edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Banks John: Motions — 2012 Paralympic Games—Success of New Zealand Team 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Banks John: Motions — 2012 Paralympic Games—Success of New Zealand Team 
[Sitting date: 11 September 2012. Volume:683;Page:5033. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon JOHN BANKS (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 The extraordinary television coverage that we saw on the news at night was of the elation of the New Zealand winners with their gold silver and bronze medals. The sheer elation on their faces said everything about the quality of themselves their family supporters their team-mates and the whole of the country. I rise on behalf of the ACT Party to give our warmest congratulations to the New Zealand Paralympics Team on its outstanding achievements in 2012. The team brought home a total of 17 medals including six gold seven silver and four bronze. Per capita country entered it must have been one of the highest. 
The Paralympians are an inspiration for all of us. They live with disabilities that many people would think would hold them back but instead they have gone on to participate and succeed in sport at the very highest level. I hope their success is of particular inspiration to young people living with disabilities who need to know that they can achieve anything with the support of the community with the support of their families and with the support of their country. Swimmer Sophie Pascoe is to be congratulated on her remarkable success in the swimming pool. She alone won half of New Zealand’s total gold medals. I am reminded this afternoon of my old friend from Whangarei Murdoch Ross who has cerebral palsy. A sign on his wall which has been there for the last 50 years says it all does it not: “Obstacles are what you see when you look away from the goal.” This attitude has truly done New Zealand proud at the Paralympics 2012.
Turia Tariana: Motions — 2012 Paralympic Games—Success of New Zealand Team 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Turia Tariana: Motions — 2012 Paralympic Games—Success of New Zealand Team 
[Sitting date: 11 September 2012. Volume:683;Page:5032. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon TARIANA TURIA (Co-Leader—Maori Party) 
: 
 I am really delighted to be able to share with every party in the House today the pride and excitement that we have experienced over these last 2 weeks with the amazing success of the New Zealand team at the London 2012 Paralympics. Yesterday as I landed at Whakatane Airport I arrived at the same time as a reception was being extended to welcome home Ngati Awa and Te Arawa mountain bike superstar Karen Hanlen. In reflecting on her meteoric climb to the London Paralympics she said her approach was built upon the philosophy that pain is temporary and pride is for ever. It is a philosophy that every single one of the 24 New Zealand athletes who competed at the Paralympics has demonstrated in abundance. 
These stars of many sports including cycling shooting swimming and shot-put have shown the world that even when others have said they could not the determination of these athletes revealed that they could and they are. In doing so they have lifted our collective pride. They have shown us all what we are capable of if only we believe. Our Paralympians are true champions for they have persevered. They have withstood every challenge and they have invested every moment of their lives in representing Aotearoa on the international sporting stage. In doing so they have shattered stereotypes and shifted perceptions. They have demonstrated that it is not the disability that defines them; it is the way they deal with the challenges that that disability presents them with. Within the disability sector we often talk about the aspiration to live a good life an ordinary life a life unburdened by the stigma and discrimination of a disabling society. The New Zealand Paralympian squad goes that one step further and reminds us that the only difference between the impossible and the possible lies in the spirit of determination. 
There have been some truly remarkable achievements in London. The talents of Sophie Pascoe left us in no doubt of the power of having a dream. Phillipa Gray Mary Fisher and Laura Thompson were not content with the honour of a gold medal; they went on and won silver and bronze as well. These are truly multi-performers. The former Disabled Maori Sportsperson of the Year Cameron Leslie not only earned gold in the Olympic swimming pool he is also a member of the New Zealand Wheel Blacks’ successful rugby squad. Each of our 24 stars and each of their coaches and managers and their families around us could teach us all about the power of positive thinking. The Maori Party applauds the New Zealand Paralympic squad for and congratulates it on their amazing success. Tenatatou katoa.
Urgent Debates Declined — Environment Canterbury—Regional Council Elections 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Urgent Debates Declined — Environment Canterbury—Regional Council Elections 
[Sitting date: 11 September 2012. Volume:683;Page:5050. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Urgent Debates Declined 
Environment Canterbury—Regional Council Elections 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have also received a letter from Grant Robertson seeking to debate the announcement made by the Minister for the Environment and the Minister of Local Government that the election for Environment Canterbury will not occur until 2016 with a review occurring in 2014. These are both particular cases of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. I would have been inclined to accept either one of them. 
