edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7320. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
2. 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee 
: When did the committee begin hearing oral submissions on the Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill? 
CRAIG FOSS (Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee): 
 The committee began hearing evidence on the bill on Thursday 15 October 2009 at around 4 p.m. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Did he ask as chair of the committee for the clerk to plan for a total of only 5 hours of evidence from submitters over the course of 1 day on the Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill? 
CRAIG FOSS 
: On that Thursday there were about 5 hours available to the committee to hear evidence so that is what was asked. Of course there were other days available.
Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7319. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
1. 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee 
: How many submissions were received by the committee on the Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill? 
CRAIG FOSS (Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee) 
: 
 As at this afternoon 374 submissions had been received. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Did he as the chair of the committee initially ask the clerk of the committee to invite only 27 submitters to attend and give evidence to the committee? 
CRAIG FOSS 
: Pursuant to the committee’s instructions I asked the clerk to get the process of hearing submissions under way after our meeting which finished I think at about 7 p.m. on Wednesday of last week. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Did Labour members of the committee make the suggestion to him that no submissions be held as was suggested to me by Mr Charles Chauvel in discussions on an amendment bill when Labour and National were— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! 
Hon Member 
: That’s terrible. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: That’s what they suggested. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: That’s what Charles said. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I say to the Hon Dr Nick Smith that he must stop interjecting when I am on my feet. I also apologise because the Minister has caught me unawares as normally only one supplementary question is allowed in questions to members. What is more the supplementary question that the Minister was seeking to ask was not strictly within the Standing Orders. 
Charles Chauvel 
: I seek leave to table an email exchange between the chairperson and me containing the initial suggestion for hearing only 30 submitters and the response. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Lee Melissa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Lee Melissa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7318. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
11. 
MELISSA LEE (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Corrections 
: What recent announcements has she made on employment training skills for prisoners? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 Recently I launched the Prisoner Skills and Employment Strategy 2009-2012. This strategy will ensure that more prisoners leave prison with essential work skills and habits. Research shows that prisoners who find work after their release are less likely to reoffend. 
Melissa Lee 
: How will the Prisoner Skills and Employment Strategy 2009-2012 assist prisoners to be more employable? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: The strategy details the plan to boost the number of prisoners learning industry-based skills by 1000 by 2011. That was an election promise and it will assist prisoners to leave prison with better skills than when they entered. There is also a much stronger focus on education and skills development in the strategy and it targets offenders who are serving sentences of 6 months who currently have fewer opportunities to access the training and employment opportunities provided by the Department of Corrections.
Norman Russel: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Norman Russel: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7314. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
9. 
Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: Does he have any concerns regarding the membership of the Tax Working Group? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 No I do not. The members of the Tax Working Group were appointed by Victoria University and where they have need for a wider range of expertise they invite people in including experts on poverty and economists who may have views that do not correspond with those of the group. 
Dr Russel Norman 
: Does he have any concerns about PricewaterhouseCoopers’ chairman John Shewan being on the Tax Working Group in light of Mr Shewan’s advice to Westpac to use tax reduction measures that the High Court subsequently found to be unlawful and that cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenue? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: No I do not. As I said Victoria University appointed a group of acknowledged tax experts and regardless of who their clients are their advice to the Government will stand or fall on its merits. 
Stuart Nash 
: Why did the Government lend its support to the formation of the Tax Working Group when the Minister appears to have ruled out the vast majority of its recommended options as presented to date? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: In fact we have made it clear throughout the year that we have ruled out almost nothing. 
Dr Russel Norman 
: Is he concerned that according to the Auckland High Court Mr John Shewan advised Westpac to use tax reduction measures in order to pay a tax rate of only 6.5 percent instead of the corporate rate of 30 percent and that those tax reduction measures were subsequently found to be unlawful tax avoidance? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I do not intend to make comment on the case in any way that might compromise the Crown’s position. As I said before from the Government’s point of view the advice of the Tax Working Group will stand or fall on its merits regardless of who offered that advice. 
Dr Russel Norman 
: How does he think the recommendations from the Tax Working Group will look in the eyes of ordinary New Zealanders if for example the Tax Working Group suggests increasing GST for ordinary New Zealanders when one of the experts on the group has been advising overseas banks on how to avoid tax to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I think the public will judge the outcome of this exercise by the wisdom of the Government’s decisions. The Government will have a look at the advice it will decide whether there is a strong enough case for change and any case for change will have to balance equity with positive economic effect. 
