edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Fenton Darien: Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Bill — Third Reading 
Fenton Darien: Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:646;Page:15302] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 I wish to take a short call because as others have said this bill has been a long time in the making and the debate has been fast and furious and spread over many many months. 
It is a real pleasure to take a call in the third reading of the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Bill. I have the privilege of being a resident in the Waitakere foothills so I am one of the property owners affected by this bill. I value the opportunity to express my gratitude to the people in my community to all of those Waitakere residents who campaigned long and hard for this bill to become law and to the councils who are promoting this bill—Auckland Regional Council Rodney District Council and the Waitakere City Council—for their foresight and determination. As a local resident I thank my local Labour MP my staunch friend Lynne Pillay who along with those other Labour MPs—the Hon Chris Carter and the Hon David Cunliffe—has worked diligently in her efforts to see this bill shepherded through the parliamentary process. 
All the people whom I know from where I live—from my neighbours friends and family in the foothills of Waitakere to my friends in areas like Te Henga Swanson Oratia and Scenic Drive—are watching the progress of this bill with intense interest. They are particularly keen to see whether National can get over its natural propensity to stick up for the interests of developers over the interests of communities. This is a chance for National to go beyond paying mere lip service to the environment for a change. Interventions like this bill are essential if we are serious about our environment and our planet. Economics cannot always be the dominant concern and sometimes as in this case the environment needs to come first. 
As a property owner in the heritage area I know the concern of my community is to ensure that the ranges are protected for all time and for all generations to come. I believe that just as we acknowledge former generations who created the Waitakere Ranges Regional Park the supporters of this important bill will be acknowledged in the future for having the astuteness and wisdom to protect the broader ranges area. I am proud to support the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Bill.
Dunne Peter: Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Bill — Third Reading 
Dunne Peter: Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:646;Page:15301] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I want to begin by acknowledging the contribution of the sponsor of this bill and the dedication of the local authorities in and around the Auckland area to achieving a level of protection and commitment to the future of the Waitakere Ranges that belies their respective significance to the people of Auckland. I think it is great that that objective has been put before the House and I agree with Minister Cunliffe’s comments earlier about these wonderful pieces of land and tracts of bush and hillside being available for him and others to enjoy their recreational possibilities in their retirement. But I think that applies to all parts of New Zealand. 
All of us can claim in our respective locations that degree of pristine beauty and that degree of natural integrity that we would want to see achieve the highest level of protection and the highest level of if you like heritage value for the future. That is what I have real problems with when I come to this legislation—the selective nature of it. I do not deny the people of west Auckland or the Auckland region the right to call for the high level of heritage protection for a particular part of their location but I do not deny that right to other New Zealanders as well. 
It seems to me that in the framework the Resource Management Act sought to put in place we actually have that level playing field that sets the circumstances that all localities in New Zealand can work to achieve and apply in their own circumstances. I am not persuaded that there is a case for special legislation to be passed in respect of the Waitakere Ranges or indeed any other area. If that is so then I think we need to come back to basics and ask: “Where does the Resource Management Act fit what are our local planning ordinances in respect of those particular locations and how should they perhaps be changed? 
It is for that reason that United Future has opposed this bill from the outset and will be voting against it at the third reading today. It is not a statement to say that the Waitakere Ranges do not have significance and are not of importance and value to the people of Auckland and the wider New Zealand community. It is a statement that recognises that that level of attachment that level of protection and that level of commitment should be able to be applied equally across the country. We are not in favour of what is essentially discriminatory law being passed in respect of one particular location—even though we acknowledge the significance it has to a large number of people. 
So although I take my hat off to those who promoted this bill for their dedication their commitment their sincerity and their determination to do well by their region I think they are fundamentally wrong in their application and I think that this legislation is not good legislation. For those reasons United Future will be voting against it.
Turei Metiria: Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Bill — Third Reading 
Turei Metiria: Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:646;Page:15299] 
METIRIA TUREI (Green) 
: 
 I take a very short call on this bill. It has been waiting to be passed for about 2 years now and I think it is very timely that it is done as soon as possible. It is a very good bill and the Greens are very proud to have supported it through all its stages. This bill is about protecting the vision that New Zealanders have about their country. We are a clean country we have room to move we have beaches and bush that we can all enjoy and these are common properties and commonly understood values by the community as a whole. This bill protects those values and gives the community the right to have a say over how land-use issues should be managed as communities have done in New Zealand for generations. It ensures that those values are protected for many generations to come. We are very pleased that it is coming to this stage in the House. 
