edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Parker David: Appointments — Judicial Conduct Commissioner 
Parker David: Appointments — Judicial Conduct Commissioner 
[Volume:655;Page:4949] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I am happy to rise and endorse the recommendation by the Attorney-General that the Governor-General appoint Mr Gascoigne as the Judicial Conduct Commissioner. I thank the Attorney-General for the consultation prior to his putting forward the name of Mr Gascoigne. Mr Gascoigne is as one would expect of a person being promoted for this position a responsible senior lawyer with many years’ experience and with respect throughout the legal community and across both sides of the House. I was fortunate to have experience in dealing with Mr Gascoigne in his prior role as the chair of the Transpower board. I always found him to be a man of integrity and a man of his word. He never played any games. He was responsible and capable. Charles Chauvel will be able to confirm that he was a chairman of partners of Minter Ellison for a number of years. Mr Gascoigne is very experienced in the law and I am sure he will bring the wisdom that is required to deal with the sorts of accusations that are made from time to time against judges. 
Although it is appropriate that we have a Judicial Conduct Commissioner it is also important that that person be wise enough to exercise his or her discretion to reject out of hand complaints that ought not to go forward. There will always be disenchanted litigants who find it convenient to blame the referee when they have a decision that goes against them. We have to be careful that we are not so process driven that we accept at face value all complaints that are made and that we have a vetting process to sort the very rare cases from the other cases so that we are not unnecessarily causing undue attention to be given to what at times can be spurious allegations. We tread a fine line in protecting the institutions we hold dear in New Zealand when we try to balance the need to properly investigate accusations of a serious nature against the need to preserve public confidence in institutions that can be undermined by repeated and sometimes scurrilous allegations against judicial officers. I think that through this Parliament and through the Judicial Conduct Commissioner we are getting that balance right and I am happy to endorse the Attorney-General’s recommendation of David Gascoigne as the initial appointee. Thank you.
King Annette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
King Annette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4942] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Earlier in question time the House gave me permission to table a letter from the Minister for Social Development and Employment regarding weekly unemployment benefit numbers. In fact it is a written answer to a written question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The honourable member has corrected the leave she sought. I appreciate her doing that. Is there any objection? Well it is a written answer but my having put it before I ask whether there is any objection to that written answer being tabled. There is none.
Davis Kelvin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Davis Kelvin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4942] 
4. 
KELVIN DAVIS (Labour) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee 
: Is the question of considering whether to forward a supplementary question on the estimates for 2009-10 relating to advice the Ministry of Education has provided on each of the expenditure reductions within Vote Education on the committee’s agenda for its next meeting? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Deputy Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee) 
 on behalf of the  
Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee 
: Yes. The committee will reconsider whether to forward a question on that issue to the Minister at its meeting tomorrow. 
Kelvin Davis 
: Is the question relevant to the estimates examination? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: In that case I will take the ruling of the chairperson who has ruled that these matters are relevant matters for estimates consideration.
Sepuloni Carmel: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Sepuloni Carmel: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4941] 
3. 
CARMEL SEPULONI (Labour) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee 
: Is the question of considering whether to forward a supplementary question on the estimates for 2009-10 relating to advice the Ministry of Education or Tertiary Education Commission provided relating to the supplying of Cabinet papers on the youth guarantee scheme on the committee’s agenda for its next meeting? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Deputy Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee) 
 on behalf of the  
Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee 
: Yes. The committee will reconsider whether to forward a question on that issue to the Minister at its meeting tomorrow. 
Carmel Sepuloni 
: What precedents will the chairperson rely on during the consideration of this matter? 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I ask you to think very carefully about that question. Certainly in asking about precedents the question would be within the Standing Orders but for goodness’ sake it is somewhat trivial. We have the Standing Orders and we have an acting chairperson who has accepted agenda items. Do we really need to go through the farcical sort of process we are going through at the moment? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Speaking to the point of order— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not need to hear any further argument on the matter. The honourable member acknowledged that the question probably is within the Standing Orders and therefore the member is entitled to ask it. I will hear the Hon Trevor Mallard in answer. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: In researching this issue as acting chair I have been unable to find any precedents whatsoever.