Dr Russel Norman 
: So far as he knows are any other members of his Tax Working Group involved in court cases involving tax avoidance? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: Not to my knowledge.
Macindoe Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Macindoe Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7311. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
5. 
TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: How is the Government’s Youth Opportunities programme making a difference in New Zealand? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 Yesterday I visited Te Mahurehure Marae for the national Women’s Refuge conference. I saw firsthand the difference that Community Max is making. When I commented on how nice the food was I was invited into the kitchen where I met four young people who had prepared the meal. They were part of our Community Max programme they were excited to have a job and they were absolutely thrilled with the difference it is making in their lives. 
Tim Macindoe 
: How many opportunities have these programmes created for young New Zealanders to date? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: Over 1777 Job Ops positions have been created so far and 1085 Community Max positions involving 1475 New Zealand employers and 227 community groups and the numbers are growing by the day. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: Does she agree that more needs to be done to significantly reduce youth unemployment when since she announced the scheme an additional 3000 young people are now on the unemployment benefit alone or is it a case of one step forward three steps back? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: I would say two steps forward because as members have just heard we are seeing that over 2000 more young people would be on the unemployment benefit if it were not for the programmes that this Government has put in place. 
Tim Macindoe 
: What further examples can the Minister give of where the Government’s Community Max and Job Ops initiatives are making a difference? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: People are coming up with such great and innovative ideas themselves. Actually just last week the member Rahui Katene and I were discussing some of these ideas and how we could get them out to further iwi. We have put together a set of examples of Community Max programmes for Maori and I certainly offer it to any members of this House who would like to take those examples to the iwi and the community groups in their electorates and share those ideas so that we can get more people on these programmes.
Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Description of Documents 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Description of Documents 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7305. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Points of Order 
Tabling of Documents—Description of Documents 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Climate Change Issues) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I raise a specific issue in respect of the leave that was sought to table documents in question time yesterday. Yesterday the House granted leave for the tabling of a statement by the Australian Minister for Climate Change and Water Senator Penny Wong containing a summary of the changes put forward by the Liberal Opposition and a critique by the Labor Government of the changes. My issue is that the document that was tabled was no more than a very short Sky News web page that did not contain any of the information that the House granted leave to be tabled. I seek your advice on firstly the status of a document that has been tabled and put on the record of the House but which is not what the House granted leave to table; and secondly the actions that are available to the House in respect of the member who was given leave to table the document that was not tabled. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the honourable member for raising a serious point of order. I think the best thing I can do is to undertake to investigate the matter. Obviously I do not know the facts of the matter without investigating it. I will investigate the matter and come back to the honourable member and from that point on he can decide whether he is satisfied with what I find from the investigation. I accept that it is a serious and important matter that where the House gives leave for the tabling of a specific document that document is what is tabled. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Just on that point could I ask that in your ruling you also consider the consequences in situations where documents are tabled as official documents by Ministers. There have been occasions—I can provide you with examples for your deliberation—where the document was a blank sheet of paper for instance with simply bullet points on it and no reference to a department or a Government agency and where it could be seen as perhaps speech notes or whatever. What is the status of such a document if it is characterised as an official document? I ask that you make that issue a part of your deliberations. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Obviously in order to investigate a particular issue I will need to be given a particular case to investigate. If the honourable member wishes to provide an example of where that has happened I am happy to investigate that situation too.
Power Simon: Domestic Violence (Enhancing Safety) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Power Simon: Domestic Violence (Enhancing Safety) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7350. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I thank the member Lynne Pillay for her comments on the Domestic Violence (Enhancing Safety) Bill. She is aware that since this bill was introduced to the House a second bill that deals with some of the other issues that she refers to—plus another matter which will enable us to ratify an international instrument in respect of one particular matter—has been tabled. Some issues remain with regard to the current legislation to which the member refers and that is why the second bill the Domestic Violence Reform Bill remains on the Order Paper. I assure her that I am doing my best to work my way through the remaining issues. 