I very briefly reflect on what I think is the scaremongering of New Zealand First about the property values around the Waitakere Ranges. What is actually true is that real estate agents support this legislation because they see that there is a significant marketing opportunity in having a Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area and indeed we are seeing houses for sale being marketed as within the heritage area this bill covers. It is very important to New Zealanders to have this kind of area protected for all of the good reasons that have been previously stated. 
I echo Lynne Pillay’s thanks and greetings to all of those who were involved in the bill. I particularly thank Kath Dewar and the Waitakere Ranges Protection Society for the work she and that organisation did. I also thank the public law team at Simpson Grierson for whom I have a great deal of respect for their efforts in the proceeding of this bill in supporting the select committee and providing the good advice we needed to get this bill right. I thank them very much for all of their work. I look forward to this bill passing its third reading. Kia ora.
Pillay Lynne: General Debate 
Pillay Lynne: General Debate 
[Volume:646;Page:15286] 
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour—Waitakere) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Apart from the fact that that is a really silly suggestion we have very important legislation before the House. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: No that is not a point of order. Nice try.
Smith Nick: General Debate 
Smith Nick: General Debate 
[Volume:646;Page:15286] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 I seek leave to pick up the challenge of Lynne Pillay and Steve Chadwick. I understand Mr Assistant Speaker that you did not wish the challenge to be taken up in the middle of a speech but I now seek leave for the House to be wound up so that there can be a general election as the Labour Party seeks. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member can ask for that but the House is the master of its own destiny. Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? Yes there is.
Cullen Michael: Points of Order — Obituary—Tumu Putaura 
Cullen Michael: Points of Order — Obituary—Tumu Putaura 
[Volume:646;Page:15273] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Perhaps it might be appropriate for you to refer to Madam Speaker the potential for the House to mark that tomorrow at the start of the House in the usual way that we do. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the member for that suggestion.
Points of Order — Obituary—Tumu Putaura 
Points of Order — Obituary—Tumu Putaura 
[Volume:646;Page:15273] 
Points of Order 
Obituary—Tumu Putaura 
NANDOR TANCZOS (Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sorry to interrupt the proceedings of the House and I offer my apologies to Mr English but I just wanted to draw the attention of the House to the fact that I received an email this afternoon that one of our security guards has passed away after 21 years of service—Mr Tumu Putaura. I just want to make sure that this House will have the opportunity to properly acknowledge that fact. The man has provided service to us for 21 years and I think that it would be deeply offensive if we just continued with our usual carryings-on without acknowledging that. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the member. That is a matter for the House to decide Mr Tanczos but I thank the member for drawing it to the House’s attention. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Perhaps it might be appropriate for you to refer to Madam Speaker the potential for the House to mark that tomorrow at the start of the House in the usual way that we do. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the member for that suggestion.
Tanczos Nandor: Points of Order — Obituary—Tumu Putaura 
Tanczos Nandor: Points of Order — Obituary—Tumu Putaura 
[Volume:646;Page:15273] 
NANDOR TANCZOS (Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sorry to interrupt the proceedings of the House and I offer my apologies to Mr English but I just wanted to draw the attention of the House to the fact that I received an email this afternoon that one of our security guards has passed away after 21 years of service—Mr Tumu Putaura. I just want to make sure that this House will have the opportunity to properly acknowledge that fact. The man has provided service to us for 21 years and I think that it would be deeply offensive if we just continued with our usual carryings-on without acknowledging that. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the member. That is a matter for the House to decide Mr Tanczos but I thank the member for drawing it to the House’s attention.
Peters Winston: Tabling of Documents — Driving Incident 
Peters Winston: Tabling of Documents — Driving Incident 
[Volume:646;Page:15272] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a letter to the  
Northern Advocate  
dated Friday 7 March 2008 about an MP—I do not know; MP may be in inverted commas—apparently asleep at the wheel turning down the wrong way on a road driving over an island and over a directional arrow as well— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.
