edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Dean Jacqui: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDean Jacqui: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9698. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): This bill the Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill repeals and replaces the Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Act 2004. There are two parts to the bill. The first part clarifies interception obligations for telecommunications companies and the second part introduces a transparent network security regime for network operators and the Government to work together on matters of national security. I look forward to scrutiny of this bill in the Law and Order Committee. Thank you.
Roy Eric: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9694. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no requirement that I am aware of under Standing Orders. It is an advised and an accepted practice. It is up to the Minister. I think the member has made a valid point.Hon Amy Adams: Speaking to the point of order Mr Speaker—Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I have already ruled. Are you seeking the call?Hon Amy Adams: I wished to cover why—Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: You can do that in your speech if you like.
Vote: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9693. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill be reported back to the House by 26 July 2013 and that the Intelligence and Security Committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) during an evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 188 and 191(1)(b) and (c).Ayes61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes57New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 13; New Zealand First 7; Māori Party 3; Independent: Horan.Motion agreed to.
Ross Jami-Lee: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9693. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National): I moveThat the question be now put.
Roy Eric: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9690. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Chris Simpson.
Simpson Scott: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSimpson Scott: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9690. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): I moveThat the question be now put.
Collins Judith: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCollins Judith: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9677. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice)on behalf of theMinister responsible for the GCSB: I moveThat the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill be reported to the House by 26 July 2013 and that the Intelligence and Security Committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) during an evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 188 and 191(1)(b) and (c).The Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill will go to the Intelligence and Security Committee for a shortened period because the difficulties of interpretation in the Government Communications Security Bureau Act need to be resolved in a timely manner. The compliance review by Ms Rebecca Kitteridge raised issues that need to be addressed. Until legislation is clarified the Government Communications Security Bureau remains in the situation where it has put important activities on hold. This includes the vast bulk of its assistance to other agencies like the New Zealand Police and the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service. Until the legislation is passed the bureau’s ability to help important private sector companies with the rising threat of cyber-attack is also unclear. This needs to be resolved. The public will have a chance to have its say and rightly so but for a reduced period of time.
Vote: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9677. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the question be agreed to.Ayes61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes59New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Māori Party 3; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Question agreed to.
Vote: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9677. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes59New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Māori Party 3; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Bill read a first time.The question was put that the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill be referred to the Intelligence and Security Committee.
Tisch Lindsay: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9674. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I understand the next call is a split call.
McClay Todd: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMcClay Todd: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9674. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua): What an angry speech from an angry man. Mr Goff is a man who comes to this Parliament after continuing to leak to the media suppressed details from a coroner’s report a report that is still subject to a suppressions order in an absolute disregard for legal process and the laws of this country. Then he has the audacity to come down here to this House and lecture us on what he views as being right and being wrong. You see the problem that we have here is that Mr Goff has just questioned whether or not the Prime Minister received a briefing. What we have got to do is look at the year before last when he was Leader of the Opposition. Do you remember that he was the man who forgot he received a briefing from the SIS? And then he said he would not meet with the SIS again without somebody else there who was independent because he forgot. So it is not just that he does not trust all intelligence services in New Zealand; it is that Mr Goff forgets sometimes but he will not own up to that.This bill the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill is a responsible piece of legislation on behalf of the Government and for this Parliament. It does a number of things. The first is that it looks at a service—the intelligence community—that has a vital role to play in our national security. Very clearly the bill is to provide a clear and consistent legal framework for the Government Communications Security Bureau. It will also update the bureau’s legal framework in response to a rapidly changing security environment. And the third thing it will do is strengthen the oversight regime that applies to our intelligence agencies—something that everybody in this Parliament must surely want.One of the challenges we have is that the Government Communications Security Bureau is arguably more important today than it has been for many a time. The reason for this is that cyber-security and the way that security must be handled on behalf of nations around the world has changed and continues to change rapidly. We need to continue to be able to have our services tackle a rapidly increasing threat. Very clearly what will happen is that the Government Communications Security Bureau will continue to have three core functions: information assurance and cyber-security foreign intelligence and cooperation and assistance with other entities. This legislation will help Parliament look at that and make sure we are doing this work in the right way and give the surety that New Zealanders need that the agencies are working in their best interests. I look forward to it passing through this House and to further discussion. Thank you.