Broadly speaking this bill is a piece of work that I started on about 2½ years ago with some staff with whom I was working at the time while in Opposition. I am pleased that the bill has made the progress that it has to date and I hope that towards the end of the evening before we adjourn the House we may make some more progress on it. 
Part 1 amends the Domestic Violence Act 1995 by inserting new Part 6A which provides for the police safety order initiative. In brief the provisions provide the police with the power to issue a police safety order when called to a domestic dispute if they are unable to arrest the alleged violent person. Part 1 also amends the offence provisions. Firstly it removes the tiered penalty structure for the offence of contravening a protection order while retaining the current maximum penalty of a term of imprisonment of up to 2 years. That was actually quite an important signal to send in the Part 1 provisions. Secondly it separates out the offence of failing to attend a programme as directed and retains the current penalty of up to 6 months’ imprisonment or of a fine not exceeding $5000. That continues to give emphasis to the importance of participating in the programmes emphasised in this legislation. Section 50(2) of the Domestic Violence Act which requires an arresting officer to consider certain criteria before arresting a person who he or she suspects has breached a protection order is also repealed. Repealing those criteria aligns the principal Act with section 315 of the Crimes Act 1961 which permits arrest without a warrant where there is good cause to suspect that an offence has been committed. 
The Justice and Electoral Committee made a number of changes to Part 1 to provide more explicit provisions around the law enforcement and court processes associated with the police safety orders. I thank the committee for that work; I think it added to the bill and has made it a more whole piece of legislation. Supplementary Order Paper 72 in my name consists of several technical amendments to Part 1 and I hope the Committee of the whole House will see its way to supporting them.
Pillay Lynne: Domestic Violence (Enhancing Safety) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Pillay Lynne: Domestic Violence (Enhancing Safety) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7349. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to stand and take a call on the Domestic Violence (Enhancing Safety) Bill. I will get the negative stuff over first and say from the outset that we in Labour were a little disappointed that this bill went only part of the way to picking up Labour’s Domestic Violence Reform Bill. Our preference would have been to see National take over that bill and progress it through the House. That has not been the case but I stand and speak in support of this bill. I know that it goes a long way to addressing many of the concerns around domestic violence. 
Part 1 which amends the Domestic Violence Act will ensure that there is more protection for women—although not in every instance it is predominantly women and families in the case of domestic violence—at the crucial time when there is considerable heat in the situation and it is essential that the offending party is off the premises and away from the family. I note that in terms of new section 49 “Offence to contravene protection order” and new section 49A “Offence to fail to comply with direction” in clause 5 the changes are sensible. They are common-sense changes. Certainly as I said before they go a considerable way towards enhancing protection for women and families in domestic violence situations. 
We all know that domestic violence is an absolute blot on this country’s landscape. The previous Labour Government put considerable resource time and energy into this issue. It worked with non-governmental organisations to tackle the causes of domestic violence to provide education around domestic violence and to raise awareness to ensure that people in this situation get the support and the protection that they so much deserve. 
I am taking only a short call on this bill currently but I am very pleased to be speaking on it. This bill will get the support of all members of the Committee I assume and I think that is commendable. At the very heart of the matter is protection for families who are subjected to violence and actions that no human being—and in particular no child—should be subject to. I am very pleased to speak in support of the bill. Thank you.
Macindoe Tim: New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Amendment Bill War Pensions Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Macindoe Tim: New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Amendment Bill War Pensions Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7328. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) 
: 
 The member for Manurewa and the deputy leader of the Labour Party noted that this legislation’s introduction was supported by almost all parties in this House. I agree with Ms King’s comment that a pension is not a benefit; it is an entitlement earned by hard-working older New Zealanders who have contributed fulsomely to our country over a lifetime. I hope that we will always be internationally recognised as a country that values and respects our senior citizens and guarantees through our pension system dignity for all in their retirement. 
The overriding purpose of this legislation is to create a more flexible regime that reflects New Zealanders’ nomadic inclinations giving our older citizens greater freedom to travel in their retirement without facing a heavy financial penalty. The key change is a new more generous maximum payment. Instead of the current flat rate of payment older New Zealanders will be able to receive up to 100 percent depending on the number of years they have resided in New Zealand. The legislation also frees up the rules that restrict the ability of superannuitants and veterans pensioners to move around once they get overseas. It also allows payments to people who wish to reside in countries with which New Zealand has no social security arrangements whether they remain in such countries or begin travelling. 
