edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:666;Page:13898] 
1. 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee 
: How many submissions were received on the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) as at 5 p.m. Monday 13 September 2010? 
DAVID BENNETT (Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee) 
: 
 I am unable to state the precise number of submissions that were received on that bill as at 5 p.m. of that day. However 200 submissions and six cartons containing hundreds of form submissions have now been received. 
Darien Fenton 
: How many of those submissions have requested an oral hearing and is he satisfied that the committee has sufficient time— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I apologise to the member. I am really struggling to hear her. I apologise that the sound system is letting her down but could she just speak a little more slowly. I must be able to hear the supplementary question because there is a tendency for some supplementary questions to be out of order. I would hate to judge the member’s question wrongly. 
Darien Fenton 
: How many of those submissions have requested an oral hearing and is he satisfied that the committee has sufficient time to hear and consider all of those submissions before the report back date of 7 November for a bill that is due to come into force on April Fool’s Day 2011? 
DAVID BENNETT 
: I am unaware of how many have requested an oral hearing but I am sure the committee will find that out in due course.
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:666;Page:13898] 
12. 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Labour 
: Does she stand by all of the statements made on her behalf in response to question for oral answer No. 11 on 9 September 2010? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 Yes. 
Darien Fenton 
: What specific changes is she considering to collective bargaining? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: There are currently no plans to implement any changes to collective bargaining at this point other than the provisions— 
Darien Fenton 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: I apologise to the Minister for interrupting. I would like to go right back to the start and have Darien Fenton repeat her question because I struggled to hear it and I ask the Minister whether she could speak a little closer to her microphone because it is difficult to hear her. 
Darien Fenton 
: What specific changes is she considering to collective bargaining? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: There are no plans to implement any changes to collective bargaining at this time except for changes that have already been signalled in the amendment bill that is currently before the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. 
Darien Fenton 
: If she stands by the statement given on her behalf that any changes to employment laws would “take into account all the issues for the benefit of employees and employers equally” then how is a law that allows employees to be fired at will with no reason having to be given and with no right to an unjustifiable dismissal claim equally to the benefit of employees and employers? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: The 90-day trial provisions which have been very successful and have been generally and universally accepted do not take away rights. In fact several rights are maintained and enhanced. The trial period gives opportunities for employees to get their foot in the door and get a job which I would have thought that that member applauds. 
Darien Fenton 
: What does she say to the warning from Dr Judy McGregor Equal Employment Opportunities Commissioner for the Human Rights Commission that the 90-day trial law “offends against natural justice the presumption of the law in favour of procedural fairness and a commitment to a fair go for employees.”? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: It will probably come as no surprise to that member that I do not agree with the comments made by Dr Judy McGregor.
Adams Amy: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Adams Amy: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:666;Page:13897] 
11. 
AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) 
 to the  
Minister of Agriculture 
: What is the Government doing to support the rural Canterbury community through the earthquake recovery? 
Hon DAVID CARTER (Minister of Agriculture) 
: 
 The Government has moved urgently to assist rural Canterbury in its earthquake recovery. We have formed a rural recovery group involving organisations such as Federated Farmers Fonterra banks insurance companies and Irrigation New Zealand. To assist this group we have employed a rural recovery coordinator who has specific responsibility for overseeing quake recovery efforts and establishing exactly what extra Government assistance might be needed. 
Amy Adams 
: What is the level and scale of earthquake damage in rural Canterbury? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: A full stocktake of damage is still being undertaken but current estimates are that 300 to 400 farms have sustained some damage with approximately 100 to 150 of those quite badly damaged. Damage primarily involves buildings silos that have tipped over inoperable dairy sheds and some ground cracking. A major concern is the impact the quake might have had on underground irrigation infrastructure and we are currently working to ascertain the extent of this damage and what work will be needed to fix any damage prior to summer. 
Amy Adams 
: What further steps is the Government considering to support affected rural businesses and communities? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: Most farms are getting back to business as usual but it is clear that a number of rural properties have damage that may not be covered by insurance. Once the rural recovery coordinator provides the Government with a full picture of this damage we will consider whether any further assistance is warranted.
