requirement of undertaking investment, and that will therefore provide a benefit versus the status quo\u2014I am comfortable that that will happen immediately. The reason for that is certainty, and certainty in regards to what people are required to do and not required to do under the law, without compromising the safety of the buildings in the context of earthquakes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETaking into account that we are taking a proportionate, risk-based approach, based on the best available science and data, it gives me confidence and assurance that New Zealanders should and will be in a position where this legislation protects them in regards to the risks that they face.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u002208d5453f80050714e0a731fb127a6240\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002208d5453f80050714e0a731fb127a6240\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (10:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I want to ask the Minister for Building and Construction questions just on clause 2. The commencement opportunities here\u2014they\u2019re effectively a dual commencement but at different dates, so they\u2019re not in parallel. One of the interesting things is that one change that he has made relates specifically to Schedule 2 not actually coming into force on the day after Royal assent. The Transport and Infrastructure Committee did suggest and recommend that actually Schedule 2, amongst a few others, would come into effect on the day after Royal assent. What the Minister is, effectively, doing with his Amendment Paper change\u2014Amendment Paper 702\u2014is he is suggesting that Schedule 2 would actually not come into effect then, but with the rest of the Act on 1 July 2027.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, Schedule 2 is related to the new map that we have become familiar with. My question is that the Minister has already today said that the only way in which this map will change is if Parliament chooses to change it. I just don\u2019t see the logic of needing to delay the ability for this map in Schedule 2 to come into force on 1 July next year when there is no expectation that the Parliament is going to change the map between now and then, necessarily. There\u2019s been nothing today that has indicated that there will be a need for Parliament to change the map. Actually, the Minister himself has indicated that it is highly unlikely that changes will occur, because it is around the seismic risk to the country, and that\u2019s based on the information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe select committee reported back that, really, there\u2019s no reason why this map\u2014which, in static form, is not going to change unless the Parliament determines that it will\u2014should be delayed in terms of its implementation. The insertion of the map is the only thing here, in terms of Schedule 2; there\u2019s nothing else that\u2019s contained in the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper. He has referred to the existence of a digital map being stood up. The digital map that is referenced\u2014and I\u2019d need to check if that\u2019s in terms of Schedule 2 or not, but it might be that it\u2019s trying to align the two\u2014from what we\u2019ve understood in the last few hours, is still going to be exactly the same as the static map; it\u2019s just that the level of granularity is going to be much more specific, because you\u2019re able to zoom in and have a look at your own property. That\u2019s what we\u2019ve heard from the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI know that there have been a number of other changes in terms of the commencement, but the one that really did jump out to me, given that we\u2019ve spent a little bit of time looking at the map, is why it is that there needs to be a delay when the threshold for changing that map\u2014there is, really, no higher threshold in this country. It would require, as we understand it, an Act of Parliament or a change of the Parliament in order to do that. Given that that threshold is so high, why can the map not simply, through Schedule\u00A02, come into force the day after Royal assent?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002239d07052ae6df263bdd1a3082fc7009f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002239d07052ae6df263bdd1a3082fc7009f\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (10:57)\u003C/span\u003E: In effect, the map does come into force after Royal assent. The point on the date, around 1\u00A0July 2027, relates to when the map will go into the Building Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022 data-id=\u0022d44a932c5f064f227af92252dc9b09cf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d44a932c5f064f227af92252dc9b09cf\u0022\u003EDr VANESSA WEENINK (National\u2014Banks Peninsula) (10:57)\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\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u00228ce635f93106b09cbdc666dba9cd03bc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228ce635f93106b09cbdc666dba9cd03bc\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (10:57)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, I wish to take a call on clause 1\u2014the title. This Act should be called the \u201CBuilding (Earthquake-prone Buildings that are Everywhere Except Auckland) Amendment Act 2025\u201D. I take issue with the Minister for Building and Construction saying in his answer to Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan that these distinctions were made on the basis of science and evidence\u2014that\u2019s not right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHis own regulatory impact statement, evidence provided by officials to the select committee, and numerous submitters all said that the exemption to Auckland is something that has called for but it is not something that could be based on science and evidence around risk. There are earthquake-prone buildings in Auckland. We accept that as a Parliament, and we should be told as such. The distinction between the earthquake-prone buildings in Auckland and the earthquake-prone buildings in other places is that some are included in the regulatory net and some are not, and that distinction is based on whether they are in Auckland or not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EEvery electorate MP in this House should appreciate that, if you represent an area outside of Auckland, your buildings\u2019 owners are not being treated as special in the way that the special building owners in Auckland are being treated. The Auckland impact of the regulatory change that the Government is introducing is big; within the billions of dollars that they like to champion. That is something we have supported, but we should be clear that the regulatory relief being offered to the Cantabrian building owners who are affected by this that Vanessa Weenink represents, that the building owners represented by Stuart Smith in his electorate at the top of the South Island, are not considered special enough to get the regulatory relief from day one that this Government has opted to give Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is why it should be a part of the title of this bill that we could alternatively name it \u201CBuilding (Earthquake-prone Buildings (Auckland is Special)) Amendment Act 2025\u201D, because I believe that, but do the members in this House realise how the Government is treating the building owners in their areas who are affected by this and who cannot afford to remediate \u2014that when they approach their local MP and they say, \u201CThank you for changing these rules. I have heard you on the news say that there will be billions of dollars of regulatory relief available to us.\u201D, it doesn\u2019t apply to them; it only applies to people within a certain geographic catchment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister says that it is based on science and evidence and that there are buildings that are much more earthquake prone and risky to the public, because Auckland is a populated place with urban centres where cars, buses, trains, and people are much more prevalent than those streets in Feilding\u2019s town centre, but Auckland gets a special exemption not because of the life and limb that is at risk, not because their buildings are lower risk, but because the Government has decided on a special carve-out for Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey cannot be doing it in regulations, and they cannot change the regulatory map here that my colleague Tangi Utikere has been talking about. They could not do this in regulations, because there is no science and evidence which the Parliament could have delegated to officials to draw a special line around Auckland. We had to do this in this Chamber because this is a decision which is only available to the House, because it is a political decision. When the Government presents this as something which is based on science and evidence, we have to look at what kind of science and evidence they have relied upon. When we compare our regime to something like Sacramento, California, that is a regime which is entirely built around information. This is not a regime that is built around information or disclosure; this is a regime which is built around actual regulationary effect, which requires some building owners to make remediations which are costly to private property for public benefit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is a different way of designing the regime. It is not comparable to the science which has been used in those cases, so that is wrong, but we should be very clear eyed about what we are being asked to do here. This is no longer a regime which singles out the most earthquake-prone buildings, puts them on a list, and requires remediation and priority order. It is a regime which does that but excludes some because they are in a zone which is deemed to be less seismically active than others, a zone which is in the middle of the Pacific Ring of Fire with more than 20 volcanoes and an active volcano less than 700 years ago. It\u2019s unwise for a Minister to stand in this Chamber and say that that is based on science and evidence, when we all accept that there is some degree of science here and some degree of woo-woo to go along with the plan advocated by the Mayor of Auckland and property developers who will benefit from this change. I am advocating for a change in the name, Minister. Will you accept it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00229615fe689682a87f551cea6c20acc7bf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229615fe689682a87f551cea6c20acc7bf\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (11:02)\u003C/span\u003E: No, I won\u2019t, but I\u2019ll give a little bit of background just to finish this off in regards to the seismic risk, because it is an important aspect, considering a significant portion of New Zealanders live in Auckland. Auckland, Northland, and the Chatham Islands are further from plate boundaries or major faults, and the faults that do exist often move very slowly or haven\u2019t ruptured in a very long time, with the last significant earthquake in Auckland being in 1891. While strong earthquakes can happen, they are much less likely to give in any given year. The media reports relating to a new study in regards to one of the fault lines south east of Auckland City say that it is considered active because it ruptured within the past 10,000 years and could create an earthquake as a result. However, any fault that has moved within the past 125,000 years is considered active within our model. On that basis, we believe that the cost-benefit analysis shows that Auckland has a low risk in regards to earthquake and, therefore, the requirements and intentions under this legislation are targeted and that we are proportionate and focused on the areas of New Zealand which have the highest risk to loss of life, and that is what this legislation will deliver.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df3e6766443b46819410ad4fedf34077\u0022 data-id=\u00227af85a28fd5cb68265d5e72c5e9ea880\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df3e6766443b46819410ad4fedf34077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227af85a28fd5cb68265d5e72c5e9ea880\u0022\u003ESTUART SMITH (Senior Whip\u2014National) (11:04)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007611\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 41\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 25; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6170a02e65fc1e505d5f1d1e5327798\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendment to clause 2 set out on Amendment Paper 702 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007619\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 41\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 25; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill to be reported with amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022928b85bf2fc844d1cea2742657c3238e\u0022\u003EHealthy Futures (Pae Ora) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022928b85bf2fc844d1cea2742657c3238e\u0022\u003EBuilding (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002240923446f81f808d047e786a5c0eaff6\u0022\u003EReport of Committee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bcb2435091cb58dd63b4a3ab726ec6c4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, the committee has considered the Pae Ora (Healthy Futures) (3-Day Postnatal Stay) Amendment Bill and reports it with amendment, retitled the Healthy Futures (Pae Ora) (3-Day Postnatal Stay) Amendment Bill. The committee has also considered the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) 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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227903b2f5d2bca191441cb06f3ba7a6aa\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The Healthy Futures (Pae Ora) (3-Day Postnatal Stay) Amendment Bill is set down for third reading next sitting day. The Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill is set down for third reading immediately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00228a5c24f362b3e5a6243ff65f1d00d108\u0022\u003EBuilding (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b42d8d6e08d6ad9e22d98febcd8d50db\u0022\u003ELegislative Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00220064f27136e0eedd19283457b41d7a8c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220064f27136e0eedd19283457b41d7a8c\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (11:07)\u003C/span\u003E: I present a legislative statement on the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ecd1c17ededb6d5c7c43c707d9b5ec92\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022bb83d101f9c63f79027b5569e3c5ade4\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002252b33774c685680fdff9ff626f8b910a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002252b33774c685680fdff9ff626f8b910a\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (11:07)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill be now read a third time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI wish to firstly acknowledge all of those that have been party to preparing this legislation. This legislation is very, very important and is built upon some of the most significant challenges that we as a nation have faced as a result of the earthquakes in the Canterbury region and the remediation works subsequently. I would also like to acknowledge my good friend and colleague the Hon Chris Penk for his significant contribution as the Minister who led this reform under this Government and has put it in the position in which we are able to pass and will be passing it today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis bill is about taking unnecessary costs and red tape off building owners and communities while keeping the earthquake-prone building system focused on protecting life safely. The savings from this bill are significant. The refocused system is expected to save New Zealanders more than $8.2\u00A0billion in remediation and demolition costs. That is a significant saving for the New Zealand economy and communities, but importantly, the bill and legislation ensures that the system remains focused on the buildings that pose the greatest risk to life.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe current system has not worked as well as it should have, and for many buildings, the price of strengthening runs from hundreds of thousands to several million dollars. As a result, these buildings are often left empty and become derelict, making them even more dangerous to bystanders in a potential earthquake. This bill takes a more pragmatic and practical approach. It focuses the strongest requirements on the higher-risk buildings in higher-risk areas. It removes low-risk buildings from unnecessary requirements, and it gives owners and councils the certainty, the clarity, and the tools to get on with the job.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill makes the system more proportionate to risk. It narrows the system to higher-risk buildings in medium and high seismic zones. It introduces more cost-effective remediation requirements. It ensures that risk mitigation is targeted, including in the areas of retrofit. It removes the new building standard from the statutory system. It provides more flexibility for owners through exemptions and extensions, again, to ensure certainty, including extensions for up to 15 years where progress is being made. It improves transition, implementation, and council decision-making tools, including through a digital map with drill-down capability. That is the right balance. We are not walking away from life safety. We are focusing the system where it will make the most significant difference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill regulates higher-risk buildings in medium and high seismic zones only. That means that the buildings that are more likely to present real life-safety risks remain within the system. Buildings in low seismic zones will come out of the system. That is a common-sense change. It means owners are not forced to spend time and money on requirements that are not justified by the risk.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill also makes the required work more sensible. Buildings where there is key risk, particularly in areas of unreinforced masonry falling on to people outside, will need to mitigate that risk only. Other buildings, where the risk is full or partial in the areas of building collapse, will need a targeted retrofit that protects people inside and outside the building. Some buildings will stay on the register, but their owners will not be forced to carry out seismic work. That applies to one- and two-storey unreinforced masonry buildings outside urban centres. They will have warning signs, however, and their owners must mitigate the risk of facade collapse to get the building earthquake-prone status removed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill also gives owners more flexibility. Councils will be able to grant extensions for up to 15 years with conditions where needed. That recognises the reality that seismic work can be complex, expensive, and difficult to plan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAt the committee of the whole House stage\u2014and I wish to recognise the committee who worked on this bill\u2014there was further improvement through the addition of an Amendment Paper, with amendments made to ensure the bill works as intended. These amendments allow owners to seek a seismic work exemption where prescribed risk mitigation measures sufficiently reduce the building\u2019s risk profile, provide owners with a further five years to complete seismic work if the exemption is revoked after the deadline has expired, enable certain tall buildings using heavy materials and some unreinforced masonry buildings to be identified after the usual identification time frame, clarify which unreinforced masonry buildings are in scope of the earthquake-prone building system, and clarify the scope and the role of the earthquake-prone buildings methodology so that it can support the practical identification, evaluation, remediation, and other operational decisions councils and owners need to make.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Amendment Paper also made other technical changes to improve the bill\u2019s clarity and operation. These changes do not alter the purpose of the bill. They make it easier for councils to administer the scheme and easier for owners to understand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis bill reflects practical reform by this Government. It protects people, it reduces unnecessary cost, and it makes the system easier to use. That is exactly what good regulation should do, and it\u2019s for that reason that I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224d3e9fe136a225ed4e43a3580af0add8\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u0022af926782073a2a3a8faf538483b6c71f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022af926782073a2a3a8faf538483b6c71f\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (11:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Labour support sensible rules to remediate buildings that pose the greatest risk of life and safety, and maintain affordability, particularly for regional communities. This is an issue that we have engaged with both the Minister in the chair earlier\u2014and I thank him for his work\u2014and the former Minister, Chris Penk, in his engagement with us at all stages of the development of this policy and bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is not ordinary Labour politics to welcome the relaxation that will provide developers with some relief when they\u2019re in the middle of remediation that is expensive and is for public benefit but paid for by private people who own these buildings. Yet we continue to support it because we recognise the significant impact that it is having, particularly on regional communities and regional towns, where these remediations are unaffordable and cannot happen and will not happen if the current regime is not amended. This is critical, and that is why we continue to support the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut on this occasion of the third reading, it is also appropriate to remember why the regime exists and that on 22 February 2011, when 185 people died in the Christchurch earthquakes, 39 of those people were killed by the failure of unreinforced masonry and buildings. The findings of the royal commission were tabulated in Volume 4 of their report about the unreinforced masonry buildings and the tall buildings that we have been talking about today. Not only that, not only were people killed within those buildings when they should have been protected by the people who built them and who owned them, but there were also people killed outside of the buildings: they were walking past them, they were driving past them, they were on buses alongside them when the masonry fell. The royal commission concluded that there was \u201Ca demonstrated need in the interests of public safety\u201D to strengthen hazardous elements of unreinforced masonry buildings throughout New Zealand because of that. That is because people cannot know and should not need to know the risk of buildings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis isn\u2019t a problem of a lack of information. This is a problem where private buildings impact on public places and on the public living of life within our communities, which people cannot go without and they cannot choose to do without just because of the impact on them by private buildings. That is why the Government will always have an interest in ensuring that there is not only a public register of that information and that information is provided in a timely way but also that these remediations occur at the expense of the private building owners. But that\u2019s where the rubber hits the road on these politics\u2014that the Government is requiring private building owners to maintain their private property in a way which is expensive.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Labour Party does stand on the side of those people who cannot know and should not know, who require the Government to step in in these situations, so there are some pieces of this legislation which we continue to raise our opposition to. One is the exclusion of Auckland from the rules for remediation of risky buildings. I want to be clear on this point about what we do and do not support. It is fair to exclude many of the buildings that are being left out of the new regime in Auckland because it is a low seismic risk zone. It is sensible for a Government to recognise that these are far from faults, that there is low risk in some parts of Auckland, and that the science is relevant and that we should reflect that in our legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat\u2019s not sensible is that there are some buildings which have features like unreinforced masonry that are tall and that front on to public spaces, public squares, and streets that are being excluded by the Government\u2019s blanket exclusion of Auckland. They are higher risk than other buildings which are included. But for the exclusion, they would still be on the register. But for the exclusion, they would be higher priority than some of those businesses in Feilding town centre. Because of the Government\u2019s decision to leave Auckland out of the map, this is the effect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have to be clear-eyed about that: the majority of earthquake prone buildings, the majority of the figure that the Government likes to champion\u2014I think the Minister said it was $8.2 billion as savings for New Zealanders\u2014is being made in Auckland. These are not changes in updates to the science. There are some savings associated with the science being understood in a different way, but the majority of the savings are being made because every building in Auckland is being left out of the regulatory net. It\u2019s not a minor issue and it is one we will continue to watch closely and engage with the industry on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to raise the point that the Greens have consistently been arguing for in committee and we have been at odds with them. We now agree with them. The regime in the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 702 has gone too far in allowing developers who are undertaking some building works to pass over their obligations that they would otherwise be required to comply with for fire safety and disability access. Developers who have an earthquake building are now better off than developers without an earthquake building\u2014who need to comply, when they are doing any building works, with the modern standards for disability access and for fire. What does that mean? It means that, for many of those apartment buildings in Wellington right now where 20 to 50 people live, where there is someone who accesses those buildings with a wheelchair, when there are remediations in their buildings currently, the owner of the building as a whole, or the body corporate, as it may be, would need to make remediations that take into account the requirements that they have not only in an earthquake but also in a fire. They will need to be able to get out of the building safely according to the modern regulations, not the regulations under which that building was built\u2014say, in the 1970s, when those regulations wouldn\u2019t have applied.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s fair for the Government to make a decision that, if the remediation is only to the unreinforced masonry and is only to the underlying parts, or the structural parts, of the building which are important for earthquake safety, there would not be the additional requirement to update the fire safety exits, say, from the 1970s regulations to the now 2026 regulations. It is certainly too far to allow a special pathway for developers to circumvent those requirements. That does affect people now. It does affect wheelchair users. It does affect elderly people. It does affect the new demographic of people who are choosing to live in one-bedroom apartments because they are elderly or sick and in need of support and because those apartments are all that they can afford. There is a changing demographic, in a city like Wellington, of those people accessing apartments. They currently think that it is a requirement for the body corporate or the building owner to update when they remediate or when they make alterations, which they will now not be entitled to expect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is a change in the way the legislation works. It is a change for those people who have bought apartments a year ago or two years ago with the understanding that they would be improved. It is a shame that we now have a situation where people with significant disabilities cannot rely on the Government to ensure that private building owners will spend the money\u2014that they need and are already obligated to spend, but will now no longer be obligated to spend\u2014on their needs of access to the places which they live. That is a shame. Yet we continue to support this bill, because we recognise that the affordability considerations are such that these things won\u2019t get done if we don\u2019t change the rules. The practical considerations for the Labour Party are that, if we make these changes, more remediations will be done. More remediations will take place because they are better able to prioritise those buildings which need to be remediated now, not later.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are some liberalisations in these provisions, but the overall practical impact is that the buildings which need to be done now, which are hard to be done now, which councils are at odds with private developers about now, will need to continue. That is a good thing. It is a good thing to be able to prioritise these works. We do not have endless capacity of engineers in New Zealand, especially not after 20,000 construction workers are gone, and 1,500 engineers every year is what the Engineering Association says we are in deficit of, because some are leaving and some are not graduating in the first place. That is a critical workforce, and it is critical that we prioritise those resources where they are needed most. This bill does that. That is a good effect of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut the Labour Party does continue to have these significant concerns, which we will monitor very closely, because there are some things in this bill we cannot live with, and this must be a regime which is sticky, which survives future Parliaments as well, and which continues to deliver for people who cannot advocate for themselves. Teenagers going to a Wellington cinema shouldn\u2019t need to check a sign about whether it is safe or not; they should be sure that the Government will step in on their behalf and make sure that that is a building which is safe to be in, in the kind of earthquake which we can legitimately predict will happen in an area like that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022 data-id=\u0022101e970a899a1129ae42c37fb9992c71\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022101e970a899a1129ae42c37fb9992c71\u0022\u003ECELIA WADE-BROWN (Green) (11:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of the Greens to support this bill at the third reading. I\u2019d like to start by saying this country has a real earthquake risk, but it is only one of the risks that we face. I\u2019d like to pay tribute to the people who died in the Christchurch earthquakes and the people who actually continued to suffer for a very long time when they weren\u2019t sure what insurance would cover, how long it would take, or when their building would be inspected. It\u2019s not only the impact in the immediate tragedy; it is an ongoing issue for many people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would also like to thank, actually, both the Hon Chris Penk and the Hon Simon Watts for taking this very seriously, for getting into the detail, and also for answering our questions\u2014about a 90 percent pass rate on that; so there\u2019s still a couple of things that we could, I think, improve. Also, it was a collegial process. I was on the Transport and Infrastructure Committee at the time, and it was helped by having Chair Andy Foster, who, of course, also brought his local government background to play.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is no zero-risk strategy. I think we need to be clear about this. It is a balance between the renaissance particularly of some of our provincial and rural centres\u2014it is quite depressing to go to some towns and just see buildings that are stickered and empty. And that doesn\u2019t mean there\u2019s zero risk if you walk past them. About more than half of the buildings currently on registers will be removed, and hopefully that, together with some better economic policies\u2014but that would be going outside the scope of this bill\u2014will rejuvenate and revitalise those centres.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are some very strange outcomes. It\u2019s quite easy for people without necessarily the background in this to say, \u201COh, well, these old buildings, they survived that quake, and yet they had to knock down the BNZ building on the waterfront.\u201D What people don\u2019t understand is that each earthquake, because of the waves through the Earth, might affect two identical buildings quite differently. It\u2019s too easy to say, \u201CIt has stood here and nothing\u2019s fallen off for the last 100 years.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think the engineering and building assessments have been really good. We had a lot of submissions that were quite technical, that actually talked about materials, and, in Wellington, both before and after my time as mayor\u2014we accelerated it under my time, and it continued to work\u2014there was a lot of money spent not just on earthquake-proofing council buildings but also for grants to heritage buildings to keep the character of the city. Now, you can\u2019t save every one, but it would have been tragic if some of the most interesting examples\u2014I think of some of the buildings along Ghuznee Street or Cuba Street\u2014had not been strengthened. It would not be the same city. It\u2019s so good that people can go to the St James Theatre or the state Opera House, which I think are pretty important, even if they might not be listed in the local government requirements these days.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would like to say a few more things. The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment advice was good; GNS, which, of course, has changed names. The depth of knowledge in this country about earthquakes and about resilience is really fantastic. Once upon a time, we were going to have a centre of excellence for earthquake and other resilience, I think, based in this city, together with Massey, Victoria, Government institutions, and so on. I mean, it\u2019s a bit like turning lemons into lemonade, but I think our experience of what risks we are prone to and what we can do about them\u2014that includes technical items, it includes building, but it also includes community resilience. For example, Neighbours Day, in some ways, is just about as important as fixing the facade on an individual building. We need to make sure that we can continue to fund those too.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is a slightly strange item that we didn\u2019t get to in question time questions, about when councils can amend the strategic transport routes. Now, it makes perfect sense that whether it\u2019s a road for an ambulance to get through or it\u2019s a pedestrian mall that\u2019s got thousands of people going down it should be a real consideration\u2014that those buildings have to be strengthened\u2014but I do think, for a Government that\u2019s rather over-excited about new roads, it does seem strange that local authorities are not able to add any new strategic transport routes. Maybe this is quietly signalling a change in policy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA bigger issue for me\u2014and I really appreciate the words of my colleague Arena Williams, who really knows her stuff about Auckland and risk and buildings, and that she\u2019s come round to seeing that we could be stronger on the disabled access and fire safety egress. It is not usually hugely more expensive to fix those things when you\u2019re doing other building changes, and it is difficult for a building owner to commit to doing them just afterwards when you\u2019ve fixed all the carpets, you\u2019ve put the tiles back, and you\u2019ve painted the walls. Is that really the time you want to be putting in a ramp access or better fire egress? Nevertheless, to give credit, it still says, \u201Cas far as reasonably practical\u201D, and hopefully people won\u2019t use that as an escape clause and they will take it seriously, because there are more and more people who have some form of visible or invisible physical disability, and buildings should be for all of us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it\u2019s important for some of the MPs down South to really come to grips with the fact that Oamaru, Dunedin, and so on are now included in the way that they were not before. Now, many of those buildings, you know, the solid stone blocks of Oamaru stone will be fine, but there are considerations for that council and for the building owners and for the residents and visitors that\u2014of course, we haven\u2019t actually changed the risk, but we recognise the risk, and I think it\u2019s quite important to say that all of the parties, as far as I know, are supporting those changes. We do have similar reservations about taking Auckland out, partly for the numbers of people, partly because the real scientists are continuing to identify new faults and note the risks, whether it\u2019s the Hikurangi fault, whether it\u2019s the Alpine fault, or whether it\u2019s something we haven\u2019t found yet, because we actually do have relatively limited human knowledge beyond a couple of millennium. It\u2019s not like Italy where we know so much more about the history of what has happened. I think that\u2019s covered all the points I wanted to make. I would like to commend this bill to the House and pass on. Thank you, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022440a125e85954bae9f5d470b7551e4f3\u0022 data-id=\u00221d8cc815ab0cc159872a1b48dd8403f6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022440a125e85954bae9f5d470b7551e4f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221d8cc815ab0cc159872a1b48dd8403f6\u0022\u003ECAMERON LUXTON (ACT) (11:33)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a pleasure to stand long overdue on this Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill and speak on behalf of the ACT Party. It puts me in mind a line of a poem: \u201CIf you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs and blaming it on you.\u201D The reason that comes to mind is that, 10 years ago, ACT stood against costly and kneejerk reactions that established this scheme. We called for a risk-based earthquake-strengthening regime, and that has finally been delivered today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe costs and pain that individuals and towns have gone through for the last 10 years can\u2019t be repaired, but sense has been restored and ACT is proud that we have now got parties around the House standing and seeing the light. I can promise you, ACT will continue to light that path to unlock New Zealand\u2019s potential. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022 data-id=\u00227405ac6ddd43dbfadb8a938821881383\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227405ac6ddd43dbfadb8a938821881383\u0022\u003EANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (11:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First, and also as chair of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee, to speak on this third reading. I just want to start off just by thanking submitters, thanking the officials, thanking the always excellent members of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee; but I did want to say thank you also to the Ministers, particularly to Chris Penk for the work that you did not only on this but on many other pieces of legislation we work with. I really appreciated that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs we\u2019ve heard, we live in a seismically-challenged country. We have, apparently, about 14,000 earthquakes a year, of which about 400 are over magnitude 4, and every four years we get one at 7 or more, so we are an active place. We have had some which have killed significant numbers of people, and, obviously, we\u2019ve heard about the tragedy in Christchurch and earlier in the 20\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E century with the Napier ones, which, between them, killed 441 people if you take all the Christchurch earthquakes, and we want to try and avoid that sort of situation. But as Celia Wade-Brown before me said, risk is an inherent part of life and there is no zero risk. This bill is about being proportionate about risk. In fact, it was really interesting to read just a quick quote from Russell McVeagh. They said that \u201CAfter eight years of New Zealand\u2019s current earthquake-prone building system, the Government has announced a significant and welcome reset, aimed at delivering a fairer, risk-based approach to seismic safety.\u201D, and I thought that was quite a measured thing to say.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve already heard about the savings there will be, from $12 billion costs down to an estimated $4 billion. But a couple of things I did want to pick up. Arena Williams talked about the 39 people tragically killed in Christchurch from unreinforced masonry buildings. This bill would still require those buildings to be strengthened, obviously, at some point in whatever time they got to that point; they clearly weren\u2019t at that point. We also did, as a select committee, insist that we did need to make sure that information was provided on those buildings to say that they are earthquake-prone.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the removal of Auckland, we did explore that at some length, and the very clear advice was it wasn\u2019t justified, and that the benefit cost ratio of doing so was about 0.3, and so that is why we have taken it out because it was genuinely low-risk. The bill also removes low-risk buildings like single-storey wooden buildings\u2014I can never understand why they were in there in the first place\u2014and the level of strengthening required for many of them, so many buildings are facade only, but some will still need to do the whole full strengthening.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI did want to just touch on one area though in particular, and that\u2019s coastal Otago, particularly recognising my colleague the Hon Mark Patterson next to me. We did engage significantly with Otago. They were really concerned about being moved from low-risk to medium-risk, and feeling that that would mean that there will be more impost on those communities and they would struggle to strengthen those buildings. But, in fact, when we explored that in greater depth, there are no new buildings that require strengthening\u2014no new buildings require strengthening. Some will come out, some will require less strengthening,  so it\u2019s actually less onerous, but I did take the time to go and visit Dunedin at Mark Patterson\u2019s request in direct response to and meet with some of those submitters, and hear some of their stories.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey\u2019ve still got thousands of buildings to assess, which is an issue. Those places have fabulous heritage and we don\u2019t want to lose that heritage\u2014Dunedin and Oamaru in particular\u2014and we in New Zealand First are a strong supporter of heritage. We think it really matters, and a lot of people have lost sight of that. It really matters to this country to protect our heritage buildings, and New Zealand First strongly believes that. I heard about the economic challenge, particularly in those areas, of strengthening some of those buildings, and seeing vacant building sites where, literally, buildings have fallen down, not because of an earthquake but because of that neglect we\u2019ve been talking about. The economics of strengthening are really, really important. In our view, what we should be doing is allowing that strengthening to be written off much faster so that it\u2019s not something that you put onto capital and take 50 years, or maybe 100 years, to write it off; but you\u2019re able to do it over one, two, three years, sounds a whatever it might be. That bit like Investment Boost to me, and that will be something which we, I think, would be a good move to make. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, this bill sees the end of the New Building Standard system, which was challenging. Most people didn\u2019t really understand it. It moved around all over the place. It was seen as an uncertain and arbitrary, and also, often, as retrospective, because if building standards rose, then you could have had a building which was fine that suddenly become not fine. This is a proportionate response. I think it\u2019s a good bill, and I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022 data-id=\u0022b8e5b3356b7f940340f3bf591270ac1e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022dca7b20260b94cda81a3187e58a1d7c9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b8e5b3356b7f940340f3bf591270ac1e\u0022\u003EMIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (11:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of the Green Party to support this bill. Firstly, I do want to acknowledge the former Minister in charge of this bill, the Hon Chris Penk, and also Minister Watts for the work he\u2019s done. This is obviously an important piece of work that had to be done sensibly as well. I\u2019d like to acknowledge the Transport and Infrastructure Committee, chaired by Andy Foster, for the work they did also on this bill as it passed through the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it\u2019s really important, as I start my call, obviously, what started this regime for earthquake-prone buildings and the Christchurch earthquake that happened over 15 years ago now where 185 people lost their lives and 2,200 people were seriously injured, and so it\u2019s really important that we do have a regime in place that looks to protect life. Obviously, with the changes that we\u2019re seeing, there\u2019s going to be significant benefits in the costs of the work that would have had to have been done, not done, and that was mentioned at around $8.2 billion. However, of course, at the same time, this also creates a risk to life. There\u2019s a 30 percent increase compared to status quo, and we shouldn\u2019t avoid that, because that is a reality when we reduce the amount of buildings that we are going to require to be fixed: it means it does increase risk to life.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s quite interesting when you look at Christchurch, around the Port Hills there are lots of tracks and there are some very clear signs where it says, \u201CDo not stay still. Keep walking.\u201D for, like, the next 200 metres because of the risk of rock fall. Obviously, the impact of that, which we know from the earthquakes\u2014there was a lot of rock fall at the time that did kill people. When you see the signs, you\u2019re aware of that risk yourself, and you take on that risk and you\u2019d normally make the decision to keep walking through and not stop, or you may make the decision to stop and have a bit of a look round.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it\u2019s really important that when people do have that choice, it\u2019s very clear. But often, and we saw that in Christchurch, people aren\u2019t aware of the risk. That\u2019s why the warning signs on buildings need to be very plain and very clear so people understand the risk. But then again, if you looked at Christchurch, when you\u2019re in a bus and some unreinforced masonry falls down, you are not aware and you\u2019re put in a position that ultimately costs you your life.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it is very concerning, the political decision to carve out Auckland from the earthquake-prone building requirements. We just obviously heard the fact that they discovered this new fault line near Auckland. I think we just always remember that before the Christchurch earthquake, those were unknown fault lines. No one knew they existed. It wasn\u2019t until the earthquake hit. I think we just need to be a little bit cautious when we say that there\u2019s low risk, because there are things happening underneath this land of ours that we don\u2019t quite know about until they actually happen. We just need to be very careful, because the impact of unreinforced masonry can be devastating. It\u2019s probably one of the first things that does collapse when the earth starts shaking. So it was disappointing, to say the least, that Auckland was carved out, obviously to try and save money. I do agree we need to make sure that we assess the balance between life and cost, but I think this one went too far.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to acknowledge my colleague Tamatha Paul, who put forward some amendments to try and get an outcome for multi-owner resident buildings that are actually stuck in a difficult situation where they want to repair their buildings but just don\u2019t have the means, and actually how we could make that work, which\u2014it was a bit of a shame that didn\u2019t pass. I think we need to really assess how we can work better together to ensure that people that want to do the work can actually have the means to do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, in my last 15 seconds, I do want to acknowledge local government in the work that they\u2019re going to have to do in this space in the very near future. Once again, this is another cost to local government that\u2019s being pushed down on to them, which is hard with all the costs they get. Kia ora.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022 data-id=\u0022ed7f0e2a27754080c2baf4a95f677a69\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ed7f0e2a27754080c2baf4a95f677a69\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS PENK (National\u2014Kaipara ki Mahurangi) (11:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, sir. I\u2019ve said a number of times in this House over the years that I believe human life is infinitely valuable. I still believe that to be true, morally and philosophically. But, of course, from a public policy point of view, it\u2019s important that we focus our resources, both public and private, where they can make the most difference. For that reason, I\u2019m pleased that we are, together, amending our earthquake-prone building laws to refocus them. I thank everyone who has contributed to this work and supported it. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u00226d7c92176cceaa1c25183e978a4840fc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226d7c92176cceaa1c25183e978a4840fc\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (11:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Kia orana, Mr Speaker. It\u2019s a pleasure to rise and take a call on this, particularly following the member who has just resumed has his seat. I want to acknowledge the work that the Hon Chris Penk has done in this space. I know that he is retiring from Parliament, and I know from my previous engagement with him when we were both chief whips that he is a fine parliamentarian, and I want to acknowledge the work that he has done and wish him well for what comes next.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am speaking in support of this bill, and Labour has indicated that we will be supporting it. We do have a couple of issues that I\u2019ll elaborate on in a moment, but what is very clear is that here in New Zealand we do need an earthquake-prone building system or approach that is practical, that works, that is proportionate, that can acknowledge the risk that exists, but fundamentally is also focused on the protection of human life and of safety. The sad reality here in Aotearoa New Zealand is that compared with some other parts of the world, our experience is very direct and dire when it comes to earthquakes and the resultant impact that they have, not just on buildings and structures but on communities all around the motu, and there are members in this House who have direct experience of that over the years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat has become clear is that the current regime that we have in place has created some challenges\u2014some challenges for local government and for councils, some challenges for building owners, for tenants, for community groups, for heritage organisations that think about the ongoing need for heritage, and fundamentally, for communities. So we approach this bill, and we have approached this bill, in a constructive way to indicate that reform, yes, is needed. It is necessary. We must reduce some of those unnecessary burdens. I\u2019m not just talking about cost, but we also need to fundamentally ensure that we do not lose sight of public safety. That is why some of the concerns that we do have around this bill are not going to prevent us from supporting it, but we very clearly want to place on the record those concerns so that the Government of the day is very clear as to where we stand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe resources in any respect can be finite, yes, but they should be directed at what can make the greatest difference. What we do know is that when it concerns a single property in this country, whether it\u2019s in Feilding in the Manawat\u016B or elsewhere in New Zealand, the fact of work that needs to happen in that space can have a far greater impact than just the person who owns the building. It has an impact on those that potentially use the building; it potentially has an impact on those that might be travelling to and from, and we\u2019ve talked about that previously as well. It can mean that community organisations, effectively, are impacted because they lose use of a particular location or premise, and the funding implications around heritage, which is always a tightly constrained environment, can potentially be impacted. As I asked the Minister for Building and Construction just last night, it can also lead to some delays in revitalisation of town and community networks when there are particular gaps along the way in terms of buildings and what that might look like for the short term, but indeed into the future as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen I think about the community that we represent, there are some really strong transport opportunities there. Our community has a focus on heritage. But nonetheless, there are still resilient buildings that are in any community, and ensuring that they are fit for purpose is fundamentally really, really important. Those safety obligations do need to be achievable and they need to be credible. But I guess what we\u2019re hearing through the Parliament is the need to balance that with what is fair, reasonable, perhaps economic, but also is not going to cause huge concern to public safety and public services.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, like Mr Foster, I want to acknowledge the fact that this bill has gone through a select committee process. I want to acknowledge colleagues who sit on that committee; it\u2019s going to be still meeting and working into next week as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022665b65554c49d2e113b6454f4d6cb2c2\u0022\u003EGlen Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: Busy!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221008d320319b53f7b4c7f81a4bfcbfce\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE\u003C/span\u003E: Very busy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to acknowledge the officials who were here until late last night and here again this morning who have helped the committee work through a number of aspects. What the committee sought to do was to balance, I think\u2014and did quite well\u2014the practical considerations alongside the experience and the policy that was absolutely needed. I think the fact that it\u2019s going to, at this stage, have cross-Parliament support is a good indication of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the issues that we have been concerned about is the lack of inclusion, so I guess by definition the exclusion of Auckland from this particular process. We know that Auckland is our largest city in this country. We know that there is a huge form of density and concentration of people. We know that there are a number of buildings. We know that there are transport systems in place there\u2014the City Rail Link. My two colleagues immediately to my left were on the first train out of \u014Ct\u0101huhu in the early hours of Sunday\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b6b8df5ffaa7fd8213fcb769bedf5740\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003E4.50!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a9d6d278569c3e2ec045f250a0928191\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. That\u2019s a fantastic opportunity. It will be even greater when Labour\u2019s fare cap policy of $20 a week comes in. What we need to actually understand here is that this is our biggest city, and low risk and no risk are issues that need to be really considered here. The Parliament and the Government must accept that low risk is not no risk. It is a concern that there is this carve-out for T\u0101maki-makau-rau, where, if things go wrong, they will go drastically wrong. We need to be ensuring that the Parliament is aware of that, because the Labour Party have real concerns about the exclusion of Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, there is a middle ground there\u2014we could look at options around a lower level of implication, perhaps\u2014but having no implication, we don\u2019t believe is the right way to go. It may be that Governments of the future might actually realise that this is an issue and may wish to change that. The Minister himself has given the Parliament a little bit of a history lesson as to when the last form of volcanic activity was in Auckland. Well, what we\u2019ve heard in this House today is that the experience of New Zealand is not always reliant on when the most recent volcanic activity was. We do need to place on record our real concern around this. We do believe that there were options available to the Government to ensure that there was some consideration of how Auckland might play out in terms of this regime and this plan, and we are disappointed that that is not going to happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to acknowledge the role that local government as a sector has played. I\u2019ve talked about the challenges and the pressures that exist\u2014they are ever increasing under this current Government\u2014but what is really important here is that this will provide the sector with a little bit of breathing space and a little bit of bandwidth to be able to still focus on the task and the job at hand, and also to adopt an approach that is reasonable in the circumstances.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve talked previously in this House about some of the changes in the transport space. This bill will roll back some of that applicability, where we have in this country a number of strategic transport routes that have been identified as such. That means that there are limitations on it. This provides a one-off opportunity for that to be reviewed, not to add in additional routes but to review the existing transport routes to see if they are still suitable. It is important that we do have legislation that does identify those strategic transport routes. When we think about the role of first responders\u2014of civil defence emergency responders, as well\u2014it is important that they are able to get where they need to go in an earthquake or following an earthquake in an unimpeded form or fashion. This will provide an opportunity, I think, to take a balanced approach to transport routes in this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe do support this bill, with the caveat of some issues that have already been traversed today. Fundamentally, we want a regime that focuses on the paramount nature of safety and also provides some flexibility that is appropriate in the circumstances. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226c562dc86e974914b8878595e580f138\u0022 data-id=\u0022d0410276a7d14119ab72c6681cf7d4cb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c562dc86e974914b8878595e580f138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d0410276a7d14119ab72c6681cf7d4cb\u0022\u003ECATHERINE WEDD (National\u2014Tukituki) (11:54)\u003C/span\u003E: This is a very practical, good, balanced bill. I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022 data-id=\u00224e128e98647faceab98820320563b99f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224e128e98647faceab98820320563b99f\u0022\u003EGLEN BENNETT (Labour) (11:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. We do live in an amazing place at the bottom of the world, often referred to as the \u201CShaky Isles\u201D. Our beauty is forged through volcanoes and earthquakes and winds and storms, through that volcanic and geothermal activity. It is what has helped create its beauty, but also, obviously, within the beauty, there is the pain that comes with that. That\u2019s why we need to be thoughtful and considered when it comes to human life, when it comes to nature, when it comes to being prepared for what is to come and to protect human life.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ECameron Luxton, from the ACT Party, did use some theatre and poetry, so I thought I\u2019d do the same. This is a very old one I found\u2014actually, on the Parliament website: \u201CThey say, and it is quite believed by everyone in town, The Lords are shaking in their shoes, The House is tumbling down!\u201D That was written in 1872 about the Parliament buildings on this site. It was a bit of a dodgy building back in the day, evidently. It was a bit of rot and a bit of timber that was sort of hacked together. There were conversations around the town about the fear, and the Lords in the House concerned about the shaking of the old building and it coming down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022440a125e85954bae9f5d470b7551e4f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9cef4fc859a1821de6774f79f2d4c9e\u0022\u003ECameron Luxton\u003C/span\u003E: Was it New Zealand Parliament House?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ae1a3bb10a14d4ffcad89a05a8671eca\u0022\u003EGLEN BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: It was the New Zealand Parliament House, back in 1872. I jump forward to 2026, and, funnily enough, there are still some issues and shakiness about this place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EFor some of my colleagues\u2014I\u2019m looking around the room, at the Hon Jo Luxton, Arena Williams; I\u2019m looking at Tangi Utikere and myself\u2014when we came in, in 2020, we got to move into these beautiful, wonderful renovated offices in the basement of the old Parliamentary Library. It was less than a year later that we had to move and they had to find spaces for us because of the earthquake risk and because of the regulations. It meant that the basement that had been beautifully fitted out for us, which was a wonderful space, suddenly realised it fitted into the current law in terms of the issues and the fact that it was going to potentially fall on to the car park below, and the Speaker\u2019s lawn above could have collapsed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222286c673e819d59c11ecb1444386bfd5\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Kept us in the basement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ffe73ae4ffa70dfa41563dec46183103\u0022\u003EGLEN BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: They kept us in the basement. The good news: I went from the basement to the attic. I ended up in the attic of the old library. Anyway, there are still concerns, and, obviously, because of current legislation, we were moved, and I think partly rightly so, because, again, as has been said by my colleagues, human life is so important and protecting people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe do need to reflect on legislation. In 2011, there was something massive and painful that happened, but we need to really consider, \u201CWas it knee-jerk?\u201D Potentially it was, but it was decisions that were made by this House to ensure that we strengthened safety. As Arena Williams said, there were 39 people killed in Christchurch from falling masonry. I look around the streets of Wellington, I look around the streets of our towns and cities around the country, and you see those challenges of those private properties, those private buildings, that impede or can impact when it comes to public spaces.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reality that was brought up earlier, as well, is around Auckland and its carve-out from this, and whether it should be included. I think about my own home in Taranaki. For many years, the discussion was that Taranaki was an extinct volcano\u2014that it had long since blown its top\u2014but then more reports came out, and the most recent talked about the fact that there\u2019s a 50 percent chance in the next 50 years that Taranaki will erupt yet again, and the mitigations that we have to put in place for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s why we challenge the decision on Auckland, because even though, as people like the Green Party member said, Christchurch wasn\u2019t on the map in terms of earthquakes, we need to ensure that we protect the people and the places but also, obviously, we want to be fair when it comes to people\u2019s property and what they do in those spaces.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe will support this bill. We would like more work to be done, but we want to ensure that life safety should always be the overriding objective to making good legislation. I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u00228e812eb98e76909d4809f5b63a8de612\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228e812eb98e76909d4809f5b63a8de612\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (11:59)\u003C/span\u003E: The Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill is a common-sense, risk-based approach to earthquake-prone buildings. National\u2019s changes are expected to save $1.2\u00A0billion across provincial and regional New Zealand in the years to come, including Whanganui, which is set to benefit by $24\u00A0million alone. For Whanganui, Ruapehu, South Taranaki, and Stratford, this means more money staying locally for jobs, for investment, and for growth. I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229f071e5323b640f383726a46f39e8187\u0022 data-id=\u0022181064d040b5280b8444b6f62b8b539f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229f071e5323b640f383726a46f39e8187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022181064d040b5280b8444b6f62b8b539f\u0022\u003EHon PHIL TWYFORD (Labour\u2014Te Atat\u016B) (11:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I was in this Parliament in 2010-11, when the Canterbury earthquakes happened, and they were a momentous series of events. I think it was good when Arena Williams spoke earlier to really just make the point that this entire reform process started as a result of the Canterbury earthquakes and the unnecessary loss of life\u201434 people died. Many of them were hit by falling masonry; others were inside buildings, like the CTV Building. There was a very good royal commission into those events, and their subsequent recommendations were that there needed to be an overhaul of New Zealand\u2019s approach in this area, particularly in relation to the fact that we have so many buildings in our cities that have unreinforced masonry and the hazard that that poses for people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s fair to say\u2014I think, from this point in time, looking back\u2014that this Parliament and successive Governments have really struggled with this issue. There\u2019s no dissent, I think, on the point that we must have a system that prioritises human safety and that there\u2019s a huge hazard throughout our towns and cities that has to be dealt with, but we\u2019ve really struggled to find a system that is rational, evidence based, has protection of human life at its heart, but is implementable and that is practical and viable and economic. What no one wants to see is a system that is impractical and has the effect of leaving buildings empty and derelict around the country because it\u2019s simply uneconomic to do the seismic strengthening.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to touch base with the key principles of Labour\u2019s approach and position on this bill. Like everybody else in this House, we support a stronger, fairer, and more risk-based approach to earthquake-prone buildings. We support focusing regulation on the buildings and the regions that actually present genuine risks to life. The current system has created unnecessary costs for some owners and councils, and we support the approach which takes steps to reduce those burdens while still addressing the risks posed by the highest-risk structures\u2014proportionate remediation rules and removing unnecessary regulatory add-ons that have made strengthening unaffordable for some owners\u2014but it is important to say, as others have said in this debate, that the risk doesn\u2019t disappear when you change the policy settings. It merely transfers to others\u2014to future owners, tenants, councils, potentially insurers and taxpayers, but also to the people either in those buildings or walking beside unreinforced masonry buildings when earthquakes occur. The bottom line, in our view, is that these safety principles should apply everywhere, even if the level of obligation varies by risk. That is the key principle, and that is the basis on which we have been very critical of one of the key features of this amendment bill, and that is to carve Auckland out of the new system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGovernment members have been very keen to celebrate an estimated $8.2\u00A0billion in savings as a result of the scaling back of reach of the system. We think that most, if not all, of those savings are a result of the Auckland carve-out. There\u2019s been some good commentary, I think, in this debate about the extent to which the carve-out is based on science or politics. We don\u2019t contest the advice from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment to the committee that Auckland is a low seismic-risk zone\u2014there\u2019s no disagreement with that\u2014but low seismic-risk does not mean no seismic risk, and as Arena Williams argued in her contribution earlier in the debate, undoubtedly there are buildings in Auckland, individual buildings, that will be just as risky or more risky than buildings that are in other parts of the country, which, under this new system, will be required to undertake remediation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn our biggest urban centre, with 1.5\u00A0million people, with the biggest concentration of buildings, with entire suburbs where there are buildings from the Edwardian era and before that have unreinforced masonry on their exterior, and with large buildings in high-volume pedestrian precincts where there may be a very considerable risk to pedestrians and passersby on busy streets from these high-rise buildings, from these high-rise buildings\u2014that\u2019s the point: there is significant risk in Auckland and the carve-out, the geographic carve-out of our biggest city, of 1.5\u00A0million people, is an incredibly blunt instrument. The point has, I think, been well made that this is a political carve-out. The science is uncontestable that Auckland is a low-risk zone, but it\u2019s not no risk. To just, with the stroke of a pen, eliminate the Auckland region from the system, because there is political advocacy and political pressure from the mayor and from others and the dangling prospect of reducing the total overall bill for the nation by $8\u00A0billion or more, doesn\u2019t make for good policy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt actually brings to mind a very similar calculation that was made in the recent passage of the health and safety amendment bill under the stewardship of Minister Brooke van Velden, when, in the desire to reduce the compliance burden and the cost for small and medium enterprises in New Zealand, their health and safety obligations were significantly reduced for 97\u00A0percent of the country\u2019s employees\u2014sorry, 97\u00A0percent of the firms in New Zealand were given, by that bill, a much lighter compliance burden for health and safety. Again, it was a blunt instrument for political reasons, carving out a huge part of the population from protection. In the case of the bill we\u2019re talking about, seismic strengthening to protect human life\u2014the analogous bill was health and safety protections to keep people safe at work\u2014it\u2019s the same approach. It\u2019s politically convenient, but it\u2019s not actually based on science and evidence, and the effect of it is to put a very significant section of the population at risk. We think that\u2019s unfortunate. We think it\u2019s the wrong policy choice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other objection we have is that we think that\u2014by virtue of the Amendment Paper, the large Amendment Paper that the Minister put on the Table in the committee stage\u2014the regime has gone too far in letting developers off the hook for what would have been an obligation to upgrade disability access and fire protection provisions at the same time as seismic strengthening. It will disadvantage and hang out to dry a significant group of people who bought, invested, and committed to dwellings in buildings that were due for seismic strengthening that will now not get the benefit of those important upgrades.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy final point is that there\u2019s unfinished business here. There\u2019s a group of apartment dwellers who face not only the very significant costs of seismic strengthening but the administrative and logistical difficulties of doing it as a body corporate. There\u2019s nothing in here for them, and that\u2019s outstanding.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy final point is that there is unfinished business here. There is a group of apartment dwellers who face not only the very significant costs of seismic strengthening but the administrative and logistical difficulties of doing it as a body corporate. There is nothing here for these things outstanding.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022297bc572c27f45308dffb067ca3e7915\u0022 data-id=\u0022d0c14f8e14f2c3463a9677a2ed2f2068\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022297bc572c27f45308dffb067ca3e7915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d0c14f8e14f2c3463a9677a2ed2f2068\u0022\u003EDr HAMISH CAMPBELL (National\u2014Ilam) (12:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is a great pleasure to rise in support of the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill in its third reading. The purpose of this bill is to establish a more proportionate and risk-based regulatory system for managing earthquake-prone buildings. It\u2019s just common sense.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022781c07c5c8102d24f440e1db3289a3a5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022781c07c5c8102d24f440e1db3289a3a5\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (12:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of the Green Party to also support the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d54e4b96948752c89a97de96daee581a\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019ll be enough; perfect!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dfde18dba16dec81cb5e30a350477628\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: I note that, during the committee stage, we did have a robust discussion, particularly around the Minister for Building and Construction\u2019s Amendment Paper 702, which didn\u2019t go through the select committee. It was released post select committee, so it was important for us to be able to unpack some of the new elements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOverall, in terms of the earthquake-prone buildings, we support the bill\u2019s intent. We support the idea of clarity. Also\u2014and I think I said this in the second reading debate as well\u2014I want to acknowledge you, Mr Speaker, in your role in some of the management post the Christchurch earthquake, in terms of providing certainty for the people of Christchurch. I think that, in this case, there is a fine balance between giving certainty and creating additional risks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things we were trying to tease out in the committee stage was the narrowing of some of the requirements, and in terms of unreinforced masonry buildings, we are concerned that it opens the ability for some of the buildings that are currently considered risky or earthquake prone to be exempted as a result of this narrowing of some requirements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am specifically referring to new section 133AB(6)(c), in clause 7, and it was something that we did discuss at length, and, as members from different parts of Aotearoa, we were trying to engage with the Minister on different scenarios both here in Te Whanganui-a-Tara and in T\u0101maki-makau-rau on what some of those exemptions could mean. We are worried that, while there is a certain carve-out and the criteria for what is considered high risk, medium risk, and low risk has shifted, the goal posts have shifted and it actually doesn\u2019t provide the kind of certainty for people in those areas. I am referring particularly to T\u0101maki-makau-rau Auckland, around what that safety requirement potentially could mean.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhile there is certainty, we are, I guess, a little bit concerned over some of the carve-outs and some of the exemptionswe\u2019re seeing, particularly when the areas that are considered out of the scope of this bill now mean that it actually then would alleviate or reduce in some ways the liability for the Government and the council in terms of council buildings or Government buildings or public buildings that need to be earthquake strengthened or need to have remedial work done and are not going to be done now, at this stage, because it is no longer there. That means that, even from a fiscal perspective, that potentially would reduce that allocation and potentially some of the contingencies, and would in some ways make the books look better than they really are. That is something that we wanted to tease out during the committee stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, I think there is an opportunity as part of this bill\u2014I guess, there are two opportunities as part of this bill\u2014and I really want to thank my colleagues Celia Wade-Brown, the Hon Julie Anne Genter, and Tamatha Paul, particularly the Hon Julie Anne Genter and Tamatha Paul as local MPs based in Wellington, the MP for Rongotai and the MP for Wellington Central, soon to be Wellington Bays and Wellington North, for their proposal in an amendment, which, unfortunately, wasn\u2019t taken up, about ensuring that those who do need to have remedial work done\u2014their buildings are considered earthquake prone\u2014do have some sort of, I guess, subsidy or some sort of allowance or some sort of interest-free loan to undertake that work, as they know about the burden. I think Arena Williams spoke about the fact that we have this kind of carve-out now where everywhere else other than Waikato North needs to comply with these new rules but certain areas get a particular carve-out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, we had an amendment, which unfortunately, wasn\u2019t accepted, that was specifically requested by disabled communities to ensure sufficient fire evacuation. So, while we support this bill, we still have a few concerns.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022af9ee525db999d0a83120da19fad84dc\u0022\u003EReferences to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Repeals) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00221ea41cdf0530678afb6f9faad0c26081\u0022\u003ELegislative Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u00225d292479a69c7f28fe70f20c5b31f3c1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225d292479a69c7f28fe70f20c5b31f3c1\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Minister for Tertiary Education) (12:15)\u003C/span\u003E: on behalf of the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations\u003C/span\u003E: I present a legislative statement on the References to Tiriti of Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Repeals) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281f9766eccb07863f15fb951ff0517ed\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00228ae1bdf783df88a5369249f9a279e133\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022 data-id=\u0022822a0d5c8a635256450dff36d735c9f1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224680dcac294f4cd5bdd3a5a7ed5a3bb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022822a0d5c8a635256450dff36d735c9f1\u0022\u003EHon PENNY SIMMONDS (Minister for Tertiary Education) (12:15)\u003C/span\u003E: on behalf of the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Repeals) Amendment Bill be now read a first time\u003C/span\u003E. I nominate the Justice Committee to consider the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI introduce the references to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Repeals) Amendment Bill to the House today. This bill will repeal targeted Treaty provisions where the Government considers that their relevance and application is unclear, duplicative, or inappropriate. The bill gives effect to the Government\u2019s review of references to the principles of the Te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi in legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe review looked across the statute book at how Treaty provisions that reference the principles are currently framed and how they work in practice. It was supported by a ministerial advisory group, whose recommendations helped shape this package. The bill repeals seven provisions across six Acts that refer to the Treaty or its principles. These are targeted repeals. They apply where the relevance and application of a Treaty reference is unclear, where a provision duplicates another provision in the same Act, or where provision places Treaty-related requirements on private entities in a way that the Government considers inappropriate. The purpose of this bill is to reduce uncertainty and improve the workability of the affected legislation. Removing provisions that are unclear, duplicative, or inappropriate will help readers, agencies, regulated parties, and the court understand how the law is intended to operate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe select committee process will provide an important opportunity for everyone, including M\u0101ori, to test the detail of these proposals and for the committee to hear a range of views. I expect the committee will carefully consider both the submissions it receives and the details of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo conclude, this bill is about improving the clarity and workability of legislation. It does not change the Treaty itself or the Crown\u2019s commitment to it. It ensures that, when Parliament refers to Te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi in legislation, those references are clear, appropriate, and workable in the statute in which they appear. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d99a9e425645d19055da8f08150edae6\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u00221270d4435a4c859ab9bc7625aa3a9031\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221270d4435a4c859ab9bc7625aa3a9031\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (12:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Ng\u0101 mihi, Mr Speaker. \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EKo t\u0113nei te Wiki o te Reo M\u0101ori\u003C/span\u003E [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003EThis is M\u0101ori Language Week\u003C/span\u003E], and what has the Government decided to do in this wiki of te reo M\u0101ori, which celebrates the M\u0101ori language? They have, shamefully, decided to bring in three bills, \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003Ee toru ng\u0101 pire koretake\u003C/span\u003E [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Ethree useless bills\u003C/span\u003E], to this House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af1a29e2b667a1d6ab0d8b3c7b3e1ad3\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EKoretake rawa\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EVery useless.\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba29496505ffeffb3c93c05cc17f89ba\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EKoretake rawa\u003C/span\u003E [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Every useless\u003C/span\u003E]\u2014that\u2019s right. These bills do not honour the Treaty; they dishonour the Treaty. Every single member of the National Party should hang their head in shame. What have they done to the legacy of Chris Finlayson and Bill English and every other National Minister who has\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022907e48c01366b80dd32835f8ce0259a8\u0022\u003EArena Williams\u003C/span\u003E: Jim Bolger.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f8848d49005b1d40d558bda2e34ffa8\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Jim Bolger\u2014exactly. What have they done with that legacy? They have thrown it out the window, and they have decided to accept these three bills. It damaged the mana of the Treaty and damaged the relationship of ng\u0101 t\u0101ngata whenua and te iwi M\u0101ori and the Government. It is shameful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a very significant piece of legislation, and this is the first bill of three that we will be talking to in the House today. I remind those tuning in that we are under urgency. I have read through the papers that officials have put forward in relation to this bill, and I\u2019ve also read part of one of the two reports that the Waitangi Tribunal has written in relation to these bills, and there is almost universal opposition to the steps that the Government is taking. If we think about what the Government is doing, we can look at the advice they received, and this is some of the advice that\u2019s on the Table today. This is from the Ministry of Justice: \u201CThe Ministry considers that the expected benefits of the proposed legislation are low and do not outweigh the costs, particularly the significant risk to the M\u0101ori-Crown relationship.\u201D That is the official advice that the Government has turned their back on today with the introduction of these bills.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, this bill is the bill that repeals provisions. The Minister said that this doesn\u2019t weaken the Crown\u2019s obligations. How can the Minister stand in this House and say it does not weaken the Crown\u2019s obligations when this particular bill repeals Treaty provisions in legislation? It doesn\u2019t make them more consistent. It doesn\u2019t change them so they have slightly different wording. It repeals them, meaning that they will no longer exist. This bill weakens Te Tiriti in Aotearoa, and how did we get here? How did we get to a situation where we had, from 1975, what many people consider to be the M\u0101ori renaissance in New Zealand? We had land marches, we had the establishment of the Waitangi Tribunal, we had te reo M\u0101ori as an official language of New Zealand, we had M\u0101ori TV, and we had a country that was moving forward together in terms of a Treaty relationship between M\u0101ori and P\u0101keh\u0101. But then we have the National Party consistently trying to take us backwards and trying to take New Zealand away from the future that we will eventually get to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f3aadefc5a7036c6acd4c7c26fbb1e37\u0022\u003ESam Uffindell\u003C/span\u003E: Separatism, separatism\u2014that\u2019s where you want to go.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f09babb948c8bf5ce5d459fc4c7c3f76\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and this is another step.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDon Brash tried this in \u014Crewa. He tried this in 2005, and New Zealand rejected it. New Zealanders will reject this Government too, because when this Government and these MPs\u2014and some of them will be here\u2014when they\u2019re standing on the Treaty grounds in 2040 and it is 200 years since the signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, there will be a retrospective look-back at where New Zealand\u2019s got to from there, and the members of this Government, if any of them are there, should hang their heads in shame because they have not taken a step forwards for this country in terms of the Treaty relationship, in terms of M\u0101ori-Crown relationships, and in terms of race relations. They, with these bills that repeal the Crown\u2019s obligations, are taking New Zealand backwards. This is at a time of a cost of living crisis for New Zealand. Why is the Government focusing on repealing provisions of statutes, in the Treaty bills, when they could be focusing on making New Zealand a better country, a more affordable country, and a more united country, instead of promoting division?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, they will say, in the National Party, they had to do this because of their coalition agreement with New Zealand First. I\u2019ve read that provision, and it says \u201Ca comprehensive review\u201D. It doesn\u2019t say, \u201Crepealing sections of this bill\u201D. It doesn\u2019t say, \u201Cweakening sections\u201D. It says, \u201Ca comprehensive review\u201D. This Government has chosen to take New Zealand backwards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022 data-id=\u0022e4ecd5768a7aa2ad5c726c71ed13ddf6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223bb897ab8d624eca84bc4356dec862f4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e4ecd5768a7aa2ad5c726c71ed13ddf6\u0022\u003EH\u016AHANA LYNDON (Green) (12:24)\u003C/span\u003E:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is absolutely shameful, as I stand here on behalf of the Green Party to say no in Te Wiki o Te Reo M\u0101ori. Let\u2019s give you a reo lesson e te K\u0101wanatanga p\u014Dh\u0113h\u0113. P\u014Dh\u0113h\u0113: you\u2019re wrong in what you\u2019re doing. P\u014Dhauhau: the Government is absurd in what they are doing in the racist attacks against M\u0101ori and Te Tiriti. These bills that are coming through the House spit in the face of te iwi M\u0101ori. They rip out the heart of the Crown-M\u0101ori relations. At a time when we need to be more united than ever, we see these repeals coming through now in the last weeks of Government when we are sitting and preparing for an election. This is the time for te iwi M\u0101ori and community, tangata Tiriti and tauiwi to stand up and say, \u201CNo, we do not accept this behaviour.\u201D, and, yes, the National Party should hang its head in shame\u2014shame for the good work that we have done, as te iwi M\u0101ori, through the years, and yet now we are bending over, and we are making compromises, for coalition agreements, and yet now we should be together as a nation, building a strong, prosperous future where all can thrive. Shame. Shame.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to look at some of these bills that are going to be repealed and reflect on the Mataatua declaration led by the tribes of Mataatua. We\u2019ve only just lost Hirini Moko Mead. The plant varieties Act is in here. That\u2019s Wai 262, the Mataatua claim of claims for intellectual property.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESmoke free environments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESmoke free: tobacco is a M\u0101ori killer, and you\u2019re going to repeal legislation, again, that removes and\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETe Tiriti o Waitangi and Treaty principles. Let\u2019s talk about Whatarangi Winiata, that hautupua. Here\u2019s another reo lesson for the Government. Hautupua: a giant of te ao M\u0101ori who stood up for education, who stood up for honourable k\u0101wanatanga. The Education and Training Act. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust this week, the Waitangi Tribunal has ruled that this Government is failing in its obligations to work with te iwi M\u0101ori\u2014failing abysmally\u2014and now we have to come and review this legislation that is so harmful and so racist in its behaviour that it spits in the face of Crown-M\u0101ori relations. Don\u2019t say, \u201COh, we spoke to national iwi chairs.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELesson again: the horse had already bolted. Cabinet had made its decision, and then we turn around when we talk to iwi chairs and say, \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007784\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u201CWhat are your thoughts?\u201D You\u2019ve already made the determination. You shut the door on an iwi voice. You didn\u2019t even consider hap\u016B or marae. You closed the door to the conversation. You brought it to the table and said, \u201CHere\u2019s your short, truncated time frame to give us feedback.\u201D That\u2019s the disgrace of the way that this Government is treating the Crown-M\u0101ori relationship. You can\u2019t appoint people, ask them to do things in a short time frame, and then expect a miracle that somehow is going to be honourable. That\u2019s the issue. It\u2019s a blatant misuse of K\u0101wanatanga powers, and the Ministers who are ushering this through should be shamed for what\u2019s happening.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is not bringing us together. This is material impact on Crown-M\u0101ori relationships. This is dishonourable k\u0101wanatanga. The Waitangi Tribunal reports in urgency, through this term of the Crown, stand for generations, and all of us in this House need to take note of what\u2019s being told to us and directed by the Waitangi Tribunal, because we won\u2019t be here tomorrow but our mokopuna will be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u00226f9334d01fe9027af559fbbf572cd192\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226f9334d01fe9027af559fbbf572cd192\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (12:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I raise a point of order under Standing Order 120, at page 34 of the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EStanding Orders\u003C/span\u003E. Mr Speaker, I take personal offence at the member for Tauranga describing the Treaty of Waitangi, and recognition of M\u0101ori rights under it, as separatism. Mr Speaker, separatism has a particular and serious meaning in the context of race. The dictionary definition includes the belief that a particular racial group should live apart from other people. I am M\u0101ori. I am being described as a separatist by that member, and he should withdraw and apologise. Historically, racial separatism\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa7420d136275ca25b809c2bcf77d311\u0022\u003ESam Uffindell\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e7f30c5c82fc098b6884191868b4705\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a bit of order. Carry on and get to the point if you would, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224eea646b3dd8c8bce1007220deadea9d\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014describes the separation of people on the basis of race. Racism is a prohibited term in the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cec7a7225ef9e271689338c8362b6bf1\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, you\u2019ve made your point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022 data-id=\u002271ee2ac3c9f6abee2db44cc94228f5cd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002271ee2ac3c9f6abee2db44cc94228f5cd\u0022\u003ESAM UFFINDELL (National\u2014Tauranga) (12:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Speaker, I did not refer to the Treaty in that regard. I referred to the objectives of members on that side of the House as wanting separatism.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002247236ed1ba1807f51ee11977480e87e3\u0022\u003EHon Members: \u003C/span\u003EThat\u2019s the same thing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227bf6e459fb435af3d688389570f8096d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, I\u2019m sorry, it\u2019s not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u002224811c8fefae7ce9edd1adfe3ca3654d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002224811c8fefae7ce9edd1adfe3ca3654d\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (12:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ac09e6faf68211e0b7e777d9cfe9696\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just say: no one else is making any comments at all while there\u2019s a point of order on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a023300938d69192c89a50e9607db8c\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: If the member opposite is suggesting that our agenda is separatist, we all take offence at that, from the Green Party, because that is the categorical opposite of our agenda. Our agenda is unity in Te Tiriti.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228340319dd091007a00b1ad67fb2cb7ed\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and I think you\u2019ve made that point, as has Arena Williams. When we are talking about interjections across the House, they\u2019re not part of the debate, but they can be on debating points. If it is a direct criticism of an individual member or allegation against an individual member, that\u2019s different. To suggest that a political position is of a particular nature is inside the rules of debate. The points have been made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221a30b7d60a03452cb9b736efc6896cdb\u0022 data-id=\u00228ade25762c6f26ac5c946ea6895e9ca3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a30b7d60a03452cb9b736efc6896cdb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228ade25762c6f26ac5c946ea6895e9ca3\u0022\u003EDr PARMJEET PARMAR (ACT) (12:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I\u2019m taking this call on behalf of the ACT Party to support this bill. After hearing speeches from that side, from the Opposition members, I want to put as simply as I can what this bill is about. If Parliament is making a law, it is the responsibility of Parliament to ensure that the law is clear and is understandable, and that is what this bill is doing. We cannot leave any provisions in any legislation to be open for interpretation by courts, by bureaucrats, or some other people\u2014those who have the loudest interpretation, like those members, in trying to interpret this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have to make sure that legislation is fixed, and we are talking about repealing vague\u2014I repeat the word \u201Cvague\u201D\u2014references to the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. This is not repealing Te Tiriti. This is not erasing history. I want to be really clear about this: this is about fixing those provisions that Parliament has failed to fix so far, and we have left them for many, many interpretations outside of Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe respect our history. Yes, we can recognise our history, but, at the same time, it is our job as members of Parliament to ensure that our legislation is understandable. These are not contradictory positions, and I\u2019m really proud to say that ACT has been the consistent voice for one law for all and one future together. The ACT Party is happy to support this bill and commend this bill to the House. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007805\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b088fb29ec2bacf46dfecec63c9ca5f4\u0022\u003EPersonal Explanations\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022217e353c3ae60348cf1c5262a5c1d9cb\u0022\u003EUnparliamentary Language\u2014References to Presiding Officer\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022 data-id=\u0022fd98b3259fe6643e240155fa560d8c7e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fd98b3259fe6643e240155fa560d8c7e\u0022\u003EDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Co-Leader\u2014Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori) (12:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek leave to make a personal explanation regarding an allegation made about my conduct in the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002290cad74afeffe67090c758fb96c1d5ea\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: When was the conduct?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ed0d65e5eec7fedf8f0b9dc45388cd3\u0022\u003EDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER\u003C/span\u003E: On 17 September.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3eb7ca2d467d3dbc48b2833d6f075a9\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d6e83fe11aed7e1f4617859bad13cb59\u0022\u003EDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER\u003C/span\u003E: During proceedings on 17 September, a member alleged that a comment I made was directed at the Assistant Speaker. That is incorrect. I was speaking to my colleague Oriini Kaipara. My comment was not directed at the Assistant Speaker, and I did not call the Assistant Speaker that word. The allegation has subsequently been repeated publicly in a way that suggests I directed an offensive term at the Speaker. I did not. I make this personal explanation to correct the record and because I will not allow an allegation about my conduct towards the Speaker to stand uncorrected. Kia ora r\u0101.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298e72450a71d59e1c84e6db43b875de4\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for that clarification and for the recognition, too, that it is an unacceptable word to use in Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00226d35a7edc74de6929a1632ceae23efb9\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a5a087a45adaf83803433edd44cc2333\u0022\u003EReferences to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Repeals) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b021159e9a183436f38f2217541f8e6e\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007817\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u0022d9586a4dde5dfb459c6ee4479a74dfeb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d9586a4dde5dfb459c6ee4479a74dfeb\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Minister of Customs) (12:34)\u003C/span\u003E: I rise to speak on the References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Repeals) Amendment Bill. It is noted that this piece of work has resulted in three pieces of legislation, which will, of course, add complexity as we progress this bill, but New Zealand First knows it is important that this legislation, which has for too long been avoided, is addressed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First has held a decades-long position that we honour the Treaty of Waitangi, Te Tiriti o Waitangi, as our founding document. However, we have and will always affirm that there are no principles to the Treaty of Waitangi. Legislative interpretation following on from a misinterpreted ruling from decades ago has resulted in decades of the insertion of vagaries and ambiguity in the form of Treaty principle references. These references were less about accountability, responsibility, delivery, or good law and more about placation and tokenism. These references have not propelled us forward as a nation but too often held us back.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First has been clear and consistent in our position that this is not an attack on the Treaty itself. We reject nebulous, undefined principles inserted as statutory flourishes. The pepper-potting of Treaty references into laws is not delivery of outcomes for M\u0101ori or for anyone; it is opportunity for confusion, delays, inconsistencies, and unnecessary complexity. The three bills being introduced today are a piece of work that is rationalising, simplifying, and, in some instances, deleting superfluous references.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhile that side of the House may claim to be the sole voice for M\u0101ori, inferring that being M\u0101ori means we think and speak in one voice, this side of the House actually knows that we, like all New Zealanders, want to be well served by the law. Despite what these previous speeches would lead us to believe, we lose nothing here; in fact, we gain. We do not need ill-defined vagaries that, in the end, do more for lawyers than they do for M\u0101ori. The repeals that are achieved by this bill and the standardisation and strengthening of the other two bills recognise the importance of good lawmaking. Clarity is what is needed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Treaty is not a justification for ongoing division. It is not the opportunity to claim faux victim narratives. It is the foundation of the nation that we forged. Our legislation is long overdue for this correction to ensure we are not pulled backwards into the never-ending cycle of despair but propelled forward to tangibly improved outcomes. We have had decades of this principles posturing, and yet to listen to that side of the House, nothing has actually improved. Ignoring actual improvements and progress, that side of the House wants to continue to perpetuate a narrative of despair and division of us and them in order to retain political relevance\u2014political relevance that is founded on conflict between employer and employee, wealthy and poor, tenant and landlord, rural and urban, M\u0101ori and the rest.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHow dare they continue to demand that, as M\u0101ori, we have to choose whakapapa over citizenship? How dare they continue to fight with a death grip on the status quo, depriving any opportunity to strengthen, clarify, and improve legislation at the same time as being critical of the outcomes being achieved? As we stand in this House, where over a quarter of our MPs are M\u0101ori, they claim that M\u0101ori have no voice, when, actually, they mean that they don\u2019t have the voice they want to hear. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212d98aab4fc15a3c4a30bc1091269e70\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just calm it all down a bit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221fd7641a458094d992146636c6a64513\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: I stand with New Zealand First, the party that is led by two of the strongest political voices in this country and who happen to also be M\u0101ori. Half of our caucus is M\u0101ori; our three in-Cabinet Ministers are M\u0101ori. We have a voice, we have power, and we have authority. But, as a reminder to some in this House, it requires showing up every day and using your voice, using the authority given to you by those who voted you here, and most of all, it requires actually doing the work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007826\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIt is New Zealand First that is actually prepared to focus on outcomes, and better law is critical to making it easier to deliver outcomes. New Zealand First has always and will always honour our democracy, our nation, and our people. Foundational to this position is workable legislation that recognises we are all equal before the law. \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EHe iwi tahi t\u0101tou\u003C/span\u003E. On behalf of New Zealand First, I commend this bill to the House, with the promise that our work is not yet done.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022 data-id=\u00220aa32227dc1f283db980239077b50189\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220aa32227dc1f283db980239077b50189\u0022\u003EDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Co-Leader\u2014Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori) (12:38)\u003C/span\u003E: There are moments in the House when you have to ask yourself, \u201CWhy?\u201D Why does this Government detest Te Tiriti o Waitangi so much? Seriously.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EAuthorised te reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office\u003C/span\u003E ]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat is it about Te Tiriti that gets so far under this Government\u2019s skin that they are prepared to come back into this House again and again and again to weaken it? Three bills, three attacks, three different ways of telling tangata whenua \u201CKnow your place, M\u0101ori\u201D\u2014know your place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet me remind this Government of something: M\u0101ori do know their place. We know exactly where our place is. It is not beneath the Government, it\u2019s not behind the Government, and it\u2019s certainly not as \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EAuthorised te reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office\u003C/span\u003E.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007834\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003Eto the Government\u2014certainly not as\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007835\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EAuthorised te reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office\u003C/span\u003E.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe are not subjects waiting obediently for whatever crumbs or scraps the Parliament decides we are allowed to keep. It is\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EAuthorised te reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office\u003C/span\u003E.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007840\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003Efor anyone to ever think that.  Strip away the words like \u201Cstandardisation\u201D, \u201Cconsistency\u201D, and \u201Cclarification\u201D; this bill is simply about power. Te Tiriti puts limits on the Crown\u2019s power. Te Tiriti tells them they are not the sole authority in this land. Te Tiriti tells M\u0101ori that rangatiratanga was never extinguished by the creation of this Parliament. Te Tiriti tells Ministers that there are obligations. That is what gets under their skin. Te Tiriti reminds the Crown that its power is not absolute; no one ceded sovereignty. Our rangatiratanga does not exist because they allow it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007841\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt reminds of the uncomfortable truth that sits in this nation. Muru raupatu? We are still here. Loss of our w\u2019enua? We are still here. Loss of our reo? We are still here. Loss of our economy? We are still here. Attack after attack after attack\u2014we are still here, and guess what! We last longer than you in other places of this Government, and here we are: Te Tiriti attack after attack. Bill repeals\u2014six Te Tiriti provisions, across six Acts: Crown pastoral land, education, energy efficiency, conservation, organic production, taonga species, and smoke-free legislation\u2014go figure\u2014affecting our kaitiakitanga, affecting our tikanga, affecting our w\u2019enua, and our wellbeing. We have increasing poverty, housing issues, and health service issues, and this is this Government\u2019s priority.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007842\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EEnd reo M\u0101ori[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]End reo M\u0101ori\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007843\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007844\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen we look at the whole issue that we\u2019re dealing with here today, we have members of Parliament who, during their years in Hobson\u2019s Pledge would say, \u201CWe are one people\u201D, refer to Te Tiriti as an imaginary partnership. Be very clear, we\u2019re real; our mokopuna are real. What this member of Parliament and her Hobson\u2019s Pledge say, I say, is\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007845\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007846\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007847\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat this member of Parliament and her party say, I say, is\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007848\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007849\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007850\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd what her Government does, I say is\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007851\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007852\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007853\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd our people are \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007854\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007855\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003Eat this Government, which is why we must get them out, and we will ask for the candidate vote to make sure this rotten Government never gets back in again. We will entrench Te Tiriti, bind the Crown\u2019s conduct to Te Tiriti, bind the Tribunal, and invest in Matike Mai, because constitutional transformation presents so many opportunities that this Government insists on blocking. Our rangatiratanga didn\u2019t happen in this Parliament, e k\u012B\u2014e k\u012B. Te Tiriti didn\u2019t begin with his Parliament; they were all here before this Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007857\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGovernment can rewrite six parts of legislation; you can\u2019t delete us. You can remove statutory references, but you can\u2019t legislate w\u2019akapapa out of existence, and you cannot remove Te Tiriti from us, as hard as you try. We will ensure that every right of our mokopuna cannot be erased, whichever collection of upokok\u014Dhua thinks they can. No upokok\u014Dhua will ever remove us. This Government is temporary, this bill is temporary, w\u2019akapapa is not, and that is what we have. There\u2019s really only one place that a bill like this belongs, and that is in the rubbish bin.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022 data-id=\u002210b8a2b675d142ab595e5c2fb0429b35\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007858\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002210b8a2b675d142ab595e5c2fb0429b35\u0022\u003ESAM UFFINDELL (National\u2014Tauranga) (12:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007859\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022124f68abb5765d73a124006da5393df8\u0022\u003ETamatha Paul\u003C/span\u003E: All right, tell us\u2014tell us what you got.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007860\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022200839810eb94155be7306bf21d350dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002263ada827ce1e41bfa68aac2f2b3352fa\u0022\u003ESAM UFFINDELL\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s nice to see you here today. The National Party is quite clear\u2014quite clear\u2014that the Treaty of Waitangi is the founding document of New Zealand. We\u2019re looking at the legislation, and there are all sorts of references to the Treaty: \u201Cto honour\u201D, \u201Cto have regard to\u201D, \u201Cto take into account\u201D, \u201Cto give effect to\u201D, and we need consistency and we need predictability in the law. That is what this bill is working to do. I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f988bc72b5e47b8856ba70e41dfbbaf\u0022 data-id=\u0022d153bc23bcbd0ab72ce51d258b6c3f24\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007861\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f988bc72b5e47b8856ba70e41dfbbaf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d153bc23bcbd0ab72ce51d258b6c3f24\u0022\u003EGEORGIE DANSEY (Labour) (12:44)\u003C/span\u003E: T\u0113n\u0101 koe e te M\u0101ngai o te Whare. I am almost speechless. I think I can string together a sentence to fill some time to speak to this very important bill, but honestly, I am shocked. I am shocked that we have been in urgency all week. It is now Saturday afternoon, and we\u2019re sitting in urgency to discuss this Government taking Te Tiriti o Waitangi, our founding document, out of 18 Acts. These three bills in front of us today, the worst one up first, where they intend to completely strip it out of six Acts in our legislation, is absolutely disgraceful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007862\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve sat through the last few days in Parliament. First, we dealt with boot camps, where we were going to give punitive punishments to young people in need; instead of offering wraparound support that our wh\u0101nau need, we\u2019re throwing them into a boot camp. We know that these people, these young people with those needs, are disproportionately M\u0101ori. What an absolute punch down. Just throw them away and lock them away\u2014lock them away and throw away the key. Then we had move-on orders. The amount of homelessness living on our streets is growing by the day. Again, a disproportionate amount of M\u0101ori are among our homeless, but what this Government is going to do is just move them along. No worries! We don\u2019t need to worry about housing our people or feeding our people or offering social support to our people! We\u2019ll just tell them to go sit and be homeless in the suburbs where we can\u2019t see them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007863\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd now here we are. This spineless Government is appeasing New Zealand First and ensuring that we are changing the references of Te Tiriti o Waitangi in 18 pieces of legislation. It comes days after 50,000 people petitioned Parliament against these bills, because, for our wh\u0101nau, this isn\u2019t the first time we\u2019ve had this. There has been attack after attack after attack on Te Tiriti o Waitangi from this Government. We have had h\u012Bkoi after h\u012Bkoi, and I commend every single one of those people who has stood up to the ridiculous nature of this decision making. This is not the New Zealand that we are. This is not the people that we represent. This is a Government who is appeasing their coalition partners because they want to win votes. But I\u2019ll tell you what, you\u2019re not going to win any votes out of this, because what this is going to do is show New Zealand that you don\u2019t care about the future of New Zealand and the protection of our founding document, Te Tiriti o Waitangi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007864\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo speak specifically to some of the feedback on this bill, I want to speak to what the Ministry of Justice said. The new words that are going to be replaced are \u201Ctake into account\u201D. They have said this will be considered a lower standard than the previous provisions if replaced. The benefits are low, and the costs fall disproportionately on M\u0101ori people. The best option, according to the Ministry of Justice, is to leave the law alone. There is so much work that we can do to ensure that Te Tiriti is honoured in this society, but this Government is taking us backwards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007865\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EEvery day when I speak to people, they are not talking to me about the importance of the standardisation of references to Te Tiriti o Waitangi; they are talking to me about the cost of living. Our people are struggling day to day. It is getting more and more expensive to live in this country. So we move urgency and then spend five days talking about things that do not address the cost of living in any way! When is this Government going to stand up and put something on the table that will actually benefit New Zealanders? We haven\u2019t seen it yet. New Zealanders haven\u2019t seen it this term, and that\u2019s why, on 7 November, New Zealanders will make their decision and vote this Government out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022 data-id=\u00227947b428203afa033736a73495c95730\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007866\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227947b428203afa033736a73495c95730\u0022\u003ERIMA NAKHLE (National\u2014Takanini) (12:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. This bill does fulfil one of the coalition agreements between New Zealand First and the National Party. One thing I will not do is the disgraceful behaviour by people that remember that they have a job and have actually turned up for the first time in months. I won\u2019t be weaponising the M\u0101ori language. National commends this to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u002264ede114471442f9a197d7705eb32be2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007867\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002264ede114471442f9a197d7705eb32be2\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (12:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. In the following years, my father will reach his 100th year. He was raised on the shores of the \u014Chiwa Harbour by his grandfather, Rimaha, who was a priest of the Ringat\u016B faith, for whom a memory of the signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, the following decades when M\u0101ori petitioned their members of Parliament for its enactment in legislation, the fighting of the Land Wars, and the subsequent removal of M\u0101ori rights and interests under Te Tiriti o Waitangi, was a real memory\u2014not only a person who remembered our history in those early years but a person who also petitioned his local member of Parliament for the enactment of legislation which he felt he was guaranteed under Te Tiriti and under the agreements made by his rangatira and the Crown for access to the \u014Chiwa and the kai that it produced for the village.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007868\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is why, in 1971, National Prime Minister Keith Holyoake called the Treaty \u201Cthe real starting point of New Zealand\u2019s history as a nation.\u201D Keith Holyoake, who is one of the Prime Minister\u2019s I most respect in New Zealand\u2019s history, said, \u201Cthere can be no true concept of New Zealand unless M\u0101ori and European are considered as equal partners in our nation.\u201D Holyoake went on to say that the Treaty was a \u201Cgenuine attempt to achieve justice for both M\u0101ori and P\u0101keh\u0101\u201D. And he reached, in that speech, for an old biblical phrase to describe the way that we should approach it: \u201Cthe letter killeth but the spirit giveth life.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007869\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe point in Prime Minister Holyoake\u2019s speech was that the words of Te Tiriti missed the point of the spirit of the agreement; that New Zealand\u2019s history is peppered with approaches where people have sat down and have been able to say to each other, \u201CWe did not get everything right, but it is our job and it is our solemn duty between the Crown and those it represents, to M\u0101ori, to find a way forward, which future generations can be proud of.\u201D That is the promise of the Treaty, and that is what is being dishonoured by this bill today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007870\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJim Bolger\u2019s National Government began the modern Treaty settlement process; Jenny Shipley\u2019s continued it. In 1998, Jenny Shipley said to Waitangi\u2014and I was there as a child with my father, who was a journalist at the time\u2014that it should be a \u201Cplace where we renew our commitment to honour the Treaty\u201D. She describes Treaty settlements as addressing historical injustices and as a bridge to the future\u2014I was eight years old. Te Tiriti o Waitangi has been a bridge to the future, which has seen me, now, 30 years later, representing the electorate of Manurewa, which is the most populous M\u0101ori urban population in the country. I am proud to stand here as a child of the Treaty and to recognise the contributions of the Prime Ministers before me\u2014National and Labour\u2014who have stood up for that vision for me and my generation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007871\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EShe said there was a \u201Chuge silent majority of New Zealanders who understand the responsibility that goes with being a Treaty partner\u201D. I believe in that legacy of the National Party as well as Labour; that two major parties in Aotearoa must stand up for the constitutional principles that guarantee the right of M\u0101ori, and future generations of M\u0101ori, not only to stand in this House but to have their rights recognised in legislation. This bill takes away those rights in education and environmental rights, and in the rights for things like growing plants, which are \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003Etaonga tuku iho\u003C/span\u003E, which should be guaranteed to M\u0101ori for successive generations to come.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007872\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt was John Key\u2019s National Government that continued the settlement tradition, and it is no surprise today that, under this Government, there is only one National Minister in the House. There are two New Zealand First Ministers that should have taken the first call on this bill\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007873\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227598e21e6b15f434dcb706a24b7b4a4e\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, just\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007874\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e6d85293eea972fe2fb2cc5083b68cbd\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS\u003C/span\u003E: There is a convention that there should be, in matters of importance like this, under the Standing Orders, the ability for representatives to speak to an important decision such as this, because this bill does something very concrete that only the legislative process can do by majority in this House: it removes Treaty provisions from six Acts of Parliament. Even though the Waitangi Tribunal has investigated the actual policy decisions that produced this legislation, its conclusions are devastatingly specific: that Cabinet made these decisions without adequately informing itself of the effects of the changes on M\u0101ori or M\u0101ori interests, and that it was prioritising coalition agreement commitments over the need to make informed policy decisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007875\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWhen Christopher Luxon said he was extremely proud of National\u2019s heritage of working to honour the Treaty and restore the honour of the Crown, he was right\u2014it is a proud record of both major parties in this House. National Prime Ministers in the future will not be able to make this claim. This is a shame, and National members should vote against it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u0022b5b1516a31323bcd7e20011d64c563b9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007876\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b5b1516a31323bcd7e20011d64c563b9\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (12:54)\u003C/span\u003E: This bill fulfils a coalition agreement of the Government with New Zealand First, and therefore, I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007877\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Repeals) Amendment Bill be now read a first time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007878\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007879\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007880\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 41\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007881\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 25; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007882\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007883\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a first time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007884\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00226833d222ce6da36b321b41f8c5265531\u0022\u003EReferral to Select Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007885\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260ff2b6890d27054f853de4a90a9ec33\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The question is, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Repeals) Amendment Bill be considered by the Justice Committee\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007886\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007887\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill referred to the Justice Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d400af67a3b322af06d9c5df8051298a\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The hour is now\u2014well, I think we will progress since we\u2019re all here on a Saturday. I call on the Hon Penny Simmonds.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022 data-id=\u002270447b70d144acf6601c40e1b49e19fb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002270447b70d144acf6601c40e1b49e19fb\u0022\u003EGLEN BENNETT (Chief Whip\u2014Labour) (12:56)\u003C/span\u003E: There is no business before the House. The Chair should now move on to another order of the day and discharge.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007890\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e5c11d34c8cd76e1f21d9f686d11ca3f\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, I confused things by thinking that we were so close to midday, where the House breaks for its break. I was about to do that, then said \u201CNo, we will progress\u201D, and then I called the Hon Penny Simmonds.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007891\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022050f0712d19e02db054313f773dfa6d1\u0022\u003EGLEN BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order. She was unavailable, and she had to move around and, obviously, was not ready to go; therefore, this should be discharged.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007892\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022082c1ea3e8c8addcb7bf5c06dac0cf09\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u002239eb18d4a62a59494f85bd7af65a4f71\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002239eb18d4a62a59494f85bd7af65a4f71\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (12:57)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, speaking to the point of order, Mr Brownlee. There was a Minister available to take the call; however, we didn\u2019t get an opportunity because members took points of order. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] I know members may have forgotten in earlier contributions, but I am also a Minister that is able to move readings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022e7577bf45c1287eb9b9efbab06142935\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007894\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e7577bf45c1287eb9b9efbab06142935\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (12:57)\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, Ministers must be ready to take their first reading call. This is a strong convention of this House. No Minister on that side of the House stood up to take this call. This is a matter of extreme importance to the country, and the fact that they could not even get themselves organised to stand up and take a call\u2014not one single Minister. Their presence in the House is irrelevant. They need to be available to stand up and take a call, and Speakers in your position, in other Parliaments, have discharged bills when a Minister has not been available. It is my strong recommendation that you do so in this instance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007895\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022085dac602e1f9789cc9194d66a4a7b09\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, thank you for that advice. The time has come for me to leave the Chair for the lunch break. We\u2019ll return at 2 o\u2019clock.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007896\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 12.58 p.m. to 2 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007897\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022241bb8b3d8186ec04b5c81a401fbfda3\u0022\u003ESpeaker\u0027s Rulings\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007898\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022323797bfe41c638333db291a3277dfbc\u0022\u003EUrgency\u2014Order of Business\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007899\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002243a656c70eb5de5cb0730a060b21e56d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Prior to the lunch break, there was a short pause in proceedings, during which time I heard two points of order, one from Glen Bennett and one from James Meager. Glen Bennett\u2019s point was that, since a Minister had not responded to a call, the bill should be discharged. Ordinarily, if no member moves the next order of the day, the bill would be discharged. However, the remaining two References to Te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi bills are not on the Order Paper, and therefore the order of the day for them cannot be discharged as part of an urgency motion agreed by the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007900\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EDuring urgency, the Government may progress business in the order in which they appear on the Order Paper. Bills that are not yet on the Order Paper, or have progressed past the stage outlined on the Order Paper, can be moved at any time or not at all by the Government, and Speaker\u2019s ruling 15/4 makes that clear. The Government can now either choose to move one of the bills in the urgency motion that is not on the Order Paper, or I would ask the Clerk to call the next item on the Order Paper. The question is: does the Government wish to move one of the bills not on the Order Paper?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007901\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00221d2f1867752ca8ab0a363a284c44eefd\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007902\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00224fd95bbfb7d73ea41fb8e7bb749b6bb9\u0022\u003EReferences to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Standardisation) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007903\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002237fc643963e05240fa681f7983077638\u0022\u003ELegislative Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022c014ec0137c92aaa90f787796a15dda6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007904\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c014ec0137c92aaa90f787796a15dda6\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (14:01)\u003C/span\u003E: on behalf of the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Justice\u003C/span\u003E: I present a legislative statement\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007905\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2b36a4307d9eb1e3a6c3173ea4b8f6c\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: You must move.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007906\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225053ceecb25644f1fc6251d81e76de7d\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS\u003C/span\u003E: I move\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007907\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221d3dfc2bd4b5598d6233bffae0d88a7\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007908\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224cf4cd0b745cd0acc03800096bf433b2\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, hang on. We\u2019ve got a point of order here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007909\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022568ca0f772b67a2570d686cabb4a64d9\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: We accept your clarification of the situation and that, at normal times, and in the situation that occurred, it\u2019s possible that the bill could have been discharged. We do have an additional issue here, however, which is that you called the Hon Penny Simmonds, and it was her call, and now we have a situation where another member has just attempted to move the legislative statement on this. If the Hon Penny Simmonds is not in the House, which appears to be the case\u2014and I apologise for breaching the Standing Orders around that, but I need to say that to make this point\u2014the Government has not taken that call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EYou\u2019ve called her; she is not here to take it; therefore, the convention is that the Government has forgone its opportunity to take that call. It has, therefore, foregone its opportunity to move the legislative statement, and it has forgone its opportunity to make the first reading introductory speech. On that basis\u2014and I\u2019m not disputing your ruling around the previous situation\u2014I\u2019m asking you to rule on this presently, that, if you have called the Hon Penny Simmonds to do so on behalf of the Government, it is improper for the Hon Simon Watts to take that call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007911\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202e70713a818374d89da0da424192b65\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I accept that you\u2019re right; I did ask the call and the call wasn\u2019t taken at that time. The point is that, if you look at the effect of Speaker\u2019s ruling 15/4, the Government can actually bring bills that are on the Order Paper before the House at any time. The bill itself can\u2019t be discharged, so the question is that it is the Government\u2019s decision as to where we go from here. The calls that went to the Minister is irrelevant to the position of where the Government wishes to place the bill on the Order Paper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007912\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002218581615614f6744296e06401d6c11c7\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I do also acknowledge that, compared to previous instances where bills have been discharged by this House, we\u2019re in this unique situation where it is under urgency and the Government is able to do that; but also, in this peculiar instance where there has been a break, in the normal convention where we didn\u2019t have a lunch break, there would have been some form of ruling to at least move to the next order in the House and for this particular item under urgency to come back later.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007913\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do note that, while this bill won\u2019t be discharged, in previous instances where it\u2019s not under urgency, there have been bills that have been discharged\u2014or, in this case, at least the ability to move to the next order item\u2014that have been far shorter in terms of the time that has been taken for the House to decide who is going to be speaking on the bill. For example, one of the bills that was discharged between the Speaker calling for that particular bill and the first person getting up to do a point of order versus the bill being discharged was less than 30 seconds. Yet, just before lunchtime, we\u2019ve taken nearly two minutes to decide that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007914\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhile I understand that, under urgency, a bill cannot be discharged because it can always be brought back, I think we should at least have moved on to the next item, whatever that item is in the Order Paper, because, otherwise, there isn\u2019t that consistency for how we have handled these sorts of situations in other instances in this Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f61a19ae0c18c10f00cbd99692c24ec\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I reject that consistency argument because there hasn\u2019t been another situation that is comparable\u2014similar but not comparable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007916\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c34fcaad891d29403c0685fa2726f63c\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to my point of order, if I may, and responding to your guidance to the House, I\u2019ve now had an opportunity to read Speaker\u2019s rulings 15/4, and it is of note that that is specific to a third reading. This is not a third reading, and it doesn\u2019t actually relate to the process that is clearly outlined in Speaker\u2019s ruling 15/4, where a bill is reported back to the House from committee and set down for third reading, presumably because it\u2019s talking about the committee of the whole House. Neither of those two things has occurred in this instance; but, more to the point, you have called a Minister to take a call and that Minister is not here to take it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007917\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, if it is a case that, where a bill is not listed on the Order Paper, the requirements for a Government to be present to move to seek a call\u2014is it your ruling, given that there is nothing I can see in \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ESpeakers\u2019 Rulings\u003C/span\u003E that relates specifically to this instance, that the requirements on a Government to be present and to move when called and when required to does not apply if the legislation is not listed on the Order Paper? There\u2019s two issues there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007918\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022645e0374dc38d9e8decba954c66a56c9\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just say that again, sorry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007919\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd15e02ce9aed7d9c21b3269bd89ce7f\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Well, sir, you\u2019ve just said to the House that it is, in your view, a Government\u2019s responsibility to indicate when bills that are not listed on the Order Paper occur, but you\u2019ve also indicated\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007920\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc3a8de27d2566660e57c56d04833380\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Can I ask people over there to stop the conversation, so I can hear the point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007921\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fd3bacc2b67e2c4ac4e86a6e0a58942d\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: But you\u2019ve also stated, in your opening address, that in normal circumstances it\u2019s possible that the way that things played out could have warranted the bill being dismissed; but the fact that it\u2019s not on the Order Paper means that that isn\u2019t a requirement. Actually, in this instance, we\u2019ve gone through and looked at the footage on a couple of occasions. You made it very clear to the House that we were going to proceed. You then called the Hon Penny Simmonds, so we\u2019re under way. Now, we\u2019ve come back from the lunch break, the Hon Penny Simmonds is not here, and the Hon Simon Watts tried to take that call. Regardless of whether the bill is on the Order Paper or not, the Government have been called and they have not taken it, and the Government cannot put an additional Minister to speak in that Minister\u2019s stead, because Penny Simmonds was called. She\u2019s not here, and so the next call is ours.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007922\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, we can\u2019t move a legislative statement, and we can\u2019t do a speech to introduce a bill. They have forgone that opportunity. We\u2019re not actually disputing your ruling in regards to the situation. I\u2019m raising a specific point here. You\u2019ve called a Minister; she isn\u2019t here to take the call. They can\u2019t proceed with this bill, because of the requirements that are specifically for that Minister who has been called.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007923\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d8f26221126fb41ee9f0d73f482b557\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s true. The point I\u2019m trying to make is\u2014because you\u2019ll read it also in conjunction with Speakers\u2019 ruling 15/3\u2014that we have a bill that cannot be discharged. We\u2019ve got a situation where the Government didn\u2019t take the call as swiftly as they should have. I don\u2019t think it\u2019s relevant that, after the lunch break, the same Minister must return. But setting all that aside\u2014we\u2019re in new territory here, and I acknowledge that\u2014the point I was trying to make is that the Government can introduce this any time it likes. It\u2019s an odd situation. It\u2019s a bill that hasn\u2019t been introduced, because the call wasn\u2019t taken, but it can\u2019t be discharged, and so the question always has to be: what is the Government\u2019s intention? It\u2019s their urgency motion. I asked that question. The Hon Simon Watts, or whoever is going to move it, would need to say that they are moving to the bill, and that the bill be progressed, effectively.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007924\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022966f42f1575a365b9898ec229e5e3cb8\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Well, as it happens, the Hon Penny Simmonds has now turned up, and I imagine that\u2019s only because we\u2019re raising this concern. I accept your point that this is unprecedented. It is unprecedented because the Government wasn\u2019t organised, but we\u2019re now in a situation where you\u2019ve called the Hon Penny Simmonds and you\u2019ve called the Hon Simon Watts. The Hon Simon Watts has started to read out and move the introduction of a legislative statement. Now, it\u2019s your ruling that, if the bills that are under consideration are not on the Order Paper, the conventions and requirements that are on the Government for bills that are listed on the Order Paper don\u2019t stand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, I think that\u2019s something that the Standing Orders Committee should consider, because I don\u2019t think that this instance should be allowed to set a precedent, because in practice, that precedent would mean that a Government doesn\u2019t need to be organised in an urgency motion, and that would be regrettable for the order of the House. I take your nod as agreement to that. I\u2019ll accept that this is going to be referred, and I\u2019ll pose a simple question to you: who\u2019s going to be reading this? Is it the Hon Penny Simmonds, who you called in the first place, or is it the Hon Simon Watts, who started the process?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007926\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd64f23bd1afd79f2bd73f71361a7031\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the point I would make in response to your points is that the\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007927\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223c614cb7a9ceb209ffe2086149248861\u0022\u003ERawiri Waititi\u003C/span\u003E: Messy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007928\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226701b536711dad111a815143be4c1376\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Beg your pardon.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007929\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223333298d23984ea6a29993836bd0a932\u0022\u003ERawiri Waititi\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s messy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007930\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022df2729219228ee94b545c66f042c2f3b\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, that\u2019s right. Quite right. Unusually succinct and on the button. The point is that the Speaker is not responsible for the Government\u2019s management of its programme, but I am responsible for how the House might proceed in future. I think it is something that should go to the Standing Orders Committee. I think the lack of guidance in \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ESpeakers\u2019 Rulings\u003C/span\u003E indicates that that is a good idea. I, unfortunately, probably won\u2019t be able to get there for this particular round of the Standing Orders, but some sessional order around this might be appropriate. The situation we\u2019re in at the moment is that, regardless of the mismanagement of the arrangements before, this is a bill that cannot be discharged, and the question for the Government is: where do we progress from here? If the Government sees it wants to move to progress that bill, that\u2019s something that the House has to accept given the nature of the urgency motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007931\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227fd5640266f812aeeb684b4231baf057\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to that, sir, I accept that, and I thank you for it. I think it would be appropriate if that matter would be referred to the Standing Order Committee from you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007932\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I come back to Speakers\u2019 rulings 15/3 and 15/4. By your own admission, this is a statement that doesn\u2019t quite fit in with those. You\u2019d need to read both Speakers\u2019 rulings for what is, essentially, a vibe, but it\u2019s not specific to this situation. Speaker\u2019s ruling 15/4 in particular is very specific to a certain circumstance which doesn\u2019t apply here. Essentially, at least in the interim, until the Standing Orders Committee has an opportunity to review this, you are making a new ruling, essentially, and so you also, therefore, have the opportunity now to add to that new ruling that, in an instance where a bill is not listed on the Order Paper, and if a Government isn\u2019t organised and doesn\u2019t take the call, then it can be dismissed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007933\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf you are considering a new ruling in this instance, it is entirely appropriate that you also consider that. If a referral to the Standing Orders Committee deals with the matter, so be it; but, in the interim, notwithstanding the fact that we only have one more week and it\u2019s going to essentially be a partial week of sitting, the point stands, and I think that that should be seriously considered by you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007934\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217d4bdec8ee02a30fb17acf78ac9bb10\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I am seriously considering it, obviously, and while you say that Speakers\u2019 ruling 15/4, read with 15/3, does, as you describe it, a vibe, I think it\u2019s a little stronger than that. I think there are comparisons in it insomuch as it talks about bills that are not on the Order Paper. What is absolutely clear, and I\u2019m not going to rule against it, is that, if a bill is not on the Order Paper but it\u2019s an urgency motion, it cannot be discharged. The second part is that it is for the Government to determine the order in which it deals with bills that are on the Order Paper. This is an untidy situation\u2014messy, as Mr Waititi describes it\u2014but none the less, the question has to be: does the Government intend to move this bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221b9fbd9f8cae8daf8fcb261e28ec8242\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to that, one final point, if I may: given that we are considering Speakers\u2019 rulings 15/3 and 15/4, I would suggest it would be appropriate to also consider that in the context of Speakers\u2019 ruling 15/5, where it clearly says that notwithstanding an item being on the urgency motion\u2014leaving aside whether or not it is included on the Order Paper\u2014if it is part of the urgency motion and the Speaker has an indication that the Government doesn\u2019t wish to proceed, that can be interpreted as the end of urgency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007936\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, there could not be a clearer indication from a Government that it doesn\u2019t want to proceed when Ministers don\u2019t take the call. I\u2019m not putting to you that the urgency should be ended, but I am suggesting to you, sir, that, as you consider Speakers\u2019 rulings 15/3 in conjunction with 15/4, you should also consider 15/5. There needs to be a provision in \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ESpeakers\u2019 Rulings\u003C/span\u003E that accounts for a Government not being organised in its own urgency that it\u2019s moved.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007937\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226607d166b961cd01d3f46848b9cbfa70\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think time would be a small factor there as well. You\u2019ll be aware that, while there\u2019s nothing in \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ESpeakers\u2019 Rulings\u003C/span\u003E\u2014or, in fact, the Standing Orders\u2014for matters like this, if it were a select committee and the Government didn\u2019t turn up it with its quorum, it\u2019s 10 minutes. Now, we were a much shorter period of time than that, and in the end, it was 11.56 a.m. and I decided the best thing to do would be to take the lunch break and get this advice so that the House would have some guidance. I appreciate what you\u2019re suggesting regarding a ruling that would prevail until such time as the Standing Orders deals with it, or a sessional order is brought in, but I\u2019m reluctant or not willing to do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007938\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022298da804e64a96ca2b07f53c4e6bd7ca\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to that, as part of your considerations, I wish to raise to your attention an instance that occurred on 11 September 2018 under Speaker Mallard, where there was no Government Minister available to seek the call and the matter was discharged. I accept that that was on the Order Paper, but I think it adds further consideration to any potential ruling on your part, be it interim or otherwise, as to how to deal with the situation under urgency when a Government isn\u2019t available to move its own bill, regardless of whether it\u2019s on the Order Paper or not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007939\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a267e683689d19c53679d9e24b4c8427\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, look, it might be a fair argument, but it still remains that it was clear at that time that it was a bill on the Order Paper, which is dealt with in the Standing Orders. This is a bill that is not on the Order Paper, which is also dealt with in the Standing Orders, so there\u2019s an interpretive position that has to be taken, and the position I\u2019m taking is that I will ask the Government: does it wish to progress this bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007940\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec365e3afe9c30b0465243a86e7e7a26\u0022\u003ERawiri Waititi\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just for clarity\u2019s sake, and I\u2019m looking at Speaker\u2019s ruling 31/5: \u201COnce the presiding officer has called on a member to speak that member has the floor and cannot have the call taken away. This applies even though the principle of alternation or, in committee, the obligation to give preference to a member who has spoken less often is overlooked.\u201D I just want to get your clarity on that ruling 31/5\u2014that the call was given to Minister Penny, and now we have Minister Watts who\u2019s also been given a call. I just want some clarity around, \u201COnce the presiding officer has called on a member to speak that member has the floor and cannot have their call taken away.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007941\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228b74b284076d4770ab3bc46503fa37de\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I think the point is that Speaker\u2019s ruling 31/5 is referring to proceedings inside a committee of the whole House stage where members might have multiple calls, and the calls in this direction here are to always go to the member who\u2019s had the least number of calls.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007942\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e4f49ed494fdf04d1ddf53fe2f903bfb\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00222b456585e50c57323f1bcca02a77ae7e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222b456585e50c57323f1bcca02a77ae7e\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (14:19)\u003C/span\u003E: on behalf of the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Justice\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Standardisation) Amendment Bill be now read a first time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007944\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m pleased to introduce the References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Standardisation) Amendment Bill to the House today. This bill will improve the clarity, consistency, and descriptive Treaty provisions in legislation, and support a more certain and workable statute bill. The bill gives effect to the Government\u2019s review of the references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi in legislation. Over time, Parliament has used different formulations when referring to the Treaty and its principles. In some cases, these differences can make it unclear whether a different legal effect was intended. This bill will make the wording clearer and more consistent for readers without substantively changing the legal effect of those provisions. Descriptive provisions help readers understand how the Treaty is reflected in an Act by pointing to specific provisions that are intended to reflect the Treaty. While the introductory words of descriptive Treaty provisions will be amended to use a standard phrase, the operative provisions that are listed are not amended by this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007945\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo conclude, this bill is about improving the clarity and workability of legislation. It does not change the Treaty itself or the Crown\u2019s commitment to it. It ensures that, when Parliament refers to the Treaty of Waitangi in legislation, the wording is clear, consistent, and appropriate for the statute in which it appears. That is important for the public, for agencies and regulating parties, and the courts. A clear statute book helps people understand what the law requires and supports more consistent decision-making across Government. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u00227a22692242f36c10d11176169e8b106f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007946\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227a22692242f36c10d11176169e8b106f\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (14:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I want to focus on two aspects first of all in my short call on this second bill out of three bills that weaken or remove the provisions for legislation to take into account or honour, or otherwise, in Acts aspects of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007947\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThere is a Speaker\u2019s ruling that it is convention that we do not make reference to the fact that a member is away, but it is felt that, if the absence of a member is of sufficient importance, the real or suggested importance of the absence overrides this convention. I suggest in this instance that the absence of the Minister Paul Goldsmith in the House today is of sufficient importance to note this in this debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007948\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221f0c7064a91205ba9aa56a0ac4bb03a1\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Good. We\u2019ll just leave it at that, then\u2014noted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007949\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cfdac59ee4af3bba735d42c81503b2fd\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister of Justice has had a huge impact on the fact of this bill being in this House and the fact that the process of this bill has been terrible and not consultative. I also want to touch on the commitments that Minister Goldsmith has made to the Iwi Chairs Forum specifically. This bill changes provisions within legislation to a weaker standard\u2014\u201Ctake into account\u201D is a weaker standard. It weakens the Treaty provisions in legislation. This is a specific decision undertaken by Minister Goldsmith that he did not need to take. This is a choice by the National Party to make a decision to weaken the Treaty of Waitangi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007950\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have evidence to back that up. When we look at the regulatory impact statement on this bill, we look at the options that were put forward to the Minister. Then we see the decision has been made to \u201CAmend all Treaty standards to be no higher than \u2018take into account\u2019\u00A0\u201D. Why did this come before the House? It specifically says in the regulatory impact statement, \u201CThis option was a late addition proposed by the Minister for Justice.\u201D He thought of this himself. This is not to do with the agreement with New Zealand First. This is Minister Goldsmith, the Minister of Justice, deciding that there should be a lower standard across all the different pieces of legislation\u2014and we\u2019re talking about the standardisation bill at the moment, which is specifically on this point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007951\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, how did he arrive at that? We don\u2019t know, because another thing that he also did was he directed a process that has not included engagement with iwi M\u0101ori or hap\u016B as Treaty partners, the general public, or external stakeholders. This process has been a total mess. I have taken time to read the Waitangi Tribunal report into it. This is only one of two Waitangi Tribunal reports that have been written on this matter, and let me tell you, this is scathing of the process that the Minister has undertaken\u2014absolutely scathing. What is most scathing in this is the fact that it specifically includes in here that \u201CMinister Goldsmith informed the National Iwi Chairs Forum on 27 May 2026 that enactment would not be possible this term.\u201D Well, I would say that having a first reading in this Parliament is a step toward enactment and is a breach of good faith for that commitment that he made to the Iwi Chairs Forum.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007952\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs I\u2019ve mentioned, where is the argument, where is the Minister, where is his side of the story that he is putting forward as to why this is something that New Zealand needs to do? We have advice in the official information that this is going to be damaging to M\u0101ori-Crown relations. We have information in the official advice that he\u2019s received that these provisions and this enactment are going to weaken Treaty clauses and not make it stronger. We have information that it was entirely his idea.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007953\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is shameful. It comes after several shameful acts of this Minister, including move-on orders, this same week. This Minister is bringing the National Party into disrepute. The history of the National Party with the Treaty of Waitangi and the history of the Waitangi Tribunal, that was so eloquently spoken to by my colleague Arena Williams, is being trashed by this current Minister with disregard\u2014trampled\u2014disregard to the history of the Waitangi Tribunal and disregard to the statutes that have been worked so hard over successive Governments to make sure that the Treaty is honoured within our legislation, and it is shameful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022679c09a3ea2fd3a22a21b123862255a3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007954\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022679c09a3ea2fd3a22a21b123862255a3\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister for Building and Construction) (14:26)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I nominate the Justice Committee to consider the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007955\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227180f61443a04a8771604871d839359e\u0022\u003ECamilla Belich\u003C/span\u003E: This is a total mess.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007956\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002233e81f8d638f338e4d4df03da56dbb4f\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not for me to comment on that. I call Tamatha Paul.