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4941] 
2. 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee 
: Is the question of considering whether to forward a supplementary question on the estimates for 2009-10 relating to advice the Ministry of Education or Tertiary Education Commission provided relating to the Budget’s impact on regional and rural polytechnics on the committee’s agenda for its next meeting? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Deputy Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee) 
 on behalf of the  
Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee 
: Yes. The committee will reconsider whether to forward a question on that issue to the Minister at its meeting tomorrow. 
Moana Mackey 
: Why is the matter being reconsidered? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am afraid that question is out of order. I will give the member a chance if she wishes to ask a supplementary question that is in order but it would in fact be a breach of privilege to try to answer a question relating to previous decision-making of the committee. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That is presuming that an answer relating to the previous meeting is given. I do not think you can assume that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The matter is pretty simple because as chairperson the chairperson cannot answer why something took place. It is not the chairperson’s responsibility to explain why something took place. That question is simply absolutely out of order. I have ruled that it is out of order. I have invited the member to ask a further supplementary question. 
Moana Mackey 
: Why is it on the agenda for the meeting tomorrow? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The matter is on the agenda for the committee tomorrow because there has been a request to reconsider the issue placed on that agenda.
Street Maryan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Street Maryan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4940] 
1. 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee 
: Is the question of considering whether to forward a supplementary question on the estimates for 2009-10 relating to advice the Ministry of Education or Tertiary Education Commission provided relating to the Budget’s funding of universities on the committee’s agenda for its next meeting? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Deputy Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee) 
 on behalf of the  
Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee 
: Yes. The committee will reconsider whether to forward a question on that issue to the Minister at its meeting tomorrow. 
Hon Maryan Street 
: Under what agenda heading is the matter to be considered? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: It is to be considered under the heading “Notice of Motion: Estimates for Vote Education and Education Review Office” and it will involve the reconsideration of four estimates questions that were not referred for written response from the last committee meeting.
Bennett David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Bennett David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4940] 
12.  
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
 to the  
Minister of Transport 
: What progress has been made on advancing the Victoria Park road of national significance? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport) 
: 
 Last Monday I was pleased to attend with the Prime Minister the New Zealand Transport Agency’s announcement of its preferred tenderer for the Victoria Park project. I congratulate the winning V-Formation consortium which includes some of our leading infrastructure firms. This is an important milestone for the project and I look forward to construction beginning in November 1 year earlier than originally planned. 
David Bennett 
: What are the benefits of bringing this project forward? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: This project when completed will eliminate a major choke point on one of the busiest stretches of the Auckland motorway network and will greatly ease congestion for the 160000-plus vehicles that use that route each day including people who travel to and from the North Shore and Auckland’s port. It is estimated that 120 people will be working on the project within 6 months rising to about 300 by the middle of next year and that will be maintained until the project is finished. Of course that does not include the downstream impact for businesses and workers involved in related work. 
David Bennett 
: How was this project able to be brought forward? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: Victoria Park is one of the first big projects to benefit from the Government’s decision to increase funding for State highway construction by $1 billion over the next 3 years through the National Land Transport Fund. Victoria Park was scheduled to commence construction in November 2010 but under the previous Government’s policy statement there was doubt that even that date would have been met. Without the additional funding this project might never have got off the ground; neither would the jobs and economic benefits it will now bring.
Woodhouse Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Woodhouse Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4932] 
6.  
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Energy and Resources 
: Has he received any reports that the Government’s Warm Up New Zealand home insulation scheme is helping to create jobs? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Energy and Resources) 
: 
 Yes I have. I have seen a report entitled “Insulation offer cuts dole queue” in yesterday’s  
New Zealand Herald 
. The story outlines a number of firms taking previously unemployed people and training them to install insulation in New Zealand homes. Premier Insulation for example— 
Hon Phil Goff 
: And how many lost over the same day? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The Government has a scheme. It is providing jobs but Phil Goff does not want it; he just wants those workers and their families to take the dole. Premier Insulation has put an extra 80 people into work. Eco Insulation has put an extra 50 into work. All of those people were previously on the dole. Fletcher Building has increased the production of the insulation product from its factories. That has put more people into work for the 24-hour shifts it is now running. This is a very good scheme. The scheme is working well and it is also getting New Zealanders working well. 