Ross Jami-Lee: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9671. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany): This House is considering the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill because it is important that we take security threats seriously and we ensure that the legislation under which agencies such as the Government Communications Security Bureau operate is sound is robust and is fit for purpose. There are some important changes in the bill that I suggest to the House should be supported by the whole Parliament.I heard some comments from Mr Robertson and Mr Norman. Mr Robertson spent a lot of time talking about what New Zealanders deserve. I think New Zealanders deserve a Parliament that takes security matters seriously. We live in a changing security environment where threats are increasingly interconnected around the world. Globalisation means that New Zealand is not safe from threats. We need to have an agency there that is looking after us. Mr Robertson does not believe legislation like this which improves the framework under which the bureau operates is important. I think New Zealanders deserve to have changes made to the Government Communications Security Bureau Act so that they can have greater confidence in the bureau and so that they can have a bureau that has greater oversight by the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security and an inspector-general who has greater resources to provide that oversight. That is what New Zealanders deserve.New Zealanders deserve to have a Parliament that takes seriously the review undertaken by Rebecca Kitteridge. Rebecca Kitteridge made some important recommendations and highlighted some difficulties with interpreting the Government Communications Security Bureau Act. What was the bureau doing when the difficulties she highlighted were pointed out? The bureau was simply assisting other agencies carrying out their work.Mr Norman talked about the parties of the right trying to clamp down on freedom. In fact with this legislation the parties of the right are providing greater oversight greater transparency and a clearer authority for the Government Communications Security Bureau to assist other agencies to do important work on behalf of New Zealanders. This bill will improve the bureau and other similar agencies that it interacts with and it should be supported by this Parliament.
Young Jonathan: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYoung Jonathan: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9668. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth): I am very pleased to stand and speak on the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill. Thank you for your attention and for the remarks of the previous speaker Russel Norman who I am sure would be a great author of a conspiracy novel because that is what his speech sounded like.We need to understand that the safety and security of this nation is dependent upon organisations such as this and we need to understand that they must have a strong clear legal framework in which they operate. New Zealanders expect that. New Zealanders expect this Government to provide security and safety to its citizens and it is important that we have agencies that can assist and do this in a way that is appropriate.The Government Communications Security Bureau Act 2003 sought to codify and make transparent existing practices of the then Government Communications Security Bureau. But under scrutiny the 10-year-old Act potentially limits the bureau’s ability to provide the support and advice that successive Governments expect and have expected and possibly limits current support and advice that can be provided. So it is important and it is the responsible thing for this Government to do to move to clarify the Act. This bill will make the Government Communications Security Bureau Act clearer and more transparent so it is clear what the agency can and cannot do.The functions and resourcing of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security of his office will be increased and improved. It will increase capability and enable the office to have increased scrutiny over the operations of this agency.The Government Communications Security Bureau has a crucial role to play in protecting the security safety and best interests of New Zealand and New Zealanders. It is for this reason that this bill after the compliance review by Rebecca Kitteridge is progressing in order to bring those improvements to bring the improvements of oversight mechanisms that apply to our intelligence community. I am very happy to support the progression of this bill in the House. Thank you.
Collins Judith: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCollins Judith: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9662. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Is it a personal explanation or a point of order?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I think it is probably a point of order.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): All right a point of order.Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I think it is a point of order. I am sure you will tell me if I am wrong Mr Assistant Speaker. At the end of my speech on the first reading you asked whether or not I had nominated the committee. I thought we had and other members thought we had. I think there is some doubt about that. In fact I meant to and I do nominate that the committee is the Intelligence and Security Committee. Mr Assistant Speaker I am sorry that I gave you the wrong information.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Thank you.
Robertson H V Ross: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9662. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I understand that the Minister of Justice wishes to correct her statement to the House.
Vote: UrgencyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Urgency[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9657. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat urgency be accorded.Ayes64New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes56New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Motion agreed to.
Carter David: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: General Debate[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9646. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: You could seek leave to do so obviously and I do not even think the member is bothering to do that.