However there can be only one such debate on any one day. The Standing Orders provide that in these circumstances the Speaker must determine which is the most urgent and important. I have concluded given the more immediate significance of the Government’s decision to delay the sale of shares in Mighty River Power that it should have priority. 
Legislation has now been introduced to implement the Government’s decision to extend the Canterbury Regional Council’s governance arrangement and special water management decision-making powers. Consideration of this bill will provide an opportunity to debate the timing of the next election for Environment Canterbury.
Peters Winston: Motions — 2012 Paralympic Games—Success of New Zealand Team 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Peters Winston: Motions — 2012 Paralympic Games—Success of New Zealand Team 
[Sitting date: 11 September 2012. Volume:683;Page:5032. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 The London Paralympics were a great success and particularly so for our New Zealand team. New Zealand First stands with all parties here today in congratulating our paralympians on their efforts and great achievements.
Hague Kevin: Motions — 2012 Paralympic Games—Success of New Zealand Team 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hague Kevin: Motions — 2012 Paralympic Games—Success of New Zealand Team 
[Sitting date: 11 September 2012. Volume:683;Page:5032. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
KEVIN HAGUE (Green) 
: 
 I wish to add the Green Party’s congratulations to our Paralympic team. To compete at the elite level in any sport requires determination commitment and sacrifice. Our Paralympic team had those attributes in spades. These Paralympics perhaps mark the point not only in this country but in others around the world where Paralympic sport is seen as elite sport in its own right. That is a great milestone to have reached. I share the concerns that David Shearer has just expressed about the decisions made by the sports editors of our media. I cite Richard Boock’s column in the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 where he noted that the media had misjudged the public mood our desire to actually see our paralympian team competing on the world stage. Our team has been an inspiration to people living with disabilities. They have been an inspiration to those of us who look out the window and decide we do not want to go to training because it is too hilly or it is raining or we just cannot be bothered. They have also unlocked a gateway for the New Zealand public in that we may finally now honour the rights of people with disabilities to be full members of our own society. Thank you.
Shearer David: Motions — 2012 Paralympic Games—Success of New Zealand Team 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Shearer David: Motions — 2012 Paralympic Games—Success of New Zealand Team 
[Sitting date: 11 September 2012. Volume:683;Page:5031. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DAVID SHEARER (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 I also would like to join in congratulating our Paralympic team. It was a great moment to able to stand here and say that today New Zealand is on top of the world and that means that our medal total per capita was actually the best in the world which is a remarkable achievement. 
The incredible performance of our paralympians in London has been something that has made us very very proud. When our team comes home tomorrow it will bring with it 17 medals: six gold seven silver and four bronze. That is an absolute triumph and it is a significant improvement on the Beijing Paralympics when New Zealand was ranked third for medals per capita. This achievement reflects the hard work the dedication and the commitment of the Kiwi contingent. 
I would like to pay tribute to the efforts of the entire team of 24 athletes from 13-year-old Nikita Howarth who made her debut in swimming to Jan Apel who also made her Paralympics debut in sailing at the age of 61 which is an enormous inspiration to us all. Our athletes performed brilliantly across all of the events—swimming cycling rowing athletics equestrian sailing and shooting—and I would particularly like to mention the achievements of Christchurch swimming sensation Sophie Pascoe who won a medal in every event that she entered. It was a proud moment to see Sophie carry the flag into the stadium for the closing ceremony. She absolutely deserved the honour. Our team overall did us proud. I was lucky enough to meet swimmer Mary Fisher at the Upper Hutt “cossie club” just before she left for the games and I was struck by her commitment and the amount of hard work that she had put in to get where she was. She went on to win four medals including a gold. 
One disappointment for me however and I am sure for many other New Zealanders was that we were not able to see many of these achievements of all our team live on television as people did in other countries. We had to rely on delayed coverage or an international feed that did not focus on our Kiwi team. That is a shame and I hope it is different for the next Paralympics. To be able to see our athletes triumphing over personal adversity to excel at their chosen sport is an inspiration to us all. 