These provisions modernise an overseas payment policy that has been in place for nearly two decades and that is clearly outdated. The current system causes distress for many New Zealanders and prevents some from embarking on the overseas travel that in many instances they had planned for and looked forward to throughout their years of employment. At a time when they deserve to be rewarded for their valuable contributions many have instead had to modify or cancel those plans upon realising that the current flat rate of 50 percent would provide insufficient income to allow a reasonable standard of living in many countries or because existing rules restrict their ability to move to more than one country because payment is linked to residence in one particular country only. 
Forcing older people to remain in one country or preventing their ability to travel to a variety of countries is punitive and has no basis in sound policy. Because of our geographic isolation New Zealanders travel long distances whenever they leave our shores. Limiting their pension entitlements when they do so cannot be justified and I am delighted that this legislation removes that unfairness. This is a good measure. I thank the officials who have worked on it and all who submitted on it and I commend it to the House.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Description of Documents 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Description of Documents 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7306. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Obviously in order to investigate a particular issue I will need to be given a particular case to investigate. If the honourable member wishes to provide an example of where that has happened I am happy to investigate that situation too.
Cosgrove Clayton: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Description of Documents 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Cosgrove Clayton: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Description of Documents 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7305. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Just on that point could I ask that in your ruling you also consider the consequences in situations where documents are tabled as official documents by Ministers. There have been occasions—I can provide you with examples for your deliberation—where the document was a blank sheet of paper for instance with simply bullet points on it and no reference to a department or a Government agency and where it could be seen as perhaps speech notes or whatever. What is the status of such a document if it is characterised as an official document? I ask that you make that issue a part of your deliberations.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Description of Documents 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Description of Documents 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7305. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the honourable member for raising a serious point of order. I think the best thing I can do is to undertake to investigate the matter. Obviously I do not know the facts of the matter without investigating it. I will investigate the matter and come back to the honourable member and from that point on he can decide whether he is satisfied with what I find from the investigation. I accept that it is a serious and important matter that where the House gives leave for the tabling of a specific document that document is what is tabled.
Smith Nick: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Description of Documents 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Smith Nick: Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Description of Documents 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7305. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Climate Change Issues) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I raise a specific issue in respect of the leave that was sought to table documents in question time yesterday. Yesterday the House granted leave for the tabling of a statement by the Australian Minister for Climate Change and Water Senator Penny Wong containing a summary of the changes put forward by the Liberal Opposition and a critique by the Labor Government of the changes. My issue is that the document that was tabled was no more than a very short Sky News web page that did not contain any of the information that the House granted leave to be tabled. I seek your advice on firstly the status of a document that has been tabled and put on the record of the House but which is not what the House granted leave to table; and secondly the actions that are available to the House in respect of the member who was given leave to table the document that was not tabled.
Hawkins George: Social Assistance (Payment of New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Overseas) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hawkins George: Social Assistance (Payment of New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Overseas) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7301. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Labour—Manurewa) 
: 
 The RSA has been concerned for a long time that people were not able to receive their payments overseas. That was based on the injuries that occurred to them. It is very important therefore that they should not have to wait if they were injured and qualified when they were 45 years old until they turn 65 to be able to draw their entitlement. I also again mention that all the preparatory work done on this Social Assistance (Payment of New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Overseas) Amendment Bill was done by Ruth Dyson when she was Minister. I think that is very important. I also say how pleased I am that this bill is going through under urgency. What disappoints me is that only one Minister has risen during the Committee stage thus far and had anything to say about the bill. I would have thought that the Minister of Defence the Minister of Veterans’ Affairs and the Minister for Senior Citizens would have risen in the Committee stage and had something to say. But as there is only one Minister here that is not likely to happen. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 77 in the name of the Hon Paula Bennett to Part 2 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
King Annette: Social Assistance (Payment of New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Overseas) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
King Annette: Social Assistance (Payment of New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Overseas) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7300. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
: 
 As I said this part deals with amendments to the War Pensions Act 1954. This was an area where the members of the Social Services Committee probably wished that we could make some changes to the bill but that was not possible. 