Peters Winston: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: General Debate[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9646. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My colleague was making so much sense that I move an extension of time.
Carter David: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: General Debate[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9646. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: The member’s time has expired.
Carter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Health and Safety Workplace—Task Force Report Kauri Dieback Disease—Research FundingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Health and Safety Workplace—Task Force Report Kauri Dieback Disease—Research Funding[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9642. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from Darien Fenton seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the release of a report of the Independent Taskforce on Workplace Health and Safety. The release of the report is a particular case of recent occurrence involving the administrative responsibility of the Government. Although the release of a report may warrant an urgent debate this must be exceptional especially when working through a report’s recommendations will take some time. The Minister of Labour has indicated he expects to respond in July. I am therefore not convinced that the matter warrants the setting aside of the business of the House today. The application is therefore declined.I have also received an application from Brendan Horan seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the funding of kauri dieback disease research. A proposal to discuss a continuing problem such as the funding of research is not one contemplated by Standing Order 386 in that it is not a particular case of recent occurrence. The application is therefore also declined.
Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9641. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]12.GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader—Labour) to thePrime Minister: Does he stand by his answer to Written Parliamentary Question No 4253 (2013) that he “neither agree[s] nor disagree[s]” with State Services Commissioner Iain Rennie that the phone call he made to Ian Fletcher about the position of Director of GCSB should have been made by Mr Rennie; if so what view other than agreement or disagreement does he have?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): I stand by the answer and I do not have a view on Mr Rennie’s statement.Grant Robertson: Should Iain Rennie have made the phone call to Ian Fletcher rather than the Prime Minister himself?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: That is a matter of interpretation.Grant Robertson: What is the Prime Minister’s interpretation of that question?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Well now you ask I am comfortable with the phone call I made.Grant Robertson: Did he discuss the possibility of Ian Fletcher taking up a position in the New Zealand Public Service when he met him for breakfast on 17 June 2011 just 3 days after he had approved the interview panel for the Government Communications Security Bureau director position?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No.Grant Robertson: What did he discuss with Mr Fletcher at the breakfast meeting on 17 June 2011?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Largely policy issues in relation to what was happening with economic development in Australia. [Interruption]Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Members on the other side of the House were wondering whether there were more questions. There certainly are Mr Speaker—Mr SPEAKER: That is not a point of order.Grant Robertson: —so could I seek the leave of the House to ask a further question?Mr SPEAKER: The member can seek leave. Leave is sought to ask an additional supplementary question. Is there any objection? There is.
O'Connor Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9641. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.SIMON O’CONNOR (National—Tāmaki) to theMinister of Education: What recent announcement has she made about the Government’s commitment to support parents and communities to raise educational achievement?Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education): Today I have announced that this Government is investing $80.5 million over the next 4 years to help support parents and communities in playing their role to lift the educational achievement of young people. Of this funding $63.6 million has been committed to Positive Behaviour for Learning. This very successful initiative provides tailored programmes for parents teachers and schools to address challenging behaviour in children and young people. The $63.6 million investment over 4 years means that an extra 200 primary and intermediate schools will be able to participate in Positive Behaviour for Learning over the next 4 years and it will be available to all secondary schools by 2016.Simon O’Connor: What other initiatives has she recently announced to better support parents?Hon HEKIA PARATA: This Government recognises and values the contribution parents make to their children’s schools through boards of trustees. Boards of trustees are operated by parents and are critical to the success of our schools. That is why this morning I also announced that we are investing $14.5 million over the next 4 years to support boards of trustees—this being an increase in funding of 86 percent. This Government also wants to ensure that all parents are well informed and engaged in their children’s learning and that is why we are investing $2.4 million into a new Connecting Communities initiative which will focus on providing information to families whānau aiga and communities to enable them to confidently engage with their early childhood services and schools and we are encouraging parents to stand in the elections for boards of trustees.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9636. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: That is certainly in order but just bear in mind that you are still now addressing the question technically to the Associate Minister of Education. The member can proceed.