So I would like to thank our athletes and pay special tribute to all the unsung heroes around them: the coaches the physios the volunteers—all those people who put in enormous amounts of time so they could succeed. Thank you and congratulations on your success.
Peters Winston: Urgent Debates — State-owned Energy Companies Sales—Delay of Mighty River Power Sale 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Peters Winston: Urgent Debates — State-owned Energy Companies Sales—Delay of Mighty River Power Sale 
[Sitting date: 11 September 2012. Volume:683;Page:5062. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think the public want to hear more of this confused legal babble so I move an extension of time for Mr Finlayson.
McCully Murray: Motions — 2012 Paralympic Games—Success of New Zealand Team 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
McCully Murray: Motions — 2012 Paralympic Games—Success of New Zealand Team 
[Sitting date: 11 September 2012. Volume:683;Page:5031. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon MURRAY McCULLY (Minister for Sport and Recreation) 
: 
 I seek leave to move a motion without notice congratulating the Paralympic team on its performance at the recent Paralympic Games. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none. 
Hon MURRAY McCULLY 
: I move  
That this House congratulate the members of the 2012 New Zealand Paralympic team on their outstanding performance achieving six gold seven silver and four bronze medals and finishing ranked 21st in the world. 
 The 2012 New Zealand Paralympic campaign can be judged a real success and on behalf of the Government I want to acknowledge all of the athletes who were members of the team and congratulate them collectively on their achievement. 
I want to mention in particular Sophie Pascoe who added significantly to her previous successes on the international stage collecting three gold and three silver medals and setting two new world records and one new Paralympic record. We saw outstanding performances from a number of other athletes who were part of the New Zealand team. The achievement of 17 medals is all the more admirable when you note that there were only 24 in the team. On top of that New Zealand has come out as the leading nation per capita up on third at the Beijing Paralympics. 
The 2012 Paralympics broke a number of records with 2.7 million spectators filling the various venues and more than $70 million raised in ticket sales. Both of these are unprecedented figures. Two hundred and fifty-one world records were broken over 11 days. For our people to have succeeded in an environment this challenging is a very significant achievement indeed. I am therefore pleased to offer on behalf of the Government our congratulations to all of the members of the 2012 Paralympic team as well as their coaches support staff and families who played such an important part in their performance.
Urgent Debates — State-owned Energy Companies Sales—Delay of Mighty River Power Sale 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Urgent Debates — State-owned Energy Companies Sales—Delay of Mighty River Power Sale 
[Sitting date: 11 September 2012. Volume:683;Page:5049. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Urgent Debates 
State-owned Energy Companies Sales—Delay of Mighty River Power Sale 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Hon Clayton Cosgrove seeking to debate the Government’s decision to delay the initial public offering of up to 49 percent of Mighty River Power until March-June 2013.
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4778. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
1. 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee 
: On what date will submissions on the Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading and Other Matters) Amendment Bill close? 
TODD McCLAY (Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee) 
: 
 I thank the member for her interest in this bill. Subject to confirmation of the committee submissions on the bill will close on 10 September 2012. 
Moana Mackey 
: Did he consult with the committee before setting the closing date; if not why not? 
TODD McCLAY 
: Traditionally committee chairs have made a call for public submissions where there is a delay between the referral of legislation and the committee meeting or where a committee has a more focused time period for consideration of the bill. This is done under Standing Order 192. It was my view that given the report-back date that was set by Parliament the public should be given every opportunity to comment on this bill in the time available and therefore submissions were called for.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Accident Compensation Corporation—Reports into Release of Personal Information and Governance KiwiRail—Performance Child Poverty—Expert Advisory Group Report 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Accident Compensation Corporation—Reports into Release of Personal Information and Governance KiwiRail—Performance Child Poverty—Expert Advisory Group Report 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4779. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think the member has highlighted why perhaps the matter does not meet the bar for an urgent debate today. The member has acknowledged that in the case referred to earlier a significant proportion of the board of ACC resigned. If that had happened in response to this report then I think the matter would have met the requirement for an urgent debate. But as the member himself has pointed out the time frame for responding to or implementing the proposals is up to 2 years. There will be many opportunities over that time to hold the Government to account on how it is responding if that is in fact the time frame. That is why the application was therefore declined. 
