Multimedia Investments Ltd
Auto Added by WPeMatico
Source: New Zealand Parliament – Hansard
THURSDAY, 21 NOVEMBER 2024
The Deputy Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.
KARAKIA/PRAYERS
DEPUTY SPEAKER: Almighty 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, justice, mercy, and humility for the welfare and peace of New Zealand. Amen.
Source: New Zealand Parliament – Hansard
THURSDAY, 21 NOVEMBER 2024
The Deputy Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.
KARAKIA/PRAYERS
DEPUTY SPEAKER: Almighty 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, justice, mercy, and humility for the welfare and peace of New Zealand. Amen.
Source: New Zealand Parliament – Hansard
2. KAHURANGI CARTER (Green) to the Minister for Children: Will she commit to retaining strategic partnerships with iwi and Māori organisations, as recommended in the select committee report on the repeal of section 7AA; if not, why not?
Hon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children): Thank you, Mr Speaker. The repeal of section 7AA is about ensuring the safety and wellbeing of children in care is at the forefront of all decision making. I’ve always said that strategic partnerships should continue, and I’ve made my expectations clear to officials that they should continue the good work that is being done in this space, if the agreement is working in a positive way to the betterment of children. I also made it very clear in my first reading speech that nothing in this bill prevents Oranga Tamariki from retaining its current strategic partnerships or from entering new partnerships with iwi, hapū, and Māori organisations. In regards to specific recommendations in the select committee report, I want to thank those who made submissions and those who appeared before the committee in person, and I also want to thank the select committee for their careful deliberation and consideration on the bill. I will consider the recommendations and take advice before making any decisions on next steps.
Kahurangi Carter: Why does she not recognise the value of reporting on outcomes and disparities for tamariki Māori, given she has now recognised the need for strategic partnerships?
Hon KAREN CHHOUR: In regards to reporting, we have a number of ways that can be reported on issues in that space. We have a report from the Independent Children’s Monitor in this space, we have the national care standards report that reports on outcomes for Māori and young people and their whānau, we have an annual Oranga Tamariki report that reports in this space, and under section 448B of Oranga Tamariki Act, the Minister for Children is required to report on whether the legislation and Government policy meets the needs of children and young people.
Kahurangi Carter: So does she believe that requiring the chief executive of Oranga Tamariki to consider and report on outcomes for Māori limits the ability to serve tamariki Māori, and, if not, would she also reconsider retaining this 7AA requirement?
Hon KAREN CHHOUR: In regards to the first part of the question, what I think is important for the CE of Oranga Tamariki to concentrate on is making sure that the children that come into the care of Oranga Tamariki are safe, healthy, and loved.
Kahurangi Carter: Will she commit to reconsidering other aspects of this repeal to better reflect select committee evidence, and Whanaketia, and Waitangi Tribunal findings that tino rangatiratanga over kāinga and protection and active partnership must be enshrined in care, and, if not, why not?
Hon KAREN CHHOUR: When it comes to Māori children in care, I can tell you: Māori children are no different to any other child. They want to feel safe, they want to feel loved, and they want to feel like they belong. And they want to know that when they wake up tomorrow, they’re going to be safe.
Kahurangi Carter: Does she accept Dr Luke Fitzmaurice’s select committee submission argument that “There is no clash between tikanga and safety … In reality, the two are intertwined.”, and, if so, how can she go ahead with repealing any aspect of 7AA?
Hon KAREN CHHOUR: No, I don’t disagree, and I’ve never said that the two clash. What I have said is that the safety and wellbeing of children must be first and foremost when we’re making decisions about all children in care. Every child deserves to feel safe and loved.
Kahurangi Carter: Will she admit, now select committee has reported back, that it was a mistake to introduce a bill that would fully repeal section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act, and, if not, why not?
Hon KAREN CHHOUR: As I’ve said, I will consider the recommendations and take advice before making any decisions in the next step. But, no, I stand by my decision, because I’m proud of the fact that we are redirecting Oranga Tamariki back to their core purpose, which is the safety and wellbeing of children.
Source: New Zealand Parliament – Hansard
WEDNESDAY, 20 NOVEMBER 2024
The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.