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9639. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) to theMinister of Health: What reports has he received regarding improved services for dementia patients?Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health): New Zealand faces a rising tide of dementia as people live longer. Whether it is a family member a friend or even personally dementia will touch all of our families. I have seen many positive responses to the Government’s recent announcement of extra dementia services and this is the third year in a row that this Government has provided extra funding for dementia. This means that over the next 4 years the Government will be investing over $100 million more into dementia services—almost certainly the largest increase in funding for dementia care in our nation’s history.Dr Paul Hutchison: What are some of the specific dementia services that this significant extra dementia funding supports?Hon TONY RYALL: There will be a $12 million increase in funding for dementia bed subsidies over the next 4 years. This is important because it encourages further investment in dementia beds remembering that it is projected that the number of New Zealanders with dementia will treble over the next 40 years. There is going to be another $2 million invested to support dementia awareness programmes and to support clinical teams in early detection of dementia and a further $1.2 million over 3 years will be invested in dementia-related training for health care workers. Despite very tight financial times our Government continues to make health investment a top priority including early detection and support for serious long-term conditions like dementia which are important to New Zealand families.
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9637. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.DARIEN FENTON (Labour) to theMinister of Labour: Does he agree with the statement from the Report of the Independent Taskforce on Workplace Health and Safety established by his Government in June 2012 that “the fact is that a lot of bad things happen to people at work in New Zealand”?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Labour): Yes absolutely. Can I take this opportunity in the House to thank the task force for its thorough and comprehensive work.Darien Fenton: Does he accept the task force’s statement that a cause of our broken health and safety system is labour market liberalisation; if so how will the Employment Relations Amendment Bill and more liberalisation of workplace rights reduce the death and injury toll in our workplaces?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: I think what the task force was referring to was the failure by successive Governments to implement the Robens approach fully and to see that organisationally bedded in. But unlike perhaps the member opposite I think we can hold two thoughts simultaneously in our minds and both ensure flexible labour markets and be pro-jobs whilst also having more stringent health and safety standards.Darien Fenton: How will cuts to meals and rest breaks in his Employment Relations Amendment Bill help improve workplace health and safety?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: It will ensure in certain instances people do not go off the job and ensure that there are actually very unsafe instances. But the fact of the matter is that although the member may not like it the vast majority of New Zealanders and employers will not notice anything. It is simply about not being overly prescriptive and having I think some sensible common-sense flexibility in the system.Darien Fenton: If the original reason for the cuts to meals and rest breaks legislation was breaks for air traffic controllers which have long since been resolved through negotiation why does he think these changes are still needed?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: As the member well knows these issues come and go.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFlavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9636. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TE URUROA FLAVELL (Māori Party—Waiariki): I note firstly that the Associate Minister of Education is not present and the Minister of Education is present and that there will be some discrepancies in the question as to the “he” and the “she”. I seek leave of the House to ask the question taking into account those small discrepancies.
Calder Cam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCalder Cam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9635. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.Dr CAM CALDER (National) to theMinister of Science and Innovation: What initiatives has the Government announced to invest more in science?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Science and Innovation): On Wednesday last week the Prime Minister and I announced 10 National Science Challenges along with an additional $73.5 million over 4 years from Budget 2013 to help fund those challenges. This is on top of the $60 million allocated as part of Budget 2012. The National Science Challenges will take some of the biggest science-based issues and opportunities facing New Zealand and tackle them by drawing together scientists from across institutions and disciplines. Targeting these specific challenges will help the country get greater value from the $1.3 billion investment this Government makes in science and innovation annually. If these challenges are achieved they will create a major and enduring benefit to New Zealand. The funding for National Science Challenges forms part of a wider internationally focused growth package to be announced in next week’s Budget.Dr Cam Calder: What are the subject areas of the National Science Challenges?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The Government has identified 10 challenges which cover research to protect the environment improve the health of New Zealanders andadvance our economic growth. They are ageing well a better start healthier lives high-value nutrition New Zealand’s biological heritage our land and water life in a changing ocean the deep south science for technological innovation and resilience to nature’s challenges—and do they not hate it? The challenges were chosen by a peak panel chaired by the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor from submissions by scientists institutions and the public.Dr Cam Calder: How does the funding of National Science Challenges lift the Government’s investment in science and innovation?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: National Science Challenges contribute to the very significant increases in funding for science and innovation that this Government has made since it has come into Government from around $1 billion in 2009-10 to just over $1.26 billion now despite the global financial crisis. That is under the leadership of course of the Prime Minister who is very passionate about the investment in science. It includes programmes such as the Primary Growth Partnership which we have developed; increases in the Marsden Fund which were the first for many years; increases in the Performance-based Research Fund similarly; research and development co-funding for businesses which were established and grown under this Government; and funding for the development of Callaghan Innovation. Despite the global financial crisis the Government has invested significantly more in science and innovation and members can be confident that I am continuing to lobby the Minister of Finance for more money.