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u0022ae0ef8b94c1e830597d8380cf147e671\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007957\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ae0ef8b94c1e830597d8380cf147e671\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (14:26)\u003C/span\u003E: I can for you, Mr Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007958\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e270734f3d815b51a4aff5cbdf35baef\u0022\u003ECamilla Belich\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Two points. Firstly, we wouldn\u2019t expect a reference to the select committee to be made at this point in the proceedings, and it is quite shocking to see another example of this Government not knowing when the correct place to do referrals is in the Standing Orders. Secondly, he would need to seek leave to refer it to the Justice Committee at this time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224ca4d72c77c5543361f3b9cc543f351\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, he doesn\u2019t. The Minister in charge who is presenting a bill can refer it to a select committee at any point. That\u2019s quite clear in the Standing Orders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007960\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c412ac15cba9c3d42d157d815ffbc872\u0022\u003ETangi Utikere\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just speaking to that point, the Minister has exercised his call. The normal proceeding is that there are allocated calls for the remainder of the debate. The question, then, is at what opportunity would the Minister simply be able to seek another call? I mean, there\u2019s nothing to stop a Minister in this respect then simply seeking call No. 7 to do exactly what the Minister has done. I\u2019m seeking some clarity around how that aligns.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007961\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb27d8ed6dae79bc88acbbfcdf249bb8\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, look, he\u2019s indicated by way of point of order the select committee that it\u2019s going to be sent to, but at the end of the debate, it\u2019s the Speaker who asks the House to consider what select committee it gets sent to. It\u2019s a point of information. I agree with some of the analysis that might have been behind the points of order you\u2019ve made. None the less, I call Tamatha Paul.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007962\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ecfb43b9d74a75cdb379a93306f44dd7\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Oh, what a bunch of amateurs. You fellas remind me of that Hyrox lady running around looking like that. Can\u2019t even get your mahi kaikiri right. How embarrassing. Far out, how many parties does it take to bloody trample on the Treaty? You guys are going to need a bigger coalition than this, because you can\u2019t even get that right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007963\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan you believe, Aotearoa, that despite all your struggles, the New Zealand First Party made this a matter of priority for the House\u2019s business? What an absolute disgrace. I\u2019ve been in some debates with them recently, and they don\u2019t get up and talk about the stuff that they\u2019re doing. They get up and talk about neoliberalism, how we need to split up the gentailers. But what do they actually use their time doing? This kind of waste of time kaikiri stuff.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007964\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou know, what this really showed me is a another reason why politicians shouldn\u2019t be allowed to trample and trifle with Te Tiriti, because in the last bill, Parmjeet Parmar got up and talked about how this was making it hard for the interpretation of judges and the courts, despite the fact that that is not true. The regulatory impact statement says that there is limited available evidence to justify the statement that the provisions create legal uncertainty, so that\u2019s untrue. What it really demonstrates is that Parmjeet Parmar doesn\u2019t even understand the constitution of this country and the separation of powers between the judiciary and us as the ones that write the laws. It is, actually, in fact, their job to interpret the law, not for us to write it out for them. That\u2019s why those branches are separated. Maybe Parmjeet Parmar should have had a k\u014Drero with her colleague James Christmas, who was actually involved in the advisory group that advised on these bills, who also said that there is no justification for this bill.  Because guess what! There\u2019s no uncertainty. All there is is incompetence, because they don\u2019t understand the Treaty. They don\u2019t understand the Treaty, so it makes them uncertain. Oh my gosh: the mention of the Treaty confuses us so much; that\u2019s because they don\u2019t understand it, Casey Costello. And it\u2019s so funny that this is a bill from New Zealand First. Does anybody remember this guy? [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHolds up image of Hon Shane Jones\u003C/span\u003E] \u201CAotearoa 1990: 150 years of oppression\u201D. This is a message to rangatahi: don\u2019t end up like this, where you\u2019re one day marching around in an activist shirt saying, \u201CWe\u2019ve been oppressed for 150 years.\u201D, and then a couple of decades later, you\u2019re here selling out your own people. What a disgrace. What a disgrace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007965\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet\u2019s be clear: the regulatory impact statement says, \u201CThere is no apparent benefit to this bill.\u201D Every person who is struggling and miserable in this county is now having three hours of their time wasted, and then some\u2014because of the incompetence of the Government\u2014to push through this BS legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007966\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPoliticians don\u2019t understand the Treaty. All they do is they listen to what that crusty old fart Don Brash has to say\u2014don\u2019t you? We all know the biography that the Minister of Justice, Paul Goldsmith, wrote. He wrote Don Brash\u2019s biography. He\u2019s taken a page out of it, and he\u2019s doing the same anti-M\u0101ori sentiment. We know who New Zealand First\u2019s besties, eh? A Hobson\u2019s Pledge puppet. That\u2019s what you are. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007967\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat this shows is that the Government doesn\u2019t understand the Treaty. And what we know about human psychology is that people are afraid of things that they don\u2019t understand. They don\u2019t understand the Treaty, and they listen to what people like that crusty old fart Don Brash has to say about the Treaty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007968\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022adf175868aa0b31a7b4d41968fd4bcee\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The point here is quite a simple one: we don\u2019t use those terms to describe anybody outside the House. They have an absolute, natural justice right to come in here at a later time and defend themselves. It\u2019s not something that is to be encouraged. What is to be less encouraged is the use of those sort of descriptors. I would ask the member to withdraw and apologise for those particular descriptors, the two of them\u2014three of them, in fact\u2014and then to progress the rest of the speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007969\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd1da07296530484477914d1e3992e20\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, can I ask for a point of clarification on that? Like, genuinely.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007970\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002267e562fbc1f2ed644e54a0d2e9a46fd0\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it better be, because I\u2019ve actually instructed the member on how to progress, and if she doesn\u2019t follow that instruction eventually, then the speech is over.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007971\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b7dc035d6291f772b5a6e42ec7795a3e\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: I understand that, Mr Speaker. Which part of that am I meant to be apologising for?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007972\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022275b2af72b1f034a6858f370d41fcccb\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m not repeating\u2014I\u2019m not repeating\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007973\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c9e52a8dbd9f7739194ac9cdd1e38e27\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: But then I don\u2019t know what I\u2019m apologising for, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007974\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a46539c24c75c7a4f84a6e1aa4503585\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m sorry, but the member\u2019s speech is terminated. We\u2019ll move now to Simon Court.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007975\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220838e5f9bac748d2a59aea595e5226a0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022399238b64a976948ae930fcd291e3f44\u0022\u003ESimon Court\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007976\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2964df2ba78adfd74a806aab84000eb\u0022\u003ETangi Utikere\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007977\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc5875d7e1bb6c0d81e24c1e7070883e\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Tangi Utikere. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] There is a point of order on at the moment, and Tangi Utikere is the only one speaking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u0022a4b637fa370ac9f92b51fd0c19eb79f6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007978\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a4b637fa370ac9f92b51fd0c19eb79f6\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (14:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I didn\u2019t want to interrupt the member\u2019s speech. I just want to refer you to Standing Order 295(1)(a). This was the issue that I\u2019d raised earlier, just wanting some clarity around this. This is a requirement around the nomination of the select committee; 295(1)(a) clearly indicates that it is the requirement that the member moving the bill\u2019s first reading must, on the commencement of that member\u2019s speech, nominate the relevant select committee to consider the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007979\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EGiven the Minister, when called upon, did not do that at the time, I\u2019m just wanting some clarity in terms of what course of action is available. Clearly, if this does pass first reading there will need to be a select committee, but is it then open to members to determine, and is it debateable?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007980\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221d62be243209fd28327e30134fdd8175\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Can I take some advice on that, and I\u2019ll come back to you shortly. Simon Court.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220838e5f9bac748d2a59aea595e5226a0\u0022 data-id=\u0022c135761963d80d2ac68cf68171f24060\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007981\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220838e5f9bac748d2a59aea595e5226a0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c135761963d80d2ac68cf68171f24060\u0022\u003ESIMON COURT (ACT) (14:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. ACT has consistently stood for the simple principle that every New Zealander should have the same fundamental rights and responsibilities, regardless of when their ancestors arrived here, or whether they came by waka, sailing ship, or aeroplane.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007982\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve been the most consistent voice in Parliament of one law for all, so we could have one future together. The Treaty principles bill was the clearest demonstration of that. In that debate, ACT was the only party in Parliament that demonstrated that commitment. We stand for the principle that every New Zealander should have those rights. We would have welcomed other parties standing with us, particularly those who champion equal rights, but their decision not to do so does not change our position. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007983\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EACT will continue to be the consistent voice that we should have one law for all, so we can have one future together. These bills are a great step towards clarity and consistency, and how New Zealand\u2019s legal provisions operate across the law, and ACT is happy to support them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to come to the member Tamatha\u2019s Paul\u2019s explanation of what that member considers to be comity between Parliament and the judiciary. I urge her to have a read of the Attorney-General\u2019s speech that Chris Bishop gave to the Law Association on Thursday, 6 August 2026. For that member\u2019s benefit, and anyone watching or listening, it is available on the Beehive website, under the Attorney-General\u2019s banner. I urge that member Tamatha Paul to read that speech, where Chris Bishop says very clearly: Parliament must be clear about the scope of legislation, and how it applies. And it is up to the courts to deliver on Parliament\u2019s intention, not to widely range across different ways of interpreting things that Parliament should and must make clear. Chris Bishop was quite clear: Parliament has the obligation to clarify laws. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007985\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, these bills do not go as far as the Treaty principles bill would have; we make no secret of that. That bill preferred a stronger approach. It sought to put into law principles based on equal rights and equal citizenship, and to allow Parliament and the public to have a fundamental debate about those principles. These bills do not go that far, but they move the statute book towards greater clarity, greater consistency, greater accountability, and ACT supports this progress.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u00226e5560b47ec2f963ece1ad63243ff98a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007986\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226e5560b47ec2f963ece1ad63243ff98a\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Minister of Customs) (14:37)\u003C/span\u003E: I rise to speak on behalf of New Zealand First to the References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Standardisation) Amendment Bill. This bill is delivering on a core part of the New Zealand First - National coalition agreement, where it was agreed to conduct a comprehensive review of all legislation, except when it related to, or was substantive to, existing full and final Treaty settlements. That includes references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, and to replace all such references with specific words relating to the relevance in application of the Treaty, or to repeal the references.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007987\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis bill is one of the three bills we will be speaking about today. I don\u2019t want to repeat earlier commentary to expand the time of the House, but this is reducing inconsistency and reasserting parliamentary sovereignty by setting explicit legal clarity. New Zealand First supports the bill because it removes vague, fragmented drafting that historically triggered litigation and that enriches law firms rather than helping communities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007988\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is ironic that when we talk about the concept of being one people, and when we talk about the concept of unity, we get mocked and criticised.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007989\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022135eb8bd6a14380aa80131a8cf2cb844\u0022\u003ERawiri Waititi\u003C/span\u003E: We get imprisoned.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007990\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220ad2f8833fbaf91949c58eebfafffc1d\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: When we say, \u201C\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EHe iwi tahi t\u0101tou\u003C/span\u003E\u201D\u2014\u201CWe are all one people\u201D\u2014we get mocked.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007991\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d528a0353a2b0da5c34ad2958d3b7565\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E: Because you want to minimise someone else. You want to diminish another people to achieve it. You want to diminish a whole other people to achieve it\u2014that\u2019s why.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007992\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002218fc322128d15145653352e3ec757a40\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: And yet when we introduced this first bill, the Green Party took a point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007993\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236d8c2d603832632193207b9458a60c5\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Interjections are one thing; a barrage is another. The member will proceed with her speech without people being quite so boisterous around here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223f015b549b84d9ea01af37f8a46439eb\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. So, when we talk about unity and being one people\u2014the Green Party in its initial point of order, when we first started these debates, said, \u201CWe\u2019re all about unity.\u201D When we say it, apparently, that is a bad thing. Apparently, this is a bad situation we\u2019re in. At the same time, we\u2019ve heard repeatedly from these members that the situation for M\u0101ori needs improvement. There are housing issues. There are health issues. There are education issues. There are poverty issues. And yet, at the same time, when we say, \u201CLet\u2019s improve the law so we can improve outcomes.\u201D, we\u2019re discredited. We want to keep the current law, even though we know it\u2019s not delivering what they need, but if we actually say, \u201CLet\u2019s look at the law and make sure it is fit for purpose and delivering the outcomes we need.\u201D, we\u2019re criticised for doing it. On one hand, we defend the legislation as it exists, even though we think it\u2019s not delivering what it needed; on the other hand, if we try to look at that legislation and improve it, we\u2019re criticised. The hypocrisy is rich in this debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007995\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen we\u2019ve talked about power. It\u2019s about power. Yes, it is absolutely about power. It\u2019s empowering the people that need to be empowered, because the representation they get in this House is failing them dismally. They cannot get through a single speech without using foul language, without using insults and denigration\u2014they cannot actually get through the speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007996\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI will provide some clarity around the commentary that we\u2019ve heard today. Again, what we\u2019re saying is that this is improving legislation for clarity so that we can improve delivery and so that we can ensure the people that we represent are actually getting the best legislation that they can. This is what we\u2019re delivering. Despite the faux victimisation that sits across the other side of the House, we are actually delivering outcomes. For that reason, New Zealand First comments this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007997\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002250ee9b79d99b2c52cf93ae2b3fd9613e\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just before I call Rawiri Waititi, I just want to clarify the point of order raised by Tangi Utikere just before.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007998\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETangi Utikere raised the question of when a bill should be referred to a select committee by the member who is speaking first and referred to Standing Order 295. For the second time today, we find some gap in our proceedings, but I would refer the member to \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EParliamentary Practice in New Zealand\u003C/span\u003E, page 458, a large volume that you\u2019ve probably got in front of you. Look for 36.16.2, and it says here\u2014let me just highlight this so I don\u2019t misread it\u2014\u201CFor most bills, the first reading precedes consideration by a select committee, and, immediately after moving the motion for the first reading, the member in charge of the bill must nominate which select committee the member intends to consider the bill.\u201D\u2014there\u2019s a reference there to 36.17 as well\u2014\u201CIf the member in charge [of the bill] fails to do so, the Speaker will require this to be done before the debate proceeds.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0007999\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn other words, it\u2019s not a breach not to place the reference to select committee at that point, because, at the end, it has to be referred to a select committee, and the Speaker would end up asking, \u201CWhich select committee are you sending it to?\u201D, and the House would then be told.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I\u2019ve also heard from the Clerk that this is not an uncommon occurrence and hasn\u2019t been an uncommon occurrence since these Standing Orders and that particular \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003EStanding Orders\u003C/span\u003E and the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003EParliamentary Practice\u003C/span\u003E volumes were put together in 2016. On that basis, we\u2019ll proceed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u00223add182cb93d1d52cce5ead3bc22526c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223add182cb93d1d52cce5ead3bc22526c\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (14:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, sir. Thank you. It\u2019s perhaps uncommon to pull that lofty volume out for a wee while and get your highlighter out but, none the less, can I just seek some clarification? The point that you\u2019ve made there is that the Speaker would then call upon the member before the debate proceeds. Is your interpretation that that can happen at any point during the debate, or is it the expectation that that point in time was when the failing of the Minister to undertake that duty was made clear?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230d3224eab6fc23c940a216696d6adf1\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think, in this case, the Minister realised that he hadn\u2019t referred to select committee and took a point of order to do so. Had he not done that, the Speaker, at the end of the debate, would have asked what select committee it\u2019s going to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u0022c9a2f7b31334fa723e70df321019c7ca\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c9a2f7b31334fa723e70df321019c7ca\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (14:44)\u003C/span\u003E: Further to the point of order\u2014thank you, again, Mr Speaker\u2014if I can just refer to Standing Order\u00A0297(1). This is related to the determination of a committee to consider the bill, and it indicates that at any time before the question is put on the first reading, a member may deliver to the Clerk a nomination under Standing Order 295(1)(a). I have done that, in terms of nominating a specified select committee, given the Minister wasn\u2019t able to. Can you just provide some direction around where in proceedings the consideration of that Tabled committee would fall?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240f6d215de02a711de8fed80f35a088d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll take advice on that, but you would presume it would be at the end of the reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022 data-id=\u0022363877b3e505ca49b17dce1a71467857\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022363877b3e505ca49b17dce1a71467857\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY (Labour) (14:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Thank you for that. Given you\u2019ve indicated you\u2019re going to seek advice, there\u2019s a matter I would hope that you could add to that. As is now evident, there has been a series of points of order raised on this particular reading and many of them have been based on the fact that this issue falls, essentially, through the cracks of parliamentary procedure because the bill is not listed on the Order Paper. That fact then raises questions around the relevancy of the Standing Orders in this particular instance and, certainly, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ESpeakers\u2019 Rulings\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, as it currently stands, the only motion or nomination for a committee is that which has been put forward by the Opposition. In the instance here, you\u2019ve outlined from \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003EParliamentary Practice\u003C/span\u003E that the Minister moving, introducing the bill, is required to indicate which select committee should considered this, by way of motion. You then indicated that, if that doesn\u2019t happen, it is on the presiding officer to require them to do so. I don\u2019t state that by any criticism. It is just a matter of fact that that did not happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d68ef6e96d4d344e99ac5e3cefec34a\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, that comes at the end of the debate, before the vote.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221eea780231c64046a9bc843d17ef4df2\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY\u003C/span\u003E: Right, so I note that, under Standing Order 297(2), it indicates that the motion will be put both after you have required that of the Government, which you\u2019ve signalled you will do, and also now that the Opposition, the Labour Party, have put forward a nomination for a select committee, that of the Governance and Administration Committee\u2014both will be put. It would be useful, I think, for the House to have an understanding as to how that would play out. I\u2019m not aware of any instance where this has occurred. It\u2019s possible that we\u2019ve now alerted the House to members\u2019 ability to put forward counter nominations for select committees. Perhaps this will become a common occurrence; I hope not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe question I also have is that, given this bill is not listed on the Order Paper and that parliamentary procedure doesn\u2019t fully apply in this instance, notwithstanding Standing Order 297(2), and in recognition of the Government\u2019s clear disorganisation around this issue, I would put to you a request that counter motions as to which select committee this will be referred to be a debatable motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227595443f9a0272b252e05907e68ebd8f\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, Tim van de Molen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022 data-id=\u0022b3f3fafdca0f57f16ceb199695f7b27f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290a05c0f561045159bf3351d524a65ac\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b3f3fafdca0f57f16ceb199695f7b27f\u0022\u003ETIM VAN DE MOLEN (National\u2014Waikato) (14:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. We seem to be making a bit of a mountain out of a mole hill here. This situation has occurred numerous over the last couple of Parliaments, where the Minister, moving a bill in their first reading speech, does not immediately indicate the select committee that it goes to. At some point through in that debate, or indeed prompted by the Speaker in the Chair at the end of the debate, that situation has been rectified. The Standing Orders are quite clear that the Minister must do so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ENow, an amendment can be moved, or a proposed committee can be moved, by another member, as Mr Utikere has done\u2014indeed, that has also been done in previous Parliaments, where we in Opposition at that time did propose a select committee that it could be put to\u2014but the Standing Orders are quite clear that that alternative proposal only ever gets voted on if the first proposal put forward by the Minister, either at the time or later, is voted down. If that motion by the Minister passes, there will never be a vote, and it is not debatable on the alternative committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be075c9b19fc7a8f1054f96036764ea5\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Mr van de Molen is right in substance there. The first point is that a Minister moving a bill does need to inform the House of what committee the bill is going to be referred to. At the end of the debate, there is a question that is put to the Minister. As a result of that notification to the House, the question is the reference, in this case to this bill, going for the Justice Committee. The House then votes on that. If that does not proceed, we would go to Mr Utikere\u2019s proposal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EA past circumstance where this has happened was on a local bill, where the member in charge of that bill did not mention what select committee it should go to. Therefore, it was the motion of Metiria Turei that saw it go to the M\u0101ori Affairs Committee. There is a process that happens sequentially, but, as we are all aware, this hasn\u2019t been the smoothest of processes from an ideal legislative situation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022 data-id=\u00226e6907852d42e4f449bcfb6cf6ed3259\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226e6907852d42e4f449bcfb6cf6ed3259\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY (Labour) (14:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. If indeed this process is to happen as you\u2019ve just outlined, should it not be the Opposition\u2019s nomination that is considered first, given ours has been lodged and the Government is still yet to do so?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221f37428b1f8aa45c85b64c6c15a98474\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, the Government doesn\u2019t have to lodge it; the Government has to inform the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e5ac0dafa1972289e5086b23c748627\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY\u003C/span\u003E: But they haven\u2019t, sir\u2014that\u2019s my point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222495029d5e76b6128fbae8911647e338\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: They have. They did it by way of a point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002276d73fb046294237d9a202ea49566418\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY\u003C/span\u003E: Now, sir, the point here\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0004086132112a94bb35fe717ef99aa\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: A point of order is being heard. No one else offers any comment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ddea977425fce9432241c7a6006350a\u0022\u003EHon KIERAN McANULTY\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014is that if this were a minor matter, as Mr van de Molen asserted it was, frankly, you wouldn\u2019t have had to refer to \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EParliamentary Practice\u003C/span\u003E in order to rule on it. The reason you\u2019ve done that is because this is an unusual situation\u2014brought about by disorganisation, but an unusual situation none the less. Now, I\u2019ve just read over the segment in \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EParliamentary Practice\u003C/span\u003E and it actually makes it quite clear that, if a Minister does not indicate which committee they will move that it go to, the presiding officer is to point that out at that point. Now, again, I\u2019m not saying this as a point of criticism, but that is what \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EParliamentary Practice\u003C/span\u003E says. It doesn\u2019t actually indicate that it can happen at the end.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EStanding Order 295 indicates that the Opposition\u2014or any member, for that matter\u2014has the ability to make a nomination for a select committee at any point before the question is put, but that is different to what you have referred to. That says that the presiding officer should intervene at that point, but once my colleague Camilla Belich spoke, that point was lost. I\u2019m not at all suggesting that the Government motion is invalid\u2014it\u2019s not, by any stretch\u2014but what I am saying is that, given this string of points of order was brought about on the basis that this is an unusual situation brought about by the fact that these bills in question are not on the Order Paper, the provisions that are outlined are not fully applicable. On that basis, that is why we are requesting that this be a debatable motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a1327084cbbcca715752f696bb62093\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, thank you for your observation. The point is that the House has been informed of the Minister\u2019s intention to refer the bill to the Justice Committee. I can\u2019t unhear that, and so the further bit that\u2019s in here\u2014I appreciate that perhaps there is a point where that should have come in. I would actually dispute that, but that\u2019s one of those things. That\u2019s why you have a Standing Orders Committee that goes through all these things. But the procedure today will be, presumably, that the Speaker, having been informed that it is the Justice Committee, will put that to the House. If the House rejects that, then, quite clearly, there is another motion lodged on the Table. Now, that would not be a debatable motion because it is a procedural matter that\u2019s covered in the sequence of how a bill is dealt with. So we\u2019ll go now to\u2014who is taking the call?\u2014Rawiri Waititi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022 data-id=\u0022180bc2077af7c0cc104e42f83b73c317\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022180bc2077af7c0cc104e42f83b73c317\u0022\u003ERAWIRI WAITITI (Co-Leader\u2014Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori) (14:53)\u003C/span\u003E: T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Mr Speaker. Well, welcome to the amateur hour at the Apollo! This has been an absolute mess of an afternoon for the Government in regard to this particular bill. What a shabby, shabby Government, and do you know why? It\u2019s because you don\u2019t stand by this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is just amateur. This is just an amateur move by this Government, and it wasn\u2019t even a New Zealand First bill; it was your own bill, National. It was your own bill. This is the last-ditch effort for this Government. This is the last-ditch effort. This is your Armageddon\u2014this is your Armageddon\u2014before the election. You\u2019ve only got two days left, and these last three bills are your Armageddon moment. This is your Armageddon moment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis debate is not merely about semantics or a change of words for clarity\u2019s sake. The real debate here is Te Tiriti versus the Treaty, and you\u2019ve got Te Tiriti and the Treaty\u2014two very different versions. You\u2019re creating more unclarity\u2014you\u2019re creating more unclarity in regard to this particular bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Crown cannot sign an agreement with our t\u012Bpuna and then appoint itself sole editor, and there is a fundamental rule of interpretation called contra proferentem\u2014read it. It means that, where the words of an agreement aren\u2019t clear, they are interpreted against the party that drafted them. The Crown drafted this agreement, the Crown chose the translator, the Crown presented Te Tiriti to our t\u012Bpuna, and more than 500 rangatira signed the M\u0101ori text; not the English version that the Crown later relied upon to claim sovereignty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EArticle 1 consented to the Crown te k\u0101wanatanga over their own citizens. M\u0101ori did not cede sovereignty, their mana, or consent to the Crown\u2014te k\u0101wana over M\u0101ori. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022397fcefca21134508354617449e75e19\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m sorry. I don\u2019t mean to interrupt the member, but you\u2019ve got a commentator behind you who is making it difficult to follow your text, and I would ask her to show some respect, because that\u2019s not showing any at the present time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fda841e3fe53d26f56da5fda2501b1a4\u0022\u003ERAWIRI WAITITI\u003C/span\u003E: As an ex - rugby player, I quite like cheerleaders, Mr Speaker. Article 2 was the protection of the pre-existing rights of M\u0101ori to be undisturbed of our full and exclusive rights to our whenua, to our k\u0101inga, and to our taonga. Article 3 was the promise of the Crown to afford M\u0101ori with the equal benefits and protections that the British settlers had. Therefore, the expectation of the Crown\u2019s responsibility to Te Tiriti is to give effect to Te Tiriti. They are not decorative words. They are not accidental. They tell us who carries the obligation: the Crown.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have one very simple question for the Minister when he watches this later on: if these words make no difference, why are you removing them? If they carry no legal weight, why has the Government gone through legislation across Aotearoa, hunting down these particular words and deleting them?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe words are the Crown\u2019s responsibility to give effect to, and they tell us what the Crown must do\u2014not merely recognise Te Tiriti, not politely respect Te Tiriti, not roll Te Tiriti out once a year for performance at Waitangi, but give effect to it, turn promise into practice, turn obligation into action, turn Te Tiriti from words on paper to justice in the lives of our people. Yet this bill replaces the Crown\u2019s responsibility to give effect to Te Tiriti with the weaker words \u201Crecognise and respect the principles\u201D and \u201Ctake into account\u201D, and the Government tells us that this is just standardisation. Nothing to see here\u2014no substantive change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EKa pai, Minister, then answer the question: why must those words go? Why does Crown responsibility frighten this Government? Why does \u201Cgive effect to\u201D offend you? Our people know the difference between somebody saying, \u201CI recognise you\u201D and somebody saying, \u201CI am responsible to you.\u201D We know the difference between the Crown that says \u201CI respect your rights\u201D and a Crown legally required to act on them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ERecognition without responsibility is rhetoric, respect without action is performance, and M\u0101ori have had 186 years of Crown performance. We have heard the acknowledgment, we have received the apologies, and we have listened to Prime Ministers stand at Waitangi and speak about partnership, but M\u0101ori have never suffered from the shortage of Crown words. We have suffered from the shortage of Crown courage, a shortage of Crown accountability, and a shortage of Governments willing to honour the agreement their predecessors signed. Do what\u2019s right\u2014do what\u2019s right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis Government has failed Aotearoa and its relationship with M\u0101ori. You should be ashamed of yourselves, and it will be bye-bye next week.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022676e292b2d87583b54da172f087a53ba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022676e292b2d87583b54da172f087a53ba\u0022\u003ETOM RUTHERFORD (National\u2014Bay of Plenty) (14:58)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. We are doing what is right, and I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u00229f999fe15b96e47b13ec6cab43398fbd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229f999fe15b96e47b13ec6cab43398fbd\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (14:58)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. We are having a debate about interpreting something that clearly in this House has different, really important types of interpretation. There are members on that side who have got EarPods in and headphones on who are not listening to the debate as it unfolds, and I think they should listen, because this is a really important conversation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002233a34f769dbbcac0aa10e2f5dcc1c451\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, one of the things that the\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b50d6c08b24fff3691af1ff4baa36b1\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EIt\u2019ll be the translation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca20fd3eb5afc8501313db796dce5894\u0022\u003ETamatha Paul\u003C/span\u003E: No, it\u2019s an EarPod, not an earpiece.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8293bc3ce4eb1964cebcaa45f064ade\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Excuse me\u2014hang on. Whoa, whoa, calm\u2014and over here, too. One of the things the Speaker cannot do is force members to listen to other members. It\u2019s a sad thing, but I can\u2019t make people do it, any more than I can make people turn up to be here for all of the sessions or the debates of the Parliament. I tell you what, we\u2019d have no problem if the whole place gets cleared out and that would make the whole urgency motion go very quickly, and so do not interrupt when I\u2019m speaking. Thank you for raising a point of order that\u2019s concerning you; it\u2019s not one that I can be concerned with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u0022a20ea4b8a98df271910f6f1dd85e73e9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a20ea4b8a98df271910f6f1dd85e73e9\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (15:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. This is a bill about the words that Parliament sees fit to enact the Treaty obligations that exist and are described by legislation in specific words in statute. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary Simon Court, in his contribution earlier, saw fit to quote the Attorney-General\u2019s speech about the limitations of the words within legislation in relation to the Resource Management Act reform. That\u2019s right. It follows a long tradition of Attorneys-General limiting the approach of judges to what is described specifically in legislation; but any follower of New Zealand political history will know that goes alongside a long tradition of Attorneys-General asserting the constitutional position of Te Tiriti o Waitangi over and above the words in legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat tradition arguably began on the 24 August 1997 with Attorney-General Doug Graham. He was a National Attorney-General and he said, \u201CWe in New Zealand of course have the Treaty of Waitangi as our founding document.\u201D And he continued, \u201CThe Treaty and its principles are there to guide both M\u0101ori and the Crown in their dealings with one another.\u201D He described those principles as requiring \u201Cthe utmost good faith\u201D, and then he went on to compare the Treaty of Waitangi to the Magna Carta to which M\u0101ori and the Crown would continue to refer in governing their future relationship. It is with that spirit that these Treaty principles were inserted into legislation in the decades following. It is important to note here that, in the context of a legislative reform in the two decades after Doug Graham made those comments, these provisions have been inserted to protect not only the rights of M\u0101ori but also the rights of other New Zealanders in legislation to honour and protect what is due to them as those things like taonga tuku iho that have been passed on to them by their ancestors.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMargaret Wilson on 18 March 2004 affirmed that in a way which is exactly relevant to what we are doing today, to deciding on the scope of the words that are included in legislation. She said, \u201CThe Court of Appeal has accorded the Treaty constitutional status as a founding document.\u201D She went on to explain that \u201CThe Treaty provided the legitimacy for the Crown to assert sovereignty and the governance of New Zealand.\u201D While that also protected M\u0101ori rights, her conclusion was that \u201CThese matters are fundamentally constitutional.\u201D When you think about what this standardisation bill is trying to do, it is trying to limit the scope of where Treaty principles are read into law; but the points being made by these Attorneys-General is that they merely described the constitutional framework that already exists with or without those provisions. The description of the way that they are meant to be applied is meant to assist the court in its interpretation, not to limit it. The Attorney-General at that time says, \u201CWhatever the nature and wording of these \u2018Treaty clauses\u2019, their purpose is to ensure the interests of M\u0101ori are not overlooked in decisions that affect them.\u201D That was the commitment given in the Treaty of Waitangi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMarch 2004 was a time when the Attorney-General and her Prime Minister, who were Labour members, were under considerable pressure by the public to read down Treaty clauses. That was a party in Government that had decided to take a political win by limiting the scope of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. We are now faced with a National Party doing that. It was a mistake when Labour did it, and it is a deep mistake when National does it now. It is a blight on our history that we have ended up with a shameful record of Governments that have taken a punch at people who cannot punch back, just for the sake of drumming up those votes of people who do not understand and do not comprehend a rich history of decades of development not only in the courts but in this Parliament by Attorneys-General\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220838e5f9bac748d2a59aea595e5226a0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224312cb1dc5daa08d7920e71817c45a56\u0022\u003ESimon Court\u003C/span\u003E: We do. That\u2019s why we\u2019re limiting it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a9face0471ec2be5b991246fb8605e5c\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014which that member likes to quote\u2014from both major parties, because there is a constitutional question which lies behind this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMoana Jackson\u2019s formulation was this: \u201CThe Treaty set a blueprint for a constitutional relationship [for all New Zealanders].\u201D That matters now because National has shown that they are not above changing our constitutional machinery for public and political gain, and that the major parties now, because of National\u2019s decisions, cannot be relied upon to protect one side of the Treaty partnership, and that is M\u0101ori rights and interests. Gone are the days where we could have a national conversation about moving towards a republican model of governance, because it has always been the Crown\u2019s responsibility under the Treaty that sat above the two major political parties which will take a swipe at M\u0101ori interests under our constitutional framework.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis puts us back as New Zealanders. We should be able to rely on the people who sit around the Cabinet table to protect our rights and interests; but it goes back to 1962, when it was Queen Elizabeth II who stood up for the Treaty when she said, \u201CThe obligations entered into at Waitangi go far deeper than any legal provision in any formal document.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022 data-id=\u002239d9e13f6a05444f2f3610400757d1e1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002239d9e13f6a05444f2f3610400757d1e1\u0022\u003ERIMA NAKHLE (National\u2014Takanini) (15:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. This bill fulfils a coalition agreement between New Zealand First and the National Party. National commends it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022 data-id=\u00228ebbc2d19432b1fb25932ebef9f80593\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228ebbc2d19432b1fb25932ebef9f80593\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON (Labour) (15:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I ran into Chris Finlayson two days ago, and he was just talking about these bills and was embarrassed\u2014embarrassed in terms of what he can see. He told me that he got in touch with Doug Graham. Doug Graham\u2019s embarrassed by this whole scenario.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220838e5f9bac748d2a59aea595e5226a0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221731ce2a134ce04ec2ce69ae62a7cf7d\u0022\u003ESimon Court\u003C/span\u003E: He said there was going to be a civil war.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e15f20ee80865b915e880386dc5de88\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right, so listen to that. Maybe you should listen to that. Maybe, when you\u2019ve got the most learned people like Doug Graham saying that type of thing, we might have some of these idiots, Mr Speaker, in Parliament and Government\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022235162dfa0953025cd106f37102712d6\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Wait a minute. Think how you just said that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a18b26f90fcf5682f3f7e6362467f86e\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Can\u2019t say that? OK, I\u2019ll withdraw that then.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298d468d0a8a086e5344fa660d5c70aa0\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, no, wait on. Think how you said it. You said, \u201Cidiots like Mr Speaker\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d648dcd7b39a25ec8e328ad03b481083\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, my apologies, Mr Speaker. I meant idiots on the other side. My apologies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022660c4c1a993c5ed635d94a798d7a15a1\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m glad we got that clarified.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002237d583e5dc8f1ad469b6ca5d520cf889\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f3f36131f8f5f9b591cb144387f7991\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m very pleased we got that clarified.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222ffb089e04ac85eb9d46f6209e7bc858\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Anyway, just coming back to the point. Doug Graham, Chris Finlayson, these are stalwarts, these are legends of the National Party, embarrassed by what this nonsense is\u2014people like this talking about race-baiting stuff. This is not just Rawiri Waititi and Willie Jackson and Arena Williams saying this; these are legends from the National Party. In fact, they feel like it\u2019s driving the Treaty out of legislation. Here\u2019s the thing: how dare this Government do this at this late stage. They\u2019re doing this at a time when people are not watching Parliament. Shame on this Government\u2014shame on this Government. How dare they bypass a due process to attack the Treaty in such a cowardly way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220838e5f9bac748d2a59aea595e5226a0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a4e81a1c132b341ac43928063a7483f\u0022\u003ESimon Court\u003C/span\u003E: Think they turned it off three minutes and 30 seconds ago.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229fcac00fc0f963badbeda9001fd03ca\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: The reality is this: the ACT Party doesn\u2019t understand the Treaty. They don\u2019t understand the Treaty. They\u2019re trying to change the Treaty, and they\u2019re trying to change it now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of this standardisation bill, constitutional change needs justification, consultation, and care, not ramming this sort of stuff through by stealth. Treaty clauses were deliberately drafted differently because different statutes govern different relationships, institutions, and circumstances. Uniform language is not automatically better law. The context matters. Parliament inserted individual Treaty provisions for particular reasons. Rewriting them through an omnibus exercise risks divorcing those provisions from their legislative history and purpose.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe truth is that the Government is undertaking a constitutional reform without M\u0101ori consultation. Changes to the statutory expression of the M\u0101ori-Crown relationship should involve genuine engagement with M\u0101ori, not simply consultation after Cabinet has decided its framework. This lot on the other side know that the Waitangi Tribunal has already criticised the wider review process and they found aspects of the Government\u2019s February decisions breached principles, including partnership and protection and good governance\u2014the very same Waitangi Tribunal that David Seymour wants to dismantle.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s no need to rush this through before the election. Legislation touching Te Tiriti deserves normal parliamentary scrutiny rather than being introduced during Parliament\u2019s final week. Our people out there are saying\u2014and I\u2019m not talking about you\u2014that this is a cowardly and shameful strategy from a Government, where the Minister can\u2019t even turn up to talk about it. Standardisation sounds administratively neutral, but Treaty clauses aren\u2019t punctuation marks; their wording reflects substantive relationships developed over decades.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThese three bills need to be considered together. Standardisation is occurring alongside outright repeals and the reduction of stronger Treaty obligations to take into account. Parliament should examine each affected Act individually, asking why its Treaty wording exists before deciding that it needs alteration. Legal certainty isn\u2019t achieved by merely making everything sound alike. That\u2019s what they\u2019ll have us believe. It certainly also comes from established case law and decades of interpretation of existing provisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETreaty legislation should be developed with M\u0101ori rather than imposed upon M\u0101ori. The standardisation bill is just another attack on M\u0101ori rights. M\u0101ori are tired of it. This has been the most anti-M\u0101ori Government that I have seen in my lifetime, and we have the nonsense coming from ACT to confirm that. The standardisation bill cannot honestly be separated politically from the Government\u2019s wider Treaty programme. Seven provisions are being repealed while stronger obligations elsewhere are being reduced. This whole thing is an absolute disgrace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u00229de66decb7715e1e00091effba8e3b7a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229de66decb7715e1e00091effba8e3b7a\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (15:10)\u003C/span\u003E: All New Zealanders will have the opportunity to comment on this in the select committee. I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Standardisation) Amendment Bill be now read a first time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 41\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 25; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a first time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225220a47f930731d093632bee9fc9420f\u0022\u003EReferral to Select Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002272c08e60325022e175fc5b37a00bea6c\u0022\u003ESPEAKER (15:12): \u003C/span\u003EThe question is, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Standardisation) Amendment Bill be considered by the Justice Committee\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008079\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 41\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 25; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 11; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill referred to Justice Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00228745dbee7d713d8921438bffafe24d1e\u0022\u003EReferences to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Strength of Legislative Obligations) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002224a6f4466c1cf9f2a92c2e01e21975f1\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u00226bf8af99628014ca60d656f445d43d15\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226bf8af99628014ca60d656f445d43d15\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Minister of Customs) (15:13)\u003C/span\u003E: on behalf of the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Justice\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Strength of Legislative Obligations) Amendment Bill be now read a first time\u003C/span\u003E. I nominate the Justice Committee to consider the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002268e175d68cf427bc99fdf5f2a950871a\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Do you have a legislative statement to present?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c2b98cdcba854c8bba5dfa8a603ba07c\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: No, Mr Speaker. I\u2019m pleased to introduce the References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Strength of Legislative Obligations) Amendment Bill to the House today. This bill will improve consistency and certainty\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd7fb488943ba89a40ca8d8433b1f2f5\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m sorry. You can move the bill, but you are obliged to present to the House a legislative statement on the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3385139d93b667503cd98479baa4c17\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EShe\u2019s not obliged to do it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022998f834b21f8956abf43355de0ee77b5\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Not obliged to do it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221f34ca3a4650f2e49fddf8e14a20d5cd\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: No, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e8af4bc144ba88ed2f712d6d6eceb57\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: OK, well, I just was trying to avoid a massive number of points of order, but I\u2019m pleased we\u2019ve got that clarified. The member will continue with her speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ae34e7d599ee1871197db564163205ea\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m pleased to introduce the References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Strength of Legislative Obligations) Amendment Bill to the House today. This bill will improve consistency and certainty about how certain operative Treaty provisions apply in legislation. The bill gives effect to the Government\u2019s review of references to the principles in legislation over time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOver time, Parliament has used different formulations for operative Treaty provisions. In some cases, those differences can make it unclear whether a different legal effect was intended. The bill amends four operative Treaty provisions across four Acts to provide a consistent level of direction. Existing provisions use different standards including \u201Cuphold\u201D and \u201Chonour\u201D, which the Government considers do not always promote the balanced consideration of all relevant factors in decision making. The bill therefore amends those provisions so that the relevant decision-makers must take into account the Treaty principles. This is intended to support clearer and more consistent statutory decision-making, while still requiring decision makers to consider Treaty principles where they are relevant to the statutory decision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Government\u2019s view is that this bill strikes the right balance, recognising that the Treaty interests may be relevant in particular contexts while improving certainty about what the affected provisions require in practice. The select committee process will provide an opportunity for everyone to test the detail of these proposals and for the committee to hear a range of views. I expect the committee will carefully consider both the submissions it receives and the detail of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill is about improving the clarity, consistency, and workability of operative Treaty provisions in legislation. A clear statute book helps people understand what the law requires and supports more consistent decision-making across Government. As I\u2019ve said before, this bill is about delivering on the core New Zealand First - National coalition agreement, in which it was agreed to conduct a comprehensive review of all legislation. This bill codifies operative provisions across four public service Acts. New Zealand First supports the bill as a step forward in replacing open-ended obligations with workable standards that provide clear, objective legal direction.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs we\u2019ve referred to many great leaders in this House, we would also like to honour Sir Apirana Ngata and Dame Whina Cooper. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] When we use these names, we are greeted with derision, when, actually, they deserve a lot more respect than that. We respect the Treaty as the foundation that formed one united nation\u2014not a tool for ongoing division. We need better as Government, and New Zealand needs better for its people. We have heard repeatedly in this House this afternoon the challenges around what is actually being delivered, the outcomes that we are achieving, and that we need to do better. Doing better requires us to look at all the levers that we have as a Government to ensure we achieve those better outcomes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDelivering for those with the greatest need is not about protecting guilt politics. That just drives us into stagnation. We need to drive prosperity, free up potential, and encourage accountability and personal responsibility. We can and will do better, and this piece of legislation will achieve us moving forward together. We commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022a3ae23b8951b00d42b49285260631cc4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a3ae23b8951b00d42b49285260631cc4\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (15:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. There\u2019s a certain amount of irony in what that previous speaker, the Hon Casey Costello, said in terms of not wanting to use the Treaty or te Tiriti as a tool of division, because this is exactly what this Government is doing with these bills. No one wanted these apart from this Government. There was no call. No one\u2019s walking down the street saying, \u201CI\u2019m so annoyed I don\u2019t have clarity between 20 different statutes on what the Treaty provisions are.\u201D This is not something that anyone is saying. In fact, they\u2019re saying the opposite.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYour very officials\u2014this Government\u2019s officials in the Ministry of Justice\u2014are saying that this will do harm and this will cause division. That is the official advice. These bills cause division and damage the M\u0101ori-Crown relationship. This Government\u2019s choices are damaging the M\u0101ori-Crown relationship. The Treaty / te Tiriti is being used to cause division, and this Government is doing so knowingly\u2014because it is in the advice. The irony is astounding.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, this is my last is my last call on these three bills, and they\u2019re not long\u2014only five minutes\u2014so I want to take the opportunity to acknowledge Ng\u0101ti Kahungunu, who came to Parliament and brought a petition of 50,000 New Zealanders opposed to what this Government is doing here. This is not something that those people who took the time to come to Parliament wanted. Can I commend them for coming here and having their voice heard, and can I also commend the Waitangi Tribunal, who spent hours and hours and hours putting together detailed analysis as to why not only should the Government not go through with this legislation but the fact that this legislation goes directly against Te Tiriti and should be the opposite of what the Government\u2019s doing; and a plea for the engagement of te ao M\u0101ori, which has been ignored by this Government. Shame on the Government. Te ao M\u0101ori has come to this House peacefully, respectfully, and to the Waitangi Tribunal, and has done nothing but provide reasons in a very, very measured way\u2014an admirably measured way\u2014as to why this shouldn\u2019t have proceed. It is shameful that their articulate calls for constraint have been ignored. Silence is deafening.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThese bills weaken Treaty provisions, and we\u2019ve heard from several speakers that this is because we want consistency. Well, here\u2019s an idea: why not have consistently better provisions, or consistently higher regard to Te Tiriti? There is no need for the Government, if their objective was consistency, to look to ride down the provisions of Te Tiriti, and that is exactly what they\u2019ve done. There is no one in their right mind\u2014and this is from the bill we\u2019re considering now\u2014who can look at the amendments to the Education and Training Act 2020, which currently states \u201Chonours Te Tiriti o Waitangi\u201D and will be changed by this bill to \u201Ctakes into account Te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi.\u201D\u2014that is a shameful weakening of the provisions, and it has not gone without notice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi is a document of immense constitutional importance and also of immense mana. Bringing bills like this to the House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003Estamps on the mana of the Treaty, and it is very, very confusing as to what the exact objection to this is. What are they scared of? What is the Government scared of?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to briefly touch on the recommendations of the Waitangi Tribunal, and I may not have time to go through all of them. The Waitangi Tribunal has recommended that the Crown immediately pause these reforms. The Waitangi Tribunal has recommended that the Crown do not progress any of the proposed amendments; the Waitangi Tribunal has recommended that they do not repeal any Treaty provisions; and the Waitangi Tribunal has recommended that, if the Crown disregards what they suggest and goes ahead with it, it has a full select committee process. Well, we\u2019re here in the dying days of this Government, and it will be referred to a select committee that will no longer exist. Not only have they ignored all of the recommendations of the Waitangi Tribunal, but they have also ignored the call for a substantive select committee process, which will, by its nature, be a lot shorter as a result of the timing of these horrendous bills that weaken Te Tiriti o Waitangi in this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u0022763d71ed78ba72d798fce059a3adb99c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022763d71ed78ba72d798fce059a3adb99c\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (15:23)\u003C/span\u003E: Kia ora, Mr Speaker. When we give an oath on becoming New Zealand members of Parliament, we may swear on a document of significance to us. Many of my Green colleagues and myself swore on this facsimile of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, which is part of the Parliamentary Library collection. I advise every member to have a look at it. It\u2019s a magnificent volume, because it has foldout copies of all of the handwritten duplicates of Te Tiriti that were taken around the country from 6\u00A0February for the eight months that Hobson and others carried them. It includes each in te reo and each of the signatures of the 540 rangatira who signed them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBy good fortune this was facsimiled and published in 1877, which means the copy of the 6\u00A0February Treaty of Waitangi contained in it is not the one that was left to moulder in a Wellington basement and be gnawed by rats at the beginning of the 20\u003Csup\u003Eth\u003C/sup\u003E century. It is the intact version of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, not that familiar ragged-edge document that we know now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen Hobson\u2014and his accounts are in this\u2014took the Treaty around, he used that word \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHe meant that the unity is achieved by upholding the sovereignty of M\u0101ori, not by denying that sovereignty and not by diminishing it. Te Tiriti is about power with, not power over, and that is the difference in the interpretation that this Government takes. The reason that they are scared of Te Tiriti and seek to diminish it and weaken it is because they know in its truest sense that, in any legal and constitutional basis, it means \u201Cpower with\u201D, not \u201Cpower over\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis Government has a desiccated view of society. It has an emaciated view of nationhood. For its whole term, it has gnawed at the foundation of our cohesion and our unity, like rats in a basement. Their epitaph will be\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003E[Authorised reo M\u0101ori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is no version of us thriving as a nation that is not based on the immemorial human truth of mutual respect. These bills are a dirty dogwhistle to spiteful political instincts. They, sadly, view humanity in a way that is designed to divide, not to bring together and not to unify. There\u2019s an interesting side conversation going on there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fbc381d34125b8c5e53e9140d381289a\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Those conversations stop. We\u2019ll extend Mr Abel by a minute if he wishes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002266cd8bc6dedc75c24cca8c3a9b858dc5\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I\u2019d appreciate that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd2b7abcf65d72bc3c83bd2b805562a6\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Because he\u2019s got content, and it deserves to be heard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249d1c56aa84c1a5203f90370ac4dd592\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. These extinguishments and diminishments of the Treaty\u2014no good can come from them, for us as a society or for us as a nation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs the world sadly lurches towards more divisive politics, our New Zealand holds together by the extent of our commitment to one another. I believe the nastiness embodied in these bills will fail, because Te Tiriti unity is an irresistible proposition. It affirms that immemorial truth that first in mutual respect\u2014and, through that, to mutual benefit\u2014we find the pathway to our nation\u2019s thriving, bound by our dedication to one another in genuine respect. That respect is expressed by honouring the Treaty in its deepest intent and meaning; by giving effect to Te Tiriti in all our laws and actions. We will and already have committed that we will repeal these pieces of legislation\u2014all three of them\u2014and we will strengthen the clauses in law to at least \u201Cgive effect\u201D to Te Tiriti o Waitangi. That means tino rangatiratanga and nothing less.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI believe that the people of New Zealand\u2014and as was expressed by the 70,000 strong who appeared at this Parliament at the first iteration that the ACT Party member spoke about, the Treaty principles bill. Well, this is sadly a lesser attempt at the Treaty principles bill 2.0, and I believe the people of New Zealand will express their views on the extent to which this sort of anti-Treaty, anti-M\u0101ori legislation has divided us as a nation over this term\u2014it has sadly characterised this Government\u2014and they will issue a move-on order to this Government for the good of our nation on 7 November. Thank you, Mr Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220838e5f9bac748d2a59aea595e5226a0\u0022 data-id=\u00222161ddc38bf8b59a01b64bf976561895\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220838e5f9bac748d2a59aea595e5226a0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222161ddc38bf8b59a01b64bf976561895\u0022\u003ESIMON COURT (ACT) (15:29)\u003C/span\u003E: ACT believes New Zealand should be a modern, multiethnic, liberal democracy where every citizen has the potential to live their best lives and has the same political rights and standing before the law. \u201COne law for all, one future together\u201D\u2014that is the principle ACT brings to debates about the Treaty, the constitution, and the relationship between New Zealanders and the State. The member Rawiri Waititi made the point that I had already made that point this afternoon in the House. Mr Waititi, if you didn\u2019t realise, ACT has been consistent on these matters for decades, so I\u2019m glad you\u2019re catching up now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EACT has consistently fought for equal rights for New Zealanders regardless of race, ancestry, what year their grandparents arrived here, whether it was by sailing waka, steamship, or aeroplane\u2014even when that has meant standing alone on the forecourt in front of the so-called 70,000 to hear them, or alone in Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EACT is happy to support these bills because they provide greater clarity and consistency around Treaty-related provisions in legislation. The strength of legislative obligations bill replaces differing standards such as \u201Chonour\u201D or \u201Cuphold\u201D and makes sure we are acting consistently as a Government, as the Crown, when it comes to delivering on our obligations to M\u0101ori. It is far more sensible, and far more practical, to adopt a standard drafting terminology when it comes to making sure the Crown\u2019s obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi are established in law. That will make it much easier for judges to interpret the law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I want to acknowledge the member Steve Abel\u2019s graciously pointing out that ACT\u2019s Treaty principles bill would have gone further. It was a better solution, and we do not walk away from the principle behind it. We will continue to be the consistent voice for equal rights. These bills are more limited than what ACT has proposed, but they are good steps towards clearer and more consistent legislation. We\u2019re happy to support them\u2014while we will always make the case \u201Cone law for all, one future together\u201D. Thank you, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022297bc572c27f45308dffb067ca3e7915\u0022 data-id=\u002259ef2650be24a3c14cb51953bdbac79c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022297bc572c27f45308dffb067ca3e7915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002259ef2650be24a3c14cb51953bdbac79c\u0022\u003EDr HAMISH CAMPBELL (National\u2014Ilam) (15:32)\u003C/span\u003E: The objective of this bill is to ensure consistency in the strength of the direction in the operative Treaty provisions. Therefore, I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022 data-id=\u00225403df06d325baa6a443de658b56d17c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225403df06d325baa6a443de658b56d17c\u0022\u003ERAWIRI WAITITI (Co-Leader\u2014Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori) (15:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just want to take a moment to speak to our people watching today. This is what we can expect if these guys get another term in Government\u2014a constant attack, not just on Te Tiriti o Waitangi, not just on te iwi M\u0101ori, but also on tangata Tiriti, who value Te Tiriti of Waitangi, who value its place, who value their place in an Aotearoa that was built for everyone, and it was built for everyone based on Te Tiriti o Waitangi, not these pretend laws that come in and out every three years. I\u2019ll tell you what, just like the Greens, we will repeal these three bills as well. They won\u2019t even get past second reading; I\u2019ll tell you that right now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor 180 years\u2014I just want you to contemplate this; for 180 years\u2014M\u0101ori have explained Te Tiriti to the Crown. There are only three articles\u2014three: k\u0101wanatanga, tino rangatiratanga, and mana taurite. It is not a long document; it is not a written pou. It does not require a doctorate to understand. Yet here we are watching another generation of right-wing politicians scratch their heads and pretend that three simple articles are beyond their intellectual reach, after 180 years\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] Listen\u2014listen, sunset\u2014you might learn something if you just take a moment to listen. After 180 years, there are only two conclusions left for us to draw: either they are too thick to understand Te Tiriti or they understand it perfectly well and are evil enough to deliberately dishonour it. Those are the choices: evil or dumb, intellectual failure or moral corruption. Choose your poison, because ignorance is no longer a credible excuse.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis Government knows that M\u0101ori never ceded sovereignty. It knows that tino rangatiratanga was guaranteed to our people. It knows that the Crown promised to protect our rights, not rewrite them whenever M\u0101ori power becomes inconvenient. They know. This legislation is not the product of confusion; it is the product of calculation. They are manufacturing doubt where none exists. They are dressing confiscation up as equality. They are taking the dishonesty of colonisation and laundering it through Parliament. They want us to believe this is an intellectual debate. It is not. This issue is not whether the Government can understand Te Tiriti; the issue is whether it possesses the moral character to honour it. Either they are thick or they are evil, and frankly, this legislation leaves very little room for doubt about which one it is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u0100perahama Taonui, the prophet from the North, talked about a monster coming, a beast\u2014a beast coming, and his teeth will be of silver and gold and his food will be the consumption of our land. We are in the belly of the beast now, as we watch the beast devour more of our whenua, more of our rights, more of our tino rangatiratanga promised to us in Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Revelation 16: \u201CThen I saw three unclean spirits that looked like frogs. They were coming out of the mouth of the dragon, the mouth of the beast, and the mouth of the false prophet. They are the spirits of demons that perform miracles. Then the spirits bought the kings together in a place called Armageddon.\u201D And here we are, the Armageddon of this particular Government. This will be your last stand; this will be your last day.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy message to our people out there: we need to send the message and ensure that we do not get another Government like this, who has consistently over the last three years tried to eliminate us from the statute book, eliminate us from the law; they have attacked Te Tiriti o Waitangi, have attacked the mana of our w\u0101hine, have attacked the mana of takat\u0101pui wh\u0101nau and our mahi wh\u0101nau. Those are all protected in Te Tiriti o Waitangi\u2014all of those things\u2014e hika m\u0101. We must act. We must turn out on 7 November and make sure that this is a one-term Government. Kia ora t\u0101tou.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022 data-id=\u002276ce4f76f739b991f446277eb9dd919a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002276ce4f76f739b991f446277eb9dd919a\u0022\u003ETOM RUTHERFORD (National\u2014Bay of Plenty) (15:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I rise, in privilege, to commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u0022bd14ea5597a4d41aeb3cc09f8562a8a6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bd14ea5597a4d41aeb3cc09f8562a8a6\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (15:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Ng\u0101 mihi o te Wiki o te Reo M\u0101ori. It is M\u0101ori Language Week. The history of M\u0101ori Language Week dates back to some of these decades that we have been talking about today, about decades of M\u0101ori activists, alongside all New Zealanders, fighting for the recognition and the celebration of not only te reo M\u0101ori but of te ao M\u0101ori itself and of our constitutional place, guaranteed by Te Tiriti o Waitangi in Aotearoa New Zealand. It is a cynical time to be discussing three bills which take a significant step backwards in New Zealand\u2019s history.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe member before me asked Government members whether they were merely ignorant of the political history that has gone alongside that or whether they were deliberately and evilly taking measures to step that back. That is a fair enough question, and it most-deeply unpopular with most New Zealanders. This is about our political history, which has been hard fought for by members of the public, by people we recognise as leaders in Aotearoa\u2019s history, and by members in this House, on both sides of it. A wilful ignorance of New Zealand\u2019s political history ends us in a place where we follow those democracies that we look to around the world, that we would usually compare ourselves to, which are looking less and less like functional democracies and more and more like the kinds of places where people cannot have a say and where ordinary people lose faith in their democratic institutions because they\u2019ve turned away from what ordinary people think and have moved further and further towards the extremes of politics, be that the alt-right\u2014or the alt-left, in some cases.