I have also received a letter from Brendan Horan seeking to debate the state of New Zealand’s rail network following issues revealed in the  
Infrastructure and Engineering Business Plan 2012-2015  
report by KiwiRail. The release of the report is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. However as I have already indicated the release of a report on its own is not necessarily sufficient to justify the setting aside of the business of the House for an urgent debate. In recent times there have been a number of questions about the performance of KiwiRail and the House has other specific procedures for examining the performance and current operations of State enterprises. Again I am not convinced that the setting aside of the business of the House for an urgent debate today is warranted. This application is therefore also declined. 
I have received a third application from Jacinda Ardern seeking to debate the Children’s Commissioner’s expert advisory group’s issues and options paper. The release of the report is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. However it is an issues and options report and working through it may well take some time. The urgent debate procedure is a means of holding the Government accountable for its actions. The time for such a debate may be when the Government response is known. The application is therefore also declined.
Little Andrew: Urgent Debates Declined — Accident Compensation Corporation—Reports into Release of Personal Information and Governance KiwiRail—Performance Child Poverty—Expert Advisory Group Report 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Little Andrew: Urgent Debates Declined — Accident Compensation Corporation—Reports into Release of Personal Information and Governance KiwiRail—Performance Child Poverty—Expert Advisory Group Report 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4778. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
ANDREW LITTLE (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Just two points on your ruling. The debate on 20 June related to the rapid departure of a number of members of the board of ACC. That raised an obvious question about the governance that was left to look after that corporation given its importance. But also particularly the report from the Privacy Commissioner and Malcolm Crompton who was the external independent adviser to that review has laid out a timetable for implementation of the recommendations that spans 2 years. With all due respect I submit that it would be unreasonable for us to have to wait that length of time before we can debate what are very very important recommendations at a very important time over very serious events for a very important public body.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Accident Compensation Corporation—Reports into Release of Personal Information and Governance KiwiRail—Performance Child Poverty—Expert Advisory Group Report 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Accident Compensation Corporation—Reports into Release of Personal Information and Governance KiwiRail—Performance Child Poverty—Expert Advisory Group Report 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4778. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from Andrew Little seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the report commissioned by the Privacy Commissioner and the ACC’s board  
Independent Review of ACC’s Privacy and Security of Information 
 and the report by the Controller and Auditor-General  
Inquiry into aspects of ACC’s Board-level governance 
 their findings and the Government’s response to them. The release of the report is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. The big hurdle to get over in applications for urgent debates is whether the matter has reached the stage where the business of the House ought to be set aside. Although the release of a report may warrant an urgent debate this must be exceptional especially where working through a report’s recommendations may take some time. An urgent debate on the release by ACC of private details of ACC clients was held on 20 March this year. The member in his application has not authenticated any response yet from the Government to those reports. In these circumstances I am not persuaded that the setting aside of the business of the House for an urgent debate can be justified today.
Dean Jacqui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dean Jacqui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4776. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
11. 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) 
 to the  
Minister of State Services 
: What reports has he received on New Zealanders’ satisfaction with public services? 
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of State Services) 
: 
 Later today I will be releasing the State Services Commission’s Kiwis Count update which measures New Zealanders’ satisfaction with 42 frequently used public services across 10 service groups. I am delighted to advise the House that New Zealanders’ satisfaction with their public services has improved across the board. Each and every service group measured in 2009 and 2012 saw a satisfaction increase. The results indicate that New Zealanders are more satisfied with the Government’s provision of health education justice environment and recreation services to name just a few. 
Jacqui Dean 
: What does the survey indicate about the public’s experience of front-line services? 
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN 
: Public satisfaction—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I apologise to the Minister. On both questions so far he has not even opened his mouth before there was unnecessary interjection. It is not reasonable. 
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN 
: Public satisfaction with front-line services is improving—for example the survey shows that the public is more satisfied with the provision of superannuation the quality of hospital emergency services receiving outpatient care and the quality of services at the border. New Zealanders reported high levels of satisfaction even in their interactions with the Inland Revenue Department. 
Jacqui Dean 
: What else does this survey indicate about what Kiwis value in their public services? 
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN 
: The survey specifically indicates that the public places a high premium on value for taxpayer spend. The improvements in this area demonstrate that the Government is delivering on its election commitment to provide better public services. This means a happy public a happy Government and an unhappy Opposition.