The change that was asked for by the RSA related to the fact that New Zealand superannuation and the veterans pension are linked in terms of the portability provision that we are making. The argument that the RSA put to us is that people are entitled to receive superannuation at a certain age—65 years in New Zealand—and people receive a veterans pension based on a disability that relates to an injury that the recipients had sustained while in the service of their country. People may be eligible for a veterans pension before the age of 65 years. They may be eligible for it at age 45 for example. The RSA argued to us that people on veterans pensions should be able to take their veterans pension to another country where they wished to live because they were entitled to it by virtue of the criteria that enabled them to have it. It asked why portability had to be linked to an entitlement to New Zealand superannuation. 
The RSA made a very strong case. I am aware that a review of the War Pensions Act is taking place. It was started under Rick Barker the Law Commission has done a lot of work on it and I suspect hopefully that there will be a rewrite of and a relook at what is provided to our war veterans. I ask the Minister whether she and the Government are considering making changes for war veterans going forward that would line up with what we heard at the select committee with regard to that submission from the RSA. I think it was a fair request and war veterans do feel quite aggrieved by the fact that they are linked to New Zealand superannuation when their pension is nothing to do with age but all to do with having a disability. This part of the bill also puts in place the same conditions for war veterans as for New Zealand superannuitants so the portability arrangements are the same for them. 
That is the only question that I have. I tell the Minister that the RSA raised a serious issue with us.
Blue Jackie: Social Assistance (Payment of New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Overseas) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Blue Jackie: Social Assistance (Payment of New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Overseas) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7295. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Dr JACKIE BLUE (National) 
: 
 I am very pleased to take a short call on the Social Assistance (Payment of New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Overseas) Amendment Bill. I acknowledge the work the former Government did in preparing this bill so that it could be in the House today. The bill amends the New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Act 2001 and the War Pensions Act 1954 to make it easier for older New Zealanders to travel or live overseas. It updates the payment overseas policy that has been in place since 1990. 
We live in a mobile world. New Zealanders are living longer and in generally better health. With over half a million predominantly younger New Zealanders living overseas and with air travel being so affordable it is only understandable and expected that older New Zealanders will want to travel to visit family and relatives or to participate in tourist activities. This Government is committed to ensuring that older New Zealanders whatever country they live in are able to live in dignity and have the freedom to move around. Older New Zealanders have contributed to our country and they have invested in this country. We need to make it easier for older New Zealanders to travel and move between countries. This bill does exactly that. Instead of the current flat rate of payment older New Zealanders will be able to receive up to 100 percent depending on the number of years they have resided in New Zealand. I commend this bill to the House.
Woodhouse Michael: Social Assistance (Payment of New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Overseas) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Woodhouse Michael: Social Assistance (Payment of New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Overseas) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7290. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) 
: 
 I am pleased to rise in support of the Social Assistance (Payment of New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Overseas) Amendment Bill. As the previous speaker Annette King said this bill will have support across the House. Although she started by saying she did not want to get political she had a crack at the Minister for Social Development and Employment for taking more credit for the bill than she should. But putting that aside I think we need to acknowledge the previous Minister— 
Grant Robertson 
: You agree then. Do you agree that she did? 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE 
: I will get to that. We should acknowledge the previous Minister Ruth Dyson for her work but the bill having been introduced languished for several months. I think the fact that this bill has been brought before the House for its second reading in amongst the plethora of legislation that this hard-working Government is putting through is a testament to the very hard-working Minister for Senior Citizens and the high priority that this Government places on that very important section of our community. 
I was not a member of the Social Services Committee but I thank those members for their work and I also thank the officials for their work on what is such sensible legislation. It also I think reflects the fact that our society is changing. We are much more mobile we are fluid and thanks to the baby boomers we are increasingly getting older on average but we are fitter and more mobile. 
As some members know my mother passed away about 3 weeks ago and I take this opportunity to thank members of the House for their messages of condolence through that time. In the last few years of her life she was very active and she travelled. Had my father still been alive I am quite sure they would have taken advantage of the opportunity to spend quite some time away in the countries they discovered in their later years. Their friends are still doing that. I expect that this legislation will come as a real boost to them in being able to travel more fluidly through other countries whereas previously they were not able to and also to earn a more generous rate of superannuation up from the current flat rate of 50 percent. So I congratulate both the previous and present Ministers and the select committee and I commend the bill to the House.