Vote: Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13957] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Noes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr Kennedy Graham to clause 6 be agreed to: 
to omit subclause (4)(l). 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendments in the name of Dr Kennedy Graham be agreed to: 
to omit from clause 7(3) “1 April 2012” and substitute “15 March 2011”; 
to omit from clause 15(1) “1 April 2012” and substitute “15 March 2011”; 
to omit from clause 17(b) “1 April 2012” and substitute “15 March 2011”; and 
to add to clause 17 the following subclause: 
(2)Despite subsection (1) if it appears by 15 March 2011 that further reconstruction is required the Minister by lodging a parliamentary notice of motion can extend the expiry provision for a further 6 months to 15 September 2011 and thereafter at 6 month intervals up to 1 April 2012.
Vote: Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13958] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Noes 112 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Amendments not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr Kennedy Graham be agreed to: 
to insert the following clause after clause 7: 
7AOrders in Council to be publicly available and presented to House of Representatives 
An Order in Council made under section 6 must be published within 24 hours of being made and presented to the House of Representatives on the next sitting day.
Goodhew Jo: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Goodhew Jo: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:666;Page:13895] 
9. 
JO GOODHEW (National—Rangitata) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: How were Canterbury schools affected by the 4 September earthquake and what is the current situation for schools in the region? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Schools in Christchurch City and in Waimakariri and Selwyn districts suffered a range of damage from the quake and aftershocks. Some suffered significant structural damage to buildings and grounds; others had no damage at all. Most schools were closed last week but I am pleased to advise that all but seven schools are now open and we expect almost all of these to be open by the end of this week. St Paul’s School and Halswell Primary School sustained severe damage and major work will need to be undertaken. St Paul’s School is expected to reopen temporarily on Monday at a ministry-owned property in Champion Street. Halswell Primary School is planning to open temporarily in the Halswell Residential College from tomorrow. I would like to take this opportunity to recognise all of the principals teachers trustees and ministry staff who deserve a huge amount of credit for making sure that schools can open for students. 
Jo Goodhew 
: What support has been given to schools and early childhood services following Canterbury’s earthquake and the subsequent aftershocks? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: The Ministry of Education’s traumatic incident teams have been made available to offer support for students and staff and workshops have been held for early childhood education services principals teachers and boards of trustee members to provide them with advice and guidance in preparation for the return of students and children. In addition the ministry has contacted all 400 parents with special-needs children to check on their current situation and needs. Advice and guidance have been provided and where required home visits are being made.
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:666;Page:13893] 
7. 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
 to the  
Minister of Transport 
: What is the Government doing to address challenges in delivering supplies into the area affected by the Canterbury earthquake? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport) 
: 
 As the member will be aware an enormous slip occurred last Friday night just south of Kaikoura blocking both State Highway 1 and the rail line. This has increased the challenge of moving supplies into Canterbury following the earthquake. The New Zealand Transport Agency KiwiRail and their contractors are working around the clock to clear the debris from the site. In the meantime the inland Kaikoura route 70 can be used by light vehicles buses and light trucks not towing trailers. All other traffic is using State Highway 63 through the Wairau Valley and State Highway 7 through the Lewis Pass to travel south to Christchurch. KiwiRail is trucking goods out of its Blenheim depot to Christchurch. 
Colin King 
: When are the road and the rail line expected to be reopened? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: Work is well under way to remove the estimated 30000 cubic metres of rock as well as to stabilise the slope from which the material has come. The full job will take about 5000 truck movements and another couple of days to remove enough material to reopen one lane of the highway to traffic on Thursday. Once the rail line is cleared temporary repairs can begin and it is expected to reopen on Friday. Work is concentrating on stabilising the face of the slip so that more material does not come down in the future.
Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 8 to Minister 
Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 8 to Minister 
[Volume:666;Page:13933] 
Amended Answers to Oral Questions 
Question No. 8 to Minister 
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Associate Minister of Health) 
: 
 I wish to make a personal explanation under Standing Order 349 in relation to an answer I gave during question time today. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN 
: In answering question No. 8 today I said that an extra $12.6 million was going into mental health services on the West Coast this year and that in terms of the Wairarapa there was another $7.8 million. What I should have said was that a total of $12.6 million was going into mental health services on the West Coast this year and that in terms of the Wairarapa there was a total of $7.8 million.
Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:666;Page:13886] 
2. 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he stand by his statement that “the vast majority” of people will be “better off” as a result of his tax switch on 1 October 2010? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Is the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research accurate when it says that around half of all households will end the year worse off than they were a year ago because rising prices the GST increase and other one-off charges more than offset personal tax cuts; if not in what respects is the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research inaccurate? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: No because a variety of different costs apply to a variety of different households. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Are the latest figures from Barfoot and Thompson which show that average weekly rents in Auckland have gone up by $20 accurate? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I could not comment on that. That is Barfoot and Thompson’s reflection. It may or may not be correct; I have not looked at it. But what I have been advised is that under the National Government rents have gone up at a fraction of the rate they went up under the Labour Government. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Is it correct that local government rates since the election have gone up on average by 6.4 percent and that GST will add an average $50 per year to everybody’s rates bills? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: It would be selective to look at that because one would also have to look at the personal tax cuts which will add about $28 a week more after all the costs of an average household rising to $41 by 2014. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Will GST add an estimated $7000 to $8000 to the price of the average new home bought by a homebuyer? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I do not have that number to hand but I can say that New Zealanders will be in a much better position to buy a home when they can keep more of their own income and they will do that under our personal tax cut plan. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: What additional burden will the increase in GST put on reconstruction costs in the Canterbury region from 1 October? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: The Earthquake Commission has made it clear that it will pay out the first $100000 on property and $20000 on contents at a GST rate of 15 percent; the bulk will be in that category and therefore will be covered. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Will the Prime Minister confirm that in fact the Government will add a further burden of $2500 for every $100000 spent during that reconstruction? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: No. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: I seek leave of the House to table the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research quarterly predictions for September 2010 which state that half of all households will be worse off by the end of the year then they were a year ago 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Coleman Jonathan: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 8 to Minister 
Coleman Jonathan: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 8 to Minister 
[Volume:666;Page:13933] 
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Associate Minister of Health) 
: 
 I wish to make a personal explanation under Standing Order 349 in relation to an answer I gave during question time today. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN 
: In answering question No. 8 today I said that an extra $12.6 million was going into mental health services on the West Coast this year and that in terms of the Wairarapa there was another $7.8 million. What I should have said was that a total of $12.6 million was going into mental health services on the West Coast this year and that in terms of the Wairarapa there was a total of $7.8 million.
Harawira Hone: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology (Storage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Harawira Hone: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology (Storage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13735] 
HONE HARAWIRA (Maori Party—Te Tai Tokerau) 
: 
 I forgot to record our party’s vote. I seek leave to record it. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: I say to the member that the only way votes can be recorded is if a member calls for a division and for a party vote. The situation the House is in now is that the vote has been called and I have declared the result. There was no call for a party vote. The Clerk has now read the bill a second time. The House is in a very difficult position to go back again. In order to be constructive I say to the member that if the member seeks leave to have the vote retaken and if every member of the House agrees then that is what will happen. 
HONE HARAWIRA 
: My apologies to the House. I seek leave to have the vote recast. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Is everybody clear on that? Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Young Jonathan: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology (Storage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Young Jonathan: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology (Storage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13735] 
JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) 
: 
 I am very pleased to stand in support of the Human Assisted Reproductive Technology (Storage) Amendment Bill. As we understand it this amendment bill is necessary because of the Government’s receipt of legal advice that fertility clinics acting in good faith may have unknowingly breached the storage limit because the law was not clear. It is incredibly important to have some clarity good sense and parameters around this bill. It is an issue that is full of concern emotion aspiration and disappointment for people so it is good that we have clarity and sense around it. We understand that a number of couples in New Zealand have great difficulty with fertility issues—20 percent has been the figure quoted—and it is great that we have the technology to assist them. 