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a mistake, and this brings our politics into a place that we haven\u2019t been in for many, many decades, where we would use small groups of New Zealanders to demonise and to weaponise in our political discourse. This is not mainstream politics in New Zealand, and I hope most New Zealanders will reject it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a debate about the constitutional role of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. The parliamentary undersecretary, moments ago, shouted across the House today that a piece of paper doesn\u2019t have mana. The Treaty does have mana, and I think most New Zealanders believe that. The Crown has mana. The honour of the Crown is what is at stake in this debate. The honour of the Crown depends on whether the Crown can keep the promises that it made in 1840 and beyond that. That has been reflected at many times in our history, in what has been an important bipartisan function of our institutions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Governor-General Sir Michael Hardie Boys put that plainly in Waitangi in 1999. He said that the Treaty was, essentially, about the acceptance of that obligation. M\u0101ori had entrusted their future to the honour of the Crown, and it\u2019s the honour of the Crown which is at issue in this bill: \u201Chonour\u201D is the word which is being taken out. \u201CIt was not an obligation frozen in time\u201D is how Sir Michael Hardie Boys put it. The obligation remains, requiring New Zealanders to honour the Treaty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESir Paul Reeves, another Governor-General, put the idea another way in 1987, when he said, \u201CA critical concept in the Treaty is reckoned to be honour\u201D. The idea here was that M\u0101ori believe that the rectification of injustices depends on the honour of the Crown. That is something that all New Zealanders can get behind; that our history has required us in the 1840s, then in the 1860s, then in the 1890s, then in the 1930s, then in the 1970s to come together in public forum and to have a discussion about the things we had got wrong and the injustices that M\u0101ori had faced and to implement ways forward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere should be, on some sides, some level of forgiveness, but there should also be a sense that the honour of the Crown will always prevail and that the promises made by the Crown to its citizens at the time when it entered into these agreements should always be striven for. That is the standard against which this bill should be judged, and it will be found wanting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis bill deliberately lowers those Treaty obligations in four Acts, and so, when we ask ourselves, \u201CHas the Crown lived up to the honourable conduct it owes its Treaty partner\u201D, the Waitangi Tribunal found that Cabinet proceeded despite clear and repeated advice from officials that there had not been time for any in-depth analysis and that the impacts were not understood, and the regulatory impact statement was not developed enough to support any informed decision, and that M\u0101ori hadn\u2019t been meaningfully consulted or engaged before the substantive decisions had been made. It found, then, that the Crown had a reckless disregard for the likely and advised harm to M\u0101ori-Crown relations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe point here is that this bill isn\u2019t standardisation; this is deliberately taking us backwards, and it is flouting political history that we all should be proud of.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022 data-id=\u002221448f4cbfd2a4c035588e7c5b6a7b38\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002221448f4cbfd2a4c035588e7c5b6a7b38\u0022\u003ERIMA NAKHLE (National\u2014Takanini) (15:42)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Listening to the deplorable name-calling this afternoon in the House, it\u2019s no wonder why bullying is so rife in New Zealand and suicide amongst youth is so rife as well. This is part of the coalition agreement between New Zealand First and the National Party, and National commends this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022 data-id=\u002246a85f0daba35d634b4d1278a24c393e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002246a85f0daba35d634b4d1278a24c393e\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON (Labour) (15:42)\u003C/span\u003E: Oh my goodness, the nonsense we\u2019re hearing in the House. The only thing shameful is your k\u014Drero.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI want to go back to what Arena Williams said: history is really important here, because so many learned, so many honourable judges and politicians have talked about the special M\u0101ori-Crown relationship, but this useless lot in ACT never ever acknowledge it. Mr Seymour knows more, apparently, than Governor-General Hardie Boys.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022678efe52fe2fd5b313b8fb741650e019\u0022\u003ECarl Bates\u003C/span\u003E: How much of your own policy do you actually understand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e968c1334f0a40bfbd05d661e979ba38\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f3a2a3f9522e2c78b5453b061e9a373b\u0022\u003EHon WILLIE JACKSON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, if we look back, Lord Cook talked about a partnership between M\u0101ori and the Crown and P\u0101keh\u0101\u2014Lord Cook, for example. Sian Elias; Governor-General Silvia Cartwright\u2014brilliant, brilliant people. Our best M\u0101ori judges: Judge Joe Williams, Judge Caren Fox, the current Tribunal boss, rangatira, and this useless lot on the other side say they don\u2019t know what they\u2019re talking about. This lot on the other side say, \u201CWhat partnership? What relationship? What are they talking about?\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMr Seymour and this ACT Party, who talks about an equal role for everyone, wants to kill M\u0101ori rights\u2014don\u2019t shake your head\u2014wants to kill Treaty rights, Treaty rights that have been agreed to by the greatest judges in this land. Oh, shake your head, you better do some reading\u2014agreed to by people like John Key, by people like Doug Graham, Chris Finlayson, all the way through, Helen Clark, Jacinda, Andrew Little, our current leader Chris Hipkins, National Party leaders, great MPs. That\u2019s why Chris Finlayson and Doug Graham are embarrassed by this useless, rotten Government, who are going to go out on 7 November\u2014that is the hope. We can\u2019t put up with this continual attack on M\u0101ori rights and on Treaty rights.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of this bill, \u201Cgive effect to\u201D and \u201Ctaken into account\u201D do not mean the same thing. \u201CGive effect to\u201D requires decision makers to actually implement or achieve the relevant obligation; \u201Ctake into account\u201D allows it to be considered alongside competing considerations. That means M\u0101ori lose an existing statutory protection. Parliament previously chose wording in particular Acts for a reason; the Government is now deliberately lowering the protection. Uniformity is not a justification for weakening rights for M\u0101ori.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou hear Minister Goldsmith, \u201COh, we\u2019re just like Winston Peters, we just want to have some consistency\u201D\u2014consistency is not about weakening M\u0101ori rights. That\u2019s not what consistency is about. Consistency is not about attacking M\u0101ori rights, attacking M\u0101ori communities. Seventy thousand to 100,000 people marched on this Parliament while the cowardly ACT Party stood in the corner\u2014David Seymour waved like an idiot like this\u2014because our people are fuming, because our people are angry. Seventy thousand Ng\u0101ti Kahungunu came down here on their horses, led by Bayden Barber\u2014brilliant. Our people are rising up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf consistency was genuinely the objective, the Government could standardise provisions upwards rather than select the weakest standard. Different laws require different Treaty obligations: environmental management, conservation, health, and other areas involve different Crown responsibilities. There\u2019s no principled reason why they must all have the same, identical legal weighting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EShame on this Government. They\u2019re all looking at their books because they know this is an embarrassing time. I\u2019m embarrassed to even be speaking on this, but I want to finish this k\u014Drero in a positive light. Tangi\u2019s all over me, and I intended to tell him my 92-year-old P\u0101keh\u0101 auntie the other day, and she\u2019s been with M\u0101ori all her life\u2014two M\u0101ori husbands, wonderful, my auntie Peggy Nepia, a great example of the Treaty in partnership. Great example\u201492 years old, always following politics, always giving us advice. Even liked you, too, Mr Speaker; in the past had a soft spot for the odd National Party person, but no time for this useless, filthy, rotten Government, who are going to be gone on 7 November. Kia ora t\u0101tou.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002246c37636db20fbeeb9a56f99fe02671e\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Before I call Carl Bates, I just want to indicate to the Hon Willie Jackson that I will overlook his suggestion that I\u2019m somehow an odd National Party person.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u002237f0badbaeb972f5bfb45a637004b2bb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002237f0badbaeb972f5bfb45a637004b2bb\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (15:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Willie Jackson forgets a lot of Labour Party policy, including the fact that it was the Labour Party that passed the foreshore and seabed law. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Strength of Legislative Obligations) Amendment Bill be now read a first time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 37\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a first time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022625fcc763c940346b9cd0939a32f23a0\u0022\u003EReferral to Select Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254725209762e31349bb726631cc4bddb\u0022\u003ESPEAKER (15:49): \u003C/span\u003EThe question is, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the References to Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi (Strength of Legislative Obligations) Amendment Bill be considered by the Justice Committee\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill referred to the Justice Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c024587857697fc3a70557e9f4755c93\u0022\u003EPolicing Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ccef0c9771ba719c2893118a8689212c\u0022\u003ELegislative Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022dfb4a53ad59ccf07630e69c9889ff203\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dfb4a53ad59ccf07630e69c9889ff203\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (15:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I present a Legislative Statement on the Policing Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fffc240fe4c7c4cc281be877388730df\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That legislative statement can be found on the parliamentary website.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cb0d97266abc644aa3d11328512c3b75\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00225f90a17313bcf502cbec06794134c748\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225f90a17313bcf502cbec06794134c748\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (15:50)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Policing Amendment Bill be now read a second time\u003C/span\u003E. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Government has committed to restore law and order as a priority by supporting Police to carry out its lawful duties, maintain public safety, and enable effective policing and enforcement. This bill provides clarity and consistency for front-line police, with the tools needed to effectively manage public safety, risks, and harms.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 of the bill confirms Police\u2019s ability to record images and sounds in public places and in private places where police are lawfully present and to collect personal information for lawful purposes, including intelligence. Part 2 of the bill expands Police\u2019s temporary road closure powers currently provided for in the Policing Act to include a broader range of accessible areas that may be subject to closure and enforcement powers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI thank the Justice Committee for their consideration of the bill and their proposed amendments to it. I support these changes. The changes to the bill include new clause 4A, which introduces a post-implementation independent review of the amendments as a safeguard that was not included in the bill at introduction. This will provide an opportunity to assess whether the information-gathering authorities that are clarified in the bill remain appropriate, proportionate, and effective.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA revived section 54E in Part 1 of the bill expressly provides that personal information collection authorised by sections 45A to 45D remains subject to information privacy principles 1 to 4 of the Privacy Act 2020. The revision of the bill clarifies that the statutory authorities in the bill do not displace fundamental collection safeguards under privacy legislation, and it is included purely for the avoidance of doubt.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThese arrangements include revised provisions that allow more time for implementation, including Police operational systems, guidance, and capability to be further developed before commencement. This extends to the commencement time for Part 1 provisions in the bill from one month to six months following Royal assent of the bill. Police may continue to take images and record sounds in police stations and premises, and Part 1 of the bill does not displace Search and Surveillance Act obligations for device use.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn particular, I thank the committee for proposing a future statutory review of the Part\u00A01 provisions of this bill as a new clause. This review will be commenced under the Minister of Police\u2019s stewardship and will present independent findings of the Part\u00A01 reforms back to Parliament. Such an independent review would provide for more robust and evidence-based consideration of the impact of the bill over and above the submissions and advice that has been considered by select committee to date.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI look forward also to my ministerial colleague the Hon Paul Goldsmith presenting legislation to this House shortly to establish an independent Inspector-General of Police to assist, in part, with better independent consideration of Police\u2019s information management practices and data and privacy protections.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s time for us to back Police. We need to accept a timely change to policing law. These changes are necessary and important, particularly as we face the complex law enforcement challenges that are confronting New Zealand as technologies advance. We need to protect people\u2019s privacy rights, and the safeguards introduced in this bill are important, but to take no action would be to the detriment of effective law enforcement and public safety. If we took no action, there could well be insufficient information and evidence available to Police to charge many criminal offenders or to effectively disrupt or prevent some serious crime in the future. This Government wants a different future so that Parliament\u2019s intention is clear and, when the courts interpret these rights and legal obligations, there is balance and clarity for New Zealand and New Zealanders rather than further legal uncertainty or confusion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI note that there have been no material changes made to Part 2 of the bill since introduction. However, I also advise the House that some minor technical changes to Part\u00A02 of the bill will be proposed in the committee of the whole House. These further amendments will make sure the bill will keep all existing temporary closure grounds from the Antisocial Road User Legislation Amendment Act 2026 and allow Police to bring the area closure powers into force on a single date. I acknowledge that the committee was unable to recommend either amendment in their report as the Antisocial Road User Legislation Amendment Act 2026 was not in law, but with the enactment of this transport law, the Government may now adjust the Policing Amendment Bill for consistency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn closing, I state that the latest version of the Policing Amendment Bill retains the central policy objective of restoring certainty regarding Police information collection and strengthening temporary closure powers. Importantly, it also introduces a number of significant modifications, including an independent statutory review mechanism, clarification of privacy protections for the avoidance of doubt, additional clarification of constraints on information collection by Police employees, and extended commencement arrangements. Collectively, these changes have helped to improve the balance of the bill, clarify the intent and proportionality of the provisions of the bill, and better support practical implementation while preserving the bill\u2019s original objective of supporting effective policing and public safety.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI again thank the committee for their work on this bill. The bill is yet another example of this Government\u2019s strong focus on restoring law and order in New Zealand. The bill is a reminder that this Government\u2019s focus is on detecting and reducing crime, maintaining public safety, and enabling effective policing. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002220f5b2499a9bb921880066897e001fe2\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just before I take the next call, I will just point out that the legislative statement presented by the Minister is published under the authority of the House. The question is that the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022735d3e1467972335c7a8a16450ab56d1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022735d3e1467972335c7a8a16450ab56d1\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (15:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This is a bill which in a form we could support, but in its current form we simply can\u2019t. The reason for that is that it, essentially, gives the Police sweeping search and surveillance powers which are not connected to known offending. Now, this has been a practice\u2014police have been taking photos and recordings\u2014for some time. It was interesting in committee to hear the Police repeatedly say\u2014and it was very frustrating\u2014that this was confirming powers that they had rather than creating them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis bill, particularly the intelligence-gathering powers, is a direct response to the decision of the Supreme Court in \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna v R\u003C/span\u003E in 2025. It\u2019s always a challenge when someone\u2019s evidence is excluded on appeal. That was a case where Mr Tamiefuna was stopped and his car was detained because it was not fit to be driven, I understand. So he had to get out and get his stuff out. As he was getting out and getting various items out of his car and waiting to be picked up by somebody else, the police officer, without any particular purpose\u2014Mr Tamiefuna was known to the police, to put it in a polite way\u2014took photographs. And those photographs of the items that he had with him became critical in a later conviction for a serious offence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the Supreme Court was very clear that what went on there was a warrantless search. It was a warrantless search, and the law of search is one where, yes, you are allowed to execute a search without a warrant in particular circumstances. The usual and appropriate trigger is that you know that an offence has been recently committed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis new piece of legislation gives the police powers to execute a search by the taking of photographs and other footage without any knowledge or suspicion of particular offending. They simply have to think it might be useful for intelligence purposes. Obviously in committee stage, we\u2019ll have a very careful look at this. That is the conceptual legal objection to this: that it\u2019s an unwarranted incursion into the freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. It goes too far.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, we\u2019ll talk later about the Privacy Commissioner\u2019s work on this, and the Privacy Commissioner worked very closely with Police and the Justice Committee. I must say it was frustrating that the Police and Privacy Commissioner couldn\u2019t seem to speak the same language in some ways. Whilst it did lead to some amendment, the Privacy Commissioner is still not satisfied that this bill will be compliant with privacy rights; that the balance has been struck. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, the other point is that this documentation, if you like, this taking of photos, the photos are generally going to be taken simply on the police officer\u2019s iPhone. We know that there have been real problems with police officers taking photos, in particular in the Wairarapa. They were taking photographs of young people they thought looked dodgy. Of course, we know what that means in terms of some of the systemic bias that exists\u2014and that the police have admitted exists in the police\u2014and they were taking photos of young rangatahi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the problems of this, which we\u2019ll come to in committee in some detail, is they were taking these photos and when it became clear that they were illegal\u2014and there are many photos on many police devices that are illegal\u2014they don\u2019t delete them. There\u2019s an independent report on the problem of all of this evidence being obtained\u2014it\u2019s not evidence, actually, because there\u2019s no crime being committed\u2014all of this information being gathered and then just being retained either on police devices or on the police system or\u2014and here\u2019s the kicker\u2014on messaging apps. The police are messaging each other on Teams or Signal or whatever and saying, \u201COh, you know, here\u2019s a photo of that bloke I took last week\u201D, and of course it sits on the messaging app. We\u2019ve got this constant duplication of these photographs and no management of how to delete them when they\u2019re no longer required.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHere\u2019s something we\u2019ll raise later as well: it\u2019s absolutely critical that if information is recorded, but it turns out that it\u2019s not needed, it should be deleted. Here\u2019s the operational problem: the police have no effective control over this information, and the independent report that they commissioned\u2014and which we questioned them on in committee\u2014made it quite clear that whilst police officers are instructed to not duplicate images and to delete them when they\u2019re uploaded to a central system, they simply don\u2019t. If you do a check on their phones, you\u2019ll see many officers will have numerous images. Now, there are lots of recommendations in that independent report\u2014and I will forewarn the Minister of Police that in terms of the operationalisation of this legislation, I intend to ask how the police are going. There are devices that can be used\u2014an electronic notebook\u2014whereby you could upload the photographs to the system and delete them immediately rather than getting back to the office, downloading it on to the OneDrive apparently, and then uploading it to the national intelligence system. But this doesn\u2019t appear to be the case. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the challenges is that we\u2019re now going to have sweeping powers of intelligence gathering, and the real question is this: there\u2019s a mismatch in the legislation. One of the privacy principles is that if your purpose is intelligence gathering, then it must be necessary to take this photo for that intelligence mission. You might be investigating the activities of XYZ gang. Well, this must be necessary\u2014not just useful but it must be, essentially, the only feasible way\u2014to gather the intelligence needed. Now, if we look at the test in the legislation, and we will come to it in detail, we\u2019ll see that it\u2019s a \u201Cmight be useful\u201D. It\u2019s not even a \u201Cmight be necessary\u201D. It may be useful. It\u2019s such a low threshold.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s easy to say the police need more tools. But one of the real hallmarks of a modern democratic society is that the balance is correctly struck between proper law enforcement activities\u2014and Police\u2019s general view is that they have a duty to detect crime and prevent crime, but they don\u2019t have a surveillance-of-the-population function, and it\u2019s getting alarmingly close to that under this legislation. We could have supported a well-drafted bill, but this isn\u2019t it. Unless there are major changes\u2014and I will table some amendments\u2014we won\u2019t be supporting it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u002223d1965f0b820a6911e6e5d01e97d82a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002223d1965f0b820a6911e6e5d01e97d82a\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (16:06)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of Te P\u0101ti K\u0101k\u0101riki to speak to this bill, and we are very strongly opposed to this bill. It was quite enlightening going through the Justice Committee process of this bill, because what it really showed us is the tensions that exist between the interpretation of the Privacy Act and the privacy principles by which the police operate under, and also the operations of the police and how they understand and interpret those principles, and that ongoing tension between those two bodies of people who look after us in different ways.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOur stance is we think that this bill enables over-surveillance. We think it takes surveillance a step too far, particularly when you\u2019re looking at speculative future purposes of collecting information and evidence. The main thing for us is: how do you know if somebody is going to go forward and commit a crime at some point in their life, and how long is that speculation and how far is that future? Police have these tools to gather intelligence and to and to surveil where crimes are happening or where they have reasonable grounds to suspect that something might unfold. Those provisions are in place and do have a requirement in terms of having those reasons, and we think that just busting the door open on that is not justified in this case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe really strongly disagree with the sentiment that the Government talks about in terms of this bill simply reaffirming a right that always existed. We strongly disagree with that. We think that that was probably the most important finding within the Supreme Court ruling in \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna\u003C/span\u003E, where they found that it actually was not the Police\u2019s right to collect intelligence in that manner and that this bill changes that interpretation or that judgment in order to make those actions lawful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the main reasons that we are also opposed to this is we think that it\u2019s an unreasonable interference on ordinary citizens\u2019 privacy rights. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe think that it\u2019s an unreasonable interference with the rights of children, and the interaction between Police intelligence gathering and children is really important to us, and I will talk to that later in this speech. The gathering of evidence, particularly around children, is one of the biggest reasons that this bill is before us in the first place. We think that ordinary law-abiding citizens should not be subject to this level of interference by anybody.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason that we\u2019ve got this bill, and probably the biggest thing that I dedicated my first reading speech to, was this ongoing saga of people having their photo taken by police. At the time, I spoke about the articles by Phil Pennington and Te Aniwa Hurihanganui when they were within Radio New Zealand and they found out that there were young M\u0101ori kids who were being apprehended and stopped in the Wairarapa because police felt that they \u201Clooked out of place\u201D. It is really important to remember that, in these cases, these kids were not committing any crimes. All they were guilty of was simply walking down the road.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere were a few people who spoke up about this experience of being apprehended by the police and having their photograph taken, and, of course, when the families and the parents of these children found out that their kids had been interrogated without their presence, it was really concerning, mostly because, as we know, adults don\u2019t know the law back to front but definitely children don\u2019t know the law back to front. What this did is it kind of blew the lid off something that was far greater than just a few isolated incidents. When this series of articles came out, suddenly more and more people came forward and said, \u201CHey, I actually had my photo taken by the police as well, despite the fact that I wasn\u2019t doing anything wrong and hadn\u2019t committed a crime.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere was an overwhelming coming forward of people across the country who had been subject to that unlawful behaviour. Police do not have the right to simply pull somebody up without reasonable grounds to suspect that they\u2019re in the middle of committing a crime or have committed a crime. Lots of people came forward and that ended up contributing to, in 2022, the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) and the Privacy Commissioner commencing a joint inquiry into whether this was a few isolated incidents or whether it\u2019s happening more than was expected, and what they ended up finding was tens of thousands of unlawful photographs of people on police officers\u2019 devices. The police do not have the right to do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the facts that I really emphasised in my first reading speech was that half of the photos\u2014and we\u2019ve got tens of thousands of photos\u2014were of people who are M\u0101ori, and a large number of these were young M\u0101ori kids. I put that speech on social media and it did really well, but a lot of the people said in the comments, \u201CWell, you know, those kids were probably being naughty. What were they doing? Don\u2019t make a crime and you won\u2019t be apprehended by police.\u201D It is important to put on the record that this inquiry and those photographs are related to people who have not committed, were not committing, and did not commit any crimes. That\u2019s really, really important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat the inquiry also showed\u2014and I want to acknowledge the IPCA and the Privacy Commissioner for undertaking the inquiry\u2014was that officers were routinely taking, using, and retaining photographs when it was not lawful for them to do so. It also found that thousands of unlawful photographs were taken and kept even after Police were instructed by the Privacy Commissioner to delete them. It\u2019s an ongoing saga, and observing that interaction between the Privacy Commissioner and the Police within the select committee showed me that there are still deep tensions between those two bodies, which is not ideal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the other things that the joint inquiry found was that there was a general lack of understanding amongst front-line police officers about what the privacy principles and laws are within this country. I don\u2019t see that as a failure of those individual officers. I see that as a competence gap in the leadership and training of our police officers. They are not adequately taught what those principles are. I don\u2019t see that as an individual failing; I see that as a structural problem that needs to be addressed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, this was reinforced by the Supreme Court case with \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna\u003C/span\u003E in 2025, and the previous speaker, the Hon Dr Duncan Webb talked about this in depth. He talked about the Supreme Court ruling really well, but what this really reaffirmed is, I think, the findings within the joint inquiry and it really reaffirmed what our concerns were in the first place. We think that, when you\u2019re considering the rights of individual citizens and also the need for proactive surveillance to keep communities safe where it\u2019s necessary, you need to weigh up the benefit of that intelligence collection against the infringement that it might have upon people\u2019s right to privacy. What the Supreme Court ruling declared is that private citizens and individuals do not waive their privacy rights when they go into a public place, which is incredibly important. What this bill does is it changes that fact, or that interpretation that exists within the law, which to us is extremely concerning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe look forward to the upcoming committee of the whole House stage to just understand this bill a lot more, but the bill as it stands does not align with our values or our principles or our adherence to people\u2019s human rights, so at this stage, we oppose the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022734dbbc8316d723d18bd481dc8183ebc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022734dbbc8316d723d18bd481dc8183ebc\u0022\u003ETODD STEPHENSON (ACT) (16:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of ACT in support of the Policing Amendment Bill. I want to thank my colleagues on the Justice Committee. We have worked through this in some detail. I also want to thank the submitters. I think we had 27 submissions in relation to this. I also want to particularly thank Police and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, because they were heavily involved in our discussions on this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to be clear for anyone watching today that what we\u2019re actually talking about is the ability for the police to collect information, primarily in public places, so, again, if the police need special warrants to undertake surveillance, etc., that is all still in place. What we\u2019re talking about is a collection of photographs or maybe audio material in public places, and in very limited private places and circumstances. I don\u2019t want  anyone to be confused today: we are not creating warrantless search powers or warrantless surveillance powers or anything like that. What we are trying to do is make some clarifications, and, again, it\u2019s now subject to the privacy principles.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to thank the Minister. One of the things we will, obviously, talk about is the statutory review which is now built into this legislation, and I want to thank him for his positive engagement with ACT on that and also, obviously, for accepting that as a recommendation of the select committee. That means that this will be subject to a statutory review so that any issues can be looked into, including making sure that the Privacy Commissioner and the Police are working together on the authorisation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m not going to say any more. I\u2019m going commend the bill to the House, and we\u2019ll get on with it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225f6c5b1a97f24773a8aaeb3a8e3b0e7b\u0022 data-id=\u0022856d442e32e4a7d4520bd038cd9cecba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f6c5b1a97f24773a8aaeb3a8e3b0e7b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022856d442e32e4a7d4520bd038cd9cecba\u0022\u003EJAMIE ARBUCKLE (NZ First) (16:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak to the Policing Amendment Bill. This bill is very, very important to restore the legal certainty around police when they\u2019re recording information, but there is also a second element to this bill which probably will not be discussed as much, and that is about managing anti-social behaviour in public spaces.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat was an important part of the bill, to give police temporary road-closure ability, especially around parks, beaches, and reserves in terms of different kinds of anti-social activity that is happening around certain roading networks in New Zealand. That was important, but what we\u2019ve heard from many members tonight in the House was around the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna\u003C/span\u003E case, which went all the way to the Supreme Court. That case created a lot of uncertainty for our front-line police officers. In reality, it has left police officers with fewer rights than the general public.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf you think of an incident, and we see it so often online, or if we do see an incident happening, people pull out their cell phones, they film, and that social media goes quickly around the community, quickly with Facebook around the world.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut with our police officers, they\u2019ve now got into a situation with this case of even taking a photo or being at a scene where that information makes it very, very difficult\u2014so actually clarifying what police can do on our front line. I just do want to put it on the record that those over 10,000 front-line police officers we do have with the New Zealand First Party, with our ambitions to keep to increasing our police force numbers. It is important to give them the certainty in what they can do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs we\u2019ve heard too, we did have those 27 oral submissions, but we did have 225 submissions in total. We have, as a committee, made a number of changes. The independent review, that\u2019s going to be in three years\u2019 time; importantly, delaying the commencement from one month out to six months just so technology with the IT systems can be updated; and also making the changes are subject to the information privacy principles.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, I just want to say is we know it\u2019s a changing world with technology. We\u2019ve got to be able to keep up with technology changes and with our police force being able to take photos, store them correctly, and there needs to be the process behind that. New Zealand First understands that, but we\u2019ve got to equip our police the best way we can. So, on that, I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022117d121ad852988cd981120c5ea99194\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: This is a split call. Steve Abel.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u002244869ad0124cf9d72ba3a7676a45c86b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002244869ad0124cf9d72ba3a7676a45c86b\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (16:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker, I am new to this bill, but I\u2019m quickly getting my head around it. There\u2019s a couple of things that immediately leap out as concerning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPrinciples of civil liberties and freedom of people to move around our society and our public spaces and our private spaces in terms of citizens in their own yards or what have you, to be free from a fear of being surveilled or being observed are very important, and particularly as we are in a time in history when there is a much greater rate of surveillance in general. Not only is there surveillance in our streets with closed-circuit television but, also, security cameras are much more readily available on private properties and on businesses, they are much lower cost; and the ability of anyone to take it upon themselves, because when I was a kid, you might have lugged the camera around with you, but nowadays everybody has a camera with them and everybody has a video device with them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo the importance of us preserving the right of citizens to be without surveillance is a very important right. I would be concerned particularly\u2014you would have liked to hope that right-wing members of the Parliament would be very committed to the principles of personal freedom and freedom to be not surveilled or observed without fitting jurisdiction on the part of the police.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI myself have been, unfortunately, subject to unwanted and secret surveillance\u2014in this instance, by a private corporation employed by the oil and gas industry in New Zealand, a company called Thompson and Clark.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002211e9e1f818754d97b60bba4b18e5dc03\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e993adb630a42a18e05c3b75cdb4134\u0022\u003EHon Mark Patterson\u003C/span\u003E: You should keep chaining yourself to helicopters, Steve.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc864f2897818145a7421bc9e6f8bda3\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m fine if someone\u2019s taking photos of me chained to a helicopter, but, in this instance, we were able to acquire some of the images that had been taken, and they included me on a Saturday at the beach with my four-year-old son. Those photographs included pictures of him, and we were simply going about our weekend business as a family. Thompson and Clark took it upon themselves to take photographs and keep records of all of that activity, under the pretext of them protecting the interests of the company for whom they worked because I might be part of some sort of protest activity, and that was their justification for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe police have similarly in the past used justifications of protecting the public or public good or private property interests to extend their rights right into our general civil liberties to protest. Protest is a New Zealand Bill of Rights Act right that we all enjoy in a democratic and free society, and a very important one for us to protect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am concerned that some of this bill and the components of this bill, general intelligence gathering, the ability of the police to move people on under an assumption of\u2014removal of people from temporary closed areas, that these could be used to actually suppress and impact on freedom of protest, for example. I think it would be important to examine that in the committee of the whole House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe know that there are varying degrees of police surveillance and intervention in public activity, including in protests, In other parts of the world, we see much more aggressive behaviour from police against private citizens protesting, and in our own history, we have seen that. In my living memory, I remember attending the 1981 Springbok tour protests when the police were very aggressive and violent towards members of the public, and their own citizens. I think that caused us all as a nation to pause for a moment and think about whether that\u2019s the sort of police activity that we want to see.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe privacy commission strongly opposed authorising police to record and keep personal information for an unknown use and has serious concerns about the potential impacts that these changes will have on the privacy of New Zealanders and, by extension, their democratic rights and freedoms. I concur with that very much, which is why the Green Party will be opposing this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI note also that, in the regulatory impact statement, there was no public consultation on this, and that is equally concerning. I look forward to scrutinising this with the Minister in the committee of the whole House, but the Green Party will be voting against this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u0022331bacc89c06f0926479b9a634ab445f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022331bacc89c06f0926479b9a634ab445f\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (16:27)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It\u2019s real honour to stand in support of this bill. Men and women of the police service do fantastic work every day out there in the community. I want to acknowledge the Minister for bringing this bill through to the Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt can be easy in situations like this, where practice and common practice, particularly in and around the police, is found by the courts to not have the legal basis with which the service thought it did. There are possibly always temptations to rush through changes and not have a select committee and to try and retrospectively correct those understandings. But I think, in this instance, the care and thought and time taken to get this right, to acknowledge the balance between privacy of individuals out there in the public and the importance of supporting our police to do the work that they need to do to keep us safe is important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to acknowledge the Minister for taking that challenge seriously and bringing to the House a bill which I think strikes the right balance and will go a long way to keeping New Zealanders safe long into the future. I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022 data-id=\u0022fc38723d2a767b364381474a5ff34064\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fc38723d2a767b364381474a5ff34064\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (16:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Well, it\u2019s no surprise that Labour will be opposing this bill at this second reading. As the Hon Dr Duncan Webb mentioned in his contribution, the reason for that is because of the search and surveillance powers that are connected to offending.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELike the vast majority of Kiwis, I 100 percent support our police. They do an incredibly difficult job, often in situations where many others would rather run away from. They investigate serious crime. They respond to family violence. They attend some terrible road crashes, and support victims and help keep our communities safe.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI might add that police officers deserve clear rules. They need to know what they can lawfully do, and the public need to know where the boundaries are. Nobody benefits when the law is confusing, least of all our front-line officers who have to make decisions, often in a matter of seconds.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also understand why this bill has been brought before the House. The \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna\u003C/span\u003E decision created a lot of uncertainty around police photography and intelligence gathering. The Police Association made the case to the committee that officers need greater clarity about what they can and cannot do. They also argued that a photograph or recording collected today might become important evidence later and could help identify someone involved in serious offending.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI accept that there is a problem that needs to be worked through, but the answer cannot simply be to write the law as broadly as possible and then leave safeguards, essentially, to Police policy. The problem with this bill is that, while it provides greater certainty for Police, it provides very little certainty for the public. Throughout the select committee process, we heard that concern raised again and again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECommunity Law Centres Aotearoa actually argued that the information-gathering powers are far too broad, important terms were left undefined, and safeguards that should sit in the law were either weak or they were missing. The bill allows police to collect information for an intelligence purpose. That all sounds official, and all that, but what does that actually mean? The bill does not properly define that. The bill also refers to information being collected in connection with a function or an activity of police. Police functions are broadly defined under the existing Act, but \u201Cpolice activities\u201D are not defined in either the Act or this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat might sound like lawyers arguing over wording, but it\u2019s not. These words form part of the legal threshold for collecting information about people, as Steve Abel mentioned in his contribution. If Parliament\u2019s going to give the State that power, Parliament should be able to tell New Zealanders in plain language what that power covers and actually where it stops. Instead, the bill says that a Police employee may collect information if they consider it may, or will, support police in performing a function or carrying out an activity. That\u2019s an extremely wide net to cast, and it\u2019s actually, I might add, very anti-libertarian, so it\u2019s surprising that ACT is in favour of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat does \u201Cmay support\u201D actually mean in practice? Does there have to be a realistic and identifying policing need? Does there need to be a connection to suspected offending, or is it enough for someone to think that information might, essentially, be useful one day? Those are questions the public have a right to know. They go to the crux of this bill, essentially, and they are questions that I\u2019ll be putting to the Minister of Police when we move to the committee of the whole House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the most interesting submissions during the Justice Committee came from the Police Association itself, and they pointed out that New Zealand already has a large amount of surveillance technology. Their submission referred to CCTV, automatic number plate recognition, information gathered through public transport and airports and speed cameras, and body cameras worn by people like traffic wardens and checkout staff. There are a lot of cameras actually out there in the community. They estimated that New Zealand has approximately one CCTV camera for every 13 people in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETheir basic point was that this technology is already part of modern life, and they\u2019re absolutely right about that. You go about your ordinary day on a Saturday\u2014maybe not us being in this House, but citizens go around\u2014and you just think about the trail of information that you can leave behind. You drive into town, your number plate may be picked up by camera. You pay for a coffee using your phone and bank card, and there\u2019s surveillance on you there. You scan loyalty cards, cameras there; you park in car parks, cameras there. There are cameras all over the show. Most people accept that, in modern life, it\u2019s important to collect information, but I think they should also expect Parliament to put clear rules around what the State can do with that information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe problem is not simply one photograph taken on one day. The biggest question is about what happens to that photograph afterwards. I suppose, in that intelligence space, for anyone that\u2019s worked within the intelligence community, how is that information fused together to generate a larger intelligence picture, and also how long is it kept? Who can actually search the database for that information, and who can share it? Can it be linked with information from another system within another agency? And can it be analysed many years later using technology that actually didn\u2019t exist at the time that the image or the bit of information was originally taken? Then, also, can information collected in one setting be used for a completely different purpose later on?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESubmissions to the select committee described this wider issue as \u201Cdata-veillance\u201D. It\u2019s not a word most people would use around the dinner table, but the idea behind it is relatively straightforward. It\u2019s that collection and joining together of small pieces of information that creates that bigger picture of someone\u2019s life. That\u2019s where the real power lies, and those are our concerns around this bill: it doesn\u2019t actually capture that in its entirety.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECommunity Law Centres Aotearoa actually warned about information being collected at protests, hui, funerals, and community gatherings and other lawful events and then retained and analysed later. Their concern was not that Police should be blind about potential risks in those areas; their concern was more around lawful participation in public and then creating that permanent intelligence record without a clear statutory limit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThese are all important things. We also talked about those inequalities within society as well. A teenager, for example, should be able to learn from a poor choice and move on without any unnecessary image following them through life. Thankfully, the age of a lot of us in this House, when we were young and making those mistakes, there was not that digital record like there is for young people today. We might be not as aware of it as our younger generations are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAt the end of the day, it\u2019s not about hiding wrongdoing; it\u2019s about whether ordinary people who are not suspected of any offence can become part of a growing intelligence net simply because someone considers that information may be useful later. I look forward to fleshing that out during the committee of the whole House. Thank you, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u0022aa68f01f43992505fc6c9d83cac5805f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aa68f01f43992505fc6c9d83cac5805f\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (16:38)\u003C/span\u003E: National is committed to keeping communities safe across New Zealand. We do that through making investments like the new Whanganui police station, and we do that by making changes to intelligence gathering, such as is the case in this Act. I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022 data-id=\u00224029d4af7757292bfae0e03521769845\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224029d4af7757292bfae0e03521769845\u0022\u003EGLEN BENNETT (Labour) (16:38)\u003C/span\u003E: Kia ora, Madam Speaker. I\u2019ve been listening to the debate and wasn\u2019t on the Justice Committee and didn\u2019t participate, but have watched, through my colleagues, through reports in our different committees we have, as the Labour caucus, but also in some of the media as well. It is good to try to understand and delve into a bit of what this is about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe need to be very clear, I think, that Police carry great power and, as the story goes, with great power comes great responsibility. It is even more so, I think, when it comes to not only vulnerable people but young people. A reason we\u2019re here today is because of some actions that were taken, and rangatahi who were photographed and videoed. What do we actually do with that, and what is the right course of action in terms of how the data is stored, how it\u2019s destroyed? Where do all those things go?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen I talk about the power imbalance, I know we understand it.  It\u2019s not until you\u2019ve actually, I\u2019d say, experienced it or have seen those moments when police have come into situations and are doing their job\u2014I fully understand that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI have a very vivid example from a number of years ago, with a young person, and the situation, again, is the young person had had some issues and had had some run-ins with the law, and we were working through that. I remember very clearly this Saturday afternoon, and I tell the story around the sort of power imbalance as an example of why we need to be very cautious and very careful about legislation like this. It was a Saturday afternoon. He was 13, maybe 14, at the time. Through circumstances at home\u2014we all have teenagers in our homes. I\u2019m sure that we\u2019ve experienced it, where you\u2019ve just had a gut\u2019s full. I said, \u201CJust get out, go away. I don\u2019t want to see you. Go for a walk, calm down, do your thing.\u201D About an hour later, I get a phone call from the police to say, \u201CWe\u2019ve arrested this young man. Could you come to the station?\u201D Of course, I was horrified and took full responsibility: \u201CWhat have I done? Did I cause that?\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs the story unfolded, he had walked out to cool down; he had walked out on to the street, on to the side of the road, sat down on the kerb, on the grass. And, just at that point when he sat down and was minding his own business and calming down, a police car\u2014as they do, and they should\u2014was driving past and saw this young M\u0101ori boy sitting on the side of the road. Of course, he saw the cop coming. He knew he\u2019d been disrespectful. He saw the police car. The police car pulled over to check in. They were doing their job, and rightly so. This young person put two and two together in his adolescent brain and ran for it, because, obviously, he thought they were out to get him. He ran, and, of course, the police did what they should do, because all of a sudden here was this kid that looked like he was up to no good. They chased him, and there was a pursuit on foot. They ended up cornering him in a bus stop. He resisted arrest, they arrested him, and he ended up in the cells at the police station.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason I bring it up is that, because of that young adolescent brain and because of the sum of the situations he\u2019d been in in his life, it meant there was that fight or flight moment, where he actually made a choice. The good news about it is that actually there was resolution that came. The police were actually very good, and when they realised the situation, they went through a process and apologised to him because they realised it had been a bit more than it should have been, from their side. I think, actually, in terms of the trajectory of his life, that was a moment that made him appreciate the police in a different way and that, actually, they were doing their job and they were there to help.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason I bring up this story is because of that young adolescent brain. In those moments, and there are high-risk moments, when a police officer wants to capture an image or take a video, or whatever it is, there is not the understanding for many people in the community. How does a young adolescent whose brain isn\u2019t fully formed understand that? How do we make sure that there are checks and balances, to make sure of how that information is stored and kept, and then how it is destroyed? We need to consider it very carefully.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022739b3bbed7fe4186aa30494700144b3a\u0022 data-id=\u002206d106ca977980aff1faea31bbb1eee3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022739b3bbed7fe4186aa30494700144b3a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002206d106ca977980aff1faea31bbb1eee3\u0022\u003EPAULO GARCIA (National\u2014New Lynn) (16:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This bill places more tools into the hands of law enforcement. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022efae6a1477bd51118fe41b355c594719\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022efae6a1477bd51118fe41b355c594719\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (16:44)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It\u2019s good to be able to take a call on this bill. It is a rather complex matter. I don\u2019t think I was there for the entire select committee process, but I was there for, I think, the majority of the select committee process when we\u2019re considering the Policing Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt a bit of a vexing issue to be honest, because there\u2019s a few truths that can exist alongside each other. The first issue is that we had a situation, in the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna\u003C/span\u003E case, where there was a ruling that the current practice of Police was not lawful and that there was no statutory authority for the types of evidence that they were collecting through these photographs. I don\u2019t\u2014and I don\u2019t think it\u2019s a position of the Labour Party\u2014criticise the Government for taking that into account and providing a statutory response, but the nature of that statutory response is, I suppose, what we would take issue with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is something that we approached the select committee with in good faith, as well, to try and see if there was a way that the concerns that we had around overreach about over-surveillance could be addressed. I would like to commend the Justice Committee. I think it was the genuine intention of probably all members on the select committee to try and find a resolution to this. We did encourage our advisers to engage with the Privacy Commissioner. The Privacy Commissioner was, I think, very involved with this process. I suppose it\u2019s regretful, then, that we haven\u2019t been able to reach a situation where some of the aspects around the bill that we were concerned about remain. The Privacy Commissioner\u2019s very clear advice to us was that they, the Privacy Commissioner and Office of the Privacy Commissioner, still had very strong and evidential-based concerns around the nature of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do think there have been some improvements made by the select committee. I think all of the select committee amendments were unanimously agreed, so that is something, and I do note there will be a number of amendments on the Table at the committee stage. It might be that the Minister decides to accept some of those, but the remaining kinds of concerns we have\u2014we\u2019ll go through these.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFirstly, I say that this is not anything to do with being opposed to, or criticism of, the police. This is about our job as legislators, because we have to make the best law we can for the police to follow. It\u2019s not for the police to look at the laws we have made and fix any issues with them, and it\u2019s not for them to question the decisions we make. I think, in this particular bill, some of the powers that remain in here, although I\u2019m sure the police will do the best they possibly can, could be used in a way which I think most members of the public would think would be overly\u2014would make a breach of privacy lawful, which I don\u2019t think many New Zealanders would find acceptable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the key things that I brought up right at the very beginning of this bill was the type of surveillance that could be undertaken by police. This hasn\u2019t been fundamentally changed. One thing that has happened is that we\u2019ve had an assurance by the Police and clarification with the Privacy Commissioner that the privacy principles will still be in place and that they can still be read in conjunction with this bill. I think it\u2019s important to put that on the record, because that is an important check on the police\u2019s powers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe still have a situation where the bill in front of us today states that a Police employee may\u2014for, essentially, any lawful purpose; it\u2019s a very wide purpose section\u2014record anything that can be seen normally without a recording device; not something that requires the ability to zoom in. If it can be seen\u2014say, from a berm or a footpath or something that\u2019s a public place\u2014under new section 45B, this law allows the police to continuously record what they can see. That could be something that\u2019s in a private house. I think I made the comment, at the first reading of this, that that appeared quite Orwellian. That remains, and that\u2019s a shame, I think. I think that, for most people, they wouldn\u2019t find that acceptable even if there was a good reason for that continuous observation as possible under this bill\u2014and that is concerning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs I said, that\u2019s not to say that I\u2019m not sure that the police will do the best they can to make sure they record evidence only when it is necessary\u2014I\u2019m sure that the police will consider and won\u2019t have the time to set up unnecessary continuous surveillance\u2014but, at the same time, the right to undertake that type of surveillance remains in this bill, and there are also provisions in relation to when the police are on private property as well. So that is concerning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother concerning aspect of this bill is the fact that we do not yet have the assurances that there is sufficient budget and sufficient technology to allow for the correct storage of these images. We do have information to suggest that these images may be, to date, still held in temporary measures, like, for example, on constables\u2019 phones. That\u2019s not good enough, and I think the police know it\u2019s not good enough. From the committee\u2019s perspective, we were unable to obtain an assurance that the proper storage system was currently set up to be able to ensure that images that were recorded lawfully under this legislation were also stored lawfully and in a way which was secure, in a way which was well organised, in a way which would allow, if there was an issue around privacy, for those images to be easily collected, retained, or distributed if that was the correct process. There is a concern around that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou\u2019ll note that, in the bill, there are some delays around commencement. That is also an indication around the readiness of the Police to have this in place. I\u2019m looking forward to being able to put those to the Minister at committee stage, and, hopefully, he will be able to assure us that the technology is in place. To date, we don\u2019t have that assurance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other aspect of this bill which we probably will need to touch on is the second half of the bill, which was probably looked at a little bit less than the first half of the bill, but that is the section in relation to temporary road closures. This is an important part of the bill. The whole second half of the bill is in relation to temporary road closures, so this does form the other policy objective of this bill and it does go into a lot of detail about when the police can make those types of choices. We\u2019ll also look at that at committee stage, and if there are any issues in relation to that, we\u2019ll look forward to discussing those with the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just wanted to touch on one more thing before I finish, which is last time, at first reading, I made a comment to one of my colleagues about one of my ancestors, who was actually the first police officer in New Zealand. I felt because it was mentioned by my colleague Glen Bennett, it would be worthwhile explaining to the House that story. I think, in 1886, when the first policing Act was put into place in New Zealand, my direct ancestor John Nash was the first police officer that\u2014so every constable has a number. He was a sergeant, and he had No. 1. That\u2019s my history with policing\u2014not a very extensive one, but one that was probably quite important to my family at the time. I think he got a gold watch for his services, and it\u2019s in the Police Museum. If you read some of his history, you can see that maybe he was intending to do the right thing at the time, but there are probably a few questionable decisions in terms of his service. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHe did, after his retirement, not decide to retire peacefully, but he became the Inspector of Nuisances. You can see that sometimes there are police officers that can be quite enthusiastic about their work. The reason I bring that up is because that is the type of person that we have to think about when we\u2019re looking at this legislation. Someone who, in lieu of a peaceful retirement in Nelson, decided to take up the position of Inspector of Nuisances is someone who might be overly enthusiastic with surveillance powers as well. We just think back to that little piece of history when we consider this bill as we move forward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d41fe4ff1d8b6953d879b8525afa541\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: It doesn\u2019t sound like the member has any ambition to follow in his footsteps when it comes to that role.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022 data-id=\u00221dbddcf6e66fc909e2b21aa25e40c4d7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221dbddcf6e66fc909e2b21aa25e40c4d7\u0022\u003ERIMA NAKHLE (National\u2014Takanini) (16:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I strongly commend this bill, put forward by my favourite police Minister ever, to the House. In select committee, we had extensive conversations with representatives from our amazing New Zealand Police, and I trust them. This bill is yet another way that the National Party continues to put victims first.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022215d05a68f209e1a929047ee74079ce4\u0022\u003EDavid MacLeod\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f988bc72b5e47b8856ba70e41dfbbaf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296f072cdd8091c30aada1e647e69ed9c\u0022\u003EGeorgie Dansey\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker\u2014I said \u201CSpeaker\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226fece89e178b5175d1813f84b0d5e276\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think David MacLeod was the person who called first.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u00226a7b53ccb8a862fe3eaabf4cf54bdd34\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226a7b53ccb8a862fe3eaabf4cf54bdd34\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (16:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Could I just ask for clarification here, because you said, \u201CI think Mr MacLeod was first\u201D, but\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225c89e6162e9b4649ca2db1d35085779b\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, Mr MacLeod was first. I didn\u2019t think\u2014I heard his call first.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229726f125aecba54ae0944a6da4fb5622\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s not the point; my point is that there are a number of factors that you can take into account when awarding the call, and \u201Cfirstness\u201D isn\u2019t one of them\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e78d950a954a56f4f9b724a3e1962934\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll take that thought into account, Dr Webb, but that is the way I\u2019ve been doing it for this term of Parliament, and so I think with\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f13bb03dcf8143b2289f97a349d8bd49\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s somewhat frustrating when we are debating an important bill and a member has a significant contribution to make\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227039eabdfcfb024edff4ceb830fd9780\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: If the member has a suggestion for, in future Parliaments, how we might run a different process for that process\u2014but that\u2019s what we\u2019ve actually been doing for this term, so I stand by my call, and I call David MacLeod.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022 data-id=\u002295839f9dc49d96e5b8476a85db51a506\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002295839f9dc49d96e5b8476a85db51a506\u0022\u003EDAVID MacLEOD (National\u2014New Plymouth) (16:55)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I\u2019m very happy to commend this Policing Amendment Bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Policing Amendment Bill be now read a second time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 36\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022863fef5d0f005ad07f11747c6b78806d\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: This bill is set down for committee stage immediately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00227b6a874341e8c3e8b242b4fc6753b968\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a66a8db5230ede523b2214a807aaacac\u0022\u003EPart 1 Amendments relating to collection of information\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d6e17f1635e09cbb1dee2991bea347a2\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the House is in committee on the Policing Amendment Bill. We come first to Part 1. This is the debate on clauses 4 and 4A, \u201CAmendments relating to collection of information\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=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00221836e2dbe17cec9ed187ccec84b9efcd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221836e2dbe17cec9ed187ccec84b9efcd\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (16:57)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m very pleased to be leading the Policing Amendment Bill through the committee stage. The bill amends the Policing Act 2008, with two principal objectives: to confirm police\u2019s ability to record images and sounds in public places and in private places where police are lawfully present, and to collect personal information for lawful purposes, including intelligence; and to expand police\u2019s temporary road closure powers to include a broader range of areas and provide police with the necessary powers to deter and enforce non-compliance with temporary area closures.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m also introducing a Government Amendment Paper that makes minor and technical amendments to Part 2 of the bill. These amendments will ensure the bill is consistent with the temporary closure grounds contained in the Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Act 2026. The change will also bring the area closure powers into force on a single date, excluding the provisions related to the infringement notice. I acknowledge that the Justice Committee was unable to recommend either amendment in their report, as the Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Act 2026 had not passed at that stage. With the recent enactment of this transport law, the Government can now make the required amendments. These amendments will ensure that police have the necessary tools to fight crime and keep New Zealanders safe without unfairly affecting the everyday lives of New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI look forward to hearing the views from fellow members as we debate the bill at this committee stage. I\u2019m very happy to answer any questions on the bill now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u002254b8b75c52dcf0321ea03383d98a0ec7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002254b8b75c52dcf0321ea03383d98a0ec7\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (16:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Thank you to the Minister for his comments, and thank you for explaining the basis of the Amendment Paper. I just seek some guidance from the Chair. The Amendment Paper appears to cover both Part 1 and the commencement provisions, and I\u2019ll just check where clause 14 is, because it might be\u2014yes, it\u2019s in Part 2 as well. Is the Chair\u2019s expectation that we speak to the Amendment Paper in one provision or as the clauses\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd559d48e775ed6e4cc12f6ab4772df2\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The clauses go on both parts and also on the commencement, but if members stray into the part that isn\u2019t relevant to what we\u2019re talking about, then obviously I will be looking to move the debate on. As long as we stay relevant to the part that the Amendment Paper is relevant to, that\u2019s absolutely fine.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214f5e14b1d390fc5f563814de5b7668d\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. That\u2019s really helpful. We\u2019ll just speak to those clauses as they occur, because it seems to cover the whole bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ll start with Part\u00A01, and this is a part of the bill which has been particularly contentious. If we look at clause 4, which has new section 45A as the first part of it, we look at the reasons that Police may collect information. In my reading, this is quite a broad provision, and in my last contribution, in the second reading, you may have heard that one of the reasons there\u2019s some hesitation to support this bill is the fact that the purposes for collection are so broad. We can see that they are for \u201Csafety\u201D, \u201Cintegrity of policing\u201D, \u201Can intelligence purpose\u201D, or \u201Cany other lawful purpose connected with a function, or an activity, of the Police.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question to the Minister of Police is: can he explain what is included in this? Also, maybe an easier question would be: what\u2019s not included? It seems so broad that it\u2019s almost anything connected to policing that would be able to be covered by new section 45A. I think it\u2019s important to know if there is a limitation to it. We did discuss this a little bit with officials in the select committee, and it was not really satisfied that there was sufficient narrowness in that clause, because it just appears to cover everything. I suppose that is the concern: that a constable would be able to, essentially, have any purpose to collect it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EObviously, we assume it\u2019s lawful\u2014if it wasn\u2019t lawful, that would be a separate reason for not allowing it\u2014but it just appears that everything else is covered. So, first of all, that\u2019s my first question for the Minister on that section.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022f682d4ca16fcdde64e9c7a0e6f078129\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f682d4ca16fcdde64e9c7a0e6f078129\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (17:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you for the question from the member Camilla Belich. There are no new powers enabled through Part 1. Nothing in Part 1 permits Police to exercise powers over members of the public or requires the public to cooperate with Police. It\u2019s intended to confirm the circumstances and purposes for collecting information within a privacy framework, and low privacy expectations obviously exist in public places. In private places, they can collect what can be seen or they can hear for policing functions or activities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022 data-id=\u0022e4fafe3233cb9a9f0a8f79be36b57cea\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e4fafe3233cb9a9f0a8f79be36b57cea\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (17:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just continuing on from Camilla Belich\u2019s question, my question is around new section 45A, but just with \u201Cintelligence purpose\u201D. Let\u2019s put this into everyday terms: if someone\u2019s casing a house for burglaries, most people would expect that the Police gather information, but what about someone standing around a train station looking a bit out of place, or what about someone attending a protest, or a young person hanging around a shopping precinct with mates?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s the concern I have, and that\u2019s why I\u2019ve submitted an amendment in my name to define the meaning of \u201Cintelligence purpose\u201D, and the time stamp for that is 15\u00A0September, 8.52.02. That\u2019s the addition of section 45AA. This amendment doesn\u2019t stop Police gathering intelligence; it just ensures that intelligence gathering is reasonably necessary, proportionate, and connected to preventing or investigating offending.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf that is already the Government\u2019s intention, there should be no difficulty in putting that into the bill. The concern isn\u2019t that Police would act in bad faith; the concern is that broad powers operate differently over time, particularly when technology makes collecting and storing information easier than ever before.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust combining that with a question to the Minister of Police, alongside that amendment, what objective limits exist within section 45A to prevent intelligence-gathering powers gradually expanding beyond what Parliament intends today? Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022dbe1bc786568fba319062f50543a1e32\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dbe1bc786568fba319062f50543a1e32\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (17:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. First of all, can I just thank the member Dan Rosewarne and his interest in the bill, and also acknowledge his comments during the second reading, in relation to acknowledging the outstanding work that our police officers do every day in keeping their communities safe.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EHis amendment, which is to insert new section 45AA, \u201CMeaning of intelligence purpose\u201D\u2014I don\u2019t support this tabled amendment. This would undermine the purpose of the bill. It would limit collection to offending, whether a wider collection and use of intelligence information is needed. It creates a new threshold of \u201Creasonably necessary\u201D, would create uncertainty for front-line staff, and end consistency with information privacy principle 1 of the Privacy Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u0022a869aa9a7107657af12fe09479887844\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a869aa9a7107657af12fe09479887844\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (17:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Kia ora to the Minister of Police\u2014looking forward to a robust session together.