Stewart Barbara: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Stewart Barbara: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4772. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
8. 
BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: What reports if any has he received regarding the enrolment into the Midwifery First Year of Practice Programme? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) 
: 
 I have received a number of reports all of which showed that virtually all midwifery graduates enter the Midwifery First Year of Practice programme. Those who do not are either on maternity leave themselves or travelling overseas after their studies. The member will be interested to know that for the first time last year the Government fully funded the Midwifery First Year of Practice programme for every graduate. 
Barbara Stewart 
: Does he believe that the voluntary Midwifery First Year of Practice programme with only 32 hours of supervision over 1 year is sufficient for all midwives to feel confident during all births and to recognise all birthing complications in a time frame that will prevent serious birthing incidents? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The Midwifery First Year of Practice programme should be viewed in the context of the changes that have been made in midwifery in the last few years. The member will be aware that some of those changes include that their time of training under supervision while studying has gone from 1500 hours over the course of the programme to 2400 hours over the course of the programme. In their third year trainee midwives have to spend 1280 hours of clinical training under the supervision of an independent mentor. 
Barbara Stewart 
: Does he have any plans to ensure that a midwife’s first year out of graduation is completed in a level two or three hospital environment to ensure “significant post-graduate monitoring supervision and education updates before going into private practice.” as recommended by the Health Committee recommendation nine following petition 2008/23 of Jennifer Maree Hooper? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: Quite a lot of work is going into providing confidence to New Zealanders around maternity services. Indeed we have released the maternity quality and safety programme which is a very important part of that. What I would say specifically to the member with her question is that she should not have a view that midwifery graduates do not get some hospital-based experience during their undergraduate years. The Government is determined to work positively with the profession to provide that confidence that mothers fathers and their families would want.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4771. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
7. 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
 to the  
Minister for State Owned Enterprises 
: Has he seen the advice from Tower Investments Chief Executive Sam Stubbs that a delay in a float of Mighty River Power until early next year could increase demand for the shares; if so what harm would be done by delaying the sales while the Treaty partners negotiate a solution to recognise Maori rights and interests in water? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister for State Owned Enterprises) 
: 
 Yes I have seen those comments. There are three implications from delaying a sale I would respond to the member. The first is that we have only so many market windows to float these companies each year and it has been the Government’s preferred option to have the first float in the second window of 2012. Secondly we could very well end up having to borrow more. Thirdly the Crown will have to incur substantial expenditure a second time in the event that the sale is delayed and some of the complex work has to be repeated. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: What advice has he received regarding the Waitangi Tribunal’s view that if the Crown proceeds with its shares sale without first preserving its ability to recognise Maori rights the Crown will be in breach of the Treaty and how will this impact on the share sales process? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The Government has received the 300-page report from the tribunal we are receiving a large amount of advice on the tribunal’s views and those views are going to be considered by the Government. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: What advice has he received about the concept of “shares plus”—the additional rights sought in electricity-generating companies? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The Waitangi Tribunal has set out its views on the possibility of a “shares plus” arrangement. The Government is getting advice from both its legal and its commercial advisers on that proposal. But as I said we are taking an open mind as we consider the report of the Waitangi Tribunal.
Sabin Mike: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Sabin Mike: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4771. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
6. 
MIKE SABIN (National—Northland) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development 
: What recent announcements has she made to require those on benefits with work-test obligations to be ready and work available? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development) 
: 
 Today we have announced that—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! That is not reasonable. There is no way I could hear the Minister’s answer with that noise. 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: Today we announced that from July 2013 beneficiaries with full or part-time work obligations will be sanctioned if they refuse job opportunities that require a drug test or if they fail a drug test. Labour members can cry out but for 9 long years they let beneficiaries sit on welfare with no tests whatsoever and it is acceptable to them for those people to sit there and have recreational drug-use and not actually have any obligations under that. 