TEANAU TUIONO (Assistant Speaker): E te Atua kaha rawa, ka tuku whakamoemiti atu mātou, mō ngā karakia kua waihotia mai ki runga i a mātou. Ka waiho i ō mātou pānga whaiaro katoa ki te taha. Ka mihi mātou ki te Kīngi, me te inoi atu mō te ārahitanga i roto i ō mātou whakaaroarohanga, kia mōhio ai, kia whakaiti ai tā mātou whakahaere i ngā take o te Whare nei, mō te oranga, te maungārongo, me te aroha o Aotearoa. Amene.
[Almighty 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.]
Source: New Zealand Parliament – Hansard
VISITORS
Malaysia—Senate of Malaysia
Tonga—Parliament of Tonga
SPEAKER: I’m sure that members would want to join with me in wishing a welcome to the delegation from the Senate of Malaysia who are present in the gallery. I’m sure we would wish to welcome the Hon Dr Mo’ale ‘Otunuku, member of Parliament from the Parliament of Tonga, who is present in the gallery.
Source: New Zealand Parliament – Hansard
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram): Thank you, Madam Chair. As you say, last night when the House concluded, we were having a very broad-ranging debate in terms of the purpose of the Bill. There are still many questions that we have from material that the Minister has introduced into this debate around energy security.
But to start off, this morning, I just do want to move on to another couple of pieces of Part 1 of this Act, one of which is the clauses in this bill that pertain to the Tier 3 permits that are covered off in Part 1. Now, in terms of the size of the Tier 3 permits, one of the things that we heard at select committee—we had many people asking why it was that the size of the area that was eligible for a Tier 3 permit was decided on, that this seemed quite large in terms of what would be seen as a hobbyist permit and some of the submitters were questioning that. So I’d like to ask the Minister about the policy context, the advice he received—what was the policy context for settling on the size of the permit area that is before us in this legislation?
But the other important piece that we will have many questions on in this part of the bill, in Part 1, is the provisions that are in here in clause 12, and that is around the Minister having the power to issue a Government policy statement. Now, this is a new mechanism that will come into play through this legislation; we haven’t previously had this. Obviously, we have Government policy statements in a range of areas, but I think there are some questions, given that this is a new mechanism that could be brought into play, for the Minister to inform the House on. First of all, what is the time frame that the Minister is thinking of? Has he begun work on the Government policy statement and when would he be thinking of introducing this? If the work hasn’t begun, where in his work programme does this work figure?
The other important question, I think, we have is that a Government policy statement is a place where a Government rightly sets out its strategic priorities and the work programme and the way in which it’s going to get to its outcomes. I’m assuming that the Government policy statement would be aligned with the purposes of this bill. But we also have another piece of legislation in this jurisdiction, and that is our climate response legislation that sets out very closely our emissions reduction plans. So I’d like to hear from the Minister how it is that he intends to ensure that we have synergy between these two strategic documents that any Government will need to work from. How will the Government policy statement interact with the emissions reduction plans that the Government does adopt? We know, of course, that the Government is due to adopt new emissions reduction plans by the end of this year for emissions budget 3. So what work has the Minister done to ensure that we are aligning what is happening under this legislation with that other strategic intent of Government?
What we know, from advice from the Minister’s officials, is that this legislation is going to increase our greenhouse gas emissions. There have been several pieces of advice that have been provided to the committee in terms of what the impacts on emissions budgets 1 and emissions budgets 2 will be. But of course, we have emissions budget 3 coming—and the extent in which the Minister has been working with his Cabinet colleagues to ensure that there can be those interactions and those alignments. The advice that we received from officials is that there will be a million megatonnes of carbon dioxide in emissions, as compared to the baseline for the second emissions budget for 2025 to 2030, and another 0.6 to 1.4 megatonnes for the third emissions budget. So what mechanisms will be in place in that Government policy statement to ensure there is alignment with different pieces of Government policy?
As I said, there are a range of other questions that are still outstanding in regard to changing the purpose statement. Certainly, the Minister opened up a range of areas which just sparked the inquisitive nature of the Opposition and a range of questions that we’ve had time to percolate overnight that we’ll come back to on that material.