Subsequent legal advice has raised concerns that the 10-year limit starts whenever a human sperm egg or embryo is stored. This means that any person who stores sperm eggs or embryos for more than 10 years is in breach of the Act. This bill now clarifies that situation. Sperm eggs and embryos stored before 2004 can be stored until 2014. If fertility clinics have clients who wish to extend storage beyond 2014 they will require approval from the Ethics Committee on Assisted Reproductive Technology before the 10-year storage limit is reached. 
This amendment bill brings some clarity to one particular issue that needed addressing and it does so with largely the support of the House. I am very pleased to support the bill. Thank you. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: The question is that the motion be agreed to. Those who support that motion will say Aye; to the contrary No. The Ayes have it.
Vote: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology (Storage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology (Storage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13736] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Human Assisted Reproductive Technology (Storage) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.  
Ayes 116 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 5 
Maori Party 5. 
Bill read a second time.
Goodhew Jo: Sittings of the House 
Goodhew Jo: Sittings of the House 
[Volume:666;Page:13722] 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to now rise for the dinner break since we have made such excellent progress this afternoon. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Sitting suspended from 5.59 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.
Henare Tau: Whanganui Iwi (Wanganui (Kaitoke) Prison and Northern Part of Wanganui Forest) On-account Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
Henare Tau: Whanganui Iwi (Wanganui (Kaitoke) Prison and Northern Part of Wanganui Forest) On-account Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13737] 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
: 
 I will leave the definition of “on account” to my learned colleague Paul Quinn. The Maori Affairs Committee recommended that the spelling of Wanganui be changed to “Whanganui” throughout the Whanganui Iwi (Wanganui Kaitoke (Prison) and Northern Part of Wanganui Forest) On-account Settlement Bill with the exception of the reference in clause 4 to the Corrections (Wanganui (Kaitoke) Prison) Notice 2008 but including clause 1 the title clause. We had fun in recommending that Wanganui be spelled with an “h” considering all of the hullabaloo over that. 
The agreement by the Crown to enter into an on-account settlement was an outcome of discussions between Ngati Apa and the working party to address concerns Whanganui hapu had with aspects of the Ngati Apa settlement as part of the overlapping claims consultation process. The bill in essence protects Whanganui iwi interests in the northern part of the Wanganui Forest and the half share in the land under Wanganui Prison. This may seem to be an innocuous piece of legislation but it gives an indication of some of the issues that come about in the negotiation of Treaty settlements. 
I will briefly say that the select committee had a very very good hearing up at Turakina Maori Girls College. It was supported very well by the Maori Party the Labour Party and of course the Government. I think what that says about the difficulties with Treaty settlements is that there is a possibility for there to be an agreement with two “conflicting” iwi. I am quite happy to stand here and speak on this bill. I will say that it was not a hard decision to put the “h” back where it belonged. I for one am very very pleased that our select committee in the interests of brotherly and sisterly love was able to come to an agreement on the spelling of “Whanganui”. Thank you.
Harawira Hone: Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Bill — Second Reading 
Harawira Hone: Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13714] 
HONE HARAWIRA (Maori Party—Te Tai Tokerau) 
: 
 The Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Bill is important in ensuring that security guards bouncers and doormen provide relevant police information wear authorised badges and hold licences or else cop fines of up to $60000. It was encouraging to see submissions from the industry itself calling for a private investigators’ code of conduct to be established. It may well be that further amendments are needed to make that happen in the interests of the rights and safety of both the public and security staff themselves. 
This bill is also important because many of the people engaged in the industry are Maori and Pacific Islanders many of whom were originally enticed into the business because of their size and menace without any serious consideration being given to the need for proper training—an area that hopefully will also be standardised within the industry from now on. I know from mixing with security personnel at various pubs clubs and sporting events around the north that many of them already undergo training as part of getting their formal New Zealand Qualifications Authority qualifications and that many are expected to get referees and even police checks. But I note that those standards differ between agencies and that in some cases staff have no qualifications at all nor are they encouraged to do anything about getting them. 