Vote: Sentencing (Vehicle Confiscation) Amendment Bill Summary Proceedings (Vehicle Seizure) Amendment Bill Privacy Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Sentencing (Vehicle Confiscation) Amendment Bill Summary Proceedings (Vehicle Seizure) Amendment Bill Privacy Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7285. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Sentencing (Vehicle Confiscation) Amendment Bill the Summary Proceedings (Vehicle Seizure) Amendment Bill and the Privacy Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 113 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Bills read a third time.
Young Jonathan: Sentencing (Vehicle Confiscation) Amendment Bill Summary Proceedings (Vehicle Seizure) Amendment Bill Privacy Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Young Jonathan: Sentencing (Vehicle Confiscation) Amendment Bill Summary Proceedings (Vehicle Seizure) Amendment Bill Privacy Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7284. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) 
: 
 It is my pleasure to stand and speak in support of this legislation. I congratulate the Hon Judith Collins on taking this legislation through the steps that it needs to take. Right now throughout our country there are thousands perhaps tens of thousands of teenage boys particularly who have posters on their walls of hot shiny cars with slick tyres big exhaust pipes and very very powerful engines. In fact the engines that these cars have these days are probably far more powerful than the engines that racing car drivers had in their cars 20 or 30 years ago. These inexperienced drivers are driving their vehicles much to their pleasure but much to the danger of other people around them. I think that this legislation is legislation of great responsibility to society to those people in different communities who are plagued by not only the tremendous volume of sound but also the danger that exists outside their front doors. 
Members will be aware that vehicles these days have incredible power. It is easy for people just to turn on the gas to take these vehicles to incredible speed very very quickly and to lose control. No doubt there are people in this House who have done precisely that over the years. I am sure that has never been the occurrence when you Mr Assistant Speaker Barker ride your motorcycle through the country as you are a tremendously law-abiding citizen. But I am sure that other people will not be as law-abiding as you are. 
It is also important to note that this legislation takes account of some serious offences and tragic fatalities that have taken place over these last years. I am sure that the parents and family members of those who have died because of illegal street racing will this day have an increased sense of closure in their grief. They will see that this legislation will help to prevent other young people from dying and other families from suffering the tragedy they have suffered. Today we remember Scott Finn who died in Mount Maunganui; we remember Laureen Helen Reilly an elderly woman; we remember Ratu Victor Vikash a 23-year-old; we remember two girls both aged 16 who passed away in Christchurch at that party; and we remember pedestrian Amy Edward-Minton killed on a crossing in Cambridge Terrace Wellington. We remember these people. We remember Billy Wall and other people who have lost their lives because of illegal street racing. We know that their family members today will have a sense of closure because of this legislation we are passing. 
I think it is sensible good legislation and I commend it to the House. I congratulate our Minister the Hon Judith Collins on bringing the legislation to the House. Thank you.
Bridges Simon: Sentencing (Vehicle Confiscation) Amendment Bill Summary Proceedings (Vehicle Seizure) Amendment Bill Privacy Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Bridges Simon: Sentencing (Vehicle Confiscation) Amendment Bill Summary Proceedings (Vehicle Seizure) Amendment Bill Privacy Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7281. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga) 
: 
 I did not agree with what Keith Locke had to say earlier and I make that very clear but— 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: Where is that tie from? 
SIMON BRIDGES 
: —everyone on the other side is wearing a yellow tie—what I at least liked about what Keith Locke said was that he had the courage of his convictions and that he said he would be voting against this bill. He may be wrong but at least he has the courage of his convictions. I contrast that with what we read by Patrick Gower a political reporter in the  
New Zealand Herald  
this morning about Labour’s position on the bill: “The Labour Party which has prevaricated and criticised the boy-racer legislation will support both bills and the other four law and order bills as well.” How confused is that? It is interesting that when we look at that we see that Labour gets just a paragraph in a very long story. I would say that that paragraph is in fact about 4.6 percent of the story and that says something about the polls. 
But I say seriously in relation to the legislation that we have a serious problem. No one is saying that it will fix all the problems and make everything better but it is a good start. We have said it before and I will say it again: it is a tool in the tool box for the police and the justice system. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: Oh what a cliché. 