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9630. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Will you therefore confirm that the Hon Bill English—Hon Lianne Dalziel: Trevor! Sorry Trevor. It’s changed.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: Sorry?Hon Lianne Dalziel: It’s been changed. It’s changed on the yellow sheet.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: Sorry I apologise Mr Speaker. There appears to have been yet another change that has occurred here.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9629. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: As I have just alerted to Dr Russel Norman it is the Government’s prerogative—and it has been long established for many years—to determine whom it sees fit to answer the questions. There is the ability for the Speaker to decline a transfer in the event that I perceive that transfer to be something that would avoid the question being answered satisfactorily. I have had a look at this. I am quite determined that the Government has correctly transferred this question. If the member wishes to continue to ask it he will do so now.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9629. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My simple question seeking clarification is this: how on earth are we going to find out whether the Prime Minister agrees with Mr English when in fact the Minister of Energy and Resources is going to answer? The whole thing is impossible at this point in time.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9629. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Can I ask the member to refer to Speakers’ rulings particularly 151/1 151/2 and others that clearly say it is the prerogative of the Government to determine who answers the oral question. Does the member wish to continue?
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9629. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There appears therefore to be an error in the wording of the question. The question was to the Prime Minister and asked whether he agreed. You are absolutely right that it can be transferred and there is a lot of precedent for that but what has happened in the recent past under your rulings and the rulings of the Speaker before has been that there has been an opportunity to reword the question. The question would thenhave been reworded if that proper negotiation had occurred as “Is he aware whether the Prime Minister agrees?”. The Rt Hon Winston Peters is absolutely right that the question is about the state of mind not of Mr Bridges but of the Prime Minister.
Urgent Debates Declined — Health and Safety Workplace—Task Force Report Kauri Dieback Disease—Research FundingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeUrgent Debates Declined — Health and Safety Workplace—Task Force Report Kauri Dieback Disease—Research Funding[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9642. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Urgent Debates DeclinedHealth and Safety Workplace—Task Force ReportKauri Dieback Disease—Research FundingMr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from Darien Fenton seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the release of a report of the Independent Taskforce on Workplace Health and Safety. The release of the report is a particular case of recent occurrence involving the administrative responsibility of the Government. Although the release of a report may warrant an urgent debate this must be exceptional especially when working through a report’s recommendations will take some time. The Minister of Labour has indicated he expects to respond in July. I am therefore not convinced that the matter warrants the setting aside of the business of the House today. The application is therefore declined.I have also received an application from Brendan Horan seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the funding of kauri dieback disease research. A proposal to discuss a continuing problem such as the funding of research is not one contemplated by Standing Order 386 in that it is not a particular case of recent occurrence. The application is therefore also declined.
Member VacancyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMember Vacancy[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9629. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Wednesday 8 May 2013Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.Member VacancyMr SPEAKER: Honourable members I wish to advise the House that following the death of the Hon Parekura Horomia I have given notice that the seat of Ikaroa-Rāwhiti is vacant.
Robertson H V Ross: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9707. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I understand this is a split call?Hon David Cunliffe: Split call. A 5-minute call Mr Assistant Speaker.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): A 5-minute call. I call the Hon David Cunliffe and I will give the member a bell at 4 minutes.