Mike Sabin 
: What evidence is there to point to the fact that drug use is a barrier for those on benefits seeking work? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: There is no doubt that we have a problem with recreational drug-use in New Zealand. Ministry of Health research shows that around 20 percent of beneficiaries use drugs at least once a week and that those receiving an unemployment benefit were around three times more likely to be regular cannabis users than those not on welfare yet over 40 percent of the jobs we are asking beneficiaries to apply for require a drug test. At the end of the day I believe that the majority of the New Zealand public shares the very reasonable expectation that people do not let their illegal recreational drug-use get in the way of a job. 
Mike Sabin 
: How will this policy change support greater employment opportunities for those on benefit? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: Requiring beneficiaries to be work-ready available and drug-free will certainly improve employment opportunities giving greater confidence to employers to take them on. Many employers have publicly stated that they have problems recruiting people off benefits and into work because of their recreational drug-use. This is particularly prevalent in industries like forestry and construction and unfortunately particularly in regions like the member’s own Northland and the East Coast and the central North Island.
Ngaro Alfred: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Ngaro Alfred: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4769. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
4. 
ALFRED NGARO (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: What steps is she taking to get tough on child pornography? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 We are delivering on our promise to increase maximum penalties for child pornography offences and futureproofing our laws against advances in technology to help prevent this despicable crime. We will increase the maximum prison sentence for possession importation or exporting of an objectionable publication from 5 years to 10 years and we will increase the maximum sentence for distributing or making an objectionable publication from 10 years to 14 years. To update the law to take account of new technology we are creating a new offence of indecent communication with a child. This includes texting online and verbal communication and intentionally viewing objectionable material on the internet will be an offence even if it is not downloaded on to a computer. 
Alfred Ngaro 
: Why are these changes necessary? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Child pornography involves the sexual abuse and exploitation of children. By increasing the maximum penalties for offences we are showing how seriously we view this type of offence. The internet social networking and mobile technology have made children more vulnerable to people involved in the production distribution and possession of child pornography. Our laws to protect children from these predators have not kept up with technology and there is currently a gap in the law. 
Alfred Ngaro 
: What other steps is she taking to help protect children? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: We are also considering the Law Commission’s recommendations on minimising the harm of cyber-bullying of our children and young people. Their lives are increasingly enmeshed in social media and they are particularly at risk of cyber-bullying. In the coming weeks the Government will also make final decisions about public protection orders and legislation will be introduced to the House soon after.
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4840. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Mana 1. 
Part 1 agreed to.
Roy Eric: Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4834. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Dr Megan Woods. [ 
Interruption 
]
Hayes John: Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hayes John: Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4838. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JOHN HAYES (National—Wairarapa) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Roy Eric: Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4830. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: I am going to the Hon David Cunliffe.
McClay Todd: Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
McClay Todd: Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4826. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) 
: 
 I have just said to my colleague beside me the senior Government whip Michael Woodhouse to wake up. You are not allowed to sleep in this House. He said that it was not his fault—he had listened to the beginning the middle and the end of the speech from the last member David Clark. How is it that two MPs from Dunedin one from Dunedin North and another MP representing Dunedin South can have such a different grasp of reality when it comes to issues as important to New Zealanders as this? One is grounded in reality and one in the area of fanciful land and of course it is Mr Woodhouse who has his feet firmly on the ground. 
What we heard from the last speaker in this debate was wishful thinking. The one point that I take from what Mr Clark said was to impose more tax. He said: “Impose more tax.” He said that David Shearer is right; impose more tax. Well he is actually not right he is left but he is so much further left than what people in this country want at this time that it concerns me greatly for members opposite who believe that their leader is right. Impose more tax on New Zealanders. 
We heard about a capital gains tax—capital gains tax. We heard about it again recycled from the last election—a capital gains tax on all businesses and farms on all houses on beach houses on everything that New Zealanders own. Those members will stand up in this Chamber and say: “No no. That wasn’t what we meant before the last election. Indeed we had a good plan before the last election and New Zealanders just didn’t understand it.” We hear that from the Labour Opposition all the time. I would say that not only did New Zealanders understand but they rejected imposing more tax they rejected an unfair capital gains tax and they elected the policy that is before us delivered by the honourable Minister in the chair the Minister of Revenue. 