SIMON BRIDGES 
: But it is true. When we put this legislation with the series of bills the Government is putting forward there is a significant law and order agenda there that is making the streets safer slowly but surely. 
I just say as well that this is a serious problem certainly in Christchurch and we have heard from Brendan Burns about some of the problems there. But it is a problem even in Tauranga although it is not at the level we have heard about in Christchurch and seen on television. I did a survey in my electorate and I was very interested to know what people thought about boy racers. I was very specific about the question because I wanted to know whether people believed that it was a problem specifically in Tauranga rather than out and about. So my question was specific. Of the nearly 6000 people—that is right: 6000 people—who responded to the survey 59 percent were very concerned about boy racers in their areas. So this is a problem and we are addressing it. The legislation will not solve everything but it will send a message of deterrence to boy racers and illegal street racers that we are watching them and that in worst-case scenarios their cars will be crushed. I commend the legislation to the House.
Cosgrove Clayton: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Cosgrove Clayton: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7263. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I think there is quite a bit of precedent and it happened in Part 2 when the Minister was the first to initiate comments that ranged far wider than the part. The Minister brought other material into the debate and we must be able to address that. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I thank the member. I have allowed a pretty wide-ranging debate on Parts 1 and 2 and there has been a good exchange. But Part 3 has only two clauses. It is very narrow. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: She didn’t have to say that. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The Minister was responding to the previous speaker who had canvassed other areas and she did say that but she also identified that Part 3 was about privacy provisions. I am asking future speakers please to concentrate on the two clauses in Part 3.
Tisch Lindsay: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tisch Lindsay: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7261. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The debate on this part includes the schedule.
Vote: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7261. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 113 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Goodhew Jo: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Goodhew Jo: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7260. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 69 in the name of the Hon Judith Collins to Part 2 and the following amendment in her name to clause 28 be agreed to: 
to omit from new section 100TB(2) “100N(2)(d)” and substitute “100N(1)(d)”. 
Amendments agreed to.
Garrett David: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Garrett David: Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7258. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DAVID GARRETT (ACT) 
: 
 I will take just a short call to follow up on Mr Cosgrove’s point—he graciously acknowledged that I had one—regarding recycling through sales. He told a story which sadly is all too believable of silly mummy in the Mercedes turning up and comforting little Johnny who had several grand worth of fines. It is no surprise how little Johnny became like that. Sadly there is probably no surprise about how he will turn out as he gets older. But one source of the money is right there: silly mummies from Remuera or Fendalton who think little Johnny can do no wrong and who if the car is confiscated will turn up at Turners Auctions with the gold card and buy back the car. I personally get all of my old dungers from Turners and I can recommend it as a place for an absolute bargain. I think I got my last car which was valued at about $2500 for $1200. As the Minister in the chair the Hon Judith Collins rightly says at the dunger end of the market where there are no reserves the highest bid gets it. Of course a seized car will not have any reserve at all so $2 might get it. That is one point. 
The other reason that we support the legislation is that it enshrines that wonderful principle of “three strikes”. It gives a chance gives another chance—and I would be a bit less generous than the Minister I have to say which is probably no surprise—and gives every opportunity. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: How many chances would you give? 
DAVID GARRETT 
: I think two is probably right with crushing on the third. The point is that judges need to be given the tools and this is the place where they are given the tools. But judges also have to use them. I know all the lofty arguments; I wrote essays in law school about who has the greatest influence in our constitutional arrangements. The answer is—and Professor Joseph would agree with me although he would use more elegant language—that the sovereignty lies here and if judges do not take the signal then we will be back next year. I put on record that if it is necessary to back Mr Cosgrove to make an amendment to this legislation in order to make crushing mandatory or confiscation or whatever will work then we will support it.
Robertson Grant: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Robertson Grant: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 24 March 2010. Volume:661;Page:9832. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 I want to take the opportunity to go through one or two of the amendments I am proposing to the Education Amendment Bill because I think it is important to set the context for the Committee for why we are bringing forward these amendments. It will not be a surprise to members to realise that most of the amendments arise from the earlier version of this bill which was put forward under the previous Government. We have heard a lot of talk recently about the importance of information and about the importance of parents knowing what is happening in schools and understanding how schools work. 
Progress reported. 
Report adopted.