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is on clause 4, new section 45A, and I\u2019m going to start with new section\u00A045A(a). I wanted to ask for clarification from the Minister around supporting the safety of a Police employee while they are performing their duties as a Police employee. I wanted to ask particularly around that word \u201Csafety\u201D, \u201Cthe safety of a Police employee\u201D, and I wondered if the Minister might be able to assist me in understanding, potentially with hypothetical situations, or maybe drawing on his experience within the police force\u2014what would be an example of somebody needing to collect that information while they are performing their duties? I\u2019m just trying to understand what forms of information might be helpful to that police officer in a way that protects them, essentially. This bit is around supporting that safety while this officer is in the middle of carrying out that duty, so I\u2019m just trying to understand what kind of information might fall into that remit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second question I had is in relation to new section 45A(b), around supporting the integrity of policing. Obviously, this is a bill that is weighing up the consideration of police carrying out their job and gathering intelligence and gathering that information, but it also weighs that up with individuals\u2019 rights and citizens\u2019 privacy rights and rights to not interact with the Police if they\u2019re a law-abiding citizen that isn\u2019t raising any concerns. I wanted to ask the Minister: when it comes to the purpose of supporting the integrity of policing, why is it that we are reducing the threshold by which this information can be collected, rather than increasing the threshold by which Police operate?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the findings in the joint inquiry by the Independent Police Conduct Authority and the Privacy Commissioner was a widespread lack of understanding of the privacy principles by officers on the front line. As I said in my second reading speech, which I\u2019m not sure if the Minister was in here to hear, I think that that reflection within the joint inquiry was not a reflection, necessarily, of individual police officers\u2019 competency or knowledge, but rather may be identifying a gap in the education and training of police officers and whether there is that adequate education around the privacy rights and principles that they\u2019re operating under. My question is: why is it that we are, I guess, bringing the bar down by being more permissive in terms of the collection of information, as opposed to bringing the bar up in terms of educating police officers about what their obligations and responsibilities are under the Privacy Act, and why we took that pathway over the other one?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022330baf60765af4a1cb186f1f8418100a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022330baf60765af4a1cb186f1f8418100a\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (17:09)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a really good point. I guess, to the member Tamatha Paul, I\u2019d say that there are no new powers. The Police have had these powers for decades, but obviously the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna\u003C/span\u003E case has brought it into sharp focus. I think the good thing about going through this process now is that it is going to provide a really clear framework for police officers to work from, which will be followed up by a review three years after the legislation is passed. I just want to reassure the committee and the member that there are no new powers; these were existing powers that the Police already had before they were challenged through the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna\u003C/span\u003E case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022dd72ebf5439c69bafb4c3babbb981a07\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dd72ebf5439c69bafb4c3babbb981a07\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (17:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, I\u2019m new to this bill; I did watch all the second reading speeches to get my head around some of the issues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve risen to speak to an amendment that has been proposed by my colleague Ginny Andersen, and it\u2019s around the new section 45A, inserted by clause 4. If we look at 45A(c), it\u2019s the words \u201Can intelligence purpose\u201D. I think one of the concerns from the Privacy Commissioner was that leaving the words \u201Cintelligence purpose\u201D undefined creates a very broad capacity to collect information. Now, obviously, police need to collect information, but there does need to be a good purpose for it. What the amendment suggests is putting in a definition of \u201Cintelligence purpose\u201D, which might just help to create a little bit of a boundary there, which people might find reassuring. The definition she proposes is \u201C\u00A0\u2018intelligence purpose\u2019 means the collection of information by the police for a purpose that is directly connected with a specified current policing activity or investigation.\u201D, so a specified investigation or a current policing activity\u2014so that\u2019s not just an investigation of a particular crime that may have occurred, or something like that; it\u2019s saying, \u201CActually, we need to be keeping an eye on this activity; this is a policing activity.\u201D It links it to the police work in a way that just not defining \u201Cintelligence purpose\u201D doesn\u2019t really do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt does draw it in a bit and creates just a few boundaries on it. I see that as going to increase the integrity of the police\u2014that\u2019s not quite the words I want. I think it increases the assurance of average citizens, who don\u2019t especially want to have police gathering information when they may not really need to, or just on a random basis. Even if that definition is not preferred, perhaps the Minister of Police has some words that we could insert that would create that boundary around \u201Cintelligence purpose\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022cf854cb83d81ba1666ae4facc1673a34\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cf854cb83d81ba1666ae4facc1673a34\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (17:12)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019d just like to come back to the honourable member Tamatha Paul; the experts have given me\u2014she asked for an example, and they\u2019ve provided me one. She asked: what is a real-life example of what kind of info would be important whilst performing their duties? For example, information relating to previous violence towards police; or in the case of body-worn cameras if introduced, this would deter aggressive behaviour towards police. I hope that helps.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EComing to the member Hon Dr Deborah Russell in terms of speaking about the amendment that\u2019s been put forward bythe Hon Ginny Andersen, with a new definition of intelligence. I won\u2019t be supporting the amendment, and it\u2019s quite simply because defining the intelligence is problematic, and it\u2019s not defined in statutes such as the Intelligence and Security Act 2017 because of this, and it could have unintended consequences for other agencies. Information will always be collected for a policing purpose. This is not limited to a current police activity or investigation, as the information may also have an unknown future value. That was the case in\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022d27588e1ed251f565d4e9b941cadcf1a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d27588e1ed251f565d4e9b941cadcf1a\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (17:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, thank you, Mr Chair. Thanks, Minister, for your comments on that. I do, just in passing, note that no one\u2019s actually quite sure what intelligence purposes are, and it does seem that you could have a van going around just photographing everyone to see where they are, so that you can collate all the information and see whether anyone\u2019s activities add up to suspicious conduct. It\u2019s just a bit of a concern.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut what I really wanted to talk about was recording things from public places. This is new section 45B(1)(a) and (b), inserted by clause 4, although \u201Csounds\u201D are a little different. It\u2019s interesting, in fact, that the sounds have to be able to be heard, presumably that means by a normal, functioning human ear. So you can sort of lean against a fence and hear what\u2019s going on in the backyard and record that on your phone or whatever, but I\u2019m assuming that you can\u2019t use a device to enhance that, and if all you can hear is sort of mumblings, you can\u2019t sit there and use some additional device.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of a thing that can be observed from a public place, I guess I\u2019m a little concerned, and I\u2019d be interested in the Minister\u2019s comments, because you can, for example, stand on the top of a truck deck or a double-decker bus and look into a fence; or, as has been done, a lamp post is a public place, therefore if you put a camera on the top of the lamp post, it\u2019s in a public place, and it could be looking over a very high fence and into someone\u2019s kitchen. In fact, I think there\u2019s been cases where the camera\u2019s looked over the fence and taken photographs of notes on fridges in the kitchen, which might have been a bit incriminating, in terms of orders of the day that were going to be fulfilled in the criminal activity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think the idea that the police, for intelligence purposes\u2014not for a criminal investigation; two quite different things\u2014could put a camera in a public place but an unexpected public place, on the top of a lamp post or on the top of a truck that they\u2019ve parked outside the house, and take photos when they\u2019re not investigating a crime\u2014the real distinction here, and you will know this Minister, is that this is not that there has been a crime committed or that there\u2019s information that a crime is being planned, there\u2019s not an actual thing you\u2019re investigating; it\u2019s information to create a collage, a picture of bits of information that you want to know to pre-emptively know what\u2019s going on in what you think is a criminal community. Might not be, but might be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf you are looking at something and think, \u201CI\u2019ve seen them wearing a gang patch, so therefore I think they\u2019re part of a criminal enterprise. For intelligence purposes, I\u2019m going to peer into their kitchen and see what they\u2019re doing and what\u2019s on the laptop.\u201D\u2014because you\u2019ve got an excellent camera there\u2014that is highly invasive. If you go to a judge and say, \u201CI want a warrant to do this because we\u2019ve heard, through reliable sources, they\u2019re doing a big drug deal.\u201D, all well and good. But to do this because you just want to get intelligence and see what\u2019s going on in a community that you think is a criminal community, that\u2019s quite troubling. I\u2019m not talking about standing on the front picket fence and looking over and going, oh, I can see the car parked up the drive, snap\u2014I get that; anyone can do that. But this is a little more invasive than that, so I\u2019d be interested in\u2014you know, I might want to take advice because I do I think it\u2019s a really good thing that New Zealand needs to know\u2014is whether this, for intelligence purposes, will allow that kind of placement of cameras that peer into private dwellings from unexpected places in the public realm.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022510a892901979368532f7b5c1b50d1d9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022510a892901979368532f7b5c1b50d1d9\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (17:18)\u003C/span\u003E: So there\u2019s a few issues raised there, I\u2019ll try to cover them all off, if I don\u2019t, then come back to me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAround the mass surveillance, I want to address that early on. The bill does not enable mass surveillance. There must always be a lawful purpose, and their collection must be necessary for that purpose. Police can only collect the information for intelligence purposes where it will or may support a policing function or activity. Indiscriminate collection, or collection in the absence of a lawful purpose, is unlawful. I just wanted to make that very clear from the outset. Look, to be honest with you, to have police set up cameras that are invasive in terms of on someone\u2019s private property, that would require a warrant to be able to do that. I know from personal experience that, even my time in the dog section, we did have cameras that we could install in people\u2019s private residences\u2014they were always by their consent, and it normally related to serious stalking or domestic violence situations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt allowed us to have real-life information, and also, we would get an alert if a geofence had been broken, so we could respond and get there quickly to support the victim. I\u2019m just using it as an example, that police now have got the ability to do that, but it either requires a warrant, or it requires the consent of the household.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u00227b712c770b77ed332ae2baedd93699a8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227b712c770b77ed332ae2baedd93699a8\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (17:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Minister, just for clarity, I wasn\u2019t talking about placement of cameras in private dwellings; I was talking about placement of cameras in public places, but places that most people would expect not to be able to be intruded from. My two examples that I gave were: the top of a truck parked outside, so it\u2019s a public space; or on the top of a lamp post [looking into your house. Both public spaces. This would seem to allow that kind of intrusion, unexpected intrusion, simply because it\u2019s from a public space. So that was my question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00229a3fbf450e4ec43e209587dd9e92aff1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229a3fbf450e4ec43e209587dd9e92aff1\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (17:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. OK, thank you for clarifying. The legislation is very clear, and if the police were setting up cameras to surveil someone\u2019s private property, then they would have to seek a warrant to be able to do that. That would cover that off. We\u2019re talking about the general collection of intelligence and photographs, whether in public or private places. A private place relates to a police presence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u0022894a343fdc7b2fad7bfc22ce1584ed56\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022894a343fdc7b2fad7bfc22ce1584ed56\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (17:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. And thank you to the Minister for providing that example in your answers a few answers ago. It is helpful to have that real-life practical example provided, so thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust following on from Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s contributions and questions around public place, I wanted to ask the Minister whether he might consider adopting my Amendment Paper, which is a tabled amendment dated 15 September 2026, and it is at the back of that stack of amendments. The timestamp is 9.45.13. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat that amendment does is it provides specificity about the public place, which there seems to be a little bit of uncertainty around\u2014what that\u2019s defined as. So I\u2019ve put forward an amendment that asks whether we could define a public place as \u201Ca public place means a place that at any material time is open to, or is being used by, the public, whether free, or on payment of charge, and whether any owner or occupier of the place is lawfully entitled to exclude or reject any person from that place, and includes any aircraft, hovercraft, ship or ferry, or other vessel, train or vehicle, carrying, or available to carry passengers for reward.\u201D That\u2019s one amendment I\u2019ve brought to clause 4, new sections 45A, to bring a little bit of clarity, so I\u2019m keen to understand if the Minister might entertain narrowing the scope and definition of a public place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhile I\u2019m taking a call, I also wanted to ask the Minister whether he might support my other tabled amendments following that one, which are timestamped 9.45.14 and 9.45.15. Amendment 9.45.15 is simply deleting new section 45AC, which is, I think, probably the most broad of those purposes, which is: \u201CAllows police to collect information for an intelligence purpose connected with a function or an activity of the police.\u201D So that amendment deletes that clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the reasons I thought that it might be of some value is\u2014I have made these statements, but I think I\u2019ve heard the Minister make sentiments of a similar vein, in that there is certainly an expectation within society that police do everything. I think that can create problems where there are only so many people in the world, and there are only so many things that can be responded to at one time, and when you pile up\u2014not that he\u2019s doing this\u2014but when society piles all these expectations on one workforce, that can just become untenable, which is related to that announcement where the police are going to withdraw from some of the mental health call outs, just simply due to potential incapacity but also knowing that there might be other professions that are good at doing that, and just the fact that we can\u2019t expect any profession to do absolutely everything. I wondered whether the Minister might have some views on that Amendment Paper, it narrows that really broad information collection function, given the broad remit and responsibilities of police officers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe last Amendment Paper I wanted to speak to in relation to this part of this new section 45A, is my amendment which is timetabled 9.45.14. That one is all about, again, narrowing the scope. A lot of my amendments are around just trying to provide a bit of specificity. This one is around narrowing the scope of the defined purposes for which police may collect information, to ensure the threshold is not overly broad. This one amends the first point, and says \u201CPolice constables may make recordings in public without a warrant only when there are reasonable grounds to believe there will be use of force or violence.\u201D So, again, it\u2019s just attempting to put a bit more specificity into the bill, because one of our primary concerns is the broadness of the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9898ea10d0112cf06571eb802df2e43\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9898ea10d0112cf06571eb802df2e43\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (17:26)\u003C/span\u003E: To the member\u2019s point around police taking a lot on, I agree with you completely. We\u2019ve seen that for decades. Often our police officers are the only 24/7 social service that we\u2019ve got, and just to acknowledge that they\u2019re actually very good at dealing with a whole different array of issues. But definitely, we have tried to get the focus back on their core role. I think everyone will agree. The example used is mental health; we want to see a health response to that, not a law enforcement one. We\u2019re making some good progress on that, without a doubt.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThank you for the member\u2019s Amendment papers (APs). You have put thought into this, I can see that, particularly on 14. But in terms of 13, no, sorry, I don\u2019t support the AP, the bill relies on existing definitions across a range of existing statutes and common law. In relation to 14, sorry, no, this would undermine the intention of the bill. It would be highly impractical and problematic, and would prevent the collection of information for other policing purposes. It is also inconsistent with the other sections. And 15, I\u2019m sorry again, no, this would undermine the core objective of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022787416f7777068b875925c9e719ae07b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022787416f7777068b875925c9e719ae07b\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (17:27)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I want to speak to an issue of using technology to collect information from a public place. I\u2019d just say to the Minister, we\u2019ve had an example of this very recently in Parliament, where there are rules around where photographs may be taken of members, and where the press may take photographs from\u2014and that\u2019s the tiles; we all know that. Some enterprising photographer, from some news organisation, snapped a long-distance shot of a Minister, right down through the hall, and used it to imply that she was running away from questions. And it was a space where, as a member of Parliament, or as a Minister, one would never ordinarily expect to be photographed. Yet it was taken from a public place, or what\u2019s technically a public place in Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo there is a little bit of an issue there that we do need to sort. I heard the Minister\u2019s answer around not being able to set up a camera that surveils a private property, unless there\u2019s a proper warrant going on. But there\u2019s still a little bit of a grey area there. I don\u2019t think we\u2019ve quite cleared it up, and I\u2019m not quite sure how we\u2019re going to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe issue I was particularly thinking about was\u2014it goes back to when I was an official\u2014and one of the things we learnt as officials is: if we want to have a conversation with another official, ring them up and have a phone call or go and have a chat. Particularly, we used it, not necessarily for nefarious purposes, but if we were just trying to sort out an idea\u2014technically it was subject to a request under the Official Information Act (OIA) , but very hard to OIA it\u2014and you could at least have a very free and frank exchange of views, without creating trouble, and then reaching a bit more of an understanding. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo you\u2019d walk down the street and talk, in person, to the other official. But it just strikes me, in a public place too, you could quite reasonably expect to be talking to someone, sitting on a park bench, no one else around you, not going to be heard. But technology now enables it to be heard, with the use of microphones, and the like.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m just a little concerned that there are places where people have a reasonable expectation that their interactions will be private, even though they\u2019re in a public space. I wouldn\u2019t expect my conversation with my husband as we walk the Zig Zag track in Titirangi to be\u2014not that I expect to be the subject of surveillance anyway; I have had one speeding fine in my life, and that\u2019s about it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECan the Minister of Police see the problem? There\u2019s a very reasonable expectation of privacy, and I would be, I think, quite startled to find that the conversation that I\u2019d had, or the interaction that I\u2019d had, through the use of technology was suddenly sitting in Police information. Is there a way that we can tighten that up so that\u2014again, Police can reasonably have reasonable access to reasonable tools to use for their intelligence gathering purposes, but where is the line to be drawn on what they can and they can\u2019t use, and what protections are there, particularly for ordinary individuals, or particularly for someone who might be associating? Maybe there\u2019s someone that Police are keeping an eye on and they have an entirely innocent conversation with their brother, their kid\u2014this, that, and the other\u2014who then ends up in the Police files.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI can see the Minister nodding, so I know he can see the problem. If he could perhaps have a bit korero.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u002208de43f2fce04cf9a53d95726a10d8de\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002208de43f2fce04cf9a53d95726a10d8de\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (17:31)\u003C/span\u003E: I mean, we could have a long discussion and debate around that. In relation to Parliament and access to our press gallery and our journalists, I mean, I think that we should celebrate the fact that we are one of the most open democracies in the world and that our media has got good access to us, and that shouldn\u2019t change. But, on saying that, there should be an expectation, too, for members, whether it\u2019s members of Parliament or other staff members or anyone in this place, that if they don\u2019t want to talk to the media, there should be some rules around\u2014we\u2019ve had examples of MPs where they\u2019ve had to climb out of windows to try and get away from that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd2b446e7f9b147dce97967f1c009a88\u0022\u003ETamatha Paul\u003C/span\u003E: Where is the window? Where is it? I need to find it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022575aae76b9ec72d164c58bffeb8a33bd\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL\u003C/span\u003E: Believe me, I ain\u2019t ever going to be climbing out of a window, trust me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reality is this: what you\u2019re talking about, and I\u2019ll use an example that I can relate to personally that happened to me a week ago, at what was a private function, but you could argue it was in a public place because it was in quite a big restaurant, and it was political. We had multiple political parties there, and whilst I was delivering a speech, one of the members of that political party was videoing me during the speech, but we were in a public place. That is going to happen. Some people would feel uncomfortable with that. Some people would say, \u201CWhat\u2019s that footage going to be used for? Where\u2019s it going to go?\u201D I think those are always legitimate concerns; but the reality of it is that, if you\u2019re in a public place, there is an expectation that you may have your image recorded. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe good thing is that, in the public at the moment, everyone\u2019s got far more powers and far more ability to do that than what our police do. Our police are now going to have the ability to do that to keep the public safe, but they are actually going to have some very strict rules put around them in terms of how they do that. Can we regulate the public and everyone else in that way? Probably not, but we can with the Police. We do understand that they\u2019ve actually got powers that no one else has, so, actually, that is the right thing to do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cac20897d2526bf7c6212189f5ee12ba\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I take the next call, I\u2019ll just flag that we have canvassed new sections 45A and 45B, inserted by clause 4, to a reasonable point, so I\u2019m looking for members to move on potentially to new section 45C.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9e6947315104d8fbe8605c43b2a203d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9e6947315104d8fbe8605c43b2a203d\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (17:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I just have one question on new section 45B, inserted by clause 4, if I may. We\u2019ve had a really fulsome discussion around setting up cameras, taking images and recordings, and also videoing in public spaces. I actually want to get into the aspect of the retention of those images and recordings, because the issue today isn\u2019t just that observation piece; it\u2019s the ability to record, upload, catalogue, and retain that information, potentially for a very long time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ELike a person attending a public meeting today, as the Minister of Police highlighted, you might find that image stored on the system long after that event has actually ended. My question to the Minister is around what safeguards stop recordings made under new section 45B from being retained indefinitely where the person recorded is not suspected of any offending. That\u2019s my main question there, Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u002253160a08d57c74a130402f85aa969462\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002253160a08d57c74a130402f85aa969462\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (17:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you to the officials who have responded to this one very quickly. In terms of conversations in public places caught by microphone, the rule is: if you can hear it, there are no reasonable expectations of privacy. If the conversation is intercepted using a device, it could constitute an offence under section 216B of the Crimes Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u00227b75d5bff8f5de441c8b9ce775e6a5ee\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227b75d5bff8f5de441c8b9ce775e6a5ee\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (17:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Just to continue on from my colleague Dan Rosewarne\u2019s questions around retention, I\u2019m also really interested in that, and not just the retention and how that information is stored but also the destruction of that information once it is no longer relevant to Police any more.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think that is quite important following the Privacy Commissioner\u2019s instructions to delete all of the illegal photos that were discovered during the joint inquiry between the Independent Police Conduct Authority and the Privacy Commissioner. I understand that Police didn\u2019t follow the orders to destroy the photos, but I also recall reading some reporting that it was technically or logistically impossible to find and delete all of the photos in the first instance. I guess I am really keen to hear what the retention aspects are in relation to that previous call, but also the destruction mechanisms by which that information will be destroyed if it is no longer needed and if it is not needed for any kind of investigation or court proceedings or anything like that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI only have one small thing left on new section 45B, inserted by clause 4, but feel free to stop me if you think that this has already been covered. I\u2019m quite interested in the term \u201Cby any means\u201D, which obviously refers to the means by which police gather that intelligence. I am really interested in it because the kind of spyware and surveillance technology is rapidly evolving, as he\u2019s probably already aware. Meta, the people that run Facebook and Instagram, now have these glasses. I\u2019m not sure if the Minister of Police has seen them, but they have cameras in them, and that\u2019s caused a lot of angst for a lot of people, particularly, speaking as a young woman, thinking, \u201COh my gosh, what if there\u2019s some creep that\u2019s recording people against their consent?\u201D And, because this technology is still so new, it\u2019s still not well understood, so I suppose my question is: with that \u201Cby any means\u201D, does that include future technologies? And have the Police had any conversations in terms of the operational aspect around what those means include?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI understand \u201Cby any means\u201D is an unlimited kind of phrasing, but it also reminded me of body cameras. In the Minister\u2019s other portfolio, in Corrections, as he knows, all of the guards wear body cameras. I think that\u2019s a really good thing because, when there are interactions, they\u2019re able to review the footage and see what went wrong. I do think it\u2019s really good that corrections officers do have those body cameras, but that isn\u2019t something that is formalised throughout the front line of policing, as my understanding. I wondered whether this bill, and in particular in relation to new section 45B(1) \u201Cby any means\u201D, could mean that there will be more prominence of body cameras on front-line police officers? That is actually one of our Green Party policies, requiring body cameras on all police, and wraps up my questions around new section 45B.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00229cf2938c6ca4e0967a11e919d2a433b1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229cf2938c6ca4e0967a11e919d2a433b1\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (17:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Look, really quickly, in terms of body cameras, I think that is an operational matter for the Commissioner, but he is looking at that without a doubt, in terms of whether our police officers should be wearing body cameras.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn relation to the member Dan Rosewarne\u2014\u201CWhat safeguards stop recordings being retained indefinitely when there\u2019s no offending?\u201D\u2014it must be collected for lawful purposes and be necessary for that purpose. That is the test, and Police are subject to existing statutory requirements regarding retention of information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EComing back to the member Tamatha Paul\u2014\u201CWhat are the retention aspects and destruction aspects if they\u2019re not relevant?\u201D\u2014Police are subject to existing statutory requirements regarding retention and disposal, and Police continues to work with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229314bf7332cc32db7a08c1fbf62d499e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks, members. I\u2019m looking for us to move to new section 45C.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022ee285df2dbdaae42a94ea4733304392e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ee285df2dbdaae42a94ea4733304392e\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (17:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. That is helpful, because I have a question around new section 45C. The question I have is the interaction between section 45C, which is \u201CRecording by Police employee: private property\u201D, and the Search and Surveillance Act 2012.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason I ask this question is that I had a look at the Search and Surveillance Act\u00A02012, which is referenced in an earlier clause, and that Search and Surveillance Act has quite detailed information around warrants that are required for surveillance purposes. The question I had is: the Justice Committee has added section 46(1) of the Search and Surveillance Act into new section 45B, but we don\u2019t have that in new section 45C. I\u2019m just wondering if maybe we should have that, because, when I read section 46(1), I see that\u2014one of the things I was particularly concerned about, which I mentioned a couple of times, is recording from a public place of a private activity. When I read the Search and Surveillance Act, section 46(1), I see that a warrant is required for observation of a private activity in a private premises. Then it also uses \u201Cprivate activity\u201D in a later part\u2014I\u2019m referring to section 46(1)(c) there, and also to paragraph (e).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EEssentially, what I understand new section 45B to do is to allow observation from public places but not if it\u2019s covered by the Search and Surveillance Act 2012. I\u2019m interested to know if that is correct. If it is correct, it seems that it should also apply to new section 45C, because that covers private property. I do think the inclusion of that in new section 45B is a good thing, but the issue about it not being in new section 45C is: does that mean that those same restrictions don\u2019t apply to private property, when, in my view, it should be that they should apply more so on private property than in public property?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt may be just a heading thing, and I know that headings are not meant to be the substantive part of the statutory interpretation, but I suppose, really, the question is: the contention that it is possible\u2014and Dr Duncan Webb mentioned this, too\u2014to be in a public place and to have surveillance of private property. What are the limits on that? If I look at that in new section 45B, I see that that\u2019s limited by the Search and Surveillance Act\u2014so you can\u2019t observe private activities, and if you did, you would need a warrant\u2014but would, say, being in the front garden of your house or walking up to your gate, which is still on private property, be prohibited surveillance? My fear is that that would be allowed, that you would be able to have, under this bill\u2014and I appreciate the Minister of Police\u2019s experience under previous legislation. I suppose what we are wanting to avoid is that what he sees as and is experienced in, through regular policing up until this point, changed in a way which is not as stringent in terms of privacy standards in this new bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt appears to me that there may be an issue with when the Search and Surveillance Act\u00A02012 and the warrant provisions come into place and their interaction between public and private property and what is observable there. I think the private activity insertion in there is good. I think that is a limit, and hopefully officials can confirm that may limit that, but I think it should also, or could also, apply to new section 45C as well, which is when we\u2019re talking about private property.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe last thing\u2014because I just haven\u2019t been able to have a call since my first one\u2014is that I appreciate the Minister has been saying there hasn\u2019t been a change to this, but, of course, because of \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna v R\u003C/span\u003E, there must be a change in this legislation, otherwise we wouldn\u2019t require it to be the case. It would be good to have an acknowledgment of what \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna \u003C/span\u003Estates the law is, which is the status quo to date and what the Minister sees these changes then allowing. I appreciate that the current practice may not change, but certainly the law as in the status quo may have may be changed slightly by this. I suppose what we\u2019re concerned about is that it\u2019s going too far in that instance. Hopefully, those questions made sense for the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022ad963aaf867375b2d77f95e5b90863ad\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ad963aaf867375b2d77f95e5b90863ad\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (17:45)\u003C/span\u003E: If I can just address the question from Tamatha Paul\u2014\u201CDoes \u2018by any means\u2019 include future tech, and has Police indicated what future tech could be?\u201D\u2014using the example, and I have seen them, of the glasses with a very small camera where, obviously, you can be recorded, the term \u201Cby any means\u201D is futureproofing to enable the use of new technology such as body cameras. There must always be a lawful purpose for the collection, and the collection must be necessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EComing back to Camilla Belich\u2019s question, on new section 45C and the interaction between new section 45C and the Search and Surveillance Act\u2014the reference in new section 45B(2) not being in new section 45C\u2014absolutely that is a very relevant question. Because they can only record what they can see or hear, it is not a private activity if Police can see it while lawfully on the property or on the private property. The Search and Surveillance Act does not apply in these circumstances, if they are lawfully there and can lawfully see or hear it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022 data-id=\u0022e27a72da62f5141e0ab6535b458b0797\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e27a72da62f5141e0ab6535b458b0797\u0022\u003ERYAN HAMILTON (National\u2014Hamilton East) (17:46)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e14ab7e248541b0d9117d3240ba175d2\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re making quite good progress. I would, obviously, keep looking for members to keep progressing through the bill as we go on\u2014on new section 45C at the moment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224ee4471ecdcf4eeda5bd6179167372f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022a6d8177ab497bf9f65b67752438462fc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224ee4471ecdcf4eeda5bd6179167372f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a6d8177ab497bf9f65b67752438462fc\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (17:46)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I actually want to jump on to clause 4A, with the insertion of new section 100A; just noting some of my colleagues might not be finished in some of those earlier sections. My question is around the review in three years\u2019 time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve got a couple of key safeguards within that section, but we have also covered, in previous contributions throughout the urgency, the Inspector-General of Police, and I was wondering\u2014because, in three years\u2019 time, if I\u2019m doing my maths right, the Inspector-General of Police will be in place\u2014how the Inspector-General of Police would interface with this review, if at all. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022f80d48cb74d61a62b0ef1462b8c82183\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f80d48cb74d61a62b0ef1462b8c82183\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (17:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Very quickly on that one, it\u2019s too early to say, because there is work being done around the Inspector-General of Police and how they\u2019re, obviously, going to interact with agencies like the Independent Police Conduct Authority and Police, and other agencies that they may interact with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EJust coming back to and finishing that last question by the honourable member Camilla Belich\u2014\u201CHow does the bill respond to \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna\u003C/span\u003E?\u201D\u2014it is quite simple, and the reality of it is, as I said, that it wasn\u2019t that we didn\u2019t need to clarify and use the legislation to be able to clarify, as a result of that case; it was just that there were no new powers being introduced. That\u2019s exactly what it does; it clarifies that Police collecting information for intelligence purposes is a lawful policing function and is subject to limitations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u00226032ad6449d3a60e8afed4246710ddba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226032ad6449d3a60e8afed4246710ddba\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (17:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and just as you indicated, I\u2019m stepping through some of these things, and certainly new section 45D\u2014I\u2019ll preface that, when we get to that, I want to talk about \u201Cwill or may\u201D and how that ties in with the privacy principles.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust on new section 45C, because this is quite important, this is taking recordings on private property. Now, the police are very good at their job, and I\u2019ve seen them operate, right, when they come to your door and they knock on your door and they say, \u201COh, can you help us?\u201D Then they say, \u201CDo you mind if we come in?\u201D Of course, the natural human reaction is to say yes. Now, I\u2019ll advise my clients: \u201CDon\u2019t say \u2018Yes\u2019, say \u2018No, I\u2019m happy to talk on the doorstep.\u2019\u00A0\u201D Of course, once they\u2019re in, they\u2019re there by invitation. The general invitation is \u201CYes, come in and chat\u201D, but, again, police are very good: if they see some stuff, if they see some photos on the pin board and they think \u201CThat\u2019s interesting\u201D\u2014now, they\u2019re unlikely to get out their phone and just click them right there and then in front of the occupant, but they probably might say, \u201COh, could you get me a glass of water?\u201D Off you go to the kitchen and, before you know it, the officer has taken photos of the photos that are on the pin board.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, Minister, if you could confirm that that\u2019s exactly what\u2019s intended\u2014that that scenario is in fact exactly what\u2019s intended. I think a lot of New Zealanders would be surprised that on inviting a police officer or allowing a police officer to come into their house\u2014so they go into the house; it\u2019s a house which has gang affiliations. They see some photos of groups of people, perhaps by a car that they think might be involved in a criminal enterprise, and off they go\u2014just your confirmation that, when people invite an officer into their house, the officer can take those photos.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d also just be interested if you could talk about the limits to that: if they come and they sit at the kitchen table and there\u2019s a notebook open on the table and they say, \u201CCan you get me a glass of water?\u201D, they can take a photo of the notebook. Would it be right to say they couldn\u2019t turn the page, or could they flip over the page and see if there\u2019s a few phone numbers on the next page that are of help to them? I do think that being invited into a house is not usually seen as an invitation to come and take photos of stuff that\u2019s there on the fridge, in a notebook, on the pinboard. If we\u2019re going to permit this, and we are, I think the limits of that need to be made very clear.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo you\u2019ve got flipping a notebook; the other one would be walking around. Perhaps, you know, you\u2019re walking around and, on your way out, you look into a bedroom and you see something of interest in the bedroom. Could you quickly duck in there and take a photo on your way out? Or does the invitation not extend that far? I would invite the Minister, not necessarily right now, to explain to New Zealand exactly what the rights of a constable are in terms of taking photographs and recording things in a private dwelling, and, in particular, what, according to this piece of legislation, the limits are, because, at the moment, the limits on the words aren\u2019t that clear. It\u2019s just \u201Canything\u201D that they can see or hear. And see or hear, I guess, is where I get \u201Cyou can\u2019t flip the page\u201D\u2014because you can\u2019t see what\u2019s on the next page, and you\u2019re not allowed to touch things, because that becomes a search\u2014but walking past a bedroom and saying, \u201COh, look, there\u2019s something on the bed there; that\u2019s interesting.\u201D\u2014or someone asleep on the bed. I\u2019d be interested in the Minister\u2019s thoughts on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00226bcb6f6e6231860cd632ea3b628b3fa1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226bcb6f6e6231860cd632ea3b628b3fa1\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (17:52)\u003C/span\u003E: I think I can talk with some confidence and say from experience, having had a career in the police force, that police officers don\u2019t turn up to houses, knock on the door, and say, \u201COh, can I just come in and hang out with you?\u201D They\u2019re normally there for some purpose.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENormally, if they want to go into your home, it\u2019s because they\u2019re checking on reports of a violent domestic or family violence. They may be there to inform the family of a sudden death, which, of course, is a tragedy. They\u2019ll go in there, and they\u2019ll try and comfort them while they give them that horrible news. They don\u2019t just arrive on a doorstep, randomly at someone\u2019s house, knock on the door, and expect to be going there to just hang out. They\u2019re there for a purpose.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of, if they are in the house and they do collect some information, the test is very simple, and it\u2019s in the bill: it\u2019s that the recording must be for a lawful purpose and be necessary for that purpose. That is in the legislation, and that is the rule, and that is the test that has to be applied.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u00222cd26fd6bd464078aafa5fa4ca3c4bca\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222cd26fd6bd464078aafa5fa4ca3c4bca\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (17:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Taking your guidance around this new section, I thought I\u2019d use the opportunity to briefly ask the Minister of Police about my two tabled amendments. They are both dated 15 September 2026\u2014one\u2019s 9.45.08, and one\u2019s 9.45.09\u2014and they both apply to clause\u00A04, new section 45C. One of them is about deleting new section 45C altogether, and that is in order to address concerns regarding the lack of safeguards in the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThen the second tabled amendment is in relation to new section 45C(1A) specifically, and inserts a new subsection (1B), which says police must have permission of the people present to record on private property without a warrant. The purpose for that is to provide a layer of safeguard. I would appreciate the Minister\u2019s thoughts on those two tabled amendments before we move on from that part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022a2952a5d10d8544660c5420c4edde24c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a2952a5d10d8544660c5420c4edde24c\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (17:54)\u003C/span\u003E: My thanks to the member Tamatha Paul. In relation to tabled amendment 9.45.08, no, we don\u2019t support this. This would prevent police from collecting information on private property when they are lawfully there. In the absence of a statutory power, this would be extremely limiting for police.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn terms of tabled amendment 9.45.09, clause 4, inserting new section 45C(1A), you wish to insert \u201CPolice must have permission of the people present to record on private property without a warrant.\u201D No, I don\u2019t support this. This is completely impractical and completely undermines the bill\u2019s intent. This would prevent the use of body-worn cameras, which is the example we\u2019ve already spoken about. We create issues if there is no one present at the time, or if any of the people present do not agree. Police wouldn\u2019t be able to record information when entering private property without warranted powers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u00224e24d9efc72e9253fcff0772d1efa1c2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224e24d9efc72e9253fcff0772d1efa1c2\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (17:55)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I do want to move on to new section 45E, inserted by clause 4 of the bill, if I can. I\u2019ve just got some questions around the Justice Committee\u2019s inclusion of the new provision in new section 45E(1), which outlines that the privacy principles in the Privacy Act 2020 apply. I\u2019ve just been reading through those, and, really, a question I had for the Minister of Police is: how does he see\u2014and he may want to ask officials about this\u2014this particular provision interacting with the rest of the bill? I appreciate that new section 45E actually applies to new sections 45A to 45D as well. So it\u2019s still relevant to these clauses that are proceeding.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen there\u2019s a conflict, I suppose\u2014because we\u2019re, basically, saying, and the select committee has put in there, and I think it\u2019s a good change, after discussion with the Privacy Commissioner, that the privacy principles do apply in this. It says, \u201Csubject to information privacy principles\u201D. Now, if you look at the information privacy principles in the Privacy Act, they state things like \u201Cthe information must be collected from the person\u201D or \u201Cthe person must be informed\u201D. There\u2019s some law enforcement carve-outs for that, which I imagine would be utilised by the police in some instances. My question is: generally, does he have some advice on whether there was a breach? It\u2019s quite complicated to think of all of the different situations where that might occur, but it\u2019d be good to get some advice on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen I\u2019ve got a specific question as well. In our select committee change, we say \u201Csubject to information privacy principles 1 to 4\u201D. There is an information privacy principle 3A in the Privacy Act. I assume that that will cover privacy principle 3A as well? I just wanted to know, because it\u2019s kind of a numerically out-of-sequence privacy principle, whether that\u2014and he may want advice on this as well\u2014would be covered. It just stuck out to me as potentially not being specifically outlined in that new section\u00A045E(1).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u002222af1eb23ca7b77da990f78e6ab7be04\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002222af1eb23ca7b77da990f78e6ab7be04\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (17:58)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Yes, I will get some advice on that from the officials.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EJust coming back to the Hon Dr Duncan Webb, we\u2019ve really covered it off, but you gave the example of ducking into a bedroom. There would be no lawful purpose for going into the bedroom to record information. If there\u2019s no lawful purpose to do that, they can\u2019t do it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022790df779d7250698c680641724a1d190\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford) (17:58)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the time has come for me to leave the Chair for the dinner break. The house will resume at 7 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 5.58 p.m. to 7 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b694910005835a01156eecff7c3231bb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The committee is resumed. Before the dinner break, we were on Part 1, I believe, of the Policing Amendment Bill. The question is, still, that Part 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022ca2b06d270c0149ed49c2fd867fa3c53\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ca2b06d270c0149ed49c2fd867fa3c53\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (19:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. We were, as I\u2019m sure your notes show, stepping through these provisions. My last contribution was on clause 4, new section 45C; I will now move to new section\u00A045D. This is framed as \u201CRestrictions on Police employee collecting information for intelligence purpose\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, there\u2019s actually quite a complicated interplay between this piece of legislation and the Privacy Act, because, as the next section says, this legislation is subject to the Privacy Act. We talk a little bit about lawful purpose, and what this bill does, as I see it, is make intelligence gathering a lawful purpose. Whereas, previously, under the Supreme Court decision, the Supreme Court said that just simply getting information, without knowing exactly what it was for, was not lawful. I think that\u2019s the main legal change here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the privacy principles is that the information must be for a legitimate and lawful purpose, and the way in which you get it must be necessary for that purpose, which brings me to new section 45D(a), which, basically, says you can\u2019t collect information for intelligence purposes\u2014it\u2019s actually a permissive section\u2014\u201Cunless they consider\u201D\u2014the police officer or employee\u2014\u201Cthat the information will or may support the Police in performing a function, or carrying out an activity, of the Police\u201D. I get \u201Cwill\u201D\u2014that the information will support the Police in performing a function of the Police\u2014but \u201Cmay\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to challenge the Minister of Police a bit on that \u201Cmay\u201D, because it\u2019s actually a really low threshold. It\u2019s not even \u201Cis likely to\u201D or \u201Cprobably will\u201D; it\u2019s \u201Cit might\u201D. And to be honest, we wrestled with this at the Justice Committee. I\u2019m imagining that officials reported to the Minister on discussions at select committee. We did discuss whether it should be the officer \u201Cconsiders that the information will support the Police\u201D, because you\u2019ve got \u201Cconsider\u201D as well. It\u2019s not a factual test; it\u2019s a test of what they\u2019re thinking in their head\u2014\u201Cin my reasonable belief, I think this will help the Police in this programme.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think having \u201Cit might help\u201D is actually a really low threshold for collecting. You\u2019ve got to remember this is intelligence information. This is information which isn\u2019t about any suspected offence or offence that\u2019s been committed, or offence that might be committed in the future; it\u2019s about gathering information to assist the Police in its wider enforcement and prevention activities. My question, Minister, is: why is it such a low threshold? They don\u2019t even have to have a positive belief that it will help; they can have a much lower belief that it \u201Cmight\u201D support the Police. Given that they\u2019re collecting information about, you know, general citizens\u2019 data, and don\u2019t have to link it to any particular proposed or historic crime, isn\u2019t it a bit too generous to say that they only have to consider it \u201Cmay\u201D support the Police, not that it actually \u201Cwill\u201D support the Police?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u0022c785f2ecf9769a3780823937c70bbcdc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c785f2ecf9769a3780823937c70bbcdc\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (19:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I have been watching parts of this committee from upstairs, so I feel like I\u2019m across what\u2019s been canvassed today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m also interested in clause 4, new section 45\u2014well, basically, A through C\u2014but I wonder whether the Minister of Police, in regard to the right of the Police to record information, could express how that relates, or if there are any different parameters around, where that information is in regard to a person whose interest to the Police is to do with protest activity as opposed to criminal activity; somebody who, perhaps, has a history or is a part of an organisation, say a non-governmental environmental organisation for example, who has no record of crimes of moral turpitude but has a history of protest activity that is deemed legal under our New Zealand Bill of Rights Act\u2014the right to protest\u2014and whether there are any differentiations with somebody the Police suspect may be undertaking criminal activity or somebody that Police suspect may be undertaking organised protest activity, and what guidance the Minister might give us on that differentiation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason that\u2019s an important differentiation, I think, Minister, is that our right to protest is a very important part of our New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and is recognised as a very important part of a democratic society. Of course, we all know that in societies where there is a shut down of democratic rights, and at the most extreme police States, one of the first things that gets taken out is political dissent and the right of those to protest against the incumbent political power. It\u2019s very important that we protect that right of protest, and where the Police may be acting on behalf of a Government of the day, that may not always be consistent with that important New Zealand Bill of Rights Act protection around the right to protest.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy other question is in terms of the mechanics of how the recording is done, and forgive me if this has been asked earlier, but I understand\u2014I haven\u2019t heard this expressed\u2014there\u2019s no obligation on the police to inform somebody that they\u2019re being recorded. Can you clarify that for us? Is it conceivable that the police could, whatever recording device they have\u2014and it could be as simple as their phone, and they could turn on their voice memo and have it in their pocket and be recording an entire interaction, potentially. Or is there any obligation on the police to inform a person when they\u2019ve been welcomed into that person\u2019s premises that they are recording the interaction\u2014whether that\u2019s audio or visual?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe next part of that question is: is there a component of this, Minister, that is to do with the expectation that there will be greater use of body cams by police, or body recording devices that are in a permanent \u201Con\u201D status, or at least in a permanent status of being able to be triggered? Therefore, does that serve the practical challenge of the right of police to be recording at all times, given they might be carrying body recording equipment that is triggered by noise or movement? There are quite a few questions. I would appreciate any information\u2014the Minister can come back. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022b53d6f9ef68f3e3ba4777ca91e668cfc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b53d6f9ef68f3e3ba4777ca91e668cfc\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (19:08)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll get some advice on the second part of your question. To the first part of it, in terms of public protests: I agree with you completely. It\u2019s a fundamental of the open and free democracy that we enjoy, and should never take for granted, in our country. The police take their responsibility very seriously too, in terms of allowing people to be able to come out and participate in protests\u2014as long as it\u2019s peaceful protest and as long as you\u2019re balancing up, also, the rights of other members of the public, and that they\u2019re not being prevented or stopped from being able to carry out their daily lives.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis legislation, here, does not relate at all, nor is it connected\u2014I did listen to your second reading speech, where you related a very personal situation to you. I can\u2019t talk to that; those are private\u2014well, not private individuals but a company, and so that would be treated very differently. I think, if you\u2019d been in the Chamber earlier tonight, I would have\u2014we actually had a conversation around saying that, actually, the public have got far more rights and ability to collect video, photos, and recordings than the police have. The police are getting the powers that they always used to have. There are no additional powers, but they are heavily regulated and they should be, too, because they\u2019ve got powers that no one else has. I will get the answer to the second part of your question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EComing back to the Hon Dr Duncan Webb, the use of \u201Cmay\u201D enables the potential future use of information to support a function or activity of police. That basically addresses one of the issues that was raised through the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna\u003C/span\u003E case. There are a number of conditions that must be met before that information can be collected.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022188cfe929d394645f0d86a61c16f36a3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Just before I take the next call, just to note that members have been moving through quite methodically, and I\u2019m just noting the notes left by the previous presiding officer in the Chair that new sections 45A, 45B, 45C\u2014and the Hon Dr Duncan Webb touched on new section 45D\u2014right up to new section 45E, inserted by clause 4, have been canvassed, so if I could encourage members to continue to move forward, that would be useful for the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022eb019151d77944857015996396a0e866\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022eb019151d77944857015996396a0e866\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (19:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Yes, I just wanted to move on to the review section, which comes after new section 45E, inserted by clause 4. The layout\u2019s a little bit unusual in terms of the numbering there, but I\u2019m sure the Minister of Police can find the part that I\u2019m speaking to at the top of page 5.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMinister, through the Chair, the review section is quite broad and I just wondered if you could reflect on what your position would be if there were substantive issues. If you are Minister of Police in three years and the review comes back and it shows substantive issues with this bill, is this a policy position that you would be willing to change based on the information provided in the review? Or is it that the review would be more informative as to how the policy was going? I\u2019m just quite interested in how you would approach it if the review findings were critical of the bill or if they were supportive. What would your approach be to that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022a4ad4213f764d136d76615cc8009ebed\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a4ad4213f764d136d76615cc8009ebed\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (19:12)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s a really good question. I mean, it\u2019s difficult to say. The premise of the question is if we did the review\u2014the review will happen. Of course, the three participants are the Police, the Independent Police Conduct Authority, and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner. If it came back with recommendations that required strengthening of the legislation, then the Minister of the day, of course, would have to respond to those recommendations, but my expectation is that we should always be looking for continual improvement. We should always be strengthening our legislation and improving it. If there were recommendations to come back in line with that\u2014and again, we\u2019re looking into the future, but I think that everyone would agree that we should always be looking for continual improvement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022be02c5ff2a284c0e2d339bae236e3ae1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022be02c5ff2a284c0e2d339bae236e3ae1\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (19:13)\u003C/span\u003E: The reviewer must consult the Police, the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA), and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner. I\u2019m assuming that the reviewer can or may consult other people as well, in her or his discretion. That does seem to be a reasonable thing for the reviewer to be able to do, but I guess I\u2019m a little disconcerted that the people who may be the subject of these new laws are not being consulted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I guess they maybe get consulted via the Office of the Privacy Commissioner or via the IPCA, but it does seem that there should be some capacity for members of the public or, at least, representative bodies that might have some insight into how the law has been operating to participate in the review as well. I\u2019m thinking of, I guess, the Law Society, who might have some insights into how the law is actually operating in practice or might be able to gather that insight from some of its members, or the Citizens Advice Bureau. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m just trying to think of where\u2014even members of this committee might be good people to consult. As a constituency MP, I do recall members of the public coming to me to say that they had not been as well treated by the police as they would have liked to have been, although mostly in those cases I felt perhaps their expectations were a little unrealistic. I was very proud of the local police we had in New Lynn and Avondale and I thought they did a really good job.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want some reassurance that the reviewer would be able to consult more widely than just the three bodies that are named. I don\u2019t want to use the word \u201Cvictims\u201D in advance of the law being deployed, but people who perhaps have been subject to it in some way would want to have some way of feeding into that review. My experience is that most of the time, the police, like most people, do a pretty good job. Every now and again, you get someone who stuffs up, because the police are human beings too, but they do a pretty good job, but nevertheless, there needs to be some avenue in there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022b889b43cfc03860d8ed35be717307897\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b889b43cfc03860d8ed35be717307897\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (19:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Going back to the honourable member Steve Abel, just very quickly on the question around whether police are required to inform the person that they are recording audio or video. Police are subject to the information privacy principles, including information privacy principle 3, which requires notifying where reasonable in the circumstances. How could collecting information relate to protest activity rather than criminal activity, including no criminal history? There would need to be a lawful purpose and it would need to be necessary for any images or recordings to be made in that circumstance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EComing back to the question around whether the Minister can actually seek some other advice, we have codified in the legislation in terms of Police, the Independent Police Conduct Authority, and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, but there is nothing stopping the Minister from seeking broader advice on that review.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022df79015859faba3bd53dee37252bcc04\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022df79015859faba3bd53dee37252bcc04\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (19:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I just want to touch on the rather complicated interplay between the Privacy Act and these powers. We\u2019ve got these four\u2014or five privacy principles, in fact, if you count 3A, but 3A is a bit odd because it\u2019s about collecting information from a third party and then confirming it. But you\u2019ve got new section 45D, inserted by clause 4, that we\u2019ve discussed. Thank you for your answer to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen you\u2019ve got new section 45E(1), which says, \u201CThe collection of personal information \u2026 is subject to information privacy principles 1 to 4\u201D. Information privacy principle 1 has kind of two legs. It must be for a lawful purpose\u2014this Act makes it lawful\u2014then the collection of the information is necessary for that purpose. I guess the complex interplay that I referred to is you\u2019ve got this quite low bar in new section 45D(a), but then you\u2019ve got this high bar in privacy principle 1, which says it must be necessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn particular, there may be a number of different ways to obtain private information. In terms taking these photographs or recordings, that\u2019s one way, but if there was another way to get the same information\u2014the information you\u2019re after might be what people are associated with this known offender. Now, you could take photographs in public places of them meeting or you could have long-term surveillance. Now, there\u2019s an argument there that putting a camera up and taking photographs isn\u2019t necessary because you could run a surveillance programme, so there\u2019s that question as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess if you step through those privacy principles, you\u2019ve actually got\u2014I guess this is my point. My wider point is that you\u2019ve got two layers of regulation. New section 45E(1) says that this legislation is subject to the information privacy principles. It strikes me that you\u2019ve got to meet the information privacy principles\u2014for example, principle 4 I think it is, which says that the method of collecting information must be fair and reasonable in the circumstances.  You\u2019ve got to meet that threshold before you come to say, \u201CAnd then we\u2019re authorised under this.\u201D I suspect\u2014you know, this is the criminal law we\u2019re dealing with; people will be asking these questions in court\u2014it would be really useful to understand from the Minister whether that\u2019s the threshold that\u2019s understood to be the case\u2014the police first have to address privacy principles 1 to 4, and then if they meet those, then and only then can they say, \u201CAnd we\u2019re authorised to do this under this piece of legislation here.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u002215df64d259ebc78c0cc52484b5d44d51\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002215df64d259ebc78c0cc52484b5d44d51\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (19:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you for those answers, Minister. That\u2019s much appreciated. I think I correctly interpreted from your one on the need to inform the person being recorded that they were that they did need to be informed, if I interpret that answer correctly. At that point\u2014I\u2019m talking about the instance where somebody has come into somebody\u2019s private space, or perhaps it\u2019s not even then; perhaps it\u2019s in any instance\u2014does a citizen at any point have a right to express to the police that they do not wish to be recorded? Do they have an ability to exercise their right to, as they see it, their privacy\u2014so to say to the police, \u201CI don\u2019t consent to being recorded aurally or visually.\u201D? That\u2019s one question. And can the police override that right through this legislation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThen my second question is in a different realm, in a sense. It\u2019s to do with the term \u201Creasonable\u201D in new section 45D, inserted by clause 4. New section 45D(b): \u201Cmay make a continuous sound or video recording solely for an intelligence purpose only if\u2014(i) paragraph (a) does not prevent them from making the recording for that purpose; and (ii) making the recording solely for that purpose is reasonable in the circumstances;\u201D, and then (iii) has, \u201Cthe duration of the recording is not longer than is reasonable in the circumstances.\u201D What are the parameters of \u201Creasonable\u201D? What is the extent of what is reasonable? What guidelines are there in jurisprudence or in definitions that the police would be applying in how they interpret the meaning of that word \u201Creasonable\u201D in new section 45D? Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022ec40c670d0c921c8d433956f863e2570\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ec40c670d0c921c8d433956f863e2570\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (19:22)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, thank you. In answer to the first part of your question, I\u2019ll wait for the officials just to confirm it for me, but I think the legislation is clear that, of course, any member of the public can seek and say, \u201CI don\u2019t want my image recorded.\u201D, but the legislation provides very strict rules and regulations around what the police can record and how they do that. There\u2019s no reference to someone, a member of the public, telling them they can\u2019t do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn relation to the reasonableness test, the high-level summary is circumstance specific. It recognises that intelligence recordings are essential to policing but there are limitations. Mass surveillance is not enabled. It\u2019s subject to assessments by courts, if used in evidence, and can be scrutinised by the Independent Police Conduct Authority and the Privacy Commissioner. The reasonableness test only relates to continuous recording for intelligence purposes only\u2014new section 45D(b). The length of the recording and the circumstances\u2014it must be reasonable to record. Police\u2019s ability to undertake continuous recording solely for intelligence purpose is restricted by the reasonableness test: making a recording solely for that purpose, it is reasonable in the circumstances, and the duration of the recording is no longer than is reasonable in the circumstances. How will it be measured? Police practice and application of the reasonableness test threshold will be open to review by the Privacy Commissioner, both on a case-by-case basis and at a systemic level. In the event that evidence is challenged, it will be subject to assessments by the court.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0593d80f7ab8aa0e84cdabd22a43b53\u0022\u003ESteve Abel\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022116bb31733e2234c4ab9a23465fee0d7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Have you got a quick response to the question?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa53bc3ad2a9e0488627d5e3e0c257d6\u0022\u003ESteve Abel\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve got a follow-up, yeah.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226884562f61addc60d2e7a4fcd8670da4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: If it\u2019s a quick one, that\u2019s good, because we do want to move forward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u002272603c759616a81f133771e2a7bf8b70\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002272603c759616a81f133771e2a7bf8b70\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (19:24)\u003C/span\u003E: I understand that. My question that I asked earlier, which I didn\u2019t get a clear answer on, was to do with the use of body recording equipment, which we know is increasingly used in cars and so forth.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022088d82333ba02425b9351bd4e8712882\u0022\u003EHon Mark Mitchell\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, Mr Chair, if I can just interrupt. I realise the member wasn\u2019t here earlier. That was covered off by his colleague, so we have covered that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221355ee31d83f4775fc8cd6e518d445e2\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, pardon me. OK. So then my follow-up to that is that I imagine\u2014and I wonder if you can reflect on this with your experience as well\u2014there would be an element of an expectation that if a police officer was going into a situation where there was potential intelligence to be gathered and they failed to record, and something that turned out, in retrospect, to be very useful for them in terms of their intelligence gathering wasn\u2019t captured, in fact, the default would be for police to always record to cover their backs, for want of a better term, to make sure that they didn\u2019t miss out on anything that could be useful, as they see it, from an intelligence point of view. Hence this word \u201Cmay\u201D would lend itself to make the police, as a default, make sure they were recording in case something was said or something occurred that they then could interpret as being useful and could then be defined as intelligence that was gathered. I imagine there are instances where police would kick themselves for not having recorded an interaction where information was conveyed that was useful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022ec59c2867ac80d347724c96a2eacc409\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ec59c2867ac80d347724c96a2eacc409\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (19:26)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Good question, but the reality of it is that is that we\u2019re going to have to deal with that if and when police officers start wearing body-worn cameras. Then it\u2019ll have to be looked at. The officials will have to look at it and decide whether or not the legislation that we\u2019re passing here is sufficient or whether or not it might need some more legislation to deal with that. In terms of capturing images or recordings and their evidential value, that is very operational for police. But in terms of if and when they begin to wear body cameras, then we\u2019d have to work out whether or not we need new legislation or the existing legislation would cover that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESorry, just before we finish, Mr Chair, coming back to the Hon Dr Duncan Webb, the test for collection of personal info sits in the Privacy Act. This bill clarifies what lawful purposes are, i.e., for the purposes of information privacy principles (IPPs)\u2014(a); and police must then satisfy that the collection is necessary subject to IPPs\u2014(b).