English Bill: Personal Explanations — Electoral Finance Act—Third Party Registration 
English Bill: Personal Explanations — Electoral Finance Act—Third Party Registration 
[Volume:646;Page:15271] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 That is not actually a point of order but I will respond. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No it is not a point of order. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I discussed the matter with the Public Service Association when it put in its application. The association agreed that it had not lodged the correct application and is supporting my amendment bill that I have put before the House so I will not apologise.
Tabling of Documents — Driving Incident 
Tabling of Documents — Driving Incident 
[Volume:646;Page:15272] 
Tabling of Documents 
Driving Incident 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a letter to the  
Northern Advocate  
dated Friday 7 March 2008 about an MP—I do not know; MP may be in inverted commas—apparently asleep at the wheel turning down the wrong way on a road driving over an island and over a directional arrow as well— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.
King Annette: Personal Explanations — Electoral Finance Act—Third Party Registration 
King Annette: Personal Explanations — Electoral Finance Act—Third Party Registration 
[Volume:646;Page:15271] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Yesterday in the House the member also said that the Public Service Association did not have its address on the website and I wonder whether the member would like to apologise to the association as well.
Personal Explanations — Electoral Finance Act—Third Party Registration 
Personal Explanations — Electoral Finance Act—Third Party Registration 
[Volume:646;Page:15271] 
Personal Explanations 
Electoral Finance Act—Third Party Registration 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 Yesterday in the course of asking questions in the House I made a statement that the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions had lodged an application to become a third party that did not include the correct authorisation. That statement is incorrect. I was going on the information available on the Electoral Commission’s website and I now understand from discussion with the council that that website does not include all the information that is in the council’s application. In fact the application is correct. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Thank you. 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Yesterday in the House the member also said that the Public Service Association did not have its address on the website and I wonder whether the member would like to apologise to the association as well. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 That is not actually a point of order but I will respond. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No it is not a point of order. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I discussed the matter with the Public Service Association when it put in its application. The association agreed that it had not lodged the correct application and is supporting my amendment bill that I have put before the House so I will not apologise.
English Bill: Personal Explanations — Electoral Finance Act—Third Party Registration 
English Bill: Personal Explanations — Electoral Finance Act—Third Party Registration 
[Volume:646;Page:15271] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 Yesterday in the course of asking questions in the House I made a statement that the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions had lodged an application to become a third party that did not include the correct authorisation. That statement is incorrect. I was going on the information available on the Electoral Commission’s website and I now understand from discussion with the council that that website does not include all the information that is in the council’s application. In fact the application is correct. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Thank you.
Hawkins George: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Hawkins George: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:646;Page:15271] 
1.  
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Labour—Manurewa) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Commerce Committee 
: What progress has been made in dealing with Petition 2005/0137 of Caroline Conroy and 372 others “requesting a review of legislation to ensure communities have a greater say in the number and location of liquor outlets”? 
GORDON COPELAND (Acting Chairperson of the Commerce Committee): 
 The committee decided to refer Caroline Conroy’s petition to the Ministry of Justice with a request for its advice. The ministry is responsible for the Sale of Liquor Act. I can advise that that advice has now been received and currently awaits further consideration by the committee. 
Hon George Hawkins 
: Is the committee hopeful of reporting its deliberations back to the House by the end of this Parliament? 
GORDON COPELAND 
: As I mentioned in my principal answer the matter currently awaits further consideration by the committee and until that happens I am unable to give a firm date. But certainly I express the hope that that would occur.
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:646;Page:15264] 
8.  
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Youth Affairs 
: Has she received any reports on how young New Zealanders are benefiting from the policies taking effect from 1 April 2008? 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Youth Affairs) 
: 
 Yes there is great news for a lot of young people. I have seen a report that as at 29 February 118084 young people aged under 25 were enrolled in KiwiSaver. Over 75000 were young workers between the ages of 18 and 24 years many of whom will benefit from employer contributions to their accounts of about 1 percent. A savings culture amongst many young Kiwis will make a difference to their future. A Labour Government cares about that future. 