Macindoe Tim: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9706. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): Could I begin by acknowledging the contribution that we had from Richard Prosser as he outlined his party’s understanding of the need for this Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill. We acknowledge that his party has some concerns and they will be worked through. But I want to thank the New Zealand First caucus for its indication of support for an important piece of legislation.I want to turn just briefly to some of the comments of the member for Mt Roskill who made much of the idea that the Government has not outlined its case for this bill. I can only assume that he was not in the House at the time that the Minister for Communications and Information Technology spoke in considerable detail as she outlined exactly what the reasons for the bill were. She made it very clear that this is a bill whose time has come because technology is changing so rapidly. It would be totally inappropriate to bury our heads in the sand and to say that the law does not need to change when New Zealand’s telecommunications infrastructure has to be able to remain secure in an increasingly online world. It is about ensuring that telecommunications network security law reflects the realities of our modern telecommunications infrastructure which is constantly changing at a baffling speed.Our current legislation relating to interception obligations was put in place when there were only a few major vertically integrated network operators. So much has changed since then. That is no longer the case. Therefore times have changed the technology has changed and the law must change to reflect contemporary needs and challenges.
Robertson Grant: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9694. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader—Labour): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek your guidance and I apologise to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology. I have checked with the Bills Office and there appears to be no regulatory impact statement available for the Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill. It is noted in the explanatory note of the bill as having been created. I seek your guidance for us as members of Parliament unable to access that regulatory impact statement when we are debating the bill. It seems to me to be something that members of Parliament should have access to; we certainly did for the last bill. I seek your guidance as to how that works for us and what process there is available to us.
Vote: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9693. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the question be now put.Ayes64New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes54New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 13; New Zealand First 7; Independent: Horan.Motion agreed to.
Roy Eric: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9692. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: We did get some new material then so I will hear Denis O’Rourke.
Dean Jacqui: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDean Jacqui: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9692. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): I moveThat the question be now put.
Macindoe Tim: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9676. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): The Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill is needed. The law is inadequate and that is exactly why we are introducing this measure this afternoon. It is naive to suggest that this bill is simply about making life easier for the Prime Minister and his mates or whatever the exact wording was that the previous speaker Steffan Browning used when he was on his feet.The fact of the matter is that this is an ever-changing world. We know just with cyber-security how rapidly things change and as a result it is important that we have clarity in our legal framework. Yes there are some extensions in powers here but that is because they are needed. Most New Zealanders understand why we are doing this and they are supportive of it. I have great pleasure in supporting the first reading of this bill.
Bridges Simon: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBridges Simon: Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9663. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Energy and Resources): It is a privilege to speak on this important bill the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill where we are acting responsibly as a Government in the interests of New Zealand and New Zealanders.This omnibus bill is about New Zealand’s intelligence community which is of course critical for our national security as New Zealanders. As the Minister of Justice has said this bill effectively has three objectives: to provide a clear and consistent legal framework which is fundamental in an area such as this; to update the Government Communications Security Bureau’s legal framework again fundamental as we live in a fast-moving and fast-paced world; and thirdly to strengthen the oversight regime that applies to our intelligence agencies which of course is important in a country such as New Zealand where we abide by the rule of law.The history of this bill is reasonably well known: a compliance review of the Government Communications Security Bureau by Rebecca Kitteridge a review of the Government Communications Security Bureau Act 2003 and a review of the oversight mechanisms that apply to our intelligence community. We are also addressing recommendations that have been made by the Law Commission regarding intelligence agencies and privacy law.The Government Communications Security Bureau has an absolutely pivotal role to play in protecting our security as New Zealanders. Its operations are highly sensitive and its work cannot be talked about in detail because of a need to protect its capabilities and areas of focus. This means that its successes can rarely if ever be publicly discussed. But we are in no doubt on this side of the House that the Government Communications Security Bureau has along with its other intelligence community colleagues made an important—indeed a very important—contribution to our national security over the years.We cannot have in New Zealand an unclear legal framework that leaves room for interpretation and debate. That would not be just not good enough; it would be entirely wrong. Therefore I started this speech by saying that through this bill we are doing I think the responsible thing as a Parliament in moving to clarify the law. This bill will make our regime clear and fit for purpose and will allow the Government Communications Security Bureau to get on with the important job of protecting New Zealand and New Zealanders.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 08 May 2013. Volume:689;Page:9630. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: And again I refer the member to Speaker’s ruling 152/5 that there will be necessary textual changes to a question once it has been transferred. This question has been transferred and if the member wants to ask the question he will proceed to do so now.