NEW ZEALAND
National Party, New Zealand First, or the other parties in this House are right or wrong. This is a Bill that states quite categorically that when strike action is to be taken, there must be a secret ballot. That is the least that we ask of our country when we go to the polls— voting by a secret ballot”. Mr Darien Fenton, MP,
(Labour) said “it is a Bill that was never needed and a problem that never existed, except in the Member Tau Henare’s mind, except in his experience of 30 years ago when he was a union organizer with the Clerical Workers Union. Ever since then he has been standing up for the National Party, and the National Party’s attacks on workers”.
Ms Catherine Delahunty, MP, (Green) asked “is the Bill trying to legislate a time-honoured practice of the secret ballot over the right to strike so that it can chip away at the right to strike itself? The technicalities in the Bill allow this outcome. The Green Party holds dear the International Labour Organization position on the right to strike. The right to strike was won through sacrifice and suffering, and any moves to use the law to technically undermine its power is basically abhorrent”. Mr Simon O’Connor, MP,
(National) noted that it was “not a Bill that talks about the right to strike or freedom of association. This is about the process of
making the decision to strike. When circumstance allows, a person can strike”. The Bill passed by 61 votes
to 60. Twelve of the 34 Members’
Bills introduced in 2012 passed their first reading. Proposed by Members from National, Labour, the Green Party, and the Maori Party, the Bills include a range of issues. Labour Member Ms Louisa Wall’s Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill would allow marriage between same sex couples, National Member Todd McClay’s Bill would prohibit gang insignia in government premises, and Green Member Holly Walker’s Bill, the Lobbying Disclosure Bill,
THIRD READING: NEW ZEALAND
Alcohol Reform Legislation The Alcohol Reform Bill was divided by the Committee of the whole House into three separate Bills for the third reading, which was held on 11 December 2012.
Moving the third readings, the Minister of Justice, Hon. Judith Collins, MP,
noted: “In August of this year, this House voted to retain the current purchase age of 18 years.” Although “personally disappointed by this choice”, the Minister said “the purchase age is not the only tool available to reduce the harm for young people.” “These bills contain a wide range of measures that will help to bring a change in our drinking culture. They provide many parts of society, from central to local government, communities, and parents, with tools to make that happen”. The measures would restrict trading hours for liquor sales and introduce
changes to the liquor licensing so that “licences will be harder to get and easier to lose”. Communities would have an option “to adopt a local alcohol policy” if they wished to set rules on local trading hours and the “location of licensed premises near certain facilities such as school”. The Minister said the legislation would “give parents more control over their children’s drinking and make adults’ responsibilities more clear”. It would also give local authorities powers to extend liquor bans over public spaces “where people, including young people, gather to drink”, and it would provide the police with additional powers for seizing alcohol.
Opposition members criticized the legislation for not going far enough. Hon.
Lianne Dalziel, MP, (Labour) told the House “the evidence says increase the price of alcohol, increase the purchase age for alcohol, decrease accessibility, decrease marketing and advertising, increase drink-driving measures, and then, on top of that, increase treatment options for heavy drinkers”. She said the real issues were “restrictions on advertising, discounting, and promoting of alcohol; restrictions on trading hours; minimum pricing; making local alcohol
policies mandatory and strengthening the community’s say; banning the sale of ready-to-drinks with more than five per cent alcohol and more than 1.5 standard drinks; health risk warning labels and nutritional information panel requirements; health levies; and lower blood-alcohol levels for drink driving —all of which would contribute to saving lives”. Mr Iain Lees-Galloway, MP, (Labour) said that “pressure from the liquor
industry” and “pressure from the supermarkets”, had led to the Minister “watering down” the Bill. Although the Bill would “get broad support from around the House”, he said, the government’s “failure to act, and its failure to tackle the big issues, the difficult issues” had disappointed New Zealand. Mr Charles Chauvel, MP, (Labour) told members that the legislation “is going to be judged by all the lost opportunities, which we as a Parliament have passed up, to really try to make a dent in the problematic parts of New Zealand’s binge drinking culture, which is a problem that is acknowledged right across the House”.
Opposing the legislation, Mr Denis O’Rourke, MP, (New Zealand First) said
“there are some good things in the three bills, though, but not nearly enough to save the legislation from being a failed and weak attempt at reform”. Mr Tim Macindoe (National) acknowledged that “this legislation will not
solve all of our alcohol-related problems…the fact remains that legislation alone cannot change a culture”. He urged: “Each and every one of us must do our bit to influence better decision-making by our friends and family, to teach our youth how to handle alcohol sensibly, to oppose irresponsible promotions and distribution of alcohol, to support our health workers and law enforcement officers, who bear such a heavy burden whenever alcohol is abused”. The Sale and Supply of Alcohol Bill was passed by a majority of 108 to 13
votes. Both the Local Government (Alcohol Reform) Amendment Bill and the Summary Offences (Alcohol Reform) Amendment Bill received unanimous support.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue One | 77
would bring more transparency and public disclosure around the lobbying of Members and their staff.
On the first reading of her
Bill on 25 July 2012, Ms Sue Moroney, MP, (Labour) explained that the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill would extend “paid parental leave by 12 weeks, to reach six months over the course of the next three years”. She said she had “drafted my Bill with this global recession in mind”. Noting a recent government decision to “spend an additional $11 million on adolescent mental health services”, she asked “how much better off would our young people
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92