But those are two very specific questions around clause 12 and the Tier 3 permits, which are covered off in new section 2BA, inserted by clause 7. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Source: New Zealand Parliament – Hansard
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram): Thank you, Madam Chair. As you say, last night when the House concluded, we were having a very broad-ranging debate in terms of the purpose of the Bill. There are still many questions that we have from material that the Minister has introduced into this debate around energy security.
But to start off, this morning, I just do want to move on to another couple of pieces of Part 1 of this Act, one of which is the clauses in this bill that pertain to the Tier 3 permits that are covered off in Part 1. Now, in terms of the size of the Tier 3 permits, one of the things that we heard at select committee—we had many people asking why it was that the size of the area that was eligible for a Tier 3 permit was decided on, that this seemed quite large in terms of what would be seen as a hobbyist permit and some of the submitters were questioning that. So I’d like to ask the Minister about the policy context, the advice he received—what was the policy context for settling on the size of the permit area that is before us in this legislation?
But the other important piece that we will have many questions on in this part of the bill, in Part 1, is the provisions that are in here in clause 12, and that is around the Minister having the power to issue a Government policy statement. Now, this is a new mechanism that will come into play through this legislation; we haven’t previously had this. Obviously, we have Government policy statements in a range of areas, but I think there are some questions, given that this is a new mechanism that could be brought into play, for the Minister to inform the House on. First of all, what is the time frame that the Minister is thinking of? Has he begun work on the Government policy statement and when would he be thinking of introducing this? If the work hasn’t begun, where in his work programme does this work figure?
The other important question, I think, we have is that a Government policy statement is a place where a Government rightly sets out its strategic priorities and the work programme and the way in which it’s going to get to its outcomes. I’m assuming that the Government policy statement would be aligned with the purposes of this bill. But we also have another piece of legislation in this jurisdiction, and that is our climate response legislation that sets out very closely our emissions reduction plans. So I’d like to hear from the Minister how it is that he intends to ensure that we have synergy between these two strategic documents that any Government will need to work from. How will the Government policy statement interact with the emissions reduction plans that the Government does adopt? We know, of course, that the Government is due to adopt new emissions reduction plans by the end of this year for emissions budget 3. So what work has the Minister done to ensure that we are aligning what is happening under this legislation with that other strategic intent of Government?
What we know, from advice from the Minister’s officials, is that this legislation is going to increase our greenhouse gas emissions. There have been several pieces of advice that have been provided to the committee in terms of what the impacts on emissions budgets 1 and emissions budgets 2 will be. But of course, we have emissions budget 3 coming—and the extent in which the Minister has been working with his Cabinet colleagues to ensure that there can be those interactions and those alignments. The advice that we received from officials is that there will be a million megatonnes of carbon dioxide in emissions, as compared to the baseline for the second emissions budget for 2025 to 2030, and another 0.6 to 1.4 megatonnes for the third emissions budget. So what mechanisms will be in place in that Government policy statement to ensure there is alignment with different pieces of Government policy?
As I said, there are a range of other questions that are still outstanding in regard to changing the purpose statement. Certainly, the Minister opened up a range of areas which just sparked the inquisitive nature of the Opposition and a range of questions that we’ve had time to percolate overnight that we’ll come back to on that material.
But those are two very specific questions around clause 12 and the Tier 3 permits, which are covered off in new section 2BA, inserted by clause 7. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Source: New Zealand Parliament – Hansard
TUESDAY, 19 NOVEMBER 2024
Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.
KARAKIA/PRAYERS
ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O’Connor): Almighty 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, justice, mercy, and humility, for the welfare and peace of New Zealand. Amen.
Source: New Zealand Parliament – Hansard
TUESDAY, 19 NOVEMBER 2024
Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.
KARAKIA/PRAYERS
ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O’Connor): Almighty 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, justice, mercy, and humility, for the welfare and peace of New Zealand. Amen.
Source: New Zealand Parliament – Hansard
MOTIONS
Anniversary—Pike River Mine Disaster
Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety): Point of order. I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate acknowledging the anniversary of the Pike River disaster.
SPEAKER: Is there objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.
Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: I move, That this House note that today in 2010, 29 miners lost their lives while at work in the Pike River Mine, express its condolences to family and friends who will forever be profoundly impacted, and thank rescue and support teams for their service on that day and the days that followed.
Motion agreed to.