I also take this opportunity to speak briefly about facial ta moko and the difference in standards as they apply to people around the country who carry the moko. Some years back a Gisborne woman was banned from a bar because of her moko and last year one of Aotearoa’s leading ta moko artists Mark Kopua was banned from entering Christchurch’s Bourbon Street Bar because his moko was supposed to represent gang markings. In his response Mark Kopua said of his moko: “It’s my heritage where I’m from who my ancestors were it’s everything about me”. He laid a complaint and to its credit the Bourbon Street Bar apologised and created a new policy to ensure the same mistake would not be made again. Mind you my own view on this particular issue is that those who choose to wear the moko will do well to steer clear of places where drunkenness ignorance and violence are likely to degrade the mana of both the moko and the wearer. 
The Maori Party will support this bill at its second reading but also we will be advocating for the inclusion of clear cultural standards consistent with tikanga Maori to ensure that the boorish insults that Mark Kopua had to endure do not happen to others in the future. Kia ora tatou.
Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer 
Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer 
[Volume:666;Page:13683] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: In accordance with an agreement between the parties no questions have been lodged today.
Vote: State Sector Management Bill — First Reading 
Vote: State Sector Management Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13704] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That all the words after “Education and Science Committee” be omitted. 
Ayes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Noes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Wong Pansy: State Sector Management Bill — First Reading 
Wong Pansy: State Sector Management Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13703] 
Hon PANSY WONG (Minister for Ethnic Affairs) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of State Services 
: I move  
That the State Sector Management Bill be considered by the Education and Science Committee 
 that the committee report finally to the House on or before 24 November 2010 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) and 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 187 and 190(1)(b) and (c). 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: There is an amendment to the referral motion in the name of Grant Robertson to omit all the words after the words “Education and Science Committee”.
Vote: State Sector Management Bill — First Reading 
Vote: State Sector Management Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13703] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the State Sector Management Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 68 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Bill read a first time.
Bennett David: Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Bill — Second Reading 
Bennett David: Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13721] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 It is a sign of the mood of the House today that all political parties support the Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Bill. They see the need for reform in this area. The last reform of the legislation was many years ago in 1974; many of us were just young children at that time. 
The reform is necessary because this is practical legislation that impacts on a lot of people’s lives not only those working in those industries but also those taking advantage of the hospitality industry. They need to feel safe and secure in the environment that they are in. People working in the hospitality industry also need to feel that they have the right powers and responsibilities because public opinion of what is demanded in the hospitality trade and also public expectation of what somebody can or cannot do in that occupation have changed over time. There has also been a change in customers’ perceptions of what can and cannot be done to them should they get into a situation dealt with by security guards—or bouncers as security staff are more commonly known. 
This bill also deals with private investigators security technicians and other security-type arrangements. It sets out a code that although self-regulating to some extent is not aggressively restrictive or regulatory. In that way not too much expense is incurred in satisfying the public policy element that the bill seeks to provide for in its updated approach to the legislation. 
The parties in this House see this bill as something they would like to support and we thank them for that support as we work through the individual clauses. Opposition members have raised concerns over clause 66 and have talked about the amendments they would like in that area. I am sure those concerns will be discussed further as the bill goes through the political process and we will take into account the Opposition’s point of view on that area. 
Essentially this bill updates an area of our law that has for a long time been without the degree of modern regulation that it should have. It provides security for those in the industry and also for customers of organisations that provide that kind of security. We support the bill as it goes through this House. Thank you. 
Bill read a second time.