Moana Mackey 
: What benefits do young people under the age of 18 receive from their enrolment in KiwiSaver? 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA 
: Members aged under 18 years are eligible to receive the $1000 kick-start payment and if they are employed they may receive voluntary employer contributions. The main benefits to young people joining KiwiSaver earlier come from joining the savings culture. The earlier we start saving the greater security we have in the future. A number of parents grandparents aunts and uncles are signing up children in their families and teaching the value of savings to the young. These values will carry through as young people join the workforce and start their own contributions. In addition to this young people aged under 19 are supported in many other ways by a Labour-led Government—indirectly through the Working for Families package cheaper and free doctors’ visits and cheaper prescriptions; the list goes on. 
Phil Heatley 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. The member who protected the Government during my line of questioning by referring to long questions and answers was I think asleep when the Minister was giving her long answers. Could you please— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I understand the member’s point. Would he please be seated. Unfortunately the member did not take the advice and his subsequent questions were quite long. However I ask Ministers to please keep their answers short. If all members did that we would not have the disorder that is frequently created. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. The insult from the member for Whangarei does him no service or this Parliament for that matter. He knows full well that I was reading some foreign policy papers; I was not asleep like he was in a car recently as was reported in the  
Northern Advocate 
. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I am not sure that that was a point of order. 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I withdraw and apologise for the length of my answer and for caring about young New Zealanders. Thank you. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Thank you.
Robertson H V Ross: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Robertson H V Ross: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:646;Page:15258] 
4.  
H V ROSS ROBERTSON (Labour—Manukau East) 
 to the  
Minister of Research Science and Technology 
: What reaction has he received from the research sector to the research and development tax credits which became available from 1 April 2008? 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Research Science and Technology) 
: 
 The 15 percent research and development tax credit that became available yesterday has been welcomed by businesses and researchers throughout New Zealand. Anthony Scott the Chief Executive of Science New Zealand for example has said that the tax credit in combination with New Zealand Fast Forward represents an unprecedented investment in New Zealand science. He likened it to Vogel’s investment in the rail system which transformed the New Zealand economy in the late 1880s. The National Party voted against this tax credit and the National leader labelled New Zealand Fast Forward a gimmick. He is now out of step with almost everyone including one or two in his own caucus. 
H V Ross Robertson 
: Can the Minister tell the House whether he has a view about whether this tax credit could be used to develop solutions to the threats posed by climate change? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: My personal view is that it can and that is also the Government’s policy. It is also my personal view and that of a rapidly growing number of businesses that climate change is real and that solutions are real business opportunities. However the personal view of the Leader of the Opposition was offered up publicly on television this morning and I quote what he said: “Well look actually in terms of things like climate change I believe climate change is occurring um yeah. I think the evidence supports that but you know we have a public position. We support ah we support those positions collectively.” That is what clarity increasingly looks like these days under the National Party.
Wilson Margaret: Points of Order — Parliamentary Press Gallery—Access to Parliamentary Complex 
Wilson Margaret: Points of Order — Parliamentary Press Gallery—Access to Parliamentary Complex 
[Volume:646;Page:15253] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I thank both members for their comments. I have written to all leaders of parties explaining the position that was raised by the Hon Bill English yesterday. I will look at the position that has been raised by both the Rt Hon Winston Peters and the Hon Dr Michael Cullen. I guess the difficulty I have as Speaker is to try to get a balance in terms of the access of the media; at the same time this is a workplace and people should be able to go about their business in a manner that is unimpeded. We are always struggling to find that balance. I would also add that although we have the privilege of working in such a historic building it is not designed for the number of people who occupy it on a daily basis and that also creates issues from time to time. But I am happy to undertake to look at the issue again.
Peters Winston: Points of Order — Parliamentary Press Gallery—Access to Parliamentary Complex 
Peters Winston: Points of Order — Parliamentary Press Gallery—Access to Parliamentary Complex 
[Volume:646;Page:15253] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. You gave a ruling just yesterday regarding access by the media to the corridors of this Parliament and you appeared to be reasonably liberal about their access to them. But I am raising at the first opportunity a complaint by way of my objection—and I am sure it is not just mine alone—at being obstructed in getting into this Parliament by a barrier of media people who do not make any access way available when members are coming through the foyer out there but think they have the right to obstruct parliamentarians. It bespeaks an awful arrogance when people think they can get away with that sort of behaviour. They can put up all the arguments they like about press freedom but they are now abusing parliamentarians who are going about their duties. The foyer is not a place to hold a press conference. If they want to stand off to the side I am certain that members of Parliament and Ministers would accommodate them but in behaving the way that they have I think they have gone way over the boundaries and I ask you to make a ruling on it Madam Speaker.