Michael Woodhouse 
: How will the Warm Up New Zealand: Heat Smart home insulation scheme help the New Zealand economy in the medium and long term? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The Warm Up New Zealand: Heat Smart scheme will help the New Zealand economy in many ways in the longer term. One way will be through the reduction in health costs because warmer homes are healthier homes. The scheme should lead to fewer people being admitted to hospitals with respiratory illnesses thereby easing pressure on our health system. Warmer Kiwi homes will also ensure that more children go to school and more people stay in work when they might otherwise be sick as a result of their cold home and other living circumstances. Of course there is the ongoing job creation that I have already spoken of. 
Michael Woodhouse 
: What has been the response from the public to the Warm Up New Zealand: Heat Smart scheme? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The response from the public has been overwhelmingly positive. I am advised that since the programme started on 1 July there have been some 9000 calls to the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority call centre and over 100000 unique visitors to the website have been making inquiries into how they may access the scheme. It is very pleasing that demand is so high. In fact we are now making sure that there are more providers in order to ensure that people do not have to wait too long for this excellent Government assistance.
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:655;Page:4930] 
4.  
AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What reports has he seen on the affordability of current entitlements to New Zealand superannuation? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 Budget 2009 fully costed current entitlements to New Zealand superannuation and these were built into the fiscal forecast published with the Budget. Under this Government New Zealand superannuation will be maintained at 66 percent of the average wage for a married couple to be paid from age 65. 
Amy Adams 
: What alternative approaches to providing New Zealand superannuation has the Minister seen? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I have seen a report of comments made by Labour’s finance spokesperson Mr David Cunliffe who told the “Mood of the Boardroom” meeting in Auckland: “Nor if you listen carefully have I closed the door on re-examining questions of the age of entitlement for example.” Mr Cunliffe should clarify whether he is speaking on behalf of the whole Labour caucus or just himself and should clarify just what Labour’s policy on the age of entitlement now is. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Does the Minister share Labour’s commitment to preserve the eligibility age of 65; if he does why did he jeopardise future entitlements— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I apologise to the honourable member but I cannot hear his question. I think the House owes it to members to at least enable us to hear the question. The member may start again. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Does the Minister share Labour’s commitment to preserve the eligibility age of 65; if he does why did he jeopardise future entitlements with his suspension of contributions to the Superannuation Fund a move that Treasury says is an indication that the Government is “seriously considering winding up the fund altogether”? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I thought we shared Labour’s commitment to the age of entitlement being 65 but if that is the view held by the Labour caucus it is certainly not the view held by its finance spokesman David Cunliffe. 
Amy Adams 
: What economic policies would put the affordability of New Zealand superannuation in jeopardy? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: In the end the affordability of New Zealand superannuation is directly related to the health of the economy. There is no doubt that continuation of the policies of the last 10 years favouring over-consumption too much borrowing and reckless Government spending would certainly be bad for the health of the economy and that would put at risk the affordability of future national superannuation.
Event: Members Sworn 
Event: Members Sworn 
[Volume:655;Page:4925] 
Members Sworn 
David James Shearer was presented to the Speaker made the affirmation required by law and took his seat in the House.
Smith Lockwood: Obituaries — Hon William Lambert Young CMG 
Smith Lockwood: Obituaries — Hon William Lambert Young CMG 
[Volume:655;Page:4925] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I regret to inform the House of the death on 14 July 2009 of the Hon William (Bill) Lambert Young CMG who represented the electorate of Miramar from 1966 to 1981. He was Minister of Works and Development from 1975 to 1981. I desire on behalf of this House to express our sense of the loss we have sustained and our sympathy with the relatives of the late former member. 
Honourable members stood as a mark of respect.
Sittings of the House 
Sittings of the House 
[Volume:655;Page:5006] 
Sittings of the House 
CHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I seek leave for the House to rise very slightly early as we have made good progress this evening. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is anyone opposed to that course of objection? It appears not.
Members Sworn 
Members Sworn 
[Volume:655;Page:4925] 
Members Sworn 
David James Shearer was presented to the Speaker made the affirmation required by law and took his seat in the House.
Obituaries — Hon William Lambert Young CMG 
Obituaries — Hon William Lambert Young CMG 
[Volume:655;Page:4925] 
Tuesday 21 July 2009 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Obituaries 
Hon William Lambert Young CMG 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I regret to inform the House of the death on 14 July 2009 of the Hon William (Bill) Lambert Young CMG who represented the electorate of Miramar from 1966 to 1981. He was Minister of Works and Development from 1975 to 1981. I desire on behalf of this House to express our sense of the loss we have sustained and our sympathy with the relatives of the late former member. 