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022750565f5fd59a79dbb5429102a3de239\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022750565f5fd59a79dbb5429102a3de239\u0022\u003ERIMA NAKHLE (National\u2014Takanini) (19:28)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008439\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eae7dd5bd89185e7259532f96ad29bdf\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Ginny Andersen\u2019s tabled amendment inserting new clause 4AA be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008446\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aa0ec18ab250cacde4e0a7a30b31ae4f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul tabled amendment to clause 4 to replace new section 45A be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008453\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022479d39d9abd1699ac61f40f033fb4996\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 to delete new section 45A(c) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008460\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 4; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002272e875013ab1c44ed93b53255aca1bb9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new section 45A(2) and (3) is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Dan Rosewarne\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new section 45AA be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008468\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour  22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8; \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment no agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c93626817fcbf2352514d30ce0c8cf74\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 to replace new section 45B be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008475\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002206eaf30fe22d780852b0bb6ea0eb8e0e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 45B(1), to delete the words \u201Cby any means\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008482\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298605b4b4c3273b88b44e0f507faf638\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Ginny Andersen\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 45B(1), relating to \u201Ctechnologically-enhanced collection\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008489\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022392a230d2b911e9ab36cabdbdbe4e82f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Ginny Andersen\u2019s tabled to clause 4 inserting new section 45B(2) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008496\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227930dac18d5ba2f3ba210896dd7d71d1\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 deleting new section 45C be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008503\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f883372308cb4d77bfe5dca5a1b3db9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Ginny Andersen\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 deleting new section 45C is out of order as being the same in substance as a previous amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new section 45C(1B) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008511\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cade4224ac4ac3699d744caefbc4f576\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new subsection (1) after new section 45C is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that the Hon Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new section 45CA relating to facial recognition and biometric databases be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008519\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223cbb1a9154003ab054eb469e47ff11c5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Ginny Andersen\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 45D(a), deleting \u201Cor may\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008526\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f7681a49670f2ef75b7f5013399dda8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 45D(a), relating to reasonable grounds be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008533\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c249b5263583fda22558cd2a83beaae3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new section 45D(ab) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008540\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f3bbdaf1411c4ac4abd457c144847dd6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 45D(a), replacing everything after the word \u201Cunless\u201D is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that the Hon Ginny Andersen\u2019s table amendment to clause 4 new section 45D(b)(ii) replacing \u201Creasonable\u201D with \u201Cnecessary\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008548\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022865da189ad8204265fbced65a85b5184\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Ginny Andersen\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 45D, inserting new subsection (2) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008555\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d81437708710ed21707e263e9716184b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Ginny Andersen\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4, new section 45D, inserting new subsections (2) and (3) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008562\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022843997aff71518229f7f088ab618eec9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Ginny Andersen\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new section 45DA be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008569\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022020677e4bc4b1aa5edc9a60a8af1062c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new section 45DA, relating to the meaning of \u201Cintelligence purposes\u201D, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008576\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002201ae7d493794caf224c7cd97531d61e0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new section 45DC, relating to prohibiting discriminatory collections, be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008583\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022408ba468fc987ec4330d39c180fcfc34\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new section 45DB is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Dan Rosewarne\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 4 inserting new section 45E(1A) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008591\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002239e5f9143f094f4d6b056b9bfb5b4fd4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to insert new section 100B is out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Part 1 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 32\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 22; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ca5678a325b657078881993da40d5cc3\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022bebebea6b124857b02f4bf8d2435e017\u0022\u003EPart 2 Amendments relating to temporary closing of accessible areas\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226aa2a2e9d0eff7ca38a2ed0d6768a43a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we now come to Part 2. Part 2 is the debate on clauses 5 to 14, \u201CAmendments relating to temporary closing of accessible areas\u201D. The question is that Part 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u00225fd0c19b89d7a829e54a5b417745166a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225fd0c19b89d7a829e54a5b417745166a\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (19:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I have a few questions around this. Although it didn\u2019t get the kind of scrutiny at select committee that the intelligence gathering did, it still is a relatively significant power.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EStarting at the beginning with clause\u00A05, which amends the interpretation section, it just strikes me that this new definition of \u201Caccessible area\u201D is actually really, really wide. If it\u2019s an area that it is physically possible for a motor vehicle to enter, then it\u2019s almost everywhere, right? Obviously, it could be The Warehouse car park\u2014we\u2019ve seen the ads\u2014but, equally, it could be my own property or a farm, because if you\u2019ve got a farm gate and it\u2019s open into a paddock, then that area is accessible by motor vehicle.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess it\u2019s a pretty short question: is it an area which a member of the public can lawfully enter in a motor vehicle? The Warehouse car park would actually fit that definition because it is an open invitation to any member of the public to drive in. Or is it an area which any member of the public can physically enter? Your farm paddock is one where you\u2019re not allowed to go and drive your car on there; that\u2019s not what the paddock\u2019s for, and there\u2019s no invitation to do so. If the definition is the broad definition, then this is very far-reaching indeed, because you could have, for example, a farmer who\u2019s having a wedding that\u2019s going to be a pretty feisty affair, and the police are like, \u201COh, we don\u2019t really like that. We think that it\u2019s going to be disruptive to the neighbours, so we\u2019re going to shut it down.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s my question in short, and the farm paddock\u2019s a really good example of it. Is it a, \u201CYou can physically access it by motor vehicle one way or another\u201D; or is it, \u201CYou are legally entitled to enter this area as a member of the public, such as a public roadway, a car park, and a shopping centre, or the like\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00229227463c0b0ab690e0b4fe22e02f8e9b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229227463c0b0ab690e0b4fe22e02f8e9b\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (19:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just very quickly. Basically, with the amendment bill that I brought forward with the Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Act 2026, which hadn\u2019t been passed at the time that the Justice Committee were actually considering this bill, and so now, basically, this carries over the accessible area closure power that sits inside the Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Act, not the broad definition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u00225ad872dc3372060ddbf6292120ce0966\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225ad872dc3372060ddbf6292120ce0966\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (19:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019ve got some questions in relation to the definitions as well, and I wondered if I might also just refer to the Minister of Police\u2019s Amendment Paper too. I\u2019ll just stick with clause 5 to start with. I have a couple of questions about that. Other people may have questions on accessible areas, but I just had a kind of policy question that it seems to apply to both public and private areas from the way it\u2019s defined. I appreciate the Minister\u2019s comments on the Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Act, but I just had a policy question in relation to\u2014is that true? Public or private, it\u2019s just if it\u2019s accessible?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EBut the main questions I wanted to ask was that I was trying to match up the Amendment Paper and this bill, and I can see the deletion of the definition of \u201Cvehicle\u201D there; I just can\u2019t see where \u201Ctraffic\u201D is. I can see \u201Ctraffic\u201D in clause 5 of the Amendment Paper as it\u2019s listed. I can see \u201Ctraffic\u201D as a definition in clause 6 of the bill, which we haven\u2019t come to yet, but I just wondered if the Minister could just point me to\u2014in his Amendment Paper, it states that the definition of \u201Ctraffic\u201D is repealed in section 4. That\u2019s in clause 5, and it might be that I\u2019m just misreading it, and I\u2019ve been picked up for my reading of legislation this week already by some other members so it could be my fault, but that\u2019s just a genuine question. I just can\u2019t find where that is in clause 5 of the bill, so I\u2019d be really grateful to know the answer to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022 data-id=\u0022b8a5f1b7730ce9b4ccbd858b46fc95a9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b8a5f1b7730ce9b4ccbd858b46fc95a9\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (19:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Minister of Police, I originally had a question for clause 5, but you actually answered it in your response to the Hon Dr Duncan Webb, so thanks for that. I\u2019ll move on to clause 6, which is replacing section 35, and I just wanted to address section 35(1) in particular. I\u2019m a car enthusiast and, over the years, I\u2019ve attended plenty of car shows and cruise events and community gatherings involving\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227b4d26c4e40e31e05e427728b9003879\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: And this is where you\u2019re spending your Saturday night.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220cc46256be130c55f60f9cb4ae809589\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE\u003C/span\u003E: Absolutely, and it\u2019s actually the Kaikoura Hop this weekend, and I\u2019m in the Chamber tonight; but back to the question. The overwhelming majority of people at those events are law-abiding New Zealanders, and they\u2019re hobbyists who invest a huge amount of time and money into their vehicles and contribute positively to their communities. My concern with clause 6 is that while it\u2019s clearly aimed at antisocial road use, the powers are drafted broadly enough to allow police to close an accessible area where they believe certain behaviour may occur. I want to make sure we don\u2019t end up in a situation where responsible enthusiasts are treated the same way as people engaged in dangerous or destructive behaviour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThat distinction matters because most people attending these organised car events have no interest in things like burnouts, racing, or causing problems and things like that. So I was just wondering, Minister, if you could explain what safeguards do exist to ensure that legitimate car clubs, organised car shows, and gatherings of responsible motoring enthusiasts are not caught up by these closure powers simply because they involve modified vehicles and a large number of cars. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u00225212c95d48f1cc8aac8882bb803508dd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225212c95d48f1cc8aac8882bb803508dd\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (19:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Actually, I\u2019ve just got some thoughts going through my head about antisocial road use too. I live in West Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f8f3a5eeccb53577eb05e62d6fca73d6\u0022\u003ESteve Abel\u003C/span\u003E: All the best people do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bbfafbafd3c2b3355dc4a36aa971e70e\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: All the best people do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226835bc4a4af8562440ee299703c42bae\u0022\u003EHon Chris Penk\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002267a965e1e6abfac0122cc16bde9c6bdb\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, Mr Penk. There\u2019s a fair amount of interesting road behaviour that goes on there, shall we say, notably at the intersection just outside our house, which happens to be quite a steep rose coming up and then a T-intersection. It turns out to be a favoured spot for the local lads doing burnouts and things like that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022687bf7a613eaa3a6d2e5d5fd0e088dd5\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: Malcolm.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de0956cc8a4f99b9518652f5b3daf234\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha! He\u2019s a bit old for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f73ce8c3a9b9d05efa5052441c2182e\u0022\u003EHon Mark Mitchell\u003C/span\u003E: Sure it\u2019s not Dan Rosewarne?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbe19cf9b1fe73f1ae8e1e3eaf7fb5af\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha! Yeah, who knew you were visiting all the time, Dan. But I mean, it\u2019s West Auckland, it happens. It is somewhat antisocial, and it\u2019s not a heavy-use intersection, but it does go to a section of the community which is not the only route out but perhaps the most used route out. I\u2019m wondering just how the police are going to balance this up; the need to balance the antisocial road use to stop that kind of road use versus the need to keep roads open so that ordinary citizens can just access them as they need to and get up to the dairy to grab that litre of milk they need for their late-night Milo, and so on. There\u2019s a balancing of those two things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00225c7067ba083f21e7a428329886e8b6e4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225c7067ba083f21e7a428329886e8b6e4\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (19:57)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I\u2019d hope that the member Deborah Russell is not engaging in loss of traction when she\u2019s going up to the corner dairy to get her milk at night. Quite simply, the answer to that is to stick to the rules. We have rules on our roads to keep people safe. We\u2019re trying to drive our death toll down, and, basically, the boy-racer legislation is there to target the boy racers. They cause a lot of chaos and stress and anxiety in the communities when they come out and they perform. By the way, one car doing lots of traction and burnouts can be as bad as half a dozen. My expectation is that, if they\u2019re breaking the law and the laws are very prescriptive, then the police will take action on it. But on saying that, the police also have got discretion. I just want to say that our New Zealand Police, I think, is one of the best police forces in the world and has demonstrated decade after decade of actually being very good judicious users of that discretion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess, coming back to the member Dan Rosewarne, it\u2019s the same. I remember when we brought in the gang legislation and people were saying, \u201CWhat about the legitimate bike clubs that want to display their bike\u2019s emblem? Will they be caught by the legislation?\u201D The answer was quite simply no. You have to be already identified on the gang list as a gang that\u2019s engaging in some type of criminal activity or harm. The same would apply to people that are coming out to cause harm and create issues in the communities that they love.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EComing back, also, to the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2014the question was around, does it apply to public or private places?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf12b8012115fc0b5f9afa809069d282\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, and there were two questions there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c50eb6aa0c806ab5b42b42775145c6aa\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah. So it only applies to private places that the public has access to\u2014e.g., the example is something like a supermarket car park.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAnd coming back to the honourable member Camilla Belich, the definition of traffic; is it repealed in the Amendment Paper? The definition of traffic has been removed in the Amendment Paper, so it\u2019s actually been taken out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u00228081054cb2e83ec4f31e89fb25853c95\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228081054cb2e83ec4f31e89fb25853c95\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (20:00)\u003C/span\u003E: I am loathe to go to new section 35, because we might have had the questions earlier, but given there\u2019s conversations about antisocial road use, it\u2019s a thought that comes to mind.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI noticed on page 44 of the regulatory impact statement, in terms of expanded grounds for closing public and private areas, there\u2019s examples of what may be deemed as antisocial road use: street racing, drag racing, drifting or burnouts, driving in an intimidating convoy, dirt bike gatherings at public parks, a vehicle damaging a playing field, gatherings of vehicles, and siren battles. I wonder, in terms of new section 35(1)(e), \u201Ca person is operating, or may reasonably be expected to operate, a motor vehicle at or near the place in a way that\u2014(i) creates, or is likely to create, noise that, having regard to all the circumstances, is excessive\u201D\u2014now, I guess we all probably have a pretty good idea of what we would envisage was excessive noise, and as Deborah Russell has rightly pointed out, it is a quite familiar reality of living in certain urban parts of New Zealand and, perhaps, rural parts of New Zealand that we hear excessive noise late at night and we curse those who create it. And then we probably in our more conciliatory minds go, \u201CWell, we can put it down to young larrikins doing what young people do,\u201D as we probably all did to some extent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b8a9ff01879112ca5fdf2e67071a66a5\u0022\u003EHon Dr Deborah Russell\u003C/span\u003E: Ah, no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274623043d5ccba8f9b192141fba4b8a6\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: I thought you were a Westie, Deborah. I don\u2019t mean to be distracted. One of the things that I increasingly observe in the noise space happens by day in built-up traffic areas, and it\u2019s to do with very loud sound systems in cars. Now, I would caution those people who have those extremely large subwoofers in cars that make not just their own car rattle but all those adjacent to them that they\u2019re doing terrible and permanent damage to their ears, and I would advise against them doing it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI wonder if that would be captured, Minister, and if it\u2019s not already captured; and whether you envisage that the police might find themselves obliged to pull over somebody with a large subwoofer in their car who was causing adjacent cars to rattle; and whether that would be the best use of police time, notwithstanding that it might be something of a nuisance and notwithstanding that the person doing it might be doing harm to themselves and even those adjacent to them for that temporary period.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00224243b02cd0ef9615cedd8c275581c7f2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224243b02cd0ef9615cedd8c275581c7f2\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (20:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. To be honest with you, I\u2019ve never heard one of these, but they\u2019ve got these things called siren battles, where they come out and\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002215582f6c65d6ddab10095b185b9fe30f\u0022\u003ESteve Abel\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah. I haven\u2019t heard them, either.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c771806ba06cbdb8503a01a62babfa05\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I mean, they\u2019re extremely disturbing, not just for the neighbours but actually the whole area\u2014you know, the wider community. And so new section 35(1)(e) responds to the siren battles, and this was carried over from the boy-racer legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u00228db563faecd45f371171c922393ea175\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228db563faecd45f371171c922393ea175\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (20:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and thanks for the Minister of Police\u2019s answer to my question. I still can\u2019t find, exactly, if this Amendment Paper 668 has it written in the right place. I did check the primary bill, as well, and I also couldn\u2019t find it in there. I\u2019m just looking to see, is the Amendment Paper referring to where traffic is in the right place? Maybe he can get some advice on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe main contribution I wanted to make, and I did want to move on to clause 6, is there is quite a significant issue, a serious issue, which I wanted to get some reassurance from the Minister on. If we look at new section 35(1)(a), the definition of when the police can close accessible areas is when \u201Cpublic disorder exists or is an imminent at or near [a] place\u201D. One of the things that came up in our submission process is that there were some concerns by people like the civil liberties organisation that the provisions in Part 2 would be used to prevent lawful protest. I know that we\u2019ve touched on that briefly in Part 1 in relation to protest tours who might be followed or surveilled, but this is a different point. This is in relation to the closure of areas.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou might have a situation we have a big h\u012Bkoi or you have a big protest, as we\u2019ve seen in the past, and I think we\u2019ve already traversed today\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be28ffc11c2c35d0c45619c80d4e5b52\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: Groundswell.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220b4a7df65d61aeb2d030c85548265d8d\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, that\u2019s true\u2014and it can be, as Dr Duncan Webb says, either political persuasion who might want to do a big march down the road. But is this something that the Minister was envisaging would be covered by \u201Cpublic disorder exists\u201D? It\u2019s almost inherent in a large group of people doing anything that there is a risk of public disorder, especially if it\u2019s on a subject matter, which is a motive. That\u2019s often why police are present, because there inherently is a little bit of a risk.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe did have, I think, the New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties put forward a submission at select committee,  and they actually recommended changing this new section 35 to look at something similar to the Crimes Act, where this right may not be invoked when someone is involving themselves in protest. I think they suggested the Crimes Act, section 78AAA(5)(b). This is a genuine question: is this meant to be included or is it not? And if it\u2019s not meant to be included\u2014and I know it\u2019s a bit late and that\u2019s as much on us as a select committee and people that can put forward amendments as anyone else\u2014would the Minister be open to specifically stating that it\u2019s not to apply when there\u2019s a protest situation? Because I don\u2019t think that\u2019s the Minister\u2019s intention, but certainly it\u2019s been something that was raised in select committee and was suggested that might be changed, and it is something that I know that people are concerned about in terms of the increased powers under this section. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo, genuinely, would there be an opportunity to clarify whether that is the intention of this legislation and maybe other parts, as well, which may be relevant to that? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022b41c30d4bc12ed4910041476b9c851e8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b41c30d4bc12ed4910041476b9c851e8\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (20:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I take the member Camilla Belich\u2019s point completely, but I think that in the type of scenarios that were given, a hikoi or a planned protest or\u2014and we\u2019ve just seen one with the protest on horseback come out of the East Coast\u2014what\u2019ll happen there is the police will engage with them. There\u2019ll be some traffic plans, and there will be lots of talking. There\u2019ll be agreements to make sure everyone\u2019s kept safe, and then the protest happens. This legislation wouldn\u2019t kick in unless the protest descended into some sort of chaotic behaviour or breaking the law or not sticking to the rules, and I\u2019d expect the police, then, to look at what legislation is available to them and what powers they have to be able to deal with that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u0022a7e6d5b1f55d3bf61d5e94625f1c1ea0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a7e6d5b1f55d3bf61d5e94625f1c1ea0\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (20:08)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much. That\u2019s an excellent starting question, Camilla, and I have a follow-up to that. I can give a very specific example, Minister, that might assist in expressing concerns around this\u2014the power that police have. You just outlined that in an instance such as a h\u012Bkoi or the horse h\u012Bkoi that we recently had that there would be an attempt to liaise with the group to find a shared understanding of the interests of protecting public safety, whether it\u2019s protesters or what have you. I know, because I\u2019ve had this experience many times, that when you are organising a protest in an urban setting or wherever it is, when it\u2019s a scheduled protest, you have to deal with the council, and some councils have quite an extensive and extravagant\u2014over time, it\u2019s gotten worse\u2014expectations of what information has to be provided.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThey, in recent times, have started to apply costs, costs of the imposition, on the event and started to treat a protest event as like a parade, when, of course, the parade is not a New Zealand Bill of Rights Act expression\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b5d121235e151c928ef4eafe9b5e054a\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: It is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c7e26eb10ae59d35ac8e7f6e54aa7ba\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: A protest is. What, a parade? Is the Santa Parade in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act? I\u2019m not sure. I think, under protest right, one should not have to ask permission so much.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, this is a very important distinction, because, as with all of our rights, we should be able to express them, by definition, without seeking permission. That doesn\u2019t mean to say that we shouldn\u2019t seek to reasonably liaise with authorities in the public good and the public interest. Certainly, in my experience over many years, that has always been the intention of protesters, where there\u2019s an opportunity to communicate with the police about what our intentions are and how the police might be concerned or authorities might be concerned to protect the public. There\u2019s a conversation that should be able to happen, but there is definitely a tension that arises in where the boundary sits on reasonable protest action.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ll give you a very specific example some years ago now, probably the better part of a decade ago, in Taranaki, where there was a regular annual conference of the oil and gas industry at venues\u2014actually, it occurred around the country. Those who wished to protest those conferences would turn up and gather around those conferences to protest. Now, there was a back and forth, and there was a constant tension to be managed between the right of people to participate in those conferences, which we recognise is a right, and the right of the public to protest against that conference. This is a reality of our free democratic society.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI can envisage a problem arising with too much leeway being placed on, or too much of an option for, the police having to deem that there is public disorder\u2014as in section 35(1)(a), replaced by clause 6\u2014and exercise a right to shut down public spaces to, in that instance, protect the interests of the conference-goers over the interests of the protesters to protest. That is where I have red flags rising and alarm bells going, because too much leeway in that regard on the police would, I think, risk that right of protest.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI concur with the proposition of my colleague Camilla Belich that it would be, I think, very helpful for you to make it clear that the real intention of this part and this section and those clauses is to deal with antisocial behaviour that is not related to legitimate protest behaviour; it\u2019s to do with misuse of vehicles or, as you have outlined, antisocial behaviour, which we recognise is a problem, and the police should have jurisdiction to deal with that, but not to impact protest.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00226cd5020d43e8ffffd9e9b5f303b923bc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226cd5020d43e8ffffd9e9b5f303b923bc\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (20:13)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Look, firstly, I just want to reassure the member Steve Abel that no, this legislation is not designed to suppress legitimate protest at all. That\u2019s not the purpose for it. In terms of the protesters that you might have been talking to that are having issues around red tape and compliance issues, we don\u2019t like red tape and compliance issues, either.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ELook, the reality of it is, as we spoke about earlier, it\u2019s a fundamental right in the open democracy that we have and that we should cherish\u2014the ability to come out and engage in peaceful protest\u2014but there is a caveat to that: there is a social contract around making sure that that peaceful protest doesn\u2019t impede the rights of other people as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u002241556e2df19895007f9e4d90489e711a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002241556e2df19895007f9e4d90489e711a\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (20:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I do think this is actually a critical point, and I\u2019m wondering. I was just looking previously at\u2014I can\u2019t even remember what the legislation was called\u2014the Summary Offences (Demonstrations Near Residential Premises) Amendment Bill. That\u2019s actually quite instructive. That\u2019s one of the 58 bills that went through the Justice Committee this term. That\u2019s actually about stopping protests outside people\u2019s houses, but it sets a test of reasonableness. I guess my point is this, and I\u2019m wondering if the Minister of Police would consider an amendment that we\u2019re going put together, I hope, that actually identifies that, when in section 35(1)(e)(ii), it says, \u201Cunreasonably interferes\u201D, in fact, when you come to ask what\u2019s unreasonable, the fact that it is a protest means that the threshold is a bit higher.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf you\u2019ve got a procession of cars\u2014and I\u2019m actually talking about something that Mr Abel might have done before when he was with Greenpeace, I think, when you don\u2019t ask permission, because you don\u2019t always ask for permission, right? Sometimes the whole point is that you\u2019re being disruptive. If, for example, the plan is to stop your cars in the middle of a main thoroughfare to make a political point, that does interfere, but the question is whether it\u2019s unreasonable. Now, you might reach the conclusion that, even though it\u2019s a political protest, it\u2019s unreasonable, but I guess my argument is that it\u2019s less unreasonable if it\u2019s a political protest than if it\u2019s just a group of larrikins who think it\u2019s a laugh, right?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess that, firstly, I\u2019d be interested in the Minister\u2019s thoughts as to what Police\u2019s operational guidelines should be in terms of addressing what\u2019s reasonable and what\u2019s unreasonable and whether those rights implications should be taken into account. If he does agree that it is a relevant consideration that people are expressing political views, then, rather than kind of saying, \u201CWell, it\u2019s inherent\u201D or \u201CIt\u2019s implied\u201D, wouldn\u2019t it be much more appropriate to say that this is a relevant consideration in terms of what\u2019s reasonable and what\u2019s unreasonable?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think we all know that, if it\u2019s a whole lot of larrikins who are just trying to make trouble, make life difficult, that is unreasonable. Even if you don\u2019t like what they\u2019re doing\u2014you know, the tractors from Groundswell slowly going through saying, \u201CWe don\u2019t like three waters reforms.\u201D It\u2019s highly inconvenient, and I got plenty of emails saying that it was inconvenient and disruptive. But, at the same time, I was like, well, they\u2019ve got a point of view; I don\u2019t particularly like it, but they\u2019ve got a right to express it in the way they want to. I don\u2019t think they did cross the line. They weren\u2019t doing something dangerous, even though it was an interference with the use and enjoyment of that road by the public road users.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would be very interested if the Minister would be interested in just making it clear, because I think it\u2019s important, particularly with New Zealand Bill of Rights Act issues, to not just say, \u201CWell, it\u2019s the vibe of the thing\u201D, and actually spell it out and say that, when you\u2019re exercising a New Zealand Bill of Rights Act right, that\u2019s a relevant consideration in determining what\u2019s reasonable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022fd7b7b4e6842b01e05709e6e91a4695b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fd7b7b4e6842b01e05709e6e91a4695b\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (20:18)\u003C/span\u003E: I think the member the Hon Dr Duncan Webb would actually have a good argument if you took section 35(1)(e)(ii) in isolation, but it\u2019s not actually in isolation. If you actually look at section 35(1)(e): \u201Ca person is operating, or may reasonably be expected to operate, a motor vehicle at or near the place in a way that\u2014(i) creates, or is likely to create, noise that, having regard to all the circumstances, is excessive; and (ii) unreasonably interferes, or is likely to unreasonably interfere, with use and enjoyment of the place by the public or a section of the public; and (iii) causes, or is likely to cause, damage to, or destruction of, either or both of the following: (A) the place: (B) amenities or features in the place:\u201D. I think that, had it only been subparagraph (ii) in isolation, yes, there might have been an argument, but it\u2019s not; there\u2019s actually subparagraphs (i) and (iii) there as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EVery quickly, the definition of \u201Cpublic disorder\u201D\u2014quite simply, public disorder is part of a longstanding temporary closure circumstance that is in the current Policing Act. It means a situation where normal public peace and order are disrupted or are likely to be disrupted in a way that could affect people\u2019s safety or the proper use of public spaces, and this allows Police to intervene before or during to prevent things from escalating, such as when crowds become aggressive, fights are likely to break out, or tensions in public places arise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022fa8a135d8df37dfc5f4b07fea4497d9e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fa8a135d8df37dfc5f4b07fea4497d9e\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (20:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and thanks to the Minister of Police for engaging in this committee stage. It is genuinely good engagement, I think. I did put in an amendment, and it was just based on what, actually, the Council for Civil Liberties suggested, so just adding in a new section 35G. Hopefully, the House Office can have that tabled in due course. Basically, the wording is really just to say that, when it is in relation to a protest\u2014or industrial action, which is another thing that I didn\u2019t raise earlier\u2014you would not be able to rely on these sections. I think that\u2019s the Minister\u2019s intention. It\u2019s really helpful to have that on the record. I did put that on the Table just so there\u2019s an option there if we want to clarify it so it\u2019s extra clear. I think it would be a good idea. I don\u2019t think the Minister\u2019s intention is to include protest or industrial action in this bill. Anyway, that\u2019s there. It\u2019d be good to know if the Minister is supportive of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other question I have\u2014and I might just move along slightly to new section 35A, which is inserted by clause 6. This gives a constable the ability to tell people that they can\u2019t leave\u2014or, basically, to close off an accessible area or part of that area, so a person may not leave or enter. Now, recently, the Minister will be aware we\u2019ve been dealing with the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill. We were talking about what happens when people are moved on, and we have an extensive process in place when that happens. What I\u2019m just kind of wondering with this new section 35A is what the process would be that would be in place usually, in that type of situation, and what a constable would do to make sure there was any kind of objection to that, in new section\u00A035A? What would be the first, initial steps that are taken to prevent people coming into an area?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAdditionally, in terms of access, if blocking off the accessible area prevents someone from getting to, say, their home or their place of work or\u2014what other examples would there be?\u2014their doctor, some other place that they needed to be, is it acceptable for people to, say, direct that issue to the constable, and will they be allowed passage through that area if they do need to access it for some important reason?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022756f64306381d136b372f2e99fd72fbc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022756f64306381d136b372f2e99fd72fbc\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (20:22)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll wait for part of your initial question, for the officials. The last part of the question\u2014look, I think that it\u2019s very operational, but, at the end of the day, if police are closing the area for public safety, they\u2019ll use their discretion, whether or not it\u2019s safe for a resident to get access to their own home. They can use their discretion to allow people through. Of course, they would respond to anyone that needed to get to a medical facility or hospital or something like that. If they take this sort of action, it\u2019s always around public safety, around keeping the public safe, but they do have flexibility, and there are many, many examples of this where police will use their discretion if they need to, to allow people to have access to an area that they have closed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u002257fa48fd74f52ddd654c4fd1835c551b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002257fa48fd74f52ddd654c4fd1835c551b\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (20:23)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I don\u2019t want to belabour this point. I concur with my colleague Camilla Belich that the Minister of Police has engaged really positively on these questions, and it\u2019s much appreciated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to make a final bid for the value of making crystal clear that you have articulated it in the actual legislative wording that it\u2019s not meant to apply to protest. You very usefully pointed out, in replacement section 35(1)(e)(i), (ii), and (iii), inserted by clause 6, that it\u2019s the combination of those three things that could trigger the application of that. It\u2019s because of the \u201Cands\u201D on each of those.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do think, just to be clear, that\u2014the Groundswell protest is a good example, actually. The noise of the vehicles, perhaps there were horns tooting\u2014I know there were horns tooting\u2014could trigger subparagraph (i). It could be reasonably construed to be unreasonable interference with people\u2019s ability to get around. I happened to be in Invercargill on the day of that first Groundswell protest, and it definitely completely gummed up the middle of town for a good couple of hours. It would not be difficult to trigger that for that protest.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo the third one, I think there\u2019s a couple of instances where there could have been inadvertent or intentional impact on places or amenities or features that were consequential of a protest. That means you could, even in the context of a protest, trigger those three things. Therefore, I think there\u2019s value in ruling it out, so making it very clear that that\u2019s not the intention of the Minister or the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to give one final example of where it\u2019s important that we understand the tension between what we would construe as proper use of public spaces and public disorder and traditional civil disobedience. Now, civil disobedience is the thing that we don\u2019t see that much of in New Zealand in the traditional sense\u2014we see more conventional protest\u2014but there is a long tradition of civil disobedience which is non-violent, which is peaceful. The most well-known example is probably Gandhi\u2019s Salt March, where on mass people turned up in Gujarat, where it was actually illegal under the British regime for people to collect salt from the beaches even though it piled up in mounds there. Gandhi intentionally broke the law and was arrested by the British. It was an act of civil disobedience in protest against the British regime. It was part of the campaign to end British colonial rule, and, of course, it infamously succeeded. It was a successful civil disobedience campaign.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other one we\u2019d be very familiar with from overseas, of course, is Martin Luther King\u2019s acts of civil disobedience against the segregation rules and laws in the southern states of America, where, for example, there were sit-ins; people would go to places where it was illegal for Black people to be and sit down and refuse to leave. Those are acts of civil disobedience where, actually, the law is broken by those acts, but they are done for a greater good of expressing protest and fighting for freedom. Here there is a fundamental tension in the law, because acts of civil disobedience will involve lawlessness\u2014i.e., the breaking of laws\u2014but, if they\u2019re done in a tradition of non-violence, which is usually what they are done in, they intentionally force an issue, and there are examples in New Zealand of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to just be really clear that there is huge value, I believe, in making it very clear that the police should not in any way be considering applying any part of these laws to protest action. That would be a useful clarification, I think, both for the implementation of the law and for making it clear to the public that that\u2019s not the Government\u2019s intention.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022475ec61c656c798495d99e59c5fdc4fa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022475ec61c656c798495d99e59c5fdc4fa\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (20:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, so, again\u2014and I can respond to the honourable member Camilla Belich\u2019s tabled amendment as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI hear what the member Steve Abel is saying. This legislation is not designed, nor is its purpose, to deal with lawful protest or suppress lawful protest. There are other rules and regulations that allow the safe delivery of lawful protests in our country. This is not what this legislation is designed to do. I\u2019ll just say that we will see that, from a policing perspective, it is a balancing act in terms of trying to balance for always allowing peaceful protests as long as they remain peaceful and the rights of other people going about their daily rights. There\u2019s always a bit of tension that sits in there. It\u2019s really hard to get it perfect. It\u2019s really hard to get it perfect every time. There\u2019s always going to be someone that\u2019s a bit upset or a bit put out, but the reality of it is that this legislation is not designed for, nor would it be dealing with, those situations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022297bc572c27f45308dffb067ca3e7915\u0022 data-id=\u0022f341e8aa30304d806ac371c7894c54ef\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022297bc572c27f45308dffb067ca3e7915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f341e8aa30304d806ac371c7894c54ef\u0022\u003EDr HAMISH CAMPBELL (National\u2014Ilam) (20:29)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsTerm\u0022 style=\u0022font-style: italic\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad8cb2dd88b78c957ac7bff3c7e7ff65\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: No, not yet. I agree that the exchange between the Minister of Police and members is very fulsome, and the Minister is addressing issues that have been raised. We have somewhat exhausted components of proposed section 35, so I am looking to move this to other parts of the clause or the Part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022926186b61482a800fddec1ff2bc42f02\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022926186b61482a800fddec1ff2bc42f02\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (20:29)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I will move on. Obviously that New Zealand Bill of Rights issue was one well worthy of fulsome debate. Two things: I want to just understand from the Minister how the stopping will work, but one thing I\u2019m a little confused about, like my colleagues, is in the Amendment Paper, in clause 5, you\u2019ve repealed the definition of \u201Ctraffic\u201D. It actually says repeal the definition of traffic, but you don\u2019t repeal something that\u2019s not passed into law. Are we talking about the definition of \u201Ctraffic\u201D in this bill or are we talking about the definition of \u201Ctraffic\u201D somewhere else?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill says the \u201Ctraffic means all traffic (including pedestrian traffic).\u201D, which is kind of an unusual way to define traffic. If you could just clarify what\u2019s going on with \u201Ctraffic\u201D and whether the definition of traffic in this bill remains; that would be really useful. Then section 35A inserted by clause 6 talks about the direction to leave. I\u2019m interested in how this actually operates because it doesn\u2019t give a whole lot of mechanics around it. One of the interesting things about this framework is it appears that a single officer can make a snap decision on the basis of section 35 and then, all of a sudden, you know, kind of scarily put up his hand and say, \u201CI\u2019m stopping you and I\u2019m directing you to leave.\u201D Is that direction a simple\u2014will it be sufficient for the officer, constable to simply wave someone down and say, \u201CI\u2019m closing this road, off you go.\u201D? Or will they have to do something more formal than that? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt doesn\u2019t appear that there\u2019s any kind of notice requirements or anything like that, and yet I would assume they would have to at least say, \u201CI\u2019m closing this road because of my powers.\u201D, and at least identify the power, because if you\u2019re driving home and you\u2019re going your usual way and the office is like, well, \u201CYou can\u2019t come here.\u201D, it would strike me that you should at least expect the officer to be able to say, \u201CI have closed this road under my powers under the Policing Act, section 35.\u201D Otherwise, there\u2019s a question of authority. Most people, when a police officer says \u201CYou can\u2019t come down here.\u201D will take it at face value, but there are those that will say, \u201CWell, who do you think you are? This is a public road and I\u2019m going to do this.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EObviously, you\u2019ve got the ability to stop, and police have always had an ability to stop, and section 35B adds this as an additional ability to stop, to notify someone. I\u2019m particularly interested to understand exactly when that kicks in, because, obviously, if you haven\u2019t been notified, then going through this closed area isn\u2019t going to be an offence but if you\u2019ve been told you can\u2019t go down there, but you haven\u2019t been told on what authority that exists, I\u2019m unclear as to whether that would be in breach of these provisions or not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022b71db2a96a2379be42ffc3952e38a474\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b71db2a96a2379be42ffc3952e38a474\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (20:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just for the honourable member Camilla Belich, in relation to your Amendment Paper, I just wanted to address that. Sorry, your Amendment Paper\u2014I\u2019ll come back to that one. Your Amendment Paper: the bill does not empower police to suppress lawful protests and other lawful gatherings, and so your Amendment Paper around this section may not be invoked where any person is engaged in protests, advocacy, or dissent, or where it is part of an industrial action; does not apply because the purpose and design of the legislation is not to deal with that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe other question that you raised is the antisocial road-user legislation inserted a definition of \u201Ctraffic\u201D under section 4 of the Policing Act but it is not yet in force, so it won\u2019t be showing in the primary legislation. The Amendment Paper will remove the definition and traffic for the purpose of section 35, as defined in subsection 4.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022616923ff3b2185c3bc8af5fd86754019\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022616923ff3b2185c3bc8af5fd86754019\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (20:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and thanks to the Minister of Police. I\u2019m disappointed that he won\u2019t accept my Amendment Paper, which I think was a good one, especially because I had to write it by hand. At the same time, it\u2019s really good to have that clarified that it won\u2019t apply to protest action or industrial action. I think just the fact that we have that on the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E is actually super helpful, so thank you for engaging with that and thanks to the House Office and the Clerk for assisting me with that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI do have some questions before we move on to infringement offences. Thank you also for the definition; I\u2019m glad that we clarified that because we just couldn\u2019t make sense of it, but if it\u2019s not actually in the primary statute; that makes a lot more sense. The questions I had\u2014and I was looking at this; I know I mentioned move-on orders before, but these provisions in relation to infringement offences are actually very similar to what is in that legislation, so it has just kind of brought to mind a few of the issues that we considered, going through that legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022487fc0567face9d81604b65599de3cc3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just check that you\u2019re at clause 9?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cba491cd73151b6b66c44b1b2ee6fe44\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m at clause 7.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225b1f3635bd0d5aee23fa35cdbd0ab8d5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ac596dadcdff3fa943078d0fad6a790e\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: The point I wanted to make in 35BA(3), inserted by clause 7, when we say \u201Caddress\u201D. Now, in the move-on orders, when the House put address in, they said \u201Cif any\u201D. That\u2019s because some people, specifically with move-on orders, applied to rough sleepers. I\u2019m just wondering about the possibility of maybe if someone doesn\u2019t have an address, would they have to provide that information if they didn\u2019t have an address? It just was an issue that came up. If you look at the move-on order legislation, it\u2019s, basically, identical apart from that, because we have \u201Cif any\u201D as well for electronic address. So we are allowing for people not to have emails, but, of course, some people don\u2019t have a permanent house. Maybe that\u2019s not so much of a concern with this legislation but something to consider.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I wanted to know: another thing that came up when we were considering move-on orders, and I\u2019m just specifically looking around when people can be detained because they won\u2019t provide information; I\u2019m looking now at clause 8. In the move-on orders legislation, we had a number of suggestions from submitters around a time limit for that. I don\u2019t think there is one, actually, in that legislation now, but a suggestion was that there should be a time limit so that person can\u2019t be detained indefinitely or for an unreasonable period of time. What I was wondering is: would that be a consideration for this legislation, in that a time limit just might mean that there was more clarity as to how long the police could reasonably detain someone for a relatively minor issue, which is not providing the address that they have been requested to under the previous clause?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u00222b859fc62a8d115a9c0f9ea33329c0e0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222b859fc62a8d115a9c0f9ea33329c0e0\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (20:38)\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\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022a2780d09be3491e4f0cc23dff7706a24\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a2780d09be3491e4f0cc23dff7706a24\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (20:38)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I just thought we haven\u2019t touched on infringement offences at all, so I just\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e3ba48a4421c66cae7afedbea5a70ba\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I interrupt the member? I had indicated that I was not taking the closure motion previously because there was good engagement from the Minister of Police, but also I\u2019d asked people to consider moving on from what was clause 6. My assessment is that is exactly what the committee is doing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad23b9da0555a9c756a4a6e162e96289\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Mr. Chair. Yes, so I just think it is important that we talk a little bit about the infringement offences because this is obviously when, to use the term, the rubber hits the road for people who are breaching this particular piece of legislation. This is when we are looking at an infringement fee of $1,000 or a fine imposed by the court, not exceeding $3,000. I just wondered, again: these figures that have been landed on\u2014I don\u2019t believe we covered this at the Justice Committee; members will tell me. Are these figures comparable to other similar infringement offences? I think I recall $1,000 being quite similar to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ef750b4fec04b37ab22a1d39d9cb2909\u0022\u003EHon Dr Duncan Webb\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, the move-on orders, wasn\u2019t it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002292d7fa4919b49cfa774ac898c99524b9\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I think there was an\u2014and trespass order is I think about $1,000, but I\u2019m just wondering how the $3,000 was landed on as a fine imposed by the court.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EObviously, we don\u2019t have a term of imprisonment that I can see as the highest offence either. Those are just some questions I have. I wouldn\u2019t mind if the Minister of Police was able to just explain the process, and that\u2019s going over quite a few clauses. I think we\u2019ve got how it\u2019s issued, and then what it must contain. That\u2019s all listed out in how it must be served, but I wouldn\u2019t mind if the Minister did have an idea of how that process would usually be in place and if he could give some explanation to that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, we have a provision for reminder notices. If a reminder notice is sent, what happens if that\u2019s not complied with? That\u2019s under clause 9. So, yeah, moving on for a few other ones there. I know there\u2019s another offence also that maybe some colleagues have some questions about, but I don\u2019t.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00220df0e404c122cc034c62984067c3931b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220df0e404c122cc034c62984067c3931b\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (20:41)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll try and catch up with some of those. Detained time limit: it\u2019s not needed as it will depend on the circumstances in terms of how the interaction is and the compliance. Section 35C, amended by clause 8, requires that a person is detained for no longer than reasonably necessary. By the way, this is something that police deal with every day. You get people that give false addresses, they don\u2019t want to give their address, and, of course, you do have the odd case where they have to try and track down an address from where the person is from; but if no address, police will try and find an address the person is connected to, otherwise, the person will be listed as having no fixed abode. The infringement level matches the penalty for the infringement offence imposed through the boy racers Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eddfa106f969df89cd1fb16bceb23739\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I take the next call, given that there are Opposition members and Government members seeking the call, and the indication that I already have given, I hope that Government members are not seeking to attempt a closure motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022368af0c377703c702049fbbc3629d6e3\u0022\u003EHon Matt Doocey\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re a tough Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022035655cea495903fc1affc41e12dac62\u0022\u003ESteve Abel\u003C/span\u003E: You should follow the legislation, mate. We\u2019ve got a way to go.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022210ef75e78b6ffdef67d6a6bb16e6616\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022210ef75e78b6ffdef67d6a6bb16e6616\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (20:42)\u003C/span\u003E: Just a short question, if I may, Mr Chair and Minister of Police. It is around the infringement framework. This is more practical than legislative, but one of the real concerns about this is implementation, right. As we understand it, the infringement framework of the police is pretty much at capacity already, and we\u2019ve now got move-on orders and we\u2019ve got the shoplifting one as well\u2014that\u2019s an infringement notice as well\u2014and now you\u2019ve got another infringement notice framework here. I guess it\u2019s a very short question, but are you confident that the police\u2014because these are provided electronically, if I\u2019ve got it right. Yeah, the notice may be served by delivering it, by leaving it, or electronically\u2014that\u2019s new section 46F, inserted by clause 9\u2014and, of course, we know that there\u2019s a desire to default to electronic addresses. My first question is, is it up to scratch?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen the other one is new section 46F(e), \u201Cby sending it to\u2014(i) an electronic address that the person has given to the constable;\u201D. I get that if you\u2019re stopped and you\u2019re like, \u201CWell, my address is Duncan Webb, but I won\u2019t tell you what it is because I don\u2019t want you to know.\u201D, and so on, that\u2019s all well and good. But the other one is subparagraph (e)(ii), \u201Cif the person has not given an electronic address to a constable, the person\u2019s last known electronic address.\u201D Someone might say, \u201CI\u2019m not giving you my email.\u201D, and so they go back and they\u2019re like, \u201COh, well, we pulled him over two years ago and we gave him a ticket to this address.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s no evidence that it\u2019s live, and yet you\u2019ve got this electronic address and all the legal consequences that flow from that because it\u2019s conclusively presumed to be served. That\u2019s a real problem. Paragraph(2)(b) says, \u201Can infringement notice is sent to have valid electronic address\u201D. Now, it might still be valid, but they might have just decided to not use that account. They don\u2019t like Hotmail anymore because they get too much spam. So in terms of that particular one, sending it to an address where they have no idea whether it\u2019s still live\u2014it might be valid, but it might not be live\u2014is kind of problematic if, when they don\u2019t pay their fine, they then get a court summons. We know the kind of slippery slope from there once you get a court summons, and when you don\u2019t turn up or whatever, it can get very messy indeed. I\u2019d be interested in any comments on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00221648cff4b0335a1b5fca538590a87507\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221648cff4b0335a1b5fca538590a87507\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (20:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, in relation to an infringement notice that\u2019s not paid and how it\u2019s managed; new section 46G, inserted by clause 9, states that a reminder notice is issued to the person. If the infringement fee is not paid within 28 days, then a reminder notice is issued. The matter is then transferred to the courts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn terms of implement\u2014sorry, it\u2019s been a long night\u2014implementation and the ability for police to manage the infringements; police will be able to enforce the new infringement offence when it comes into force. The bill has been drafted to ensure that the infringement offence and related provisions in Part 2 will commence by Order in Council or no later than the second anniversary of the Royal assent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022 data-id=\u0022d2bb93f9e79f40ebf4ddb50ed089cdc0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d2bb93f9e79f40ebf4ddb50ed089cdc0\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (20:46)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and thank you for your engagement, Minister of Police. The Hon Dr Duncan Webb just kind of prompted me to ask this question, so I\u2019ll just crack on. It\u2019s around clause 7, \u201CNew section 35BA inserted\u201D, and it\u2019s interesting because it creates a new power allowing police to require a person to provide their name, address, date of birth, and electronic address for the purpose of issuing an infringement notice. I understand the practical need for that, but what I\u2019m trying to understand is where the boundaries of this power sit in practice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EFor example, it\u2019s not uncommon for large groups of motorcyclists to take part in organised charity rides and memorial rides, or club rides and things like that, and those events can involve dozens or even hundreds of riders, in some cases, travelling together entirely lawfully. I\u2019m just wondering, if an area is closed under new section 35, inserted by clause 6, a significant number of ordinary people may suddenly find themselves subject to police directions despite having committed no antisocial behaviour themselves. I was just wondering if the Minister could explain the circumstances in which a person who has committed no offence themselves can be required to provide their biographical details under this clause and what safeguards prevent this power being used more broadly than is necessary to issue an infringement notice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022b63f53a99adaf250a17baa77d9d0aa29\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b63f53a99adaf250a17baa77d9d0aa29\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (20:48)\u003C/span\u003E: In my experience, gang members are obnoxious when they use the roads on their bikes, but actually genuine motorcycle clubs are very respectful, they\u2019re well organised, and they stick to the rules. This legislation here is not designed at all to deal with motorbike clubs that are out doing a poker run or something like that. If, for some reason, the police have had to close a public area because they are dealing with a situation under this legislation, then it\u2019s in the best interest of all members of the public, including members of a biking club that are out riding, to avoid that area.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022 data-id=\u002215e01ba8d656096ed05b5a719afbf29a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002215e01ba8d656096ed05b5a719afbf29a\u0022\u003EDr VANESSA WEENINK (National\u2014Banks Peninsula) (20:48)\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\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u00223c6d9578da66ee4f5cb16d23480d1a46\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223c6d9578da66ee4f5cb16d23480d1a46\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (20:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c8bc0cec74254af92f8a22ec7a26491\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: Is this new information?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202f1ce9776e48840bd95eccfff6b9d88\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, it is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002248833984ad764c63b9bc8d19f1745580\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re just about there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212466b985d8c769cf78aa94860c3cee5\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ve only really done clauses 7 and 8, but I\u2019m going to move on to 9. That\u2019s not going to upset anyone, obviously. This might be a query and it might betray my lack of knowledge of how law works in this regard, but in new section 46F, \u201CHow infringement notice may be served. (1) An infringement notice may be served to the person who the constable believes is committing or has committed the infringement offence,\u201D. Paragraph (b) of that says it can be left \u201Cfor the person at the person\u2019s last known place of residence with another person who appears to be of or over the age of 14 years; or (c) leaving it for the person at the person\u2019s place of business or work with another person;\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI\u2019m just very interested to note that 14 years: is that a standard age where it\u2019s regarded that somebody is sufficiently old that they can carry the responsibility of delivering an infringement notice to, presumably, an elder in their residence. Why is 14 years acceptable and why it wouldn\u2019t be required that it be left with an adult?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00224b36b23890a6410a0a4a07c8337dc7aa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224b36b23890a6410a0a4a07c8337dc7aa\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (20:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, I\u2019ll just wait for the officials to deal with the 14 years issue, but just very quickly to wrap up what sounds like the last couple of questions that were in relation to an address. Police will use the address that the person gave to police, and the notice will go to this address even if they have changed it subsequently.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022309c5c43d1683d1bf8bf171ae5c65d81\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Part 2 set out on Amendment Paper 668 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008723\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 31\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 21; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f9bcc55db74bcdc777bd1e8416362047\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 6, new section 35(1)(a), deleting the words \u201Cor is imminent\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008730\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 31\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 21; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3b0718e88b7cb81204e3a1ae016ee24\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendments to clause 6, new section 35(1)(b), (d), (e), and (f), to delete the words \u201Cor may reasonably be expected\u201D lend themselves to being grouped. I will put a single question on them, unless members indicate that they wish to vote differently on a specific amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendments to clause 6, new section 35(1)(b), (d), (e), and (f), to delete the words \u201Cor may reasonably be expected\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008738\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 31\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 21; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fab2df26dc5d76421a3cfd006f5d3da3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 6 inserting new section 35(2) be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008745\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 31\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 21; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dacdc7f0ce2639a7f45b3acbf0989d08\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 6, new section 35(4), inserting a definition of \u201Caccessible area\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008752\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 31\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 21; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c35f5cfcb8cffdb7dabbc7629ca0fb8e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: Camilla Belich\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 6 inserting new section 35(5) is out of order as being the same in substance as a previous amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Tamatha Paul\u2019s tabled amendments to delete clauses 7 to 12 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008760\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 31\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 21; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Part 2 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 31\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 21; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225322d6503bc7564acd96f5f1d51bee0a\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00229b0ccfdc7ee2a8d44bcbcc363caf9f1f\u0022\u003EClauses 1 to 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220064a6a9708a348b7b7d53ecb6185a54\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we now come to our final debate. This is the debate on clauses 1 to 3\u2014\u201CTitle\u201D, \u201CCommencement\u201D, and \u201CPrincipal Act\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u00227e05af9849142f0adea096105cfb3b68\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227e05af9849142f0adea096105cfb3b68\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (20:57)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m just interested in the commencement, initially. In the course of the select committee proceedings, we were alerted to the existence of this document, which is a document produced by Gemtech for the New Zealand Police, which is \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EManaging Privacy Practice Project\u003C/span\u003E. I refer to it because it goes directly to whether or not the Police are, or will be, ready for the commencement of this bill in the near future, in particular around the storage and deletion of unnecessary photographs, because, obviously, if photographs are taken and they\u2019re not necessary, they should be deleted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat this document did was it actually went and interviewed a whole lot of officers, and it determined that progress was being made but, essentially, there was a long way to go. For example, it observed that participants were using various methods for sharing photographs, such as emails or group chats, and that it was taking too long to upload photographs to the central database and keeping them on their devices. Of course, we know that the Police still have difficulties with officers not being good custodians of the information on their phone. They should take a photo, then message it off to the office via email or whatever, and they should immediately delete it from their phone, but they simply don\u2019t.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe document has a summary of recommendations, and I\u2019d be interested in knowing whether these have been done, because it strikes me that until this is done, Police are not ready to start having the authority to take photographs. Recommendation 1.2 was to \u201CUpdate the Police Instructions and \u2026 training modules\u201D to give \u201Cmore clarity\u201D. Item 1.4 was \u201CConsider making the use of digital notebooks mandatory.\u201D The reason, I understand, for that is that digital notebooks are part of the wider Police system, unlike an iPhone\u2014which is the other thing they use. If you put it on the digital notebook, you\u2019ve, essentially, done everything and you can get rid of the original recording\u2014also stopping the practice of sharing OnDuty screenshots; that\u2019s in recommendation 1.5. In recommendation 1.13: \u201CReview the timeframes for deleting photographs/videos and provide clearer, more realistic timeframes\u201D. Also, in 1.15: \u201CExplore options for deleting photographs of members of the public from group chats [such as] iMessage and Microsoft Teams.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, that\u2019s another issue. You might take a photograph of one person, which is relevant, but it\u2019s got a whole lot of other information in it, which is not relevant. We were very interested\u2014this was not part of the evidence until we asked Police to provide it to us, and it showed, at least when it was produced, that there was a lot of work to be done. As I recall, when we were in committee, we asked, \u201CAre all the offending photographs, particularly of young people, deleted?\u201D, and the answer appears to be, if I remember rightly, that they weren\u2019t. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt strikes me that there\u2019s some systemic things to do, such as the use of digital notebooks, but also there\u2019s some work to do within Police so that they understand that you can\u2019t just take photos and leave them on your phone\u2014there\u2019s a threshold for taking your photo, and there\u2019s a requirement to delete it from your phone once it\u2019s being stored in the appropriate place and properly curated. I\u2019d be interested in the Minister\u2019s observations on whether those requirements have been met.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00228a57e347722d0e3385fa754df4175c00\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228a57e347722d0e3385fa754df4175c00\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (21:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, in my experience, certainly this term, the Police have been very, very good in implementing and operationalising legislation. They\u2019ve got multiple digital systems to store information, images, and sounds. Police apply multiple layers of security and governance controls across this information environment. They continue to strengthen information management practices across the organisation, and Police will implement, with the bill, updated Police instructions, guidance, training, and improvements to the existing IT systems and/or relevant operational controls, such as refreshed audit and quality assurance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u0022ce476106e0289adff79f5074b8c3157b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ce476106e0289adff79f5074b8c3157b\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (21:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Chair. I find there\u2019s a challenge with the names of amendment bills, or pieces of legislation in general, where they are extremely bland and innocuous and don\u2019t really give any information about the character of the amendment before us. This is probably one of the more glaring examples of this. It\u2019s simply called the \u201CPolicing Amendment Bill\u201D\u2014it doesn\u2019t inform the public or legislators in any way about what the actual purpose of the amendment is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI note that, in the legislative statement for the third reading, we have two very simple and specific things articulated in the overview of the bill; two principal objectives: \u201Cto provide a clear statutory basis for Police collection and recording of information, including for intelligence purposes.\u201D; and, secondly: \u201Cto expand Police\u2019s temporary road closure powers to include a broader range of areas, and to provide Police with the necessary powers to deter and enforce non compliance \u2026\u201D It seems to me\u2014and this is in no way to be clever about it\u2014I simply think that the bill could have a clearer title.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI realised that we can\u2019t be too wordy in these things, but I propose that it be called the \u201CPolicing (Sound and Image Recording and Road Closure) Amendment Bill\u201D, because those are the key components of what the purpose of the amendment is. It would much more greatly indicate, to those seeking out the point in the legislative process where these changes were made, if the bill had a title that drew people\u2019s attention to \u201Csound and image recording and road closure\u201D. I propose, Minister, whether you would consider it\u2014I\u2019m happy to draw it up as a formal amendment; I haven\u2019t yet done that\u2014that the bill name be changed to \u201CPolicing (Sound and Image Recording and Road Closure) Amendment Bill\u201D. Thank you,\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022c6cbd8bc21dcdba0df8ac08ce3615f17\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008784\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c6cbd8bc21dcdba0df8ac08ce3615f17\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (21:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, I might be able to address Steve Abel\u2019s issue, along with the Hon Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s, in relation to\u2014just addressing the tabled amendment that\u2019s been put in by Duncan Webb to amend the title to \u201CPolicing (Information Collection Powers) Amendment Act 2026\u201D. I wouldn\u2019t support either of those amendments. This bill amends the Policing Act. This would create a new stand-alone Act that would not address Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022a99acfe9fbbd6778585119611e08554e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a99acfe9fbbd6778585119611e08554e\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (21:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I just had a couple of questions around the commencement as well. We see a relatively complex commencement clause here, where, originally, we had Part 1 coming in the month after Royal assent, but then we had a change to \u201Csix months\u201D at select committee. If I recall correctly, I think that was because of some of the concerns around the Police being ready for this change and having the right IT systems and all of the additional support that might be needed. I do recall, I think, even in this committee stage, we\u2019ve talked about, because so many of the decisions are operational\u2014that there might be a need for guidance as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI know Dr Webb has talked about the concern that we do share around the IT systems being ready, but the additional question I wanted to ask was: will the guidance be ready in six months\u2019 time? And, of course, we have an even more complex section than just \u201Csix months\u201D, because, if there are any parts that are not in force, they\u2019ll come into force, I think, on the second anniversary\u2014so, two years after Royal assent, as well. It\u2019s a relatively complex process for this coming into force, and it does, really, beg the question whether things are ready for that to happen. I know that we\u2019ve had a few controversies around IT systems recently.