Cullen Michael: Points of Order — Parliamentary Press Gallery—Access to Parliamentary Complex 
Cullen Michael: Points of Order — Parliamentary Press Gallery—Access to Parliamentary Complex 
[Volume:646;Page:15253] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I support to some extent what the member is saying. I think that in the past there has been a clear understanding that members of the gallery stand along the side of the corridor so that members can walk past. The habit has grown up more and more as time has gone on for simply a complete wall to be put up through which members have to pass as if members are entering Parliament by grace and favour of the press gallery if one likes and I think that creates an unfortunate position. I do not think it is an intentional practice; I think it is one that has grown up over time as people have found it more convenient to be ready for the huddle of the TV cameras. But I do think members should be able to walk past the media into the Chamber without having to in effect push their way through should that be required. I think that is improper and places both the gallery and members of Parliament in the unfortunate position whereby somebody has to appear to be discourteous to somebody else.
Cullen Michael: Melanesian Trusts (Income Tax Exemption) Amendment Bill — Procedure 
Cullen Michael: Melanesian Trusts (Income Tax Exemption) Amendment Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:646;Page:15253] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Pursuant to an agreement in the Business Committee yesterday I seek leave for the debates on the questions that the Melanesian Trusts (Income Tax Exemption) Amendment Bill be read a second and a third time be taken together as a single debate of twelve 10-minute speeches. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There is no objection.
Melanesian Trusts (Income Tax Exemption) Amendment Bill — Procedure 
Melanesian Trusts (Income Tax Exemption) Amendment Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:646;Page:15253] 
Wednesday 2 April 2008 
Madam Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Melanesian Trusts (Income Tax Exemption) Amendment Bill 
Procedure 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Pursuant to an agreement in the Business Committee yesterday I seek leave for the debates on the questions that the Melanesian Trusts (Income Tax Exemption) Amendment Bill be read a second and a third time be taken together as a single debate of twelve 10-minute speeches. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There is no objection.
Tisch Lindsay: Personal Explanations — Withdrawal and Apology—Defying the Chair 
Tisch Lindsay: Personal Explanations — Withdrawal and Apology—Defying the Chair 
[Volume:646;Page:15616] 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 The member knows he has to withdraw from the Chamber. The exclusion was until the end of the session. Mr Clarkson will be leaving the Chamber now. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Thank you for raising that Mr Hughes. Everything has to be done correctly. I thank Mr Clarkson for that. Speaker’s ruling 18/5 was the course to be followed and it has been done. 
Bob Clarkson withdrew from the Chamber.
Personal Explanations — Withdrawal and Apology—Defying the Chair 
Personal Explanations — Withdrawal and Apology—Defying the Chair 
[Volume:646;Page:15615] 
Personal Explanations 
Withdrawal and Apology—Defying the Chair 
BOB CLARKSON (National—Tauranga) 
: 
 I wish to withdraw and apologise for my remark made during the previous debate. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Thank you very much Mr Clarkson for doing that. 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Leave was sought for the member to withdraw and apologise for his remark and also for defying the Chair; that was the real reason he was asked to withdraw from the Chamber. It was not his remark about the Muliaga family in the previous debate that members took offence to. It was the point where he was asked to withdraw and he then defied the Speaker’s ruling and that is why he was asked to leave. He has now come back to withdraw and apologise for that remark and we gave leave for that personal statement to occur. The punishment for defying the Speaker which is to withdraw from the Chamber must surely still stand. 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 The member knows he has to withdraw from the Chamber. The exclusion was until the end of the session. Mr Clarkson will be leaving the Chamber now. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Thank you for raising that Mr Hughes. Everything has to be done correctly. I thank Mr Clarkson for that. Speaker’s ruling 18/5 was the course to be followed and it has been done. 
Bob Clarkson withdrew from the Chamber.