Honourable members stood as a mark of respect.
Garrett David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Garrett David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:656;Page:5530] 
DAVID GARRETT (ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek your assistance with regard to a supplementary question I asked on Tuesday of the Minister for Climate Change Issues. His answer was that the figures I sought were to be found in the regulatory impact statement on the original emissions trading scheme legislation. I have looked carefully through that regulatory impact statement and I am unable to find such figures. I respectfully draw your attention to Speaker’s ruling 167/7 which as I read it states that if a Minister is in error he or she should correct that error at the earliest opportunity which should be at the beginning of question time. I wonder whether I have missed something or whether the Minister would like to comment. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have made it very clear to members that they should not litigate Ministers’ answers by way of points of order. If the member believes that the Minister was in error in that answer the member has the chance to ask further questions about it or to take it up directly with the Minister but he should not do it by way of a point of order. If he believes that the matter is serious enough if he believes that the Minister has misled the House he can write to me about it. But he should not try to litigate it by way of a point of order.
Dunne Peter: Motions — Tonga—Sinking of Ferry Princess Ashika 
Dunne Peter: Motions — Tonga—Sinking of Ferry Princess Ashika 
[Volume:656;Page:5529] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 Yesterday a ferry that had recently been refitted set sail on a routine voyage between two of the islands in Tonga. Today we woke to the news of that ferry’s sinking with some 82 people on board and already 26 unaccounted for. The enormity of that potential tragedy comes home to us when we reflect on how mundane the circumstances were—a routine journey with those adverse consequences. Like others my heart goes out to the people of Tonga and to the Tongan community in New Zealand as they come to grips with the loss and the awful period of anxiety as they wait for the news of loved ones who may be at risk. My hope is that the good news of the fact that no corpses or wreckage have yet been found bodes well in terms of the survivors who are still unaccounted for. I acknowledge the work of our defence forces and the Rescue Coordination Centre in overseeing this exercise and I hope it comes to a successful conclusion for the benefit of all concerned. 
Motion agreed to.
Norman Russel William: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Norman Russel William: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:5581] 
Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I rise to speak on the climate change estimates. I will make a few points in this short contribution. The first is that when it comes to climate change we have a moral obligation to take action. We have a moral obligation not only to ourselves and to future generations of New Zealanders but also to people who live in the Pacific. Just in the last few days the Alliance of Small Island States—some of our key neighbours—called on developed countries like New Zealand to commit to an emissions reduction target of at least 40 percent by 2020. They have called on New Zealand to make a strong reduction target because their very homes may go under. We have a moral obligation to act on climate change. It has been one of the Green Party’s great frustrations that over the years there has been very little action in terms of actually reducing our gross emissions. It is probably true that our net emissions will come pretty close to zero by 2012 but our gross emissions will be way over. 
Progress reported. 
Report adopted.
Smith Nick: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 3 to Minister Question No. 2 to Minister 
Smith Nick: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 3 to Minister Question No. 2 to Minister 
[Volume:656;Page:5580] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Climate Change Issues) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to correct an answer that I gave in the House in respect of a question from Mr David Garrett. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought for a personal explanation in relation to a question. Is anyone opposed to that course of action? There appears not. Leave is granted. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: In response to a question in respect of how much the existing emissions trading scheme legislation would reduce emissions I advised the House that the information was in the regulatory impact statement that had been provided. In fact it was in the economic analysis that was with the regulatory impact statement provided to the Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee. I seek the leave of the House to table the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research report that has the information that the member sought. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is anyone opposed? Leave is granted. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
English Bill: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 3 to Minister Question No. 2 to Minister 
English Bill: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 3 to Minister Question No. 2 to Minister 
[Volume:656;Page:5580] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Acting Prime Minister) 
: 
 I want to correct a detail in my answer to oral question No. 3 today. I stated that the unemployment rate was last at 6 percent in 2005. In fact— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: The member needs to seek leave. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I seek leave Mr Chairperson. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Is this a personal explanation or a correction? Either way is the member seeking to make a personal statement or to make— 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I seek leave to make a personal explanation to correct a detail in an answer to a question— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Just a moment. Leave is sought for that purpose. Is anyone opposed to that course of action? It appears not. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: In answer to oral question No. 3 today I stated that the unemployment rate was last at 6 percent in 2005. The correct figure is that the unemployment benefit is