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I think is slightly complex for the Police at the moment is that we did have the Crimes Amendment Act recently pass, which does provide for a new infringement regime around theft. That is a new infringement regime that will have to be supported by the Police as well. I know that some of these are Ministry of Justice, and I\u2019m not sure if they\u2019re all policing procurements, but I just wanted to know: are you comfortable that there is sufficient time for enough guidance to be offered to Police? In fact, especially with the road-user charges, there might be some community guidance as well\u2014sorry, not the road-user charges. In Part 2, that\u2019s in terms of temporary closures, there might need to be some public education around that, too.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI suppose it\u2019s just a general concern that we\u2019ve had a lot of assurances that the Police will be ready and that the systems are in place, but when we\u2019ve asked for information, we haven\u2019t seen separate corroborating evidence that they are ready. Because we know that there are so many other pulls on Police time and resources, like the theft infringement regime, I think there\u2019s a genuine concern that, if this was supported, there might be aspects of this, especially in relation to the data collection part of it\u2014and certainly that was a concern of the Privacy Commissioner\u2014that may be slightly mitigated by that. I appreciate that the Minister can only give us assurances, but I think that one option would be to have a longer period of time to make sure that they were in place, or some kind of catch-all clause where, if the Police system wasn\u2019t sufficiently at the standard needed to hold this information, because a lot of it will be private information\u2014some of it will have children\u2019s information as well. I mean, that\u2019s something we haven\u2019t really discussed at committee stage, but we did have some concerns around the Police capturing of photographic information being around children. There will be some legitimate reasons to have that, but it does just emphasise the point that we do need those systems to be in place, and it\u2019s good to have the assurances, but I\u2019m not 100\u00A0percent convinced there won\u2019t be some issues in the future around the Police not being 100\u00A0percent ready for that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s just, you know, honestly the impression we have from that, and that is relevant to the commencement, so any further information the Minister would like to share would be helpful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022c45fe9686f30b7ba726ee6531967edcd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c45fe9686f30b7ba726ee6531967edcd\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (21:09)\u003C/span\u003E: Firstly, with new legislation like this, I think that police are quite good at looking at every available channel to be able to signal that to the public, and, of course, they do an enormous amount of work and preparation in making sure the staff are well trained and understand the new legislation and how it applies in law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn relation to the six months, that was quite simply to enable consultation with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner and the Children\u2019s Commissioner in developing the operational guidance around how to implement that legislation, and, in terms of Part 2, to get the new infringement system in place in relation to boy racers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022739b3bbed7fe4186aa30494700144b3a\u0022 data-id=\u0022a3aa553378a402a4d4a7e0ea5368d72d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022739b3bbed7fe4186aa30494700144b3a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a3aa553378a402a4d4a7e0ea5368d72d\u0022\u003EPAULO GARCIA (National\u2014New Lynn) (21:10)\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008793\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 31\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 21; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f412cf30b5b217894577af500421de7d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Dr Duncan Webb\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008800\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 31\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 21; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008806\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 31\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 21; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f3df4ea7adb954ac2011d099947f980f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments set out on Amendment Paper 668 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008813\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 31\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008817\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 21; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228be2d5b5a204a86b6c0c9af96e3313b8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Ginny Andersen\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008820\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\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003Eto\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 31\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 21; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008826\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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 31\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 21; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 9; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 3 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill to be reported with amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008834\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb12d4bc0ceb7992bb3c35b1f8dbe595\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, the committee has considered the Policing 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=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008835\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289f473c7a35faed4d4cc54991542f2ae\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: This bill is set down for third reading immediately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c6e40f0e59eaabff5630506bcdd4d07c\u0022\u003ELegislative Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00220048e19e9d6bb924416d10d908d1907a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220048e19e9d6bb924416d10d908d1907a\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (21:15)\u003C/span\u003E: I present a legislative statement on the Policing Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008840\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225dd918c29e6c722b3ba81d6bc3e70588\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008841\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225013c055540968e007d8be345d548972\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022f73d90d65d98ba65e33d1ada9a13ce11\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008842\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f73d90d65d98ba65e33d1ada9a13ce11\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police) (21:16)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Policing Amendment Bill be now a third time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008843\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI am pleased to stand here before House today for the third reading of the Policing Amendment Bill. I would firstly like to say, once again, thank you to all the submitters on the bill and to the Justice Committee for their detailed consideration of this bill. I would also like to thank all members for their contributions as this bill has progressed through the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008844\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis Government has made restoring law and order a priority. A key part of that commitment is ensuring that police have a clear, effective and fit-for-purpose legislative framework to carry out their lawful duties, protect the public, and keep our communities safe. This bill delivers on that commitment. The changes made through this bill will strengthen operational effectiveness, support consistent decision-making, and help police officers carry out their duties with confidence. In turn, this will enhance public safety, reinforce public confidence in policing, and support the broader objective of creating safer communities across New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008845\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a practical and necessary piece of legislation that will better provide police with the tools to meet the challenges of modern policing while continuing to uphold the rights and freedoms of New Zealanders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008846\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 of the bill confirms the ability of police to record images and sounds in public places, and in private places where police are lawfully present, and to collect personal information for lawful purposes, including intelligence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008847\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 of the bill expands for the police their temporary road-closure powers currently provided for in the Policing Act to enable a broader range of accessible areas to be subject to closure and enforcement powers. The Attorney-General has concluded that both parts of the bill are consistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008848\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 of the bill responds to the legal uncertainty following a Supreme Court decision and findings from a joint inquiry\u2014by the Independent Police Conduct Authority and the Privacy Commissioner\u2014into police photographing members of the public.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008849\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 of the bill provides further certainty and confirms that police have clear lawful authority to collect information for the purposes of performing their policing functions and duties. It specifies lawful purposes for collecting information, it authorises recording and images and sounds in public places, and it authorises recording of what police can see and hear while lawfully present on private property. It establishes limitations on continuous recording for intelligence purposes, and it clarifies the relationship between the new provisions, privacy law, common-law powers, and other statutory authorities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008850\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 also inserts new section 100A to require an independent statutory review to be carried out on Part 1 of the bill as soon as practicable after the third anniversary of the commencement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008851\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 of the bill replaces existing road closure powers with powers to temporarily close accessible areas, permits police to direct persons to leave or not enter closed areas, creates powers to stop vehicles for this purpose, creates infringement offences and enforcement mechanisms, introduces powers to obtain identifying information for infringement enforcement, and creates new offences for failing to stop or failing to provide biographical details. Part 2 of the bill builds on the enforcement of the temporary area closure powers in the Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Act 2026 that my colleague the Hon Chris Bishop recently progressed through this House. This part will deliver a clear and proportionate enforcement response depending on the circumstances. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008852\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill is another example of this Government\u2019s focus on law and order, and it supports police officers to undertake their functions effectively and as the public would expect them to, including detecting, reducing crime, and maintaining public safety. I want to acknowledge the Police officials that have worked tirelessly with the committee and supported me and the work that\u2019s been done on this bill. This is going to have a significant, positive impact on public safety and keeping Kiwis safe. I\u2019m pleased to commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008853\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224802e7bba9c8c14e70c09585e57a83fc\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tangi Utikere)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u00227d64bdc70cf4d20a8f30632db89b789e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008854\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227d64bdc70cf4d20a8f30632db89b789e\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (21:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker, and thanks for the opportunity to contribute at this third reading of the Policing Amendment Bill. There has been a lot of work done on this bill, and I don\u2019t think the need for the work is disputed by any party in the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008855\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, we\u2019ve just heard from the Minister of Police about the background for it. We\u2019ve talked a wee bit about the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna\u003C/span\u003E case today and certainly at the Justice Committee. And I think it\u2019s important to note that this bill does also respond to the joint inquiry into police photographing of members of the public. These are both situations where the Police powers were not being exercised in accordance with the law, and there were adverse findings from the Privacy Commissioner and from the Supreme Court in relation to how the police had exercised their powers in that case and so we did need a response to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI suppose the disappointment from the Labour Party and this side of the House is that this was not done in a way that led us to fully appreciate and have confidence that the lessons that led to the cases of \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna\u003C/span\u003E and the police photographing members of the public had fully been addressed. That\u2019s a shame, because I think there isn\u2019t a dispute that the police need to be able to collect evidence. There isn\u2019t a dispute that, 99.9 percent of the time that they do that, they obviously do that for all the right reasons and to do their job. Members of the House have commended the work of the police, and I do so now as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008857\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is not an issue with how the police behave; it\u2019s an issue with us being able to provide the police, as a legislature and as a Parliament, with the best version of legislation that most effectively allows them to do their job. They will always, I suspect, want to keep within the rules, but we have to make sure that the rules that we provide to them are clear and also that the support that we provide to them is sufficient.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008858\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve talked about the IT systems and we\u2019ve talked about the guidance, and I think there\u2019s more work that we can do there. Certainly, it was a big concern of the select committee and of submitters to the committee that the IT systems and the way of the police collecting information and storing that information would be sufficient to mitigate some of the concerns that were raised and that led to this particular bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008859\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe won\u2019t be supporting it for those reasons, but I want to thank the Justice Committee for the work that they did do. I think the Justice Committee worked really hard to improve the bill, and, actually, I think it\u2019s another example of the Justice Committee actually making some significant changes to the bill that did improve it. We were proud to support the amendments that were made at select committee. I do think that those amendments did make the bill better.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008860\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI had large concerns around surveillance. I still have a concern around that, but I do think some of the changes that were made at select committee hopefully will mitigate some of the extreme forms of surveillance that I think would have been possible under the first drafting of the bill. I do think that it would be good to have greater clarity, especially because of the wide surveillance provisions that were provided for in the bill. That\u2019s not just a political party saying that; that was a message that we had a lot from submitters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008861\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI wanted to just quote from the Law Association submission and their recommendation which was to establish a statutory framework for governing retention, use, deletion, and oversight of collected information. Now, we haven\u2019t quite got to that stage with this bill, and it may be that this can be addressed at an operational level. Unfortunately, it\u2019s very difficult when the only role that you have in making sure that a bill is sufficiently ready to be implemented is through the legislative path. We just don\u2019t have the knowledge or the information to know that it\u2019s actually going to be implemented in that way. I think that that\u2019s an important thing to note.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008862\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Privacy Commissioner was very sceptical of this bill. The Privacy Commissioner did work very constructively, I thought, with both the committee and with the Police to try and improve this bill, and I think there are certainly some improvements which have been made to this bill as a result of that work. I want to thank the Office of the Privacy Commissioner for their availability, for their work with the committee, and for being very proactive with their advice. I think it has led to an improved bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008863\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe main change that I think will ensure that, if some of the fears that we have on the Opposition are played out, in terms of the practical implementation of this\u2014the review will happen in three years. It was good to ask the Minister about the review and to have the fact that the review will be taken in good faith, and if there are any improvements that need to be made as a result of the review, under that Minister\u2019s leadership, that would be implemented and improved on. I certainly hope that, if there\u2019s a future Minister of Police in the next three years who is sitting in the House at the moment, they also would take that review in good faith and implement any changes, like the Minister in the chair was able to commit to today. I think that that is really positive, and it certainly shows the benefit of the select committee process to where we are at the moment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008864\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI did want to also touch on some of the issues around Part 2 and the changes that have been made in that part. We did have a bit of a discussion, and it was really good to get some assurances from the Minister that this bill is not meant to be something that interferes with lawful protest or with lawful industrial action. It was good to have those assurances. I think we would have preferred, on this side of the House, to have one of our amendments on that matter accepted just for clarity, but it was good to have that stated by the Minister for the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E, and also to have that assurance that it wasn\u2019t meant to be focused on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008865\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI suppose this is another area where there have been examples where legislation, although it may not have been intended to affect lawful protest, has affected lawful protest, and we do have some examples of that. That is what we\u2019re concerned about\u2014that potentially, even though that\u2019s not the intention, if we don\u2019t word it properly, we may not be able to ensure that that doesn\u2019t occur.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008866\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think the other thing that I just wanted to talk to is just another concern that I know our spokesperson for Police, Ginny Andersen, has been concerned about. It\u2019s the lack of budget availability for things like IT projects. That is another kind of outstanding matter that hopefully can be addressed with the passage of this bill, but, if not, certainly that will be something where we would look to the review to see if there are any other changes that need to be made in terms of that funding moving forward as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008867\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe did have some concerns that there might still be photos of an evidential use being on phones rather than on the police Digital Notebook, which I think is the new technology that they want to use. Obviously, we would like to have an assurance that that is not the case and that that is all stored correctly. We did seek some information on that matter through the select committee process, but, yet again, we\u2019re unable to get over that final barrier there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008868\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt was helpful having the Police as advisers, and I want to thank them for the work that they did. We didn\u2019t agree with where the bill landed in the end, but that doesn\u2019t take away from the fact that I know that officials worked very hard. Also their openness to work with the Privacy Commissioner, I think, was very helpful as well. I think, in the end, we had two submissions from the Privacy Commissioner, which was really good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008869\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe final point that I wanted to touch on was that we did have a legitimate concern raised, and it was raised within the regulatory impact statement and by Te Puni K\u014Dkiri, that there were concerns about the likely impact on M\u0101ori and the fact that there hadn\u2019t been enough consultation with M\u0101ori. That is not just something to say because it sounds good or it\u2019s a thing that people should do in best practice; it\u2019s actually because when we had the joint inquiry into the photography of members of the public, M\u0101ori people were specifically impacted by that. That is something that I think is important to identify. It\u2019s an issue that raised an element of unfairness, and it\u2019s an important issue in making sure that surveillance isn\u2019t unfair and isn\u2019t particularly targeted at certain ethnicities, and something that I certainly hope\u2014in the implementation of this bill\u2014that Police can note and look to do better on in the future, because certainly that type of surveillance that unfairly targets M\u0101ori is not acceptable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u00228c869f22a4316c5b7993dee2991ae76f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008870\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228c869f22a4316c5b7993dee2991ae76f\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (21:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Kia ora, Mr Speaker. I just want to begin by addressing the Minister. This is potentially the last policing bill that\u2019s going to go through this term, and I wanted to recognise his engagement in the chair during the committee of the whole House phase and, throughout, in terms of being forthcoming, answering questions. We really do appreciate that, and because this might the last bill he passes as the police Minister, I do want to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008871\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0b3117ec2c0c46c15a3bb2904d3cef2\u0022\u003EHon Simon Watts\u003C/span\u003E: You wish.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008872\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022558fe8094aa5651fa1009ab3871a4f2a\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014thank him. I actually do want to thank him. I\u2019m going to say something nice now. I do want to thank him for working with us where there is potential to work together, and I\u2019m talking specifically about provisions inserted into the stalking law, which make sure that Police and victims are working together as best as possible. I recognise him for his collaboration where possible, for his genuine consideration of our Amendment Papers at the committee stage of this bill, and for his willingness to have conversations around, also, the duty of care provisions within the move-on orders. I hope that, should he remain as the Minister of Police, or should the Government remain\u2014which, knock on wood, it won\u2019t\u2014I hope that he\u2019ll remain open to that idea because it could be really good one that does help a lot of people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008873\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it is important that he is a Minister that engages in good faith, because not all people in this room, necessarily, have the same experiences with Police, and I hope that\u2019s something that we can all work towards together in terms of addressing that, which is really where our work today came from, in terms of the 16 amendments that we brought forward to try and narrow the scope of the bill and provide a bit more certainty and clarity for those who, perhaps, are on the fence when it comes to outright trust and confidence in the Police, which there is a segment of population who are, as reported in the annual surveying, of those attitudes. I just wanted to acknowledge you briefly, Minister. Thank you for your engagement this evening. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008874\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe really did want to try and get this bill to a place where we could potentially look towards supporting it, because we do understand that there are, of course, legitimate reasons\u2014I mean, there\u2019s always legitimate reasons for everything\u2014for the collection of intelligence, in order to pre-empt things from happening. If you can stop something bad from happening before it happens\u2014I mean that is our kind of premise of all of the advocacy that we do in the justice space, as we think prevention is so incredibly important. If provisions in this bill lead to that, in those circumstances, then that is absolutely a win, if it protects people and saves lives. However, we could not overcome what we think are the fundamental flaws in this bill, which are broadly that we just think it is too broad. We just don\u2019t think that the bill\u2019s justification justified the potential overreach, particularly in regards to citizens\u2019 privacy rights, and in particular in regards to section 21 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, which is around unreasonable search and seizure, and article\u00A017 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which is about no one being subject to arbitrary or unlawful interference with their privacy, family, home, correspondence, nor unlawful attacks to their honour and reputation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008875\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe were concerned at the first reading of this bill because we do not agree with the Minister and with the Government that what this bill is seeking to do is merely affirming a right that always existed. We believe that the evidence and the findings from the joint inquiry between the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, as well as the Supreme Court ruling in \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna\u003C/span\u003E made this clear\u2014that this was Police not acting in accordance with the law. I repeat my sentiment from the first reading that we believe it is of the utmost importance that the people who are charged with enforcing the law are held to the highest standards of they themselves acting within the law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008876\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe continue to be concerned about the way in which these powers will be used disproportionately against M\u0101ori, and that is because of the findings of the joint inquiry and those tens of thousands of photos. What that really demonstrated, with half of those tens of thousands of photos being M\u0101ori\u2014many of which were M\u0101ori kids\u2014is that there is a problem of systemic bias within the Police as reflected in the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EUnderstanding Policing Delivery\u003C/span\u003E report. I\u2019ve brought that\u2014I\u2019m not the only one actually. A few members in the House\u2014Rawiri Waititi, T\u0101kuta Ferris, myself\u2014have brought up this report, not as a weapon against the Police to say, \u201CYou\u2019re racist. Go and look at this report. Racist. Racist.\u201D What we are saying is that that report did genuinely uncover some systemic patterns within the Police, and that report happened also with the full cooperation of the Police.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008877\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose reports mean a lot to us, actually, because our dear colleague Efeso Collins, who passed away two years ago, helped work on that report, so it does mean a lot to us. To speak of our brother Efeso, he also did a lot of work and research into the interaction between the justice system and young Pacific people in South Auckland. The \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EUnderstanding Policing Delivery\u003C/span\u003E report is very important to us, because it is partially a product of our brother Efeso, but also it was a research project in good faith where it says in the preamble of those reports that Police were totally forthcoming and \u201Copened the hood\u201D when it came to policing operations and delivery and were 100 percent cooperative. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008878\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I think the report shows us is not a pointing fingers blame game, but it identifies some areas that need genuine work. It won\u2019t just be in relation to race. No workforce is perfect, and no organisational body of people is perfect, but I think if we can look at which areas we need to improve on, we can make those better things for our society. It\u2019s not just in terms of the way that, say, M\u0101ori or Pacific or low-income people interact with the Police; it is also around improving the rates of reporting sexual violence to Police, and family violence, because we know that those rates of reporting are historically low. The reason I mention those in relation to this bill is because we\u2019re concerned that without addressing some of those trends and some of those discoveries, which were found in cooperation with the Police, we are worried that because this is such a wide remit and such a broad power, it might disproportionately impact particular parts of our population negatively. So those are the main reasons why we are not supporting this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008879\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe think that the ability to proactively collect intelligence for future or prospective future use is dangerous, because how does one determine who will go on to commit crimes? Obviously, there is research that shows what the kind of determinants of crime might be, so we can make some predictions, but if someone is just walking down the road, no matter if they\u2019re dressed in a suit or no matter if they\u2019re dressed in a hoodie with the hood pulled up, we believe that you can\u2019t make assumption of intent based on, I guess, profiling alone or what they look like or making an assessment. We just think that if there are safeguards in place throughout our legislation, we might be able to address some of those biases.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008880\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis evening, we attempted to put some of those pragmatic safeguards in place. Again, we do really appreciate the Minister of Police\u2019s good-faith engagement in that, but because those were not able to be accepted, we\u2019re not able to accept or support this bill this evening. But we do thank the officials for their work. We do see that there might be a need of not repair but a bit more collaboration between the Office of the Privacy Commissioner and the police, and we look forward to continuing to support that relationship, because the two really do go hand in hand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022049c076276dbf7748f7cf1786fbb6cd4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008881\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022049c076276dbf7748f7cf1786fbb6cd4\u0022\u003ETODD STEPHENSON (ACT) (21:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of ACT to continue to support the Policing Amendment Bill\u2014a very engaging committee of the whole House stage. Again, like other members, I want to thank the Minister of Police\u2014a lot of information there on the record.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008882\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EOne aspect which I didn\u2019t talk about in my second reading speech, which I\u2019m just going to briefly touch on, is the temporary road closure powers. I mean, on this side of the House, this Government has been focused on making sure that we have the right tools to address crime. We saw a lot of antisocial road user behaviour\u2014boy racers, I suppose you might say\u2014and they really can disrupt people going about their business, whether it\u2019s going to the supermarket, sports, church, Sunday school; really, just people going about their normal business. So, again, that\u2019s a power that may not have got too much attention tonight that is contained in this bill, and we continue to support it. I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u00223f19a2946c9283c22c39401e115a6f53\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008883\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223f19a2946c9283c22c39401e115a6f53\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Police) (21:42)\u003C/span\u003E: I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak in support of the Policing Amendment Bill. Fundamentally, this legislation is a triumph for common sense and for every law-abiding Kiwi who expects our police to have the tools they need to keep us safe. We have an amazing police force who do diligently hard work every day, and giving them the tools they need is critically important at this time. I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008884\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d552f551f3b8c3a56f3e308949e3ffb\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: This is a five-minute split call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022 data-id=\u0022549d81b1cfecbd3bc0433f2672beae97\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008885\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233a8db41ad0c4278b7eb829406824bb5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022549d81b1cfecbd3bc0433f2672beae97\u0022\u003ESTEVE ABEL (Green) (21:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Yeah, I want to pick up on a couple of things. I do echo my colleagues\u2019 expressions of appreciation of the engagement of the Minister of Police, particularly in the conversation we had, along with Camilla Belich, on the questions around the impact on protest rights of this bill. I think, though we didn\u2019t get an amendment across, the conclusion was that the Minister made it very clear that there was not an intention that it impact protest rights, the road closure stuff and so forth, which is useful to have on the record, I believe.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008886\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOur concerns primarily are around the use of recording equipment, both audio and visual, and the accessing of people\u2019s private details for intelligence gathering purposes, and how to ensure that we do not lose that right of private citizens to not be surveilled, to not be recorded, to not be visually filmed. Unfortunately, we have not gained confidence that there are sufficient protections in place to protect people\u2019s private images and audio when they e been acquired by authorities\u2014of course, the case that has precipitated this legislation being but a case in point. We would urge the Minister and the Government, and, indeed, the police, to take great care with appropriate use of that power, because it is a significant power, and to take great care with destruction of images once their purpose has ended, because the accumulation of those images is also a concern.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008887\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI note a couple of other points. The disabled people in the regulatory impact statement (RIS) on page 66 \u201Cmay be disproportionately affected by expanding existing temporary area closures if they rely on specific routes, accessible infrastructure, or support services that may subsequently [be] unavailable due to [the] area closure.\u201D So, again, an urging of the police to protect those members of our society who are disabled and may be disproportionately impacted by these rights and abilities of the police.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy colleague Tamatha Paul mentioned the systemic challenges with the police disproportionately impact on M\u0101ori, and I notice also on page 66 the regulatory impact statement points out that \u201CM\u0101ori are disproportionately impacted by the criminal justice system, in part due to the higher rate of Police proceedings initiated against M\u0101ori individuals.\u201D I appreciate that very simple, bald acknowledgment of that fact of our justice system. There needs to be intentional action taken on the part of police and on the part of politicians to address those systemic imbalances and injustices.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe RIS also points out that \u201CPolice is committed to being responsive to M\u0101ori as tangata whenua and understands the value and importance of the M\u0101ori Crown relationship and honouring the Treaty of Waitangi as New Zealand\u2019s founding document.\u201D That is good language to hear articulated by the police, and I certainly hope that it is sincerely upheld and striven towards\u2014more so than I feel like this Government has done at times; obviously, we\u2019ve expressed our view on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008890\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe freedom of peaceful assembly, the right to protest, and the right, when the time arises, to express acts of civil disobedience are actually really vital democratic rights and rights that we should fiercely protect and be very reticent to allow any legal intrusion upon that is unreasonable. I\u2019m glad we were able to have that conversation, and we will be very eagle eyed as to our observation of the institution of the Act following these amendments to make sure that, indeed, the police don\u2019t overstep the mark and infringe on that fundamental democratic right of protest and peaceful assembly and expression of dissent and civil disobedience, which is a vital part of a free and healthy society. Thank you, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u00229300e38e3b3082f1cc2f0efe030558d6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008891\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229300e38e3b3082f1cc2f0efe030558d6\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (21:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I want to take the opportunity just to reiterate the Minister of Police\u2019s acknowledgment this evening of our police officials who have worked on this bill through the process that we took it through in the Justice Committee, and also take the opportunity to acknowledge all of our police across New Zealand, who ensure that our communities are kept safe. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022 data-id=\u002220e546917ce212057e85ffca01b1da69\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008892\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002220e546917ce212057e85ffca01b1da69\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (21:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Throughout this debate, this side of the House has been clear: you know, we support police, we support them having the tools they need to keep New Zealanders safe; no one in this House is arguing otherwise. We accept the Supreme Court\u2019s decision in \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ETamiefuna\u003C/span\u003E. We know that created uncertainty, and we accept that Parliament has a responsibility to provide clarity. Front-line officers do deserve to know what powers they have and where those boundaries sit, and communities also deserve confidence that police can do their job effectively. That\u2019s never really been the point of disagreement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut the real question before us at this third reading is whether Parliament has got the balance right between effective policing and protecting the privacy rights of ordinary New Zealanders, and in Labour\u2019s view we\u2019re not quite there yet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008894\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, to be fair, the bill leaves this House today stronger than the bill that did arrive here initially, and the Justice Committee did improve it. The relationship with the Privacy Act was strengthened, and it was made clear that existing surveillance warrant requirements still apply. Commencement was delayed to give police time to prepare, and a statutory review was added after three years. In my view, those are solid changes. Those improvements did not happen by accident. They came about as a result of submitters taking the time to engage with the process, because concerns were raised and because the committee listened. Labour supported those improvements, because they made the bill better than what it came into the committee as.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008895\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EImproving this bill\u2014yep, as other contributions have mentioned, it\u2019s made it better, but not as good as it could have been. The central concern Labour raised at the first reading, at the second reading, and then in select committee, as well, was that a lot of this stuff remains unresolved. One example is this bill grants police broad powers to collect information for intelligence purposes, yet Parliament has chosen not to provide equally strong safeguards governing how that information is retained, audited, used, shared, and ultimately deleted, sometimes a long time down the track. That concern hasn\u2019t just come from Labour. It\u2019s been raised by submitters, it\u2019s been raised by civil liberties organisations, and it was also raised by the Privacy Commissioner. Despite all the debate that we\u2019ve had on this legislation, those concerns largely remain. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008896\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne thing that struck me throughout this process was how often members were asked to trust that future operational policies would solve these issues. We were told that guidance will be developed. We were told that procedures will be strengthened. We were told that the systems would improve over time. Now, I have no reason to doubt the good faith of New Zealand police, and I genuinely believe that they are trying to get this right. But Parliament\u2019s role is not to write guidance documents. Its role is to write laws, and good legislation should not depend on future policy documents to provide protections that could have been included in legislation in the first place\u2014because policies change, we have commissioners change, and, of course, Governments change and it\u2019s going to change on 7 November, and technology changes, as well. Legislation is where Parliament sets the minimum standards that apply, regardless of who happens to be in charge. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008897\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s why those safeguards absolutely matter. In my view, Parliament has actually missed an opportunity here. The reality is that technology is moving faster than the law. When many of our privacy laws were first drafted, nobody was walking around carrying a smartphone in their pocket 24 hours a day, like they are now. No one imagined the scale of data being generated today. Nobody, certainly, imagined how easily information could be stored, searched and cross-referenced, and analysed many years later. You think about a normal day and how that technology is all around us. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008898\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe also talked, during the committee of the whole House stage, around CCTV. Interestingly, the New Zealand Police Association have said that New Zealand, in particular, is quite heavily surveilled as it is. We have about one surveillance camera for every 13 people. That\u2019s quite high in a democracy, and every one of those surveillance cameras can generate information. Most New Zealanders understand that that is part of modern life, but I think they would also expect Parliament to seek clear rules about what happens when that information is gathered and held by the State, because it isn\u2019t simply whether information is collected; it\u2019s what happens afterwards. Those are the sorts of questions that ordinary New Zealanders would ask about the information that\u2019s being collected about them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008899\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat goes directly to public confidence, because, as we know, public confidence in policing is not built simply by giving police more powers. It\u2019s built when people know that those powers sit alongside clear limits and independent oversight and meaningful accountability. During the committee of the whole House stage, Labour tried to address some of those concerns. We put forward amendments designed to strengthen the bill. One amendment sought clearer or greater certainty around what constitutes an intelligence purpose, and another would have required personal information to be deleted when it\u2019s no longer required for a normal policing purpose. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008900\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, let\u2019s be honest about what those amendments were and what they were not. They were not attempts to stop police investigating crime, they weren\u2019t attempts to prevent police gathering evidence, and they weren\u2019t attempts to tie the hands of front-line officers. What they were designed to do is provide clear guardrails around how those powers would operate, and, in my view, they were sensible amendments. I think they would have improved the bill. If the Government chooses not to support them\u2014well, they chose not to support them and I do feel that that is definitely a mistake, because, as we all know, good safeguards don\u2019t weaken policing. They strengthen public confidence in policing, and that\u2019s important for social licence. When people know there are clear rules around retention, deletion, and accountability, they\u2019re more likely to support the powers being exercised in the first place. That\u2019s not being soft on crime; it\u2019s recognising that effective policing and civil liberties have always gone hand in hand. In fact, I would argue that the strongest policing systems are the ones that enjoy the trust and confidence of the public that they serve. That\u2019s not created solely by powers. Trust is created by powers that are exercised responsibly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008901\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs I\u2019ve said before, I acknowledge that a review is better than no review at all. That was touched on in the committee of the whole House stage, and Labour supported including that into the bill. But let\u2019s be honest about what that review also represents. It\u2019s an acknowledgement that questions do still remain, and it\u2019s an acknowledgement that Parliament does not yet\u2014or the Government does not yet\u2014exactly know how these powers will operate in practice. It\u2019s effectively saying, \u201CYeah, let\u2019s come back in three years\u2019 time and see how it\u2019s worked.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008902\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo, yeah, it\u2019s a better bill going out the door than what it was when it came in the door, but we still have a lot of concerns. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022297bc572c27f45308dffb067ca3e7915\u0022 data-id=\u0022c9f77a5342d0671c466e9b219aff4cc6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008903\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022297bc572c27f45308dffb067ca3e7915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c9f77a5342d0671c466e9b219aff4cc6\u0022\u003EDr HAMISH CAMPBELL (National\u2014Ilam) (21:59)\u003C/span\u003E: I rise in support of the Policing Amendment Bill. This bill supports the police; we support the police. That\u2019s why I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022 data-id=\u00227065f373bac0244772002d882805994e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008904\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227065f373bac0244772002d882805994e\u0022\u003EGLEN BENNETT (Labour) (21:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Kia ora, Mr Speaker, and it\u2019s\u2014yeah, we\u2019re here on a Saturday night discussing the police and the role they play in our society to protect, to reassure, but also to, I guess, to build trust within communities. That\u2019s a key element to this piece of legislation, because we always need to think about the power balances, and the fact that the police have a critical role to play in our society and we should welcome the role they play, but, also, with that power, being very cautious and careful to make sure that they are using their powers for the right reasons and have the right tools in place to do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008905\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs has been traversed over the evening, there are two key parts to this legislation. There is, of course, the collecting of records and information which would change the Police\u2019s ability to record images and sounds in public and private places and to collect personal information for lawful purposes, including intelligence. Of course, Part 2 is around temporary road closures and antisocial behaviour and law enforcement when it comes to that. We need safeguards in place, when it is something like this, and this is a very major piece of legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008906\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt might just seem like a few photos here and a few videos there and some recording, but we live in a world where, in fact, you walk out the doors of this Chamber, and you will be recorded. You walk down Lambton Quay, as you walk home from Parliament tonight, and there will be recordings. There will be cameras throughout the city in cities throughout New Zealand. That\u2019s OK by me. That\u2019s something around safety and protection, but also, again, what do the safeguards look like when it comes to the Police gathering information? How do we make sure that the power they have is used wisely? I think being thoughtful and try to add value to this\u2014and my understanding is that I\u2019ve heard from colleagues that the Justice Committee did a lot of work and worked across the Parliament to try to make this legislation better and fit for purpose.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008907\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to acknowledge the Privacy Commissioner and their concerns around this. I note that the Minister has considered that and, obviously, has weighed things up and made decisions, which is his right to make. It\u2019s not easy, because the laws that pass today or tomorrow have implications for our communities. As I spoke about in the second reading, often we have to think about young people particularly and the way that police approach many of our young people. There are times when they must intervene. There are times when they must arrest, they must talk to, they must engage in ways that can be really tough and hard to handle. But, like I said earlier, for a young person and the brain development and the understanding of what is going on and the fact that a police officer has far more information generally and knowledge of the situation\u2014and often a young person particularly can be compliant without knowing the consequences of what it means when their image is captured or that video is taken.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008908\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe won\u2019t support this bill tonight\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008909\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ab28f6172b79f2215be8a5a2321fc2e\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EOh!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aba6d93141e9a20f9f7d7c627a4c72fc\u0022\u003EGLEN BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014as has been said. I\u2019m sure there\u2019s no shock, even though there obviously is; people haven\u2019t been listening for the last six hours, but that\u2019s OK. We won\u2019t support this bill, because we do think it doesn\u2019t quite meet the threshold for us in terms of the ensuring that the ways and means are in place to protect our communities and make sure that the Police don\u2019t overstretch and overdo things. There was a piece about, obviously, how it is stored and the funding that will go into that, which, again, are concerns for us. I\u2019m glad that there\u2019s been thoughtful debate on this, but we in the Labour Party cannot support this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022739b3bbed7fe4186aa30494700144b3a\u0022 data-id=\u0022773f7f57212f2c6ab51f4cf24f4eb50b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008911\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022739b3bbed7fe4186aa30494700144b3a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022773f7f57212f2c6ab51f4cf24f4eb50b\u0022\u003EPAULO GARCIA (National\u2014New Lynn) (22:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. It\u2019s a privilege to be able to participate in giving the Police more tools to do the invaluable work that they do for New Zealand, and it\u2019s a privilege to stand and commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u0022b4cb40406cb33e70bead52f36caea036\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008912\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b4cb40406cb33e70bead52f36caea036\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (22:04)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just want to traverse the concerns that we have with this bill. Essentially, they boil down to significant and intrusive powers being not sufficiently constrained. I guess the first is, if you look at new section\u00A045A, \u201CPurposes for which Police may collect information\u201D, we agree that the Police should be able to collect information regarding people by taking photos and recordings, but you should be able to, by reading the purpose, clearly articulate what will fall within it and what will fall outside of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008913\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EObviously, the centrepiece here is the intelligence purpose. We put up\u2014and I believe the Greens did too\u2014some pretty meaningful amendments to say an intelligence purpose means this. The concern is that intelligence simply is another word for the gathering of information in a subject area, the area of general policing, and these are one or more of the following purposes, so any intelligence purpose is enough, and it doesn\u2019t have to be attached to any particular inquiry or any particular known activity, and that\u2019s really concerning. That\u2019s the narrow one; new paragraph (d) has \u201Cany other lawful purpose connected with a function, or an activity, of the Police.\u201D There seems to be nothing excluded. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008914\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I have little doubt that this will be considered by the courts and the courts will\u2014as they have done in other legislation\u2014assume that this is consistent both with the Privacy Act and, of course, with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and the right to be free from arbitrary search in particular. It may well be that there\u2019s an overlay that the courts will put over this because Parliament, frankly, hasn\u2019t done its job. It was invited to, and we invited it to, but it chose not to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess the second aspect of this is one that I raised with the Minister. To be honest, he made a response but didn\u2019t give a reply. When I talked about recording by Police in private property\u2014and the Police do enter private property, and I\u2019m particularly thinking homes, for a raft of reasons, and quite rightly so. There might have been a report of family harm, so a police officer will come in knowing that the one person who resides there, not the person they\u2019re going to talk to but somebody else, is a person of interest in some regard. But they haven\u2019t been invited in to gather information. They haven\u2019t been invited in to conduct a search. It\u2019s actually, in terms of that invitation when they say, \u201CWe want to talk about this incident. Can we sit down and have a yarn?\u201D, the purpose of that invitation is to have that discussion, not so that they can scan the room for information. You\u2019ve got to remember that this isn\u2019t scanning the room for information about the assault that took place for blood stains on the wall; this is scanning the room for intelligence information or, to go back to the other ones, any information to be used for any other lawful purpose connected with a function or activity of the Police. It\u2019s extremely broad in its range and extremely intrusive in terms of where that may occur. It can occur in any private place where the police officer is lawfully there, anywhere where they have entered in a way which isn\u2019t illegal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008916\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, the other question I put, and I didn\u2019t really get a good answer, was whether you can take footage or photographs or whatever from outside the property but on a public place. Now, taking a photograph of a car up a drive from the footpath is one thing, but we know that the Police are a little more resourceful than that. They have been known to, in a public place, find themselves in very advantageous positions, whether that is standing on their car roof or climbing on a ladder. It\u2019s simple as that\u2014climb on a ladder to look over a fence. That is a breach of privacy and seclusion rights, and that is really problematic. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008917\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI get that it\u2019s hard. This is a hard area of law because you\u2019ve got the interplay of this legislation with the Privacy Act 2020, and in this legislation itself, it uses the words, I think, \u201Csubject to\u201D. In this legislation, the collection of personal information authorised by new sections 45A to 45D is subject to the Information Privacy Principles and we\u2019ve got the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, and exactly how those three things interact is actually far from straightforward. The Privacy Act says that you can only collect information from an individual if it\u2019s \u201Cnecessary\u201D for a lawful purpose, and \u201Cnecessary\u201D is a high threshold. In committee, I noted that the test for when you collect information in this bill is that it is as low as it \u201Cmay support\u201D the police in performing a function, whereas in the Privacy Act, it is \u201Cnecessary\u201D, and so you\u2019ve got a real mismatch there. That kind of far reach of the police\u2019s power of surveillance for a very broad purpose and very deep into the private sphere is really why we are concerned.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008918\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen I will mention the road closure legislation. Again, it\u2019s a test of any constable: \u201Cif a constable believes on reasonable grounds that 1 or more of the following apply \u2026 public disorder exists or is imminent\u201D, and so it hasn\u2019t happened, but it might happen in the future. I suppose, if you see it on a Facebook post\u2014all well and good. But, again, this is a limit of a of a New Zealand Bill of Rights right, and that is freedom of movement and also, to an extent, freedom of expression, because if the movement is a protest or whatever, then it\u2019s freedom of expression, as well. We shouldn\u2019t leave rights questions to be kind of inferred from section 5, I think it is, of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act\u2014or is it section 4\u2014which says that if there are two interpretations, the one consistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act should be adopted. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008919\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt should be here in the legislation to say that what\u2019s reasonable is subject to or is coloured by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, because, with the closing off of areas, one of the problems of legislators is that they look at the problem\u2014they look at the siren wars, or whatever it was, and the doing of burnouts in West Auckland\u2014and they say, \u201CThis will stop that.\u201D, but they don\u2019t turn their mind to the question of what else it might stop. I get it that perhaps we\u2019re at opposite ends of the spectrum and we need to meet in the middle somewhere, but we need to ask what could go wrong here. What rights of people whom we might not agree with but who are not breaking the law in that sense\u2014what rights might be infringed there? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008920\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s clear here that if you intend to drive your tractor down the main street, then you are going to cause public disorder. So you could get the road closed, but you shouldn\u2019t if doing that isn\u2019t just for fun but it\u2019s to make a political point, because political speech is really, really important. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008921\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe would like to be able to support some of these pieces of legislation, and one of the things that did consume me in committee was that the police have repeatedly and the Minister of Police has repeatedly said that this isn\u2019t changing the law, which is clearly wrong because the Supreme Court said that gathering information for intelligence purposes and not for any specific reason is an unlawful search of that person. This now makes it a lawful search, and so there is a distinction here. So we can\u2019t support this bill, which is a pity, because we should try and cooperate on these kinds of things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022 data-id=\u00225547d5bdd44f1972dc2c321c3c6267cf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008922\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225547d5bdd44f1972dc2c321c3c6267cf\u0022\u003ERIMA NAKHLE (National\u2014Takanini) (22:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Assistant Speaker Rutherford, it\u2019s a pleasure to see you in the Speaker\u2019s Chair for the first time\u2014congratulations. The National Party and I strongly commend this bill to the House\u2014strongly\u2014because all I think about is victims first, and that\u2019s been the kaupapa behind almost every bill we\u2019ve passed with through the Justice Committee. Thank you to the best police Minister ever in the history of New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022 data-id=\u002234691a25ebac925d355d801e612a4647\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008923\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002234691a25ebac925d355d801e612a4647\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY (Labour\u2014Taieri) (22:15)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m going to focus my comments tonight about the thing I find most concerning about this bill, and that is the amplifier effect of the vulnerabilities that the bill will create for children. I say this as a family member of somebody in our extended family who has had their photo taken by the police\u2014somebody who quite possibly was racially profiled when that happened\u2014and it is a mission of my extended family to find out where that photograph is sitting and what it will mean for the future of this young person.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008924\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EEverything that has been said tonight from this side of the House, I think, ratchets it up a notch when it comes to our children because they are going to be around on this earth for a very long time, and yet there are already images taken. The bill has spoken a lot about how those images are acquired, but very, very little about how they\u2019re stored and what they can be used for, and the tone of that concerns me\u2014the tone of this bill. Yes, we all want to have more effective policing and we all want to be able to use available technologies, but if I think about where we\u2019re moving around constitutional rights as a democracy and I think about the impending immigration bill that we will maybe discuss this evening or maybe before the end of Parliament, there is an underlining tone around increasing police power with very little vigilance about how we are going to manage that and what it means for those individuals who are caught very early in their lives sometimes\u2014like this young person from my extended family\u2014and how that can be used against them and what it might mean for their trajectory. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe know, despite the protestations of people from across the House or from other parts of society, that there is systemic bias, and when somebody gets into a government system where they can be labelled\u2014whether it is around a young person being vulnerable, perhaps at risk, or perhaps likely to have a trajectory through the criminal justice system\u2014it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. I\u2019m really, really concerned about that because we don\u2019t have any answers to the questions like how long the images will be retained, who will get access to them, and whether they can be linked with other databases\u2014and, if not now, when that will be an inevitability. That is not something\u2014with all the best will in the world and the good faith from the police, who do a fantastic job\u2014to leave to chance or to leave to operational structures. It is something that must be embedded in legislation, and yet it is absent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008926\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat about where the images are used for one purpose, and then later used for another purpose because the legislation has not been sufficiently clear to define what is meant by the purpose that is in the Act? Those are questions not only for ordinary New Zealanders but they\u2019re questions for parents. I\u2019m very concerned, as a parent, and if I was a parent at home watching this, I\u2019d be really concerned. But as a parent who has a family member from our extended family in that system\u2014and there are many other families in that position in New Zealand at the moment\u2014that is even more concerning. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008927\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAfter the election, when things are quieter, our family is going to do some due diligence and find out where that photo is and what we can do to get it out of the system, and I would urge any other family that believes that they have a young person who has an image that has been taken\u2014we\u2019ve seen it in the headlines. There has not been adequate explanation of what will happen to them. I urge those families to use the Official Information Act to find out where that image is and to find out whether the image will be destroyed, and, if not, why not, because the more that those images are gathered, the harder it is for there to be a cull of the images. It\u2019s all very well for someone to say \u201COh, it\u2019s just lying there dormant.\u201D, but, at some point in an unknown future, that image could be used for any purpose. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008928\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI lived in Fiji, where I saw the fragility of democracy. I saw coup d\u2019\u00E9tat, and I saw how quickly the best-intentioned empowerment of uniformed people can be used against citizens at large.  We do not ever want to be in that situation, and for that reason, the safeguarding that is being put to an operational level must be put into legislation. Without it, this legislation breaches the protections for our children and cannot be support in good conscience. We do not commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008929\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Policing Amendment Bill be now read a third time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008930\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008931\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008932\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 30\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008933\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 21; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008934\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008936\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002223f92738bb705866eda70e41796ce277\u0022\u003ECorrections (Management of Prisoners, and Prisoners\u2019 Property) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008937\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002219214d21ee7cc28da525bc1fd6a6c67f\u0022\u003ELegislative Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022682475b20ea5e264bf3fa197d8434e36\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008938\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022682475b20ea5e264bf3fa197d8434e36\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Corrections) (22:21)\u003C/span\u003E: I present a legislative statement on the Corrections (Management of Prisoners, and Prisoners\u2019 Property) Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008939\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f1cc361dbf559253b69826b0d942b0a\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008940\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00229ecb1031216281462d969aef3c77e526\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u002277bb3822571b5e93f83bc4ceb29dad4f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008941\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002277bb3822571b5e93f83bc4ceb29dad4f\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Corrections) (22:21)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Corrections (Management of Prisoners, and Prisoners\u2019 Property) Amendment Bill be now read a second time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008942\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to begin by thanking the Justice Committee for its consideration of the bill. The committee received 52 written submissions and heard 19 oral submissions. Before moving on to the Justice Committee\u2019s excellent recommendations, I want to provide a brief summary of the most important aspects of the bill as it was introduced. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill will see real, practical steps taken to enhance prison and public safety by ensuring that there is a clearer and stronger legislative framework to manage prisoners who pose an extreme risk to prison and public safety while balancing natural justice. The chief executive of Corrections will be empowered to make interim and final designation decisions to manage our most dangerous prisoners more restrictively. These are the prisoners who are exceptionally dangerous in prison, or those prisoners whose risk and influence would extend beyond the prison environment if they were not subject to more restrictive management.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008944\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill will ensure that final determinations for these prisoners known as designated management prisoners, or DMPs, are made following a rigorous assessment process informed by an expert advisory panel\u2019s recommendation. The test applies as established in new section 52C inserted by clause 12. The prisoner must pose an extreme risk to prison or public safety and need more restrictive management to manage that risk. The provisions in new sections 52D and 52F further describe aspects of this test and, when read together, have a moderating effect. This should significantly limit the number of prospective DMPs that are considered for designation. As DMPs are subject to more restrictive management than the general prison population, it is important to ensure decisions are made effectively, with the prisoner receiving clear communications about the designation process. Prisoners will be able to provide the panel with written information or a submission before they make a recommendation, and they\u2019ll also have clear rights of review. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008945\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill also amends Corrections\u2019 powers to segregate prisoners from the mainstream prison population for public safety reasons, and to do so in ways that better protect prisoners\u2019 rights. The bill includes minimum meaningful human contact requirements, which are introduced into the Act for the first time. It will also allow Corrections to apply to the High Court for an order to destroy the property of a prisoner who is designated a terrorist entity if that property poses harm to the community if it leaves prison. The bill better enables Corrections to mitigate the risk of prisoner trust accounts being used for nefarious purposes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008946\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Justice Committee recommended several changes to the bill, which strengthened fairness, transparency, and accountability, while also ensuring the bill is more operationally achievable. I will focus recent on the most important recommendations for the remainder of my time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008947\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs I mentioned before, DMPs pose an extreme risk to prison and or public safety and their risk may relate to their ability to influence others other than their risk to direct physical violence. In this respect, they are different to other high or maximum security prisoners. The committee suggested important refinements to the test for designation that are important to include in the bill. The nature of prisoner risks and offending can change over time, even while in the prison environment. I appreciate the committee\u2019s recommendation to amend the meaning of \u201Cserious offences\u201D in new section 52D to capture any serious offence under New Zealand or international law, with particular references to drug offending, money laundering, and human trafficking, among others. The Act needs to be future-focused to respond effectively to very criminal behaviour, and this change will better achieve that. The committee also recommended refining this position and the new segregation ground relating to radicalisation or recruitment to an ideology. These changes ensure that the grounds are more appropriately targeted at significant terrorism and violent extremism. This helps ensure that the most restrictive management measures are reserved for those prisoners whose behaviours and risk profiles warrant them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008948\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe committee strengthened the natural justice and good record-keeping processes. It is significant to be designated as a DMP and be subjected to more restrictive management, and it is equally important to provide these prisoners with natural justice. The designation decision is an administrative decision informed by a panel. I consider the chief executive of Corrections as still the right person to make this decision. However, given the perception of potential bias and impropriety, the bill has been amended to require the chair or acting chair to be independent of Corrections.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008949\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill already required a DMP to be provided with various notices about their designation and the panel convening, and the right to provide written submissions or information to the panel as soon as reasonably practicable. I welcome the Justice Committee\u2019s recommendation to bolster these provisions. Prisoners will be provided with support to understand the notices provided and will receive assistance to make a submission should they have communication difficulties. They\u2019ll also receive information when they are designated, including a copy of the panel\u2019s recommendation, a summary of reasons behind the recommendation, and the reasons for any disagreement within the panel. The timing for these provisions in new section 52I have also been qualified on the basis that notice must be provided as soon as reasonably practicable to the extent that it would not create a risk of adversely affecting public or prison safety.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008950\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother technical but important revision is that the chief executive and the panel must record their decisions and recommendations respectively, including the reasons behind the decision and the information relied on. This includes the reasons why the chief executive disagreed with the panel if applicable. The review provisions have also been amended to reflect prison realities, prevent vexatious reviews from occurring, and to ensure timely decision making. I welcome the committee\u2019s suggested changes to the review provisions. Relevant prisoner managers will be responsible for alerting the chief executive about whether a review may be warranted, with prisoner-initiated reviews only able to take place once every six months. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008951\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPreviously, the bill was silent on the timeliness of these reviews, but that has now changed. The chief executive must assess whether a full review is required within 28 calendar days of been notified, and would then need to conduct a full review within 28 to 42 days after making this decision. I consider this an appropriate balance between enabling effective operations, preventing the possibility of vexatious reviews from occurring, and ensuring natural justice can occur. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008952\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Government remains committed to prohibiting prolonged solitary confinement, and the committee has inserted a new provision explicitly banning this practice. The bill continues to require all prisoners to receive at least 10 hours of meaningful human contact every fortnight. The committee made important changes to these provisions to ensure there is no possibility of prisoners receiving most, if not all, of their entitlement at the start of a 14-day period, and receiving almost no time throughout the rest of the fortnight. They also recommended amending the definition of the \u201Cmeaningful human contact\u201D to capture the possibility that meaningful contact can happen incidentally. The circumstances around individual exchanges do not necessarily make them no less meaningful. I also welcome the committee\u2019s recommendation to remove the provision specifying the desirability of providing prisoners with more meaningful human contact, providing there is a mix of different kinds of meaningful human contact.  These are better expressed in operational policy than legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008953\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOver the past year, Corrections has reviewed compliance across the prison network, with the prisoner\u2019s right to at least an hour of physical exercise each day. Corrections has made significant progress in improving access to the entitlement across the estate, with greater consistency and decision making, and considerably more monitoring and oversight arrangements at a national level. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008954\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, based on this work, it has become clear that changes need to made to the legislative framework for physical exercise. Following the Justice Committee\u2019s careful consideration, the bill now introduces new grounds and safeguards for situations where a prisoner\u2019s exercise entitlement can be denied. Only a prison manager, or another suitable responsible person, can deny the daily exercise entitlement for a prisoner, and this can be no longer than two consecutive days. The exception is if a prisoner is awaiting a health medical assessment or treatment. In addition, the exceptions must be recorded in order to facilitate national monitoring and analysis. The changes to the provisions also clarify when exercise can be denied. This includes where there is current or real risk to prison security, or the health or safety of any person, including unit search operations, and when a prisoner is being transferred between prisons. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008955\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis bill responds to the evolving risk within our prison system, while maintaining appropriate safeguards and protection for prisoners. It strengthens the safety of Corrections staff, other prisoners, and the wider public, and supports the Government\u2019s commitment to restoring law and order. I look forward to us debating the bill in more detail during the committee of the whole House. I commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008956\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200d10a94a8b3e557bdf0a75413ccbd88\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u002267857dd3d1859fd96bf40030fcfcfb38\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008957\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002267857dd3d1859fd96bf40030fcfcfb38\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (22:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. We\u2019re kind of uncomfortable with this bill, to be perfectly honest, but we will support it. We see what it\u2019s trying to achieve, but as members who sat through the select committee will know, we don\u2019t think it really goes far enough. And I guess our concern is that it doesn\u2019t provide for appropriate minimum standards for prisoners. It improves their current conditions, but it doesn\u2019t go far enough. But in doing that, it then legitimises falling short. So that\u2019s our concern with it. When we were looking at this bill and whether we should support it or not, we were torn betwixt and between. But ultimately, we thought it\u2019s better than doing nothing. Doing selfies in the Chamber is not normal, Mr Fleming.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008958\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think we need to face up to the fact that the reason that this bill is before us, is because the Prisoners of Extreme Risk Unit was visited by the Ombudsman, who gave it a quite damning review. The Prisoners of Extreme Risk Unit was, essentially, set up for the mosque terrorist. One of the concerns, and one of the reasons we support\u2014particularly the tests for who enters that unit\u2014is that it appears to be filled up with prisoners who Corrections would like out of the normal system. If they\u2019re prisoners of extreme risk, then yes. So, if they\u2019re prisoners who are extremely violent\u2014this is a small number of prisoners, but they\u2019re out there\u2014and who take an inordinate amount of management to keep other prisoners and Corrections staff safe; or if they are genuine extremists, and they are preaching their horrid lies to other prisoners and, essentially, recruiting extremism, I get that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut I think we\u2019ve got to be cautious that we don\u2019t use this unit, the Prisoners of Extreme Risk Unit, in a way, by designating these prisoners simply to put away those prisoners who are difficult to manage because they know how to game the system. They know how to recruit fellow prisoners to be on their side, and to do them favours and all of those things that we know happens in prison. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008960\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think there is a sense that we do need to be cautious about this, because let\u2019s just recognise how difficult the conditions here are. These are prisoners who are pretty much all isolated from each other. And when you say \u201Cmeaningful human contact\u201D, 10 hours every two weeks in any given seven days, \u201Cmeaningful\u201D can be as meaningful as an hour with a prison guard, not with family or someone doing meaningful interactions. It can just be pretty banal, with someone who you don\u2019t have a relationship with, they\u2019re your prison keeper. So let\u2019s be very cautious about the people we put here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008961\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo be fair, and the committee worked hard on this, and I think we did a pretty good job when we said a couple of things. One was that we clarified the kind of prisoners, or the risk, where there was an extreme risk, and that\u2019s important\u2014extreme\u2014risk to public safety, the safety of prisoners, the safety of staff or employees, or visitors\u2014or prison safety or security. So it\u2019s actually up there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008962\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd then the other test was that they have to be guilty of a very serious offence. Originally it was kind of a relatively loose test, but we clarified that to include serious drug offences, serious money-laundering offences, and so on. And that\u2019s in new section 52D. So we did do some good work there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008963\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to, however, express disappointment around the exercise rules, because, again, the Prisoners of Extreme Risk Unit rules were in response to an Ombudsman\u2019s report\u2014a damning Ombudsman\u2019s report\u2014and then, all of a sudden, and it\u2019s at the last minute, after submissions had closed, when the departmental report landed\u2014so that\u2019s weeks from when we had to report back\u2014out of nowhere, in the departmental report, there\u2019s these provisions that no one had discussed, about exercise, and the grounds upon which exercise rights could be limited. I was really disappointed that such an important thing hadn\u2019t been traversed or put to submitters. And that was in response to a court case, which actually ordered Corrections to give an hour\u2019s exercise a day to prisoners, which they hadn\u2019t been giving. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008964\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do not agree with the Minister and his officials on this, who say that these are rights extending. The law already says that you can stop exercise where it\u2019s necessary for prison security or safety. What this does is it extends out those grounds by further describing what that might be, including things like conducting a search. Now, conducting a search may be about prison safety, or it may just be about finding a packet of cigarettes, right? So we\u2019ve got to be really cautious there. I was very disappointed in that, and also in terms of defining what exercise is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008965\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENot every New Zealand citizen gets to visit a prison\u2014some do, who don\u2019t choose to do that; others, like MPs, get to have a look, and are allowed to go and ask to see any bit of a prison they like, and I encourage you to do that. I have gone and looked at some prisons, and some of those exercise yards which are adjacent to a cell are not very large at all. They are about 6 or 8 square metres. You couldn\u2019t take three large steps in them. So that\u2019s the area for exercise.  In terms of it being outdoors, some of these so-called exercise yards have walls which are 8 feet high, with roofs on them, and a little gap of about a metre, often covered in wire, and that\u2019s considered an outdoor exercise area. You can barely see the sky. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008966\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI understand that some people think that, well, they\u2019ve done bad things, but if we want them to come out of this place better than they went in, we\u2019ve got to give them humane conditions. So saying that you\u2019re getting exercise when you\u2019re being put into another concrete box that just so happens to have a little bit of fresh air circulating is a little problematic for me. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008967\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs I\u2019ve said, those are only some of the concerns that we have with this bill. One of the challenges is that we\u2019ve got the Mandela Rules, better known as the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, and we\u2019re not compliant with them. This is a convention to which we have signed up and the rules are referenced in the Corrections Act itself. We have agreed to comply with them, and yet time and again we fall short and, essentially, we say that, operationally, we need to do it this way. Now, I appreciate corrections staff, I appreciate the work that they do and all of the risks they put themselves into, and by far and away, the vast majority of them are working hard to make other people\u2019s lives better, but we do need to put the resources into our corrections system to make sure that these minimum standards\u2014internationally recognised standards\u2014are met. This piece of legislation gets us closer to them, but it doesn\u2019t get it there. That\u2019s why we are reluctant in our support. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u00221e425ca0ef902eec0d8be4af59f14815\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008968\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221e425ca0ef902eec0d8be4af59f14815\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (22:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just on the last point that the Hon Dr Duncan Webb said in terms of the resources for the Department of Corrections, I disagree. I think that Corrections have pretty healthy appropriations and I think they actually do get a lot of money. I think the problem with Corrections is that there are people who are in there for non-serious, non-violent crimes and that could be managed in another way that isn\u2019t as expensive as putting someone into custody.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008969\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI don\u2019t think it\u2019s necessarily the resources, but it\u2019s the priority of who needs to be held in custody, which is, essentially, what this bill is about. It is obviously addressing the most high-risk people in this country, and I\u2019ve actually been to visit the Prisoners of Extreme Risk Unit (PERU) as part of my visit to Auckland Prison. I was accompanied there by the prison manager, Stephen Parr, and probably about 10 big guards. It was quite scary. It was the first prison I had ever set foot in and it was pretty terrifying, to be honest with you, especially going straight into PERU, because it has been designed for even higher than maximum security, and, as we all know, it was designed for one purpose, which has been well canvassed in the first reading of this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008970\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe supported this bill going to select committee because we were supportive of the concept of legislating minimum entitlements for people within the PERU for many reasons, but particularly because there was the report by the Ombudsman in 2024 which outlined some of the concerns that that office had around there not being sufficient safeguards in place to make sure that the minimum entitlements in line with the Mandela Rules were being implemented within the PERU. We supported the bill to the Justice Committee, and throughout the select committee process there was a lot of work that went into this bill from the committee, from the officials, and from the advisers and the chair, who were really trying to address some of the concerns held around the table. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008971\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EUltimately, where we\u2019ve landed today, to cut a long story short\u2014but I will be taking my full call\u2014we can no longer support the bill, because it hasn\u2019t met the threshold of what we would have liked to see. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008972\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b822391f90959c357574f17e0474bd33\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: Defund the police.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008973\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a45d2470c0efd3208eba6fe906cf0cb\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: However\u2014however\u2014however, Ryan Hamilton\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008974\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002288ad60e0edc2d2c53648ef284adfb288\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: Defund the police.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008975\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022affa35a01f6c26d3b95ad4378afa23c1\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, the Government is doing a good job of defunding the police, actually. Have a look at your Budget. Have a look at the Budget. We actually made a graph of police funding, and you\u2019ve reduced it, which is so ironic.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008976\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002259a6912cdc74c296b0ecc4f35c16fc94\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: What about outcomes?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008977\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a7b809b20917a054753882d55cbf797\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: Anyway\u2014and didn\u2019t you miss the 500 extra police officers, as well? Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008978\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e53555be0d15d2e79857b75bb87215f8\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: I didn\u2019t.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008979\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225378434932c5ecf25101e91f24454c8a\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, sorry, Mr Speaker. I\u2019ll get back on topic.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008980\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228b8620b8c3ccd629c92d69b6f9368a9d\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: I didn\u2019t miss it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008981\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9e5f36184a0f1e2718ad3cce699df75\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, he didn\u2019t miss it; the Government did\u2014that\u2019s right. Thanks for fact-checking that one, Mr Speaker. Anyway, back to the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008982\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, because we are pragmatic people, we have brought in these 10 tabled amendments which address our concerns. So after this, we have got a riveting committee of the whole House stage, which we are looking forward to, and if we can manage to pass these, then we will change our stance on this bill to support it, because these amendments are not out the gate. We can do out-the-gate ones, but these ones are, basically, about bringing this bill into alignment with the Mandela Rules, and that was a significant point of contention within the select committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008983\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat this bill does is that it does fulfil the Mandela Rules in respect to prolonged solitary confinement\u2014which has a very specific definition\u2014which is that it\u2019s fitting that those entitlements are met and legislated for, because if anyone in this room has read the Ombudsman\u2019s report into the PERU, they would see that in one of the worst case scenarios in the PERU, there was an individual who spent 900 days in prolonged solitary confinement. Regardless of what anyone might think about criminals, and particularly the worst of the worst, at the end of the day, we do not have capital punishment in this country, which means that people still have human rights. There\u2019s a good quote out there that I\u2019m too tired to recall correctly, but how a society treats the worst person in their society is a reflection of how they are, and human rights exist for every person that is a human being, regardless of what they have done in their life. We\u2019ve got these amendments that might bring the bill up to standard, and then we will be able to change our stance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat this process really showed me was that it is justified to have deep concerns about Corrections. Corrections have been\u2014how do we say this? It\u2019s hard to think of kind ways of putting things when you\u2019re really tired, but they have failed in many respects. At the time, the Chief Executive of Corrections, Jeremy Lightfoot\u2014I know that he\u2019s now at the Ministry for Cities, Environment, Regions and Transport\u2014was actually called before the High Court in December last year and was issued with a mandamus order, which is, one, unprecedented but, two, it is a court telling a chief executive of a Government department that they need to abide by their governing legislation, or their rules. The reason that the chief executive was summoned to the High Court was because Corrections was not meeting minimum entitlements, and this is for just your stock standard prisoners; this is not even in relation to those in the PERU. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008985\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is unprecedented that a Public Service chief executive is told that they need to follow their own law, and so already we had deep concerns about Corrections and their inability to provide for people\u2019s minimum entitlements. We gave them a bit of grace during COVID-19 and the lockdown\u2014well, I didn\u2019t, because I wasn\u2019t in here. But they were afforded grace because of the circumstances of that particular time for their trying to manage the spread of an infectious disease. However, now that we\u2019re well out of COVID, there really are no excuses for Corrections not being able to meet their minimum entitlements, which was really the rationale behind our original support for this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008986\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe felt that if we legislated for those minimum entitlements for these prisoners in the PERU, it might be a tool by which Corrections might be held accountable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008987\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, what we found in the process is that the minimum entitlements don\u2019t go far enough to meet the Mandela Rules. But, also, we were really disappointed that it almost felt like, in some circumstances, the advisors were trying to write this bill in a way that makes the status quo meet a new set of minimum entitlements by creative accounting, almost, creative definitions of the interpretation of an exercise yard or how much time people have access to daylight or things like ventilation. We just felt that it wasn\u2019t a genuine attempt to try and embed really important minimum standards, but rather it was an attempt to try and minimise the legal risk to\u2014and human rights in the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture (OPCAT) monitoring risk to Corrections by making a bill that really embeds the status quo. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008988\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have another concern, which we\u2019ll canvass more through the committee of the whole House stage, and that is that the Prisoners of Extreme Risk Unit (PERU) was designed with one person in particular in mind, and this is a heinous individual that we shall not name. However, now PERU has captured a whole range of other people, people who have been, admittedly, extremely violent, but also people who have very large influence in terms of organised crime and their presence or influence within those spaces. We don\u2019t think that this is what PERU was designed for. We think that PERU was designed for an exceptional, unprecedented, extraordinary situation and that it is now being used as a tool to capture others that don\u2019t fall within that remit, who would otherwise be in the maximum security unit. That includes people who are on remand as well. So we just feel like it\u2019s been created and now it is becoming a catch-all. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008989\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnyway, we look forward to spending the last hour and 20 minutes of this evening in committee of the whole House to traverse these issues, and we will change to support if we get support for our amendments. So pick up a copy and have a read.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022 data-id=\u00224d623622ea7736d71b9e2fcd6c8bf983\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008990\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224d623622ea7736d71b9e2fcd6c8bf983\u0022\u003ETODD STEPHENSON (ACT) (22:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of ACT to speak on the Corrections (Management of Prisoners, and Prisoners\u2019 Property) Amendment Bill. One of the key duties, actually, of a Government is to protect its citizens. It\u2019s unfortunate that in society we, sadly, have some people who actually pose an extreme risk to fellow citizens, but, also, even once they\u2019re incarcerated, they actually pose an extreme risk to other prisoners and staff. These prisoners, some of them, as it\u2019s been outlined this evening, are housed in the Prisoners of Extreme Risk Unit, but there are also others.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008991\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI want to thank the Justice Committee, and my fellow MPs on the select committee. We did actually work through this diligently, and despite what we might have heard from across the House, the other members, even in Opposition, actually did work through the issues. This bill actually does put in place, for the first time, these designated management prisoners. So it actually provides a framework to manage these prisoners, which actually protects their rights but also allows Corrections to understand their powers and duties. So obviously we\u2019re going to talk about this in a lot more detail, but it is actually an important piece of legislation, which, as I said, for the first time will actually give Corrections a proper framework to deal with these extreme risk prisoners. So I am commending it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022 data-id=\u00228f7dafc8af1143fde388cad9935bb5c5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008992\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f36277cb754947fa93977a31a33abd49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228f7dafc8af1143fde388cad9935bb5c5\u0022\u003EHon CASEY COSTELLO (Minister of Customs) (22:53)\u003C/span\u003E: I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak on the Corrections (Management of Prisoners, and Prisoners\u2019 Property) Amendment Bill. I recall, when I spoke on the first reading of this legislation, applauding Camilla Belich\u2019s contribution on this bill, recognising that this was going to be a difficult piece of legislation with complexities to navigate. So, therefore, I fully recognise the great work of the Justice Committee to bring it back to the House, having fully traversed the issues identified in it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008993\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThis is an important piece of legislation. It addresses some dangerous risk loopholes in our prison system. New Zealand First has always, and will always, advocate for our front-line workers. This provides a positive framework for the front-line prison officers as well. It is a useful and important piece of legislation, and we commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c7fac10ee9174580359b54204482431\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: This is a split call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022 data-id=\u002265da2e58831485ecba8ed99fcc0ca61e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008995\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cdfceb3207b43e8a21b346f9376ddc7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002265da2e58831485ecba8ed99fcc0ca61e\u0022\u003ETEANAU TUIONO (Green) (22:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of the Greens to take a split call on the Corrections (Management of Prisoners, and Prisoners\u2019 Property) Amendment Bill. For those people that are actually watching us from home, it is a Saturday night, but in the way that we run time here in Parliament, it is actually Tuesday because we\u2019re under urgency. I know that Dan Rosewarne in particular would have would have preferred to be out there with his cars, but here we are on Saturday night discussing these bills.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008996\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust to support some of the comments that have been said around the House, in particular from my colleague Tamatha Paul, who has indicated that we do have tabled amendments on the Table which would move this bill in a way that aligns with the Mandela Rules. So people that are listening, tuning in, we are talking about the Corrections (Management of Prisoners, and Prisoners\u2019 Property) Amendment Bill, but it is focusing on prisoners of extreme risk and those people that are within the Prisoners of Extreme Risk Unit. That particular designation was actually targeted to one specific individual, an individual who is infamous in the history of New Zealand. I won\u2019t name that person. But one of our concerns, amongst a number of concerns, is that this will actually capture a lot of other people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008997\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe way that we go about making sure that it doesn\u2019t capture a whole lot of other people\u2014because once you set up a designation, then it becomes easier to capture other people\u2014is actually to move it in line with the international commitments that we have signed up to. This is the reference to the Mandela Rules. As I was quickly learning about the Mandela Rules, on the preface, on the website of the United Nations, it actually begins with a quote from Nelson Mandela. He said that \u201Cno one truly knows a nation until one has been inside its jails. A nation should not be judged by how it treats its highest citizens, but its lowest ones.\u201D So words of wisdom there from Nelson Mandela himself. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008998\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are a number of different principles which guided the Mandela Rules: treating people with dignity, etc. But one of them focused on ensuring that there wasn\u2019t prolonged solitary confinement, which brings us to what this bill is trying to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0008999\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the points that was raised, I think, by the Hon Dr Duncan Webb was around meaningful contact. We know that if you\u2019ve got somebody in solitary confinement, to leave them there without being able to connect with people is in many ways a form of extreme punishment, torture even. So, one of the amendments that Tamatha Paul has tabled\u2014and I would invite members across the House to pick this amendment up\u2014is to replace that, because one of the points that actually was raised is as the bill references \u201Cmeaningful human contact\u201D, that shouldn\u2019t include like passive context. So if a prisoner goes out and they see a prison guard, that might, under the definition as it is currently drafted, qualify as \u201Cmeaningful human contact\u201D\u2014or being surveilled or being able to take telephone calls, etc., etc., etc. So this particular tabled amendment would take away that. It would provide a lot more clarity around proper, meaningful human contact. So I would invite members to take a look at that tabled amendment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI was interested to hear that the Justice Committee had some new information dumped on them in the departmental report, which wasn\u2019t actually included in part of the submissions. That was around the possible limitations to exercise. As we all know, as we should know, particularly here in Parliament, we get stuck inside a lot, being able to exercise is a way to improve one\u2019s wellbeing; it helps with rehabilitation as well. So I hope that the Minister of Corrections has done some thinking about why that was included in the departmental report late, by the sounds of it, and the different things that could be done in terms of amendments to make sure that that is also afforded to these individuals.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy sense is it is moving in the right direction, but, of course, it is best to do things once and do them properly. This bill has got a lot more work to do. We do have some tabled amendments which would move it significantly in line with the Mandela Rules, and I encourage members across the House to support these amendments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022 data-id=\u0022c5b0d80522c86b6a1d202440d6124d5a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c5b0d80522c86b6a1d202440d6124d5a\u0022\u003ERIMA NAKHLE (National\u2014Takanini) (22:59)\u003C/span\u003E: We commend this bill. There was extensive korero during the select committee process, and it\u2019s really interesting, because it\u2019s sad to hear that it\u2019s not commended by the Green Party, when, really, this is doing what they dream of\u2014giving prisoners more rights. But again and again, over and over, it astounds me how much the Labour Party and the Greens go to great extreme lengths to stand up for the rights of those who have caused some of the most grievous harm in our communities\u2014very sad but true.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u0022733b9755f1bee7a0a7d4261c8e513625\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022733b9755f1bee7a0a7d4261c8e513625\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (23:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Yet again we hear more misinformation from the member Rima Nakhle opposite. I don\u2019t think she heard our first speaker indicate that we were supporting this bill at its second reading, but, then again, I guess that at this late stage in the day or the evening that member would rather guess\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf22a832d14a4c99ab5dfd16e24446e5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d29ee6b12b6a2a013c869f64efceb412\u0022\u003ERima Nakhle\u003C/span\u003E: Truth hurts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228659b8f2065c5511a9bfc09593a19b56\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, the truth does hurt, and you\u2019ll find that out in November. That\u2019s what\u2019s going to happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAs has already been indicated, the Labour Party will be supporting this bill at its second reading this evening.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223488610248f25b9bca41a38a69e53046\u0022\u003EHon Dr Deborah Russell\u003C/span\u003E: Listen up, Rima, you need to hear this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e3fd11e3c9baf21c71f7569a3f650fe3\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE\u003C/span\u003E: I will say it again: the Labour Party will be supporting this bill at its second reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to start by acknowledging the work of the Justice Committee. I think that everyone in this Parliament knows that I\u2019m not a member of the Justice Committee, but it does appear to be a committee that has a lot on its plate in terms of this Parliament. I didn\u2019t hear any of the submissions, but I understand that there were more than 50 of them and a number of organisations and individuals were able to speak to their submissions as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I am told, though, through the select committee\u2019s report is that there were a number of themes, but the one that sticks out for me is that there is no argument, really, that the Department of Corrections need to have the tools and the ability to not just manage some of our country\u2019s most difficult offenders but be able to do that in a safe way. When I talk about a safe way, I mean safe for the staff that are in our facilities all around the country, and I note that the unit we\u2019re referring to here in the select committee is based in Auckland Prison. But the work that Corrections staff do tirelessly every day, every hour, every minute does need to be acknowledged.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe interesting thing, of course, is that there is a requirement and an expectation\u2014some would say an obligation\u2014for that safety to also extend to the prisoners. I think that internationally that is certainly an expectation that is well held and well understood. We are none the less talking about a relatively small group of prisoners who have been assessed as being an extreme risk. So it is important to note the number of prisoners that we are referring to in this bill is, by and large, a relatively small, but the implications in terms of the operations of the department are such that, naturally, there is a conversation that needs to be had around the appropriateness of how far that would extend into other parts of the corrections life. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI say that because we are talking about the way in which operations happen or may not happen, and even though we\u2019re talking about a small group of prisoners here, there are implications in terms of resourcing. There are implications in terms of some of the operational policies that would be put in place, and at the end of the day, given whatever the resourcing pot might be, there will be implications across the entire corrections sector as a result of making some of these decisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe select committee identifies in terms of the report the fact that there is a reference in there\u2014I think it\u2019s in the Greens\u2019 view in there as well\u2014to the role of the Ombudsman, and that was relatively clear in terms of the real risk that the Ombudsman was able to identify in terms of where New Zealand sits aligned with international approaches and international practices, and the possibility that operations become the new norm in terms of what some of those international standards might be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI understand that the Justice Committee heard similar kinds of arguments or submissions from other submitters as well. A lot of them relate to that kind of desire to adhere or align to international standards in terms of the way in which prisons operate and function here in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, my colleague the Hon Dr Duncan Webb mentioned the fact that members of Parliament have a statutory opportunity to visit any prison in New Zealand. That\u2019s in legislation, and it provides the opportunity for any member of this House to visit facilities all around the country to check on a few things, one of which is the conditions that prisoners are held in. The other is the alleged treatment of prisoners who are incarcerated. I have not been in a prison under that particular opportunity as a member of Parliament. I have not exercised that statutory opportunity, but prisons have not been unfamiliar to me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPrior to entering this House I spent just over five years as a visiting justice in prisons in New Zealand, undertaking disciplinary hearings over a whole manner of things. So while I haven\u2019t taken up that statutory opportunity to visit prisons as a member of Parliament, I have taken up the statutory opportunity to visit as a visiting justice. These are individuals who are appointed by the Government of the day, who, effectively, have to be either of two things. They have to be a lawyer or a Justice of the Peace, and there are a handful of these folk who every week of the year go into our prisons and undertake independent disciplinary hearings. This is relevant to this bill, Madam Speaker, because one of the questions that clearly comes through some of this conversation and the submission process is the role of independents. For a number of these issues in terms of decisions being made, is it appropriate that the chief executive of the department is making some decisions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENaturally, the chief executive needs to make decisions but when it concerns the operation of their prison, when it concerns the possible implications and impact on how much exercise a prisoner might be able to undertake, or the level of human contact that someone might have over the course of a 24-hour period or, indeed, a week, or whatever it might be, there is an issue for consideration\u2014and we want to tease this out during the committee stage\u2014around whether it\u2019s appropriate for that decision-making capacity to sit with, effectively, a member of the Public Service or whether it would sit more comfortably with, perhaps, independent individuals such as visiting justices.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EVisiting justices do have the statutory right to place someone into solitary confinement for a period of up to 14 or 15 days. I know that because I did it. These are individuals who absolutely need to understand what the impacts are of solitary confinement, what it means in terms of prisoners\u2019 ability or inability to have human contact, to be able to contact members of the family, to have access to privileges, and to lose privileges. In some instances, the maximum capacity there is up to 90 days\u2019 loss of privileges. We are talking about privileges that other prisoners have as of right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen I started in that role there was a requirement that if a prisoner had been in mechanical constraints for a period that exceeded 24 hours, that had to be notified to a local visiting justice within a timeframe. Why? So that that independent statutory appointee could consider whether that was appropriate or whether they thought there needed to be, not an investigation or anything, but some oversight over that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are already existing avenues within corrections where there are appropriately trained and appropriately appointed people who could play a role in terms of some of the issues that, clearly, have been identified by the Ombudsman and by some of the agencies that have been identified as submitters through this process. Also, there is the opportunity for folk who are familiar with what that might look like.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI don\u2019t think we can underestimate the impact that some of these restrictions will have on an individual. Now, I am by no means suggesting that the behaviour that has led these individuals to be subject to these restrictions should be condoned. It should not. There is a reason why these individuals are in a facility in New Zealand, having gone through the independent judicial process. But there is a responsibility of this Parliament to consider who is appropriate to be making these decisions and where the statutory threshold may lie.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe do look forward to entertaining some of those potential changes through the committee stage. Having said that, we come to this bill with our support for it at this stage, but, naturally, we would look at what that looked like when it emerged from the committee of the whole House to see where things would land, but for now we commend this bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022 data-id=\u0022da355a4c1975209c1842c23b54c2ae82\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002290f442a79aea4ce0aeae083763135935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022da355a4c1975209c1842c23b54c2ae82\u0022\u003ECARL BATES (National\u2014Whanganui) (23:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, National is committed to safe communities throughout New Zealand, but along with that, we\u2019ve got to make sure that we look after, and care for, our prison population appropriately. Along with the fantastic member for Rangit\u012Bkei, I visited one of our local prisons recently. This bill will continue to support the framework around the management of our prisoners across New Zealand, so I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ed2ee851ca202f69fcee9a5f8219d6f1\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Dr Deborah Russell\u2014this is a split call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022186fe8bd1ecc365ad694cda6ec9eef8d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022186fe8bd1ecc365ad694cda6ec9eef8d\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (23:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, I think I first visited a prison, actually, as a teenager. Part of the local drama class on Friday nights in New Plymouth, and we\u2019d done a play about a person who was unjustly imprisoned, and we took it to the local prison in New Plymouth, which was quite the experience there. I don\u2019t know if that prison\u2019s still in use, actually. It has\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc4996dddc00dc462080f692a86f4543\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, it\u2019s not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4e56406c81f05860320bc88721c6c06\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014very solid, thick walls, and it\u2019s quite a daunting place. I don\u2019t think I went inside a prison again until a few years ago as a member of Parliament\u2014Wiri Prison\u2014which is nothing like as scary looking as the old prison in New Plymouth, but it\u2019s still a very daunting place, going in there through screenings and walls and understanding that the people who are in that prison can go nowhere else. That\u2019s where they are. We have imprisoned them as a punishment, and their punishment is loss of freedom. That\u2019s what we do in liberal democracies. We don\u2019t engage in hard labour or in physical punishment. The punishment we hand out is loss of freedom.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt makes it quite important when we restrict prisoners in ways that entail more than the loss of freedom. We find this bill difficult on this side of the House, but we are voting for it, because alongside that sort of thinking around the loss of freedom is the need to recognise that some people are very dangerous and that some people\u2014I hate saying these words\u2014are not fit to mix with other people on a daily basis, because they impose such a physical danger to other people, yet we are charging ourselves with keeping these people safe. That\u2019s the duty we give ourselves as a liberal democracy\u2014that if we imprison people and take their freedom away from them, we keep them safe. What this bill is attempting to do is to find ways of keeping people who are very risky and who do pose a real danger safe from each other but also keeping them safe from the brutalisation that can occur in prisons. Some of those famous Stanford prison experiments are contested. Nevertheless, we know that if someone is in a person\u2019s power, it can be so easy to mistreat that person.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EEven though these are bad people, we must not mistreat them, because that reflects on us and what sort of people we think we are\u2014that we would mistreat another human being. We do need to find a balance and find a way through these difficulties. These are not good people. Nevertheless, we must keep them safe, and this bill is an attempt to do that. There are some real difficulties in it, which we need to discuss at the committee stage, but there is one thing I am quite concerned about, looking at new section\u00A052D and looking at why a person may be taken to pose an extreme risk. It is someone who may be \u201Cradicalising, or recruiting to an ideology, another person,\u201D. Gosh, that\u2019s a risky idea to have in a liberal democracy. We know what sorts of ideologies we are talking about, but it is all too easy to demonise another person\u2019s ideas\u2014to say that their thinking is wrong or their ideology is wrong. We might have laws to lock up local gang members, but, all too often, those laws might apply to the local embroiderers\u2019 guild as well. So there\u2019s a real difficulty in that phrasing. I understand what we\u2019re trying to get at, but it\u2019s difficult. I think that emphasises just how difficult this bill is and how seriously we must take it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225eba95084f8b339f3cf6983f60402426\u0022\u003EMiles Anderson\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a1adb51380f3fab93e53e6e71d2aa78e\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Is this the real Miles Anderson?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223426e7cc4b833530f2f99dc7903fe9a\u0022\u003EMiles Anderson\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll tell you later.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a95efb4ad3c1589d58c96ca2c498a8e\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just for the other side of the House, there\u2019s a whole lot of those ties around the building at the moment, so I\u2019m just checking to make sure it\u2019s the real Miles Anderson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022 data-id=\u0022d03b4fb8fc414542b60a781a6db6d021\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d03b4fb8fc414542b60a781a6db6d021\u0022\u003EMILES ANDERSON (National\u2014Waitaki) (23:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Look, I\u2019m happy to take a call on the Corrections (Management of Prisoners, and Prisoners\u2019 Property) Amendment Bill. I\u2019d really like to thank the Justice Committee for the work they\u2019ve done on this bill, and I commend the bill to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022 data-id=\u0022c1742a97671d4f7c8f55e98a1c527205\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c1742a97671d4f7c8f55e98a1c527205\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (23:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Actually, I was wondering what those ties were all about. I might just have to have a chat afterwards just to figure out what it\u2019s all about\u2014but, yeah, you\u2019re looking very sharp at this time of night.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen we\u2019re discussing issues like this, you learn a lot about your colleagues, and I was quite impressed with Tangi Utikere\u2019s past experience there as a visiting justice. It\u2019s things like that you learn about your colleagues, and those experiences really round out the caucus, so that\u2019s great. The only experience I\u2019ve really had with visiting a prison was 25 years ago when they went on strike and they sent a whole lot of us young soldiers in there to look after the prisons. That was a bit of an eye-opener as a young soldier, but you make some arrangements\u2014\u201CYou make it easy for me; I\u2019ll make it easy for you\u201D\u2014and we didn\u2019t have any issues. It was for a good couple of weeks, but it was a good experience, nevertheless, for a young person to actually see the prison and see how it all operated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnyway, Labour supports the bill. We supported it at first reading, we have taken part in the select committee process in good faith, and we acknowledge that there are aspects of this legislation that improve the current situation. The existing arrangement for managing some of the highest-risk prisoners have been subject to significant criticism by both the Ombudsman and the inspectorate. There\u2019s broad agreement that the status quo was unsustainable and that Parliament has a responsibility to provide a clear legal framework where extraordinary powers are being exercised, like in our prisons. It would be fair to say that the role of this House is not simply to approve new powers; it\u2019s to make sure that those powers are necessary, they\u2019re proportionate, workable, and accompanied by the appropriate safeguards that stand the test of time\u2014particularly when those powers affect people who are entirely under the control of the State.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the central features of this bill is the creation of the designated-management prisoners, or DMPs, and the bill creates a formal process for identifying prisoners who pose an extreme risk and allows Corrections to manage them under a more restrictive regime. Final designations can last for up to two years and involve restrictions on movement, communications, association, and property. That property piece is one thing that hasn\u2019t actually been discussed too much, and it didn\u2019t really get the scrutiny within the select committee either. Nevertheless, there is merit in having a transparent statutory process. The current arrangements have been criticised for a lack of oversight and clarity. The bill requires notification of prisoners, written reasons for decisions, and it requires opportunities to provide submissions and then also that advisory panel involvement as well. There are also review mechanisms, and those are all improvements. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, many submitters asked whether the decision-making framework was robust enough for a regime of this significance, and the Law Association actually argued that decisions of this gravity should involve a greater degree of independence, and they questioned whether psychological assessment should play a mandatory role in those designation decisions. They also raised concerns about the breadth of the designation test and whether it extends too far beyond risks that actually arise within prison environments. The New Zealand Law Society made similar points, actually, suggesting that the threshold may be overly broad and recommending greater independence in the advisory process. Those are not arguments that this side of the House dismisses lightly. When Parliament creates a framework that can impose highly restrictive conditions for extended periods, we should be confident that those decisions are based on clear evidence and the appropriate checks and balances.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other major issue raised throughout the submissions and raised tonight is that the bill creates, for the first time, a statutory requirement for meaningful human contact. That\u2019s an important step forward. We know that prolonged isolation can cause serious psychological harm and we know that maintaining human dignity matters. We know that rehabilitation becomes increasingly difficult when people are disconnected from meaningful social isolation. The Justice Committee strengthened some aspects of the bill by aligning the prohibition on prolonged solitary confinement more closely with the Mandela Rules and by adding requirements around minimum contact over 17- and 14-day periods. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDespite those changes, we do have some concerns. The Law Association argued that the minimum standards remain well below what many international experts consider appropriate. They questioned whether some forms of contact, particularly telephone and those barrier interactions should qualify as meaningful human contact at all. The Law Society expressed similar concerns and warned that redefining internationally recognised concepts risks creating inconsistency between New Zealand law and international standards. Whether the members in the House agree with those views or not, they raise an important question for this House and I look forward to fleshing that out during the committee of the whole House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf Parliament is creating statutory rights, are we setting the right standard? That\u2019s going to be an important question. The other important question is going to be around those standards. Can they actually be delivered? Rights only exist in practice if there are actually enough trained staff and we have the facilities and the resources to make them happen, essentially. A recurring theme in the submissions was that much of this bill assumes a level of resourcing that from what I\u2019ve seen, doesn\u2019t actually really exist at this point in time. The question of implementation remains, and it\u2019s one that we\u2019ll definitely ask during the committee of the whole House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to just quickly touch on the evidence provided by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists. Their submission added an important clinical perspective to this debate. They supported some of the bill\u2019s objectives, including greater procedural protections and stronger recognition of meaningful human contact, but they warned that the bill created significant new management powers without, like, an equally strong clinical framework, which I found quite interesting. The college argued that behaviours interpreted as extreme risk can sometimes arise from untreated mental illnesses and things like intellectual disability, neurodivergence, trauma, or addiction-related conditions. They were concerned that the designation framework focuses heavily on behaviour while placing insufficient emphasis on understanding and addressing those underlying causes. I found that submission particularly interesting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey also raised concerns around young people in custody and trauma-informed practice, things like alcohol and drug withdrawal as well, and the availability of rehabilitation pathways for those designated management prisoners. Now, Labour accepts that prisons must be able to manage genuine risks. Public safety absolutely matters but so does staff safety and then also prisoner safety. We look forward to fleshing those out during the committee of the whole House. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022897ed15f240e46a71d1fa185cc9c2fb8\u0022\u003EIngrid Leary\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I was just finding it really difficult to hear my colleague Dan Rosewarne speaking because of noise coming from the other side of the House, so I\u2019m just asking if, when members are speaking, we can have the courtesy of allowing them to speak, because it is quite distracting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b515858ccc8ed806d759eb2ef76a86a4\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, look, thank you for that, but I have to say there was a point about 20 minutes ago where I was actually going to rark the other side of the House up. I didn\u2019t particularly notice it at this stage, but it is\u2014yeah, I didn\u2019t notice it on that occasion, but obviously the member was concerned.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232f3425b13a4fa188b5eed90716f932e\u0022\u003EIngrid Leary\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I wasn\u2019t in the House at that point, but I found it difficult to hear my colleague and I\u2019m sitting directly in front of him, so I just thought it must have been\u2014also it\u2019s quite difficult when we\u2019re speaking in the House if there\u2019s distraction around us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1668b736f9a05aa9ffb1d8090a2b5bc\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I get that. I just hadn\u2019t noticed it at that particular point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022 data-id=\u0022311602cc535580bcecd724d97553dec9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022311602cc535580bcecd724d97553dec9\u0022\u003ERYAN HAMILTON (National\u2014Hamilton East) (23:27)\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, thanks, Madam Speaker. It\u2019s great to speak on virtually the last call of this, the second reading. I\u2019d just like to acknowledge the Minister of Corrections and his work in this space, and the Justice Committee, which is certainly the busiest committee this term, with over 50 pieces of legislation. I acknowledge the previous chair, James Meager, the Hon Andrew Bayly, and, of course, Tom Rutherford. I certainly commend this bill to the House and recommend the next speaker be Suze Redmayne.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022 data-id=\u00229c189fb7e574d6e6e479b25aaf67ad2d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d52c571cdb246f6abf50a39de1a66f7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229c189fb7e574d6e6e479b25aaf67ad2d\u0022\u003EGLEN BENNETT (Labour) (23:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Kia ora, Madam Speaker. I\u2019m glad we live in a country where we have good, chunky conversations about things like incarceration because, sadly, it is necessary. It is necessary to detain people and to punish people, but also to protect the public from some of those offenders, but also, as this bill talks about, to protect the staff who are responsible for managing the day-to-day comings and goings of inmates in our prison system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, in my family, I have a family member who is actually about to retire from the Department of Corrections on Labour weekend after doing 51 years\u201451 years with the Department of Corrections; as long as I\u2019ve been alive. It has been interesting to hear stories that they have told of their experiences\u2014everything from, you would know, Madam Chair, the minimum security of \u014Chura Prison back in the day, where the fence was sort of rather low and they\u2019d be out in the community mowing the lawns and doing all sorts of stuff, through to P\u0101remoremo and the maximum security space. Many stories have been told, and as I listen around the House and I hear the thoughtful debate, this is something\u2014like I say, I\u2019m glad that we can discuss these things as a country, because unfortunately we need prisons. We need to protect the public but we also need to protect other inmates and also the staff that manage those spaces.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs I\u2019ve been listening, and I wasn\u2019t part of the Justice Committee, but I was really curious about the Mandela Rules, and so I looked them up, as any person would, to understand them. I think it was the National Party, actually, that originally signed us up to those rules when it came through the United Nations. It\u2019s sobering reading, and, again, we understand that you do the crime, you do the time; we understand that people do need to be punished and removed from society when they hurt and harm others; but the Mandela Rules, I think, are significant for us as we continue to progress this bill, as we cautiously consider amendments through the committee of the whole House stage, and what it can look like. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Mandela Rules talk about human dignity\u2014yes, in some way we have to respect human life; around non-discrimination, which, again, is a pillar of a modern liberal democracy; around healthcare, which, again, we provide within our prison service here in Aotearoa; and then the purpose of imprisonment, which I thought was really interesting because it talked about the focus on safety and security, obviously, for the public, but also for those who are incarcerated with others. But it then talked about rehabilitation and preparation to be released and become law-abiding citizens, which should always be our hope, that, yes, these people have done bad things and we should always err on the side of victims, but we should also do our best to ensure we have less victims if we did it right through the prison system and actually did rehabilitation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut the last one, which has been traversed a number of times, but I just wanted to reflect on it briefly from my experiences around that solitary confinement. This is a piece in this legislation which is contentious, which is hard, and in the Mandela Rules, it talks about isolation for 22 hours or more daily without meaningful human contact. Then it talks about prolonged solitary confinement exceeding 15 consecutive days, which is strictly banned, and some of the numbers in this legislation are a challenge.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust in closing on that solitary confinement\u2014but also just on the fact that I\u2019ve spent a lot of time in prisons and have a fair understanding of it\u2014I remember, as a youth worker in the 1990s here in Wellington, being called up by Mount Crawford prison, which was still open at the time, and they asked me to visit a teenager in there every fortnight. This teenager had no family connection, had no sort of person, no one to phone or to talk to, and even though they\u2019re in a minimum security wing of Mount Crawford prison, Corrections had real concerns because of their disconnection, and because of the fact that they did feel confined even though they were in minimum security, but it was that human meaningful connection which we need to make sure that we uphold.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224613399aa5debf52c4795b791a369669\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The question is, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments recommended by the Justice Committee by majority be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Corrections (Management of Prisoners, and Prisoners\u2019 Property) Amendment Bill be now read a second time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 88\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; New Zealand Labour 21; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 8; Kapa-Kingi.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221857b66d44d8e1c487e9a003be748e9b\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: This bill is set down for committee stage immediately.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI declare the House in committee for consideration of the Corrections (Management of Prisoners, and Prisoners\u2019 Property) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a3c0d39b323b6ab8be8035e913d07d74\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a23a00e8c1bd74a11291b3aae3f9bc66\u0022\u003EPart 1 Amendments to Corrections Act 2004, and Schedules 1 and 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208feb03aa63f838d1adf2c47735ff71b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the House is in committee on the Corrections (Management of Prisoners, and Prisoners\u2019 Property) Amendment Bill. We come first to Part 1. This is the debate on clauses 3 to 25, \u201CAmendments to Corrections Act 2004\u201D, and Schedules 1 and 2. The question is that Part 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022a35d5d8c8bc56d04a3c7fdf0294cfe42\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a35d5d8c8bc56d04a3c7fdf0294cfe42\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (23:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I just wanted to have a bit of guidance from either yourself or the Minister of Police. We\u2019ve got a significantly large amendment bill that\u2019s been tabled, and my understanding is that it reprints a significant portion, if not the whole bill, through the amendments as well. I\u2019m just wanting a bit of guidance, while we go through the committee stage, will the Minister in the chair be looking at Amendment Paper 809 or the bill as reported back from the Justice Committee? It would also be good to hear from the Minister his intentions with the Amendment Paper. I understand this was tabled yesterday at 1.30 p.m., so some guidance on what the Minister intends to achieve with this Amendment Paper, and also wanting to know which sections or which clauses it will be applicable to, and how we should manage this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255ee17ee38f18777f72511ed8d75a677\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Yep, fair question. For Amendment Paper (AP) 809 from the Minister, it\u2019s a revision-tracked AP, so you should treat that, effectively, as the bill that we\u2019re going to be progressing through in this committee stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u002277af5c1302cb42d703fde2a5c0b184af\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002277af5c1302cb42d703fde2a5c0b184af\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (23:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019ll just start with that and start with Part 1, and I just wanted to start with the very first clause here, which is the \u201CPrincipal Act\u201D. I have had a bit of a look at\u2014actually, are we starting with the \u201CPrincipal Act\u201D, or we starting with the \u201CTitle\u201D now in the revision-tracked version? It\u2019s still with clause 3, is that right?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ab00e6f2f22fd746b983c0a1354101c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re on Part 1. Yep.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8bfa4f0ccb2874b02790e40fce657a0\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: I have a question, really. One of the issues with this bill that has been controversial is the application of Minimum Standards, often known as the Mandela Rules. That\u2019s in the Corrections Act 2004 and section 5(1)(b) states that the purpose of the corrections system is \u201Cfor corrections facilities to be operated in accordance with rules set out in this Act and the regulations made under this Act are based, amongst other matters, the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners;\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe question is, really, how does the primary principal Act\u2014which is what\u2019s outlined in clause 3 of the amendment bill, and section 5, \u201CPurpose of the corrections system\u201D, which does go through the Minimum Standards\u2014interact with this amendment bill that has standards which do outline what minimum standards are for prisoners but\u2014and this is certainly in some of the submissions that we received at the Justice Committee\u2014may be different from the United Nations Standard of Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners? That\u2019s kind of quite an important point. Does this bill change the purpose of the principal Act because of the fact that the principal Act states that the United Nations Minimum Standards is one of the purposes of the Corrections Act? So kind of a small point, but also kind of fundamental to which rights would take precedent once this bill is enacted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022 data-id=\u002221ab4450a1588e82ef1673c42458d929\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002200ae89b8149340638b3bd22c705616a9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002221ab4450a1588e82ef1673c42458d929\u0022\u003EINGRID LEARY (Labour\u2014Taieri) (23:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Just a very quick follow-up on that. If the Minister of Police could explain, please, the purpose of the Amendment Paper and why it was brought to the House yesterday, so that we have a bit of context for what\u2019s happening.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00222a44dd0b53e23aef0796806bb4ee9014\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222a44dd0b53e23aef0796806bb4ee9014\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Corrections) (23:39)\u003C/span\u003E: The amendments were developed after the bill was introduced. They are important to make now to ensure Corrections can be held accountable and prisoners are protected. In late 2025, the High Court issued a mandamus order to the chief executive of Corrections, which noted concerns about the consistent delivery of prisoners\u2019 exercise entitlements. Subsequently, Corrections identified the need for stronger monitoring and oversight of daily exercise exceptions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EFurther operational work identified gaps and uncertainty in the current law, including how the entitlement is applied across prisons. It was identified that stronger protections for prisoner rights were needed, and the bill delivers those. Operational improvements can strengthen practice, but they don\u2019t resolve uncertainty in the legislation. Legislation creates a clear and durable framework that staff can apply, prisoners can understand, and oversight bodies can review.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u002204c83e0029cfc12a18db9101d63ac4a0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002204c83e0029cfc12a18db9101d63ac4a0\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (23:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I guess it\u2019s time to start stepping through what this bill does. Obviously, having just finished the second reading, we\u2019ve talked about the overarching objectives of the bill and the fact that it looks at prisoners of extreme risk. Then I see in clause 5 of this bill, new section 3AA, we\u2019ve got a definition of \u201Corganised criminal group\u201D, and obviously that feeds into what is a prisoner of extreme risk or a prisoner who can be subject to the designation provisions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I guess I\u2019m a little confused about is we\u2019ve now got the Gangs Act, which sets out gangs and, also, the schedule there, which sets out organised criminal groups, also known as gangs. But then we\u2019ve also got section, I think it\u2019s section 98A of the Crimes Act, which also deals with the offence of belonging to an organised criminal group. So we\u2019ve already got statutory definitions of gangs or organised criminal groups, and now we\u2019ve got a another one. I\u2019d be interested to understand why it is that we need another definition of \u201Corganised criminal group\u201D when it\u2019s kind of already an established concept, particularly in section 98A of the Crimes Act; and, in fact, whether those two definitions are identical and, if they\u2019re not, what\u2019s the reason for the difference? I would have thought the easier thing to do would be to say in your interpretation section, \u201Corganised criminal group has the meaning given to it in section 98A of the Crimes Act\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESimilarly, we\u2019ve got a definition in there of \u201Cserious violent offence\u201D. Now, again, there are already, in the Criminal Procedure Act, offences that are graded in bands from 1 to 4. It would seem that, once again, we\u2019ve got this proliferation of definitions across the statute book, which just makes things more confusing. Admittedly, the Criminal Procedure Act doesn\u2019t necessarily divide out violent offences, but it does have a grade of seriousness. It would have been just as easy to say that a category 3 or 4 offence that is a violent offence is, in fact, a violent offence for these purposes. It\u2019s interesting in the definition here that damage to property is seen as a part of the definition of violent offence\u2014although that does touch on physical safety, so I guess that would include, I don\u2019t know, tampering with someone\u2019s brakes, but, also, perverting the course of justice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, perverting the course of justice sits, in the Crimes Act, under a particular category of crimes against justice, right along with corruption and bribery and things like that. And yet, you\u2019ve now got a definition of \u201Cperverting the course of justice\u201D and called it violent. In fact, it\u2019s kind of the opposite of violent. It\u2019s a crime of subterfuge. It\u2019s a crime of trying to achieve an end by trickery, deception, and coercion, rather than any kind of violence at all. I always worry about definitions that actually kind of include something which is the opposite, because it\u2019s not a very good statutory device. But I\u2019m particularly interested in why we\u2019ve got this new definition of \u201Corganised criminal group\u201D when we\u2019ve already got, essentially, more than one definition already.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022 data-id=\u002228557437218f05aade96aa2bc5db47fa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002282ab0ea3cc1948dabe8e5cc6838658d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002228557437218f05aade96aa2bc5db47fa\u0022\u003EDAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) (23:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I just wanted to touch on clause 5, new section 3AA, subclause (2). I think it is: \u201Cobtaining a material benefit\u201D. This subclause essentially broadens the definition of a material benefit so it\u2019s not just about cash changing hands. I understand why, because modern organised crime is more sophisticated than that. They\u2019ve got multiple forms of currency. But whenever we start talking about indirect benefits, things can get quite murky. You know, a prisoner might help another prisoner out, pass on information, might arrange something for them, or maintain a relationship. Sometimes that\u2019s innocent; sometimes, it isn\u2019t. The challenge is making sure that front-line staff have a clear understanding of where that line really sits. Otherwise, there\u2019s a risk that one prison may interpret this differently from another, or that different staff may interpret it differently. Most of us would agree that if someone is helping facilitate serious criminal activity, they should be captured, but we\u2019d also want confidence that ordinary behaviour isn\u2019t being swept up in all of that, as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMy question to the Minister of Corrections is, essentially, how will Corrections distinguish between conduct that is genuinely supporting organised criminal activity and conduct that is simply part of normal day-to-day interaction between prisoners? Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u0022b9b486a412553761db4f2765878e3a37\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b9b486a412553761db4f2765878e3a37\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Corrections) (23:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. The meaning of \u201Corganised criminal group\u201D is consistent with section 98A of the Crimes Act, for the Hon Dr Duncan Webb. The bill improves prisoner rights in light of the Mandela Rules as much as possible. The bill significantly introduces, such as the Mandela Rules, on prolonged solitary confinement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn terms of the Amendment Paper that was lodged yesterday, quite simply, that is just highly technical changes that ensure the bill is consistent with the Act itself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022 data-id=\u0022d50b82a3bfcb0ff90c429d9f60561950\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229ec6b21860ff42a8bfcfbf955e54750a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d50b82a3bfcb0ff90c429d9f60561950\u0022\u003ETAMATHA PAUL (Green\u2014Wellington Central) (23:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. My questions follow along from the previous questions regarding clause 5, new section 3AA, around the meeting of \u201Corganised criminal group\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s a pretty simple question, really. I wanted to ask the Minister of Corrections whether he thinks that this definition could potentially be too broad. He spends a lot of time\u2014well, I\u2019m not sure if it\u2019s a lot of time, but he goes into prisons and has a look at what\u2019s going on in there. One thing that I observed during my time visiting some of the prisons under our statutory ability to do so was that the prisons are just really struggling to manage the number of organised crime groups or gangs in the prisons, and that that presents a real challenge for them in terms of getting the combinations right. From my observations and from just talking to the people who are working in there, it seems like that\u2019s probably one of the biggest issues for them, managing the number of people who belong to an organised criminal group. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question in relation to this new section for the Minister was\u2014sorry, and it\u2019s also in relation to the physical infrastructure of the Prisoners of Extreme Risk Unit (PERU), because it\u2019s quite a small unit. My question is: does he know or can his officials advise in terms of this definition, because it\u2019s broad, as to whether there is the actual infrastructure within PERU to capture people who might fit under this definition, in line with this bit, as well as the other parts to the bill as introduced? Or whether he\u2019s aware of any kind of projections or modelling around who might be captured by this definition?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022 data-id=\u00223aef105c1adb539deb062017d42ca9ee\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022103925b6f9e64afea9688613b42f53f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223aef105c1adb539deb062017d42ca9ee\u0022\u003EHon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Corrections) (23:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I think that\u2019s a good question. I guess I can answer it for both Tamatha Paul and also Dan Rosewarne. The fact of the matter is that people that are coming into our corrections system don\u2019t come in and they don\u2019t suddenly become demure sort of people that go to yoga class in the morning and play tiddlywinks in the afternoon; they\u2019re already part of really sophisticated, often violent, criminal organisations and gangs. Just because they suddenly come into the corrections system doesn\u2019t mean that they don\u2019t suddenly stop developing those networks, trying to organise their illegal activities\u2014that carries on. Our corrections staff, quite simply, do an outstanding job of having to police that and monitor it and make sure that they take action where it becomes obvious.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s very late and we\u2019re going to be wrapping up here shortly, but let me just take the chance to put on the record just how good our corrections officers are; we don\u2019t talk about them enough. When I became Minister of Corrections, the only key performance indicator I set was a reduction of serious violent assaults on our corrections officers, because everyone deserves to go to work and come home safely. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s a really complicated system, as you would have seen. I acknowledge the member for taking the time and interest to actually go and visit the prisons and see how they operate, speak to the people that are actually delivering the services, because I can say that there are tens of thousands of positive actions that take place every day amongst all of our corrections team, whether it be behind the wire or whether it be out with community-based sentences. But the fact of the matter is they\u2019re dealing with violent, highly organised and sophisticated criminal groups that don\u2019t stop behaving like that just because they\u2019re inside the prison estate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u002217dfeb9d18f843ded2ae0987fc5d629d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002217dfeb9d18f843ded2ae0987fc5d629d\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (23:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Because the Minister of Corrections has raised it, I also echo the acknowledgement of the corrections officers. That\u2019s a really tough job and a very risky job as well; they do go towards danger and they do deserve to be safe at work. Certainly, the people who work in the prisoners of extreme risk unit (PERU) are no exception to that. They seemed to be an exceptional group of people there too. So certainly, our scrutiny of this kind of legislation is not a reflection on their work, but it\u2019s important that we get it right. Actually, when we did visit the PERU unit, they did say they do have yoga classes there, so that\u2019s something for you to check out next time when you when you visit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to stick with clause 5 for now, just because I think there\u2019s a little bit more there. There is a definition of \u201Cserious violent offence\u201D, which is quite extensive, and I think it goes a little bit to one of the key issues with this unit, which is, I think, that there\u2019s an acceptance that there needs to be\u2014well, certainly, there\u2019s at least one prisoner that, I think, there\u2019s agreement that that person needs to be there. The issue really comes when you look at the other prisoners within that unit and what their security classification is, what crimes they\u2019ve committed, and what danger they are to other people. That\u2019s really, I think, probably, where the useful part of this debate will be, is focusing on those other people who will definitely be in there a shorter time and, probably, have a high likelihood of re-entering society at some point as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo who is making\u2014and I think we\u2019ll talk about that in the next clause\u2014the decision around what a serious violent offence is? You know, interestingly, \u201Cperverting the course of justice\u201D, which is in the definition at new section 3AA(3)(b)(iv)\u2014that\u2019s an interesting way to see violent crime. I think \u201Cperverting the course of justice\u201D, you wouldn\u2019t, necessarily, think of that as a violent crime, but that\u2019s there in that definition. I wonder if that is because of the nature of some of the risk factors that you\u2019re talking about. Obviously, we\u2019ve got \u201Corganised criminal group\u201D there as well, which we\u2019ve already discussed, but the definition of who is actually covered by this unit is quite key. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI mean, I do think that, and, you know, when we did meet with some of the staff at the PERU unit, they could cite examples where people had colluded\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b9cd44c761de8d748c386bb5d5e73cc6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise to the member, but the time has come for me to report progress.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EProgress to be reported.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224a6e8c6b653a92f47d990b503d12787e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Tom Rutherford)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, the committee has considered the Corrections (Management of Prisoners, and Prisoners\u2019 Property) Amendment Bill and reports that it has made progress on the bill. I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the report be adopted\u003C/span\u003E. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235e88cc661d740b4e795ab7c1c5dbda9\u0022\u003EDEPUTY SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, 22 September.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EThe House adjourned at 11.56 p.m. (Saturday)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260915b182bad675891447e0009106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis early draft is automatically published - it is not yet complete and reviewed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n  \u003C/body\u003E\n\u003C/html\u003E"