Hughes Darren: Personal Explanations — Withdrawal and Apology—Defying the Chair 
Hughes Darren: Personal Explanations — Withdrawal and Apology—Defying the Chair 
[Volume:646;Page:15615] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Leave was sought for the member to withdraw and apologise for his remark and also for defying the Chair; that was the real reason he was asked to withdraw from the Chamber. It was not his remark about the Muliaga family in the previous debate that members took offence to. It was the point where he was asked to withdraw and he then defied the Speaker’s ruling and that is why he was asked to leave. He has now come back to withdraw and apologise for that remark and we gave leave for that personal statement to occur. The punishment for defying the Speaker which is to withdraw from the Chamber must surely still stand.
Clarkson Bob: Personal Explanations — Withdrawal and Apology—Defying the Chair 
Clarkson Bob: Personal Explanations — Withdrawal and Apology—Defying the Chair 
[Volume:646;Page:15615] 
BOB CLARKSON (National—Tauranga) 
: 
 I wish to withdraw and apologise for my remark made during the previous debate. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Thank you very much Mr Clarkson for doing that.
Barnett Tim: Family Courts Matters Bill — Second Reading 
Barnett Tim: Family Courts Matters Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:646;Page:15599] 
TIM BARNETT (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 I will take a similarly brief call on the Family Courts Matters Bill. I was really inspired by the words of Steve Maharey earlier when he reflected on the way that select committees are working very much more effectively than prior to MMP being introduced. Now we have much more of a cross-party nature to the work of select committees and also committees are able to follow themes. In saying that I just want to reflect on the fact that when I chaired the Justice and Electoral Committee— 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: A fine chairman. 
TIM BARNETT 
: I thank my colleague very much—and we dealt with the Care of Children Bill we listened very carefully to the submitters who came to us on this very matter. As a result of that we made a number of changes beyond the bill that was presented to our committee. The changes were around trying to open up the Family Court in terms of who can attend the court and what can be reported particularly in respect of guardianship issues. 
I think all of us who do a lot of local casework as members of Parliament are well aware of the continued frustration of many in relation to Family Court matters. The moves in this legislation continue the trend that we began under the Care of Children Bill. They are extremely welcome. They spread throughout the other parts of the Family Court and also take things just a little further in terms of the depth and breadth of service particularly with the introduction of non-judicial mediation. Many of us who maybe doubted the validity of some of what we were being told on hearing the story of these cases recognised that the winners in these cases are very often the lawyers on both sides in terms of the money they receive. The frustration of people on both sides—among both parties—is great. 
It seems to me that the Social Services Committee in working with this bill has taken things further than the current legislation in a really positive way. I am very happy to commend the bill to the House. Thank you. 
Bill read a second time.
Pillay Lynne: Family Courts Matters Bill — Second Reading 
Pillay Lynne: Family Courts Matters Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:646;Page:15598] 
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour—Waitakere) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to stand and speak very briefly—because I am not in much of a condition to speak too much today—on the Family Courts Matters Bill. I am a relatively new member of the Social Services Committee but I acknowledge my good friend Russell Fairbrother who I think does an excellent job chairing the committee. I also acknowledge all the members of the committee who worked on the bill because I think there was a genuine commitment to working through the issues and ensuring that when the bill came back to the House it was as transparent as possible and also recognised the rights of our young people in this country. 
It is very important legislation and there is far more fairness and transparency. I know that it will have a positive impact on our families who need to go through the Family Court process. In saying that I can see Mr Clarkson over there smiling in a friendly way nodding and endorsing what I say and that is a very good thing. It does not always happen in this House. 
We recognise that the Family Court is the last call in the process and we always wish to see matters—particularly in the care of children—resolved in families far before they go to the court process. In most cases they are. When it gets to issues not being resolved before that and it is necessary for attendance at the Family Court there is more openness in the proceedings. I think that the requirement or the provision for non-judicial mediation is very good and enhances the bill. It means that there is more opportunity to resolve issues without going to court. 
Some of the more notable changes include identifying the information about those under 18; that information is protected from disclosure. That is very important. We had considerable discussion around counselling for children and we wanted to extend the right for children to be directed to counselling if it would help. We know that often when there are court orders the changes in a young person’s life—certainly intended to be in his or her interests—can still be difficult especially for children to comply with or accept. Often in such instances counselling is a very valuable and helpful thing. Another change that guardianship disputes are referred to mediation with a lawyer acting in the interests of the child is also beneficial. 