Norman Russel William: Motions — Fox Glacier—Light Aircraft Crash 
Norman Russel William: Motions — Fox Glacier—Light Aircraft Crash 
[Volume:666;Page:13681] 
Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 The Green Party joins with other parties in this House in extending our aroha our sympathy and love to the friends whanau and colleagues of the nine who were tragically killed at Fox Glacier a tight-knit town that has lost five of its own in one afternoon and is for ever joined in grief with four other families from around the world. With sudden and tragic loss of life it is often hard to comprehend; we struggle to make sense of these events when so many people with so much potential are suddenly lost. We send our thoughts out to the people of Fox Glacier and acknowledge the impact that this event will have had on them. To the families and loved ones of all four tourists who lost their lives we send our sincerest aroha and love. Kia kaha. Kia ora.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Earthquake Canterbury—Cabinet Committee on Canterbury Reconstruction 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Earthquake Canterbury—Cabinet Committee on Canterbury Reconstruction 
[Volume:666;Page:13684] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Hon Jim Anderton seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the decision to establish a Cabinet committee on Canterbury reconstruction and to allocate funding to the mayoral fund and emergency work on roading infrastructure. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility that requires the immediate attention of the House. However as the House has given leave to extend the time for the Prime Minister’s statement today along with the comments of other party leaders on the statement I am not persuaded that the business of the House should be further set aside today. The application is therefore declined.
Power Simon: Business of the House 
Power Simon: Business of the House 
[Volume:666;Page:13683] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the members from the Canterbury area who are absent from the precincts today to be regarded as present for the purposes of casting party votes this sitting day. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.
Dunne Peter: Motions — Fox Glacier—Light Aircraft Crash 
Dunne Peter: Motions — Fox Glacier—Light Aircraft Crash 
[Volume:666;Page:13683] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 Just as the peace and tranquillity of a crisp Canterbury morning were shattered early on Saturday by the brutality of the earthquake so too were the peace and tranquillity of a warm late winter’s afternoon in South Westland shattered by the horror of the air crash at Fox Glacier which killed nine people. I share the support of others for the motion of condolence to the friends and families of all those who lost their lives in that tragedy. I simply make the observation that around New Zealand as we value our great outdoors lifestyle these forms of adventure tourism take place day in and day out and often no second thought is given to the potential risk or danger involved. That is what makes a tragedy like what happened on Saturday afternoon all the more hard to comprehend. By all accounts a routine event went terribly terribly wrong and nine people lost their lives. It is not the time to speculate on the whys and wherefores; it is the time to concentrate on the consequences for the families and the affected communities to acknowledge their suffering and their sadness and to express as a Parliament our support for them at this difficult moment. 
Motion agreed to.
Questions for Oral Answer 
Questions for Oral Answer 
[Volume:666;Page:13683] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: In accordance with an agreement between the parties no questions have been lodged today.
Hide Rodney: Ministerial Statements — Earthquake—Canterbury 
Hide Rodney: Ministerial Statements — Earthquake—Canterbury 
[Volume:666;Page:13674] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 On behalf of the ACT Party I join with all members in this House to express our support for the people of Canterbury and to acknowledge the scale of the natural disaster in the region. 
As Minister of Local Government I take particular note of the role played by local government. It is a level of government as we have seen that is close to communities in a way that central government can never be in responding to a crisis such as this. Local government has done a magnificent job in Canterbury but the job has scarcely begun. Let me put on record for this House the fact that I have had calls from local councils around New Zealand offering services and support to the people of Canterbury. It was very heartening to realise that even councils way up in Northland were offering what services they could to the people of Canterbury. I also commend Mayor Bob Parker and his team in Christchurch and those in the Canterbury region. I also recognise the tremendous work of the civil defence teams. In doing that I acknowledge the leadership provided by my ministerial colleague the Hon John Carter and I thank him for the constant briefings that he was providing. 
It has been observed in this House that we are lucky that this disaster did not lead to loss of life and to even greater damage. As the leader of the Labour Party observed for that we have to thank the good fortune of the timing of the earthquake. But also we have to thank the development in New Zealand of world-class earthquake engineering standards with all the subtle innovations they entail. That the damage was not so much greater was due to the applied science of engineering and for that we as a country have much to be proud of. That applied science is directly responsible for saving many many lives. So too is the quality of the work of the building trades and it is now this sector the builders the plumbers the electricians and the engineers who will repair and rebuild our city. Highly varied teams of specialists in a range of business activities will restore infrastructure: those in our construction industry will be out there rebuilding the roads and the damaged bridges the lines companies will be restoring the power and the telecommunications companies will be ensuring that we remain connected and able to communicate. 
