NEW ZEALAND
NEW REGIME FOR NEW ZEALAND MPS’ REMUNERATION AND SERVICES
The Members of Parliament (Remuneration and Services) Bill, which was passed with unanimous support on 14 December 2013, brings into a single statute all the provisions governing members’ remuneration, services and allowances. The Bill, introduced in 2011, followed a 2010 report
support funding, and the Minister responsible for Ministerial Services is responsible for determining any additional travel services for Ministers over and above those set by the Speaker for Members of Parliament”. At the third reading Mr Finlayson said that this division of responsibility reflected intersecting interests, “one interest being that of having entitlements determined independently from those who receive them, and the other being the democratic interest in the proper operation of the House and the ability of its members to carry out their functions”. The Bill as introduced would
Hon. Christopher Finlayson, MP
have shifted responsibility for some travel services from the Speaker to the Remuneration Authority. Hon. Ruth Dyson, MP, (Labour) who chaired the parliamentary select committee examining the Bill, said: “We
by the Law Commission calling for greater transparency, clarity and independence in light of the complexity of the existing provisions and public concern. Introducing the second
reading on behalf of the Prime Minister, the Attorney-General, Hon. Christopher Finlayson, MP, (National) said that under the Bill an independent authority, the Remuneration Authority, would be “responsible for determining accommodation services for MPs and Ministers, and also travel services for family members of MPs. The Speaker is responsible for setting directions on travel and communication services for MPs and party and member
Parliament undertake as being a fundamental part of the work of a Member of Parliament. It was
our view that the work-related requirement of a Member of Parliament to be able to travel to
THIRD READING: NEW ZEALAND
Royal Succession Bill The Royal Succession Bill passed through its Second Reading, Committee of the whole House stage and Third Reading on 10 December 2013. The Bill implements in New Zealand law changes to the rules of Royal succession that remove male primogeniture in succession to the throne, the restriction on sovereigns marrying Catholics, and the rule that all descendants of King George II must have the sovereign’s consent to marry. At the third reading the Minister
Hon. Ruth Dyson, MP
changed, by unanimous agreement…the provision in regard to the travel for Members of Parliament. Because we view the travel that Members of
of Justice, Hon. Judith Collins, MP, (National) said: “The changes result from an agreement made at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Perth in October 2011. All 16 realms of which Her Majesty the Queen is Sovereign agreed to the three specific changes.” Speaking in support, Mr Scott
Simpson, MP, (National) noted: “These days it seems, by our standards of society, that anything other than a gender-neutral royal succession would be something completely unacceptable in a
modern society.” Ms Tracey Martin, MP, (New Zealand First) said: “It is wonderful to see this House, along with 16 other nations, endorse the fact that a woman can stand there and rule equally as well as—if not better than—any man in history.” Hon. Maryan Street, MP, (Labour) observed that “this Bill is a sign of modernization. We are slowly, 479 years on, making our way to the 21st century.” However, Mr Andrew Little,
MP, (Labour) expressed the “hope that this might be the first step to a period of reflection, so that we might make a change so that we do not have to pass more laws about an institution that is increasingly less relevant to us”. Mr Gareth Hughes, MP, (Green) stated: “What this Bill does is discriminate against New Zealanders, because what we are seeing is an English head of State for New Zealand…I cannot vote for a Bill that enshrines discrimination…But I am also not going to vote against modernizing and against ending sexist, discriminatory practices”. The Bill passed with 97 votes in favour and 16 abstentions.
The Parliamentarian | 2014: Issue One | 63
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