The Finance and Expenditure Committee had an opportunity to hear from all New Zealanders on this piece of legislation the Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill and on Part 1 and we took extra time as we often do in the Finance and Expenditure Committee to listen to those submitters on their views. Although there were a range of views I believe that the bill that has been brought back to this Committee clearly follows the views of those whom we heard from from all around New Zealand. Those views were simple. They were that David Shearer is wrong—do not impose more unnecessary tax we do not want a capital gains tax; it will penalise us. We want a tax system that will benefit New Zealanders and give them an opportunity to invest in themselves and go forward. I commend this wonderful piece of legislation that the Minister of Revenue has brought to the House.
Finlayson Christopher: National War Memorial Park (Pukeahu) Empowering Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Finlayson Christopher: National War Memorial Park (Pukeahu) Empowering Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4824. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage) 
: 
 I move  
That the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee report the bill to the House on or before 18 September 2012 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 188 and 191(1)(b) and (c). 
Motion agreed to.
Vote: National War Memorial Park (Pukeahu) Empowering Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: National War Memorial Park (Pukeahu) Empowering Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4824. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the National War Memorial Park (Pukeahu) Empowering Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 105 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 14 
Green Party 13; Mana 1. 
Bill read a first time. 
Bill referred to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee.
Roy Eric: National War Memorial Park (Pukeahu) Empowering Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: National War Memorial Park (Pukeahu) Empowering Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4820. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Charles Chauvel is this a split call? 
Charles Chauvel 
: It is Mr Deputy Speaker. Thank you. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Thank you. Charles Chauvel. [ 
Interruption 
]
Robertson H V Ross: National War Memorial Park (Pukeahu) Empowering Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Robertson H V Ross: National War Memorial Park (Pukeahu) Empowering Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4811. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Just before I call the next member can I just advise members about the use of electronic devices. When not being used for notes to refresh memories when members are speaking in the debate they should be placed on the drop-down work surface so that they in no way obstruct or interfere with the Speaker’s view of the House or any of its members.
King Annette: National War Memorial Park (Pukeahu) Empowering Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
King Annette: National War Memorial Park (Pukeahu) Empowering Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4809. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Labour—Rongotai) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I wonder whether you could give the member who has just resumed his seat the Hon John Banks the opportunity to correct his  
Hansard 
 in that it was not Labour that passed the Resource Management Act—
Robertson H V Ross: National War Memorial Park (Pukeahu) Empowering Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Robertson H V Ross: National War Memorial Park (Pukeahu) Empowering Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4809. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order! That is a debatable issue and the member is a very very experienced one.
Vote: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4803. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 72 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Mana 1. 
Bill read a third time.
Roy Eric: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4799. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Just before I call the member this is a split call is it? 
Rino Tirikatene 
: Yes it is 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Thank you.
Roy Eric: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4793. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Andrew Williams.
Roy Eric: Reports — Inquiry into the Identification Rehabilitation and Care and Protection of Child Offenders 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Reports — Inquiry into the Identification Rehabilitation and Care and Protection of Child Offenders 
[Sitting date: 29 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4938. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Members our bell sounds a bit feeble this morning. I will see how we go.
Calder Cam: Legislation Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Calder Cam: Legislation Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 29 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4958. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
: 
 It is a great pleasure to take a very brief call today on the Legislation Bill. I commend the work of Charles Chauvel and also the work he does on the Justice and Electoral Committee which I am on with him. As the Hon Chris Finlayson observed in his opening introductory remarks legislation not case law is the major source of law in the land today and this legislation has assumed increasing importance for Governments and thereby the people ruled by those Governments over the last 200 years. It is exceptionally important as many speakers have pointed out that this legislation is easily understood and is easily accessible. 
This Legislation Bill is the Government’s main response to two Law Commission reports. The first Law Commission report focused on these very issues of how to make our Acts of Parliament more up to date more accessible and more user-friendly so people can find the legislation appropriate to them and understand the law appropriate to them. The other report looked at the status and function of the Parliamentary Counsel Office. All members of the House sitting in select committees appreciate the work done by the Parliamentary Counsel Office. 
The Legislation Bill will modernise and improve the law relating to the publication of legislation which is an essential function of the Parliamentary Counsel Office. As we have heard the bill brings together for the first time the law on drafting on publication and on disallowance of legislation. It ensures that legislation is made available to the public appropriately and conveniently. So basically we come back to this major theme of clearer easier access to appropriate law for the people of this country. I commend the bill to the House.