Central and local government will help and all taxpayers no doubt will contribute just as New Zealanders are now making voluntary contributions towards rebuilding our second-largest city. The people of Christchurch and the people of Canterbury have our support now and they will have it in the future as we work to rebuild their city and their towns. Thank you.
Graham Kennedy: Ministerial Statements — Earthquake—Canterbury 
Graham Kennedy: Ministerial Statements — Earthquake—Canterbury 
[Volume:666;Page:13673] 
Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party sends its condolences and aroha to the people of Canterbury. My colleague Russel Norman and I are leaving this Chamber within the next hour to fly south to inspect our parliamentary office for the first time and to lend a hand to our fellow citizens there in whatever way that we can. 
A catastrophic event such as the earthquake that rocked Christchurch in the depths of darkness on Saturday morning brings home with a sudden ferocity our human vulnerability before the powers of nature. It revealed in an instant the fragility of our buildings and of human life itself. It is deeply unsettling when a natural disaster of this magnitude strikes one’s own neighbourhood. The damage to my own home and its contents was miraculously light but others whom I know have fared less well including colleagues in this House. It is a surreal experience to go through certain areas of the city that appear to be normal and operating normally and to suddenly encounter damage to an unbelievable extent. One can almost feel the associated trauma that some people are experiencing so deeply not least because of the serious aftershocks that are still occurring. Our hearts go out to all of those most badly affected in their time of need in Selwyn Kaiapoi the city centre the eastern suburbs and elsewhere—indeed everywhere really. 
Yet the aftermath of this event has displayed the strength of the human spirit and the resilience of our local communities. We congratulate the Government and the city authorities on the manner in which they have all responded to the disaster to date. I have personally witnessed the kindness and support that Cantabrians have shared one with another yet we cannot underestimate the emotional disquiet that will follow this event. We must ensure that it brings this country as well as our own province together. I am confident that this nation will rise to the occasion and extend full support to Christchurch in the rebuilding of our city. 
This may be an opportunity for us as a nation to ensure that our rebuilding programme reflects state-of-the-art knowledge. Our modern earthquake-proof standards have been proven to be sound with the extraordinary result that no fatalities occurred compared with some other disaster areas elsewhere in the world. But we should also make sure that the rebuilding reflects updated methods of sustainable energy techniques and systems; we should make this setback a moment of opportunity. We in the Green Party look forward to working with both the Government and local communities to assist in every possible way. We have been confronted with disaster. Now we move to pick up the pieces regroup and rebuild and carry on even stronger than we were before.
Sittings of the House 
Sittings of the House 
[Volume:666;Page:13722] 
Sittings of the House 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to now rise for the dinner break since we have made such excellent progress this afternoon. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Sitting suspended from 5.59 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.
Urgent Debates Declined — Earthquake Canterbury—Cabinet Committee on Canterbury Reconstruction 
Urgent Debates Declined — Earthquake Canterbury—Cabinet Committee on Canterbury Reconstruction 
[Volume:666;Page:13684] 
Urgent Debates Declined 
Earthquake Canterbury—Cabinet Committee on Canterbury Reconstruction 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Hon Jim Anderton seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the decision to establish a Cabinet committee on Canterbury reconstruction and to allocate funding to the mayoral fund and emergency work on roading infrastructure. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility that requires the immediate attention of the House. However as the House has given leave to extend the time for the Prime Minister’s statement today along with the comments of other party leaders on the statement I am not persuaded that the business of the House should be further set aside today. The application is therefore declined.
Business of the House 
Business of the House 
[Volume:666;Page:13683] 
Business of the House 
Hon SIMON POWER (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the members from the Canterbury area who are absent from the precincts today to be regarded as present for the purposes of casting party votes this sitting day. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.
