Source: Radio New Zealand
Last week, much of the political focus was on the ongoing tensions within Te Pāti Māori. This week has been much the same, with the addition of the release of a report by the Independent Police Conduct Authority.
While these sagas dominated headlines Parliament continued to consider legislation, with four government bills completing their legislative journeys this week. Two of the four enjoyed relative consensus across the House – the other two not so much.
Third readings this week
A third reading is the last stage of debate that a bill undergoes in the House before it heads off to be confirmed as law.
The Medicines Amendment Bill passed its third reading on Wednesday morning during an extended sitting. It seeks to increase the accessibility of medicines to New Zealanders by (among other changes) employing “the rule of two”, whereby if a medication is approved for use in two recognised overseas jurisdictions it can be fast-tracked for approval here.
In charge of the bill was Associate Minister of Health David Seymour, who in giving the bill a sort of farewell to the House, noted that it was a rare instance in which parties were in agreement.
“This has been a collaborative effort,” the ACT leader said. “I note that the rule of two was campaigned on by all three coalition parties and so far has had support from every party in this Parliament. It’s a very good example of how politicians can actually hear people’s concerns in the community, formulate a solution, stay the course, implement it confidently, and make New Zealand a better place to live, one step at a time.”
Another third reading this week was the Land Transport Management Amendment Bill, which may be better known as the congestion charging bill. Like the Medicines Amendment Bill, it enjoyed relatively smooth sailing through the House, with Labour calling it a “very good bill”.
Differences emerge
That sense of legislative kumbaya wasn’t to last though as the House got to another two third readings, which this time made for fiery debate between government and Opposition.
The first of those two bills was the Education and Training Amendment Bill (No. 2) which gives effect to new government education policy in the form of putting educational achievement at the centre of decision-making. It was the amendments added in the committee stage though that had the Opposition riled up.
In that committee stage, Minister of Education Erica Stanford tabled Amendment Paper 428, which made further changes to section 127 of the bill, which pertained to schools upholding the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.
Stanford had her Cabinet colleague Minister for Vocational Education Penny Simmonds filling in for her during the third reading.
“This government considers that it is unreasonable to expect elected parents, who volunteer their time, to discharge the Crown’s legal responsibilities in respect of the Treaty. Instead, the government believes that it is the Crown’s responsibility to support Māori educational success,” Simmonds explained.
Amendments are put forward during the committee stage, which is a bill’s penultimate hurdle in the House before royal assent (when it is signed into law). Labour’s Willow Jean-Prime argued that making these further changes after the time for engagement with the public (select committee submissions) had been and gone was “a travesty”.
“The two amendment papers tabled by the minister last week in the committee of the whole House stage of this bill did not go through a select committee process, so the public did not have an opportunity to make submissions on the proposed changes to remove the section regarding Te Tiriti o Waitangi for boards or the changes to the Teaching Council of Aotearoa New Zealand,” Prime said.
“Now this is a travesty, because what we have here are two really significant changes which, as I just said, have had no consultation, no select committee process, and, actually, very little debate.”
The last third reading of the week was David Seymour’s Regulatory Standards Bill, which is probably the most contentious of the four bills to finish up their legislative journey this week.
It seeks to limit future lawmakers from introducing what Seymour considers unnecessary red tape into legislation, prioritising private property rights.
A version of the Regulatory Standards Bill has been something ACT had been keen on for over a decade, so when getting up to speak on it, Seymour may have been pinching himself at finally seeing shepherding it through its last hurdle in Parliament.
“The Regulatory Standards Act means that politicians need to at least be open and honest about the impacts that they have on individuals when they pursue their goals,” Seymour declared.
“That is what we need to be doing in this Parliament. It is a movement towards a more civilised society where adults treat each other respectfully. That is something that I look forward to implementing over the next six months as this bill comes into force. I am very proud to stand behind it.”
While Seymour celebrated its inevitable passage into law, The Greens’ Tamatha Paul lamented it, comparing the bill to a cockroach.
“The danger of this bill is how eye-wateringly boring and technical it is, so that most of the general public aren’t necessarily paying attention to the consequences of this bill,” Paul told the House on Thursday.
“They’d be forgiven for thinking that it was just a boring old bill, because the ACT Party can’t get it by standing on what they really want, so they couch it in legal and technical and constitutional terms to try and get their foot in the door-just like a cockroach. That’s how a cockroach lives, isn’t it? In the dark, in the night-not in broad daylight, being clear about the intentions of what they hope to achieve.”
The Regulatory Standards Bill now just awaits royal assent, which is the process whereby the governor-general signs a bill into law. This is likely to happen next week.
To listen to the audio version of this story, click the link near the top of the page.
RNZ’s The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament’s Office of the Clerk.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