I know that many organisations have supported the bill. I have been told that Relationship Services helped 8600 parents last year and that this bill and the further improvements made by the select committee were welcomed by that organisation. I am not supposed to be speaking too much with my laryngitis but I just could not help myself from jumping to my feet and saying a few things in support of this bill. Thank you. I commend it to the House.
Hobbs Marian: Family Courts Matters Bill — Second Reading 
Hobbs Marian: Family Courts Matters Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:646;Page:15596] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Marian Hobbs) 
: I call Te Ururoa Flavell.
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:646;Page:15586] 
12.  
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Statistics 
: What is Statistics New Zealand doing to assist business? 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Minister of Statistics) 
: 
 Heaps. The successful Go Stats! seminars are shortly starting up again. These are a very popular way of distributing information to business. Statistics New Zealand is sponsoring an information zone at the Small Business Expos and the Statistics New Zealand stand will show businesses how to use statistics products relevant to them. And last month free detailed business demography data was released under the initiative to make information freely available. Previously this information would have cost businesses around $500 for every request but under this Labour-led Government it is now free. 
Darien Fenton 
: I thank the Minister for his answer. Has the Budget initiative to make information freely available met the Government’s expectations in regard to business? 
Hon DARREN HUGHES 
: Absolutely it has. The initiative to make information freely available aims to make over a quarter of a billion pieces of statistical information available for free. The value of this initiative in the period to the end of March was in excess of $19 million—money that ordinarily would have been charged to the business community. It represents huge value for New Zealand businesses community organisations and individuals. 
Nathan Guy 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I cannot see how nearly 30000 New Zealanders leaving to go to Australia every year actually helps New Zealand businesses. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order. Would the member please be seated. 
Nathan Guy 
: I seek leave to table the external migration figures for the year ended February 2008 showing that— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Pettis Jill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Pettis Jill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:646;Page:15584] 
10.  
JILL PETTIS (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Customs 
: What recent initiatives has the New Zealand Customs Service taken to improve passenger processing and border agency efficiency at Auckland International Airport? 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Customs) 
: 
 Last week on behalf of the Government I attended the opening of the new arrivals hall at Auckland International Airport. The redevelopment project is a major initiative of Auckland International Airport that has involved the New Zealand Customs Service and other border agencies in the design of facilities better suited to efficient processing standards. There is now more space more processing booths and a distinct Aotearoa New Zealand feel to the arrivals area. The Customs Service shares the enlarged space with the Immigration Service allowing the agencies to work together to achieve maximum efficiency for passenger processing. 
Jill Pettis 
: What further initiatives are under way to improve processing times and efficiencies at Auckland International Airport? 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA 
: The opening of the new arrivals hall is only the first stage of the redevelopment. The next stage will be to revamp the baggage hall allowing more space for Customs Service and Biosecurity New Zealand staff to clear arriving passengers and their luggage. I am advised that this is due to open in July. The new design and layout will again greatly improve the arrival experience of visitors to Aotearoa New Zealand and improve passenger processing. 
Peter Brown 
: Noting those answers can the Minister give this House an absolute assurance that Auckland International Airport will not in any way shape or form turn into a farce like the one that has occurred at Heathrow? 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA 
: What I can assure the member is that the 3A redevelopment will ensure a better experience for those visitors coming to New Zealand and it will also enable border agencies to carry out their role most efficiently.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:646;Page:15579] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
Morning Report 
 is lying. That is the fact of the matter here. My chief of staff reported to me this morning that at 10 o’clock last night he had that message left on his answerphone. Those are the facts and they probably can be obtained from telecommunications records so we will find out who is telling the truth but it ain’t Bill. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: It is not for the Speaker to determine— 
Hon Bill English 
: He cannot make that accusation. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: These are matters of debate. Accusations have gone both ways. It is not for the Speaker to determine the truth or otherwise of any statement in this House. I suggest the member take it up elsewhere.
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:646;Page:15579] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I seek your guidance on this issue. We have checked with  
Morning Report  
staff who have informed my office that any claim by Mr Peters that I would not turn up for a debate on radio is false. Mr Peters has made a number of statements of exactly the opposite which according to  
Morning Report 
 and me are absolutely false. What is the opportunity for redress on this matter?
Maharey Steve: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Maharey Steve: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:646;Page:15577] 
6.  