Vote: State Sector Management Bill — First Reading 
Vote: State Sector Management Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13704] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the State Sector Management Bill be considered by the Education and Science Committee that the committee report finally to the House on or before 24 November 2010 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) and 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 187 and 190(1)(b) and (c). 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Key John: Ministerial Statements — Earthquake—Canterbury 
Key John: Ministerial Statements — Earthquake—Canterbury 
[Volume:666;Page:13678] 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 I will take this moment to thank parliamentary leaders for their comments and their reflections. I often think that at times like this words are just hopelessly inadequate to reflect the pain the stress and the suffering that the people of Canterbury are going through. But indeed words and actions from not only members of this House but also people right across New Zealand are providing tremendous comfort to the people of Canterbury. They know that at this dark time they are not alone. They know that members of this House have their priorities in the right place and that we are working collaboratively and collectively for the betterment of the people of Christchurch and the surrounding areas. We are focused on solving their problems and putting party politics to one side. 
We have heard stories from a number of the leaders this afternoon that reflect the very human face of this natural disaster. In my own case there are two stories that I will remember. The first was when I received a text message from my sister at 4.41 on Saturday morning. It was a rather foreboding text and I knew that there would be quite a major problem in Canterbury from that point on. The second came on Monday morning as I came off my flight from Auckland. A grandmother came up to me at the airport and said: “Thank you for the work that you are doing and that Parliament is doing. I am going to Christchurch because my 5-year-old grandchild is terrified and can’t sleep.” 
In the end when we put back together the houses the roads the sewerage systems the schools and the broken businesses what will be left is a lot of people who live in Canterbury and who genuinely are fearful of the experience they have gone through and what it means for them. We must encourage all of them to recognise the trauma that they are suffering and the experience that they have gone through and not to be afraid to reach out and seek support from the agencies and from their families and their friends and not to be afraid to speak of the concerns that they most naturally have and are experiencing. 
I will take one final moment to acknowledge the notice of motion that my parliamentary colleague Mr Joyce will move in a moment concerning the other disaster that took place on Saturday which was the loss of nine lives at Fox Glacier. Fox Glacier is a very small community; it will feel those losses very personally. It is a great tragedy for New Zealand and for those who lost their lives. Four of those who perished on that day came from overseas and all of them were under 30—all of them were young. 
It was a very very difficult weekend for the South Island. Our thoughts our hearts and our prayers go to the people of the South Island.
Boscawen John: Motions — Fox Glacier—Light Aircraft Crash 
Boscawen John: Motions — Fox Glacier—Light Aircraft Crash 
[Volume:666;Page:13681] 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN (Deputy Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I rise today on behalf of the ACT Party to express our heartfelt sorrow at the deaths of Rodney Miller Chaminda Senadhira Adam Bennett Michael Suter and Christopher McDonald; and the young tourists: Patrick Byrne from Ireland Glenn Bourke from Australia Annita Kirsten from Germany and Brad Coker from England—the nine people killed when their plane crashed at Fox Glacier in the South Island on Saturday afternoon. This is the worst aviation disaster that New Zealand has suffered in the last 17 years. The ACT Party joins all other members of this House in sending our deepest condolences to the families friends and loved ones of those who lost their lives on that afternoon. The death of a loved one—be it a father a mother a brother a sister a son a daughter a partner or a friend—in such particularly tragic circumstances is one of the most painful ordeals that one can experience. My heart and the hearts of my caucus colleagues go out to the victims’ loved ones in their time of grief. 
On behalf of the ACT Party I wish to also express our deepest sympathies to the two young girlfriends who witnessed their boyfriends perish in that disaster. Anyone who has seen the television coverage over the last 24 to 48 hours cannot help but be moved by the interview given by the sister of Glenn Bourke. She talked about her own experiences of skydiving in New Zealand and how she encouraged her younger brother to come and to follow in her footsteps. 
No words of mine can mitigate the pain and the sorrow that the friends and the loved ones of the nine victims must be feeling but I hope they can take even a little solace in the knowledge that the thoughts of every member of this House indeed of the entire nation are with them at this terrible time and that Parliament has seen fit to honour the lives of their loved ones with this special motion this afternoon. Thank you.