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Labour—Palmerston North) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: What reports has she received on investment in research to improve outcomes for New Zealand’s children and families? 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 Last Friday I launched a new longitudinal study that will follow more than 7500 children and their families through birth childhood adolescence and on to adulthood. I am proud to say that our Government has committed a total of $14 million to support this new research which will give us information on children growing up in 21st century New Zealand. Our Government is committed to supporting research that will help us to continue to deliver evidence-based policies that will benefit New Zealand families. 
Hon Steve Maharey 
: How has social research contributed to the policies rolled out by the Labour-led Government? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: New Zealand has a proud history of high-quality longitudinal studies. The Christchurch and Dunedin studies have informed policies such as early intervention with vulnerable children and families support for women to encourage breastfeeding free health-care for children under the age of 6 and the Working for Families package of targeted assistance which is on track to lift 130000 children out of poverty. All of these are solid evidence-based policies from the Labour-led Government and they are quite a contrast to the confused and contradictory ideas that the National Party has been struggling to develop.
Hide Rodney: Motions — Sir Keith Rodney Park GCB KBE MC & Bar DFC—Memorial 
Hide Rodney: Motions — Sir Keith Rodney Park GCB KBE MC & Bar DFC—Memorial 
[Volume:646;Page:15565] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I move  
That this House recognises the vision and skill of Air Chief Marshal Sir Keith Rodney Park GCB KBE MC and Bar DFC RAF in leading to victory those who fought on the ground and in the air during the Battle of Britain; notes that the failure of Nazi Germany to defeat the RAF in 1940 was Hitler’s first major setback forcing him to call off the planned invasion of Britain; supports the Sir Keith Park Memorial Campaign to erect a permanent statue of Sir Keith on the fourth plinth in Trafalgar Square; believes that such a memorial is long overdue to redress the lack of public acknowledgment of this great man’s leadership and would ensure the role of the RAF in defending Britain is formally recognised in Trafalgar Square; notes that a memorial would be particularly fitting given that RAF will be celebrating its 90th anniversary in 2008; and recognises that such a memorial could provide an iconic reminder of the selfless action shown by many of those from Britain New Zealand and the Commonwealth in the heroic and victorious defence of our country. 
Motion agreed to.
Motions — Sir Keith Rodney Park GCB KBE MC & Bar DFC—Memorial 
Motions — Sir Keith Rodney Park GCB KBE MC & Bar DFC—Memorial 
[Volume:646;Page:15565] 
Motions 
Sir Keith Rodney Park GCB KBE MC & Bar DFC—Memorial 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I move  
That this House recognises the vision and skill of Air Chief Marshal Sir Keith Rodney Park GCB KBE MC and Bar DFC RAF in leading to victory those who fought on the ground and in the air during the Battle of Britain; notes that the failure of Nazi Germany to defeat the RAF in 1940 was Hitler’s first major setback forcing him to call off the planned invasion of Britain; supports the Sir Keith Park Memorial Campaign to erect a permanent statue of Sir Keith on the fourth plinth in Trafalgar Square; believes that such a memorial is long overdue to redress the lack of public acknowledgment of this great man’s leadership and would ensure the role of the RAF in defending Britain is formally recognised in Trafalgar Square; notes that a memorial would be particularly fitting given that RAF will be celebrating its 90th anniversary in 2008; and recognises that such a memorial could provide an iconic reminder of the selfless action shown by many of those from Britain New Zealand and the Commonwealth in the heroic and victorious defence of our country. 
Motion agreed to.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:646;Page:15565] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week in the House priority will be given to the Government notice of motion No. 1 the first reading of the Walking Access Bill the next stages of the Maori Purposes Bill (No 2) and the Family Court Matters Bill the second reading of the Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill and progress—probably for 1 hour—in the 3-hour debate on the performance and current operations of Crown entities public organisations and State enterprises. Wednesday is a members’ day.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:646;Page:15565] 
Thursday 10 April 2008 
Madam Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business Statement 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week in the House priority will be given to the Government notice of motion No. 1 the first reading of the Walking Access Bill the next stages of the Maori Purposes Bill (No 2) and the Family Court Matters Bill the second reading of the Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill and progress—probably for 1 hour—in the 3-hour debate on the performance and current operations of Crown entities public organisations and State enterprises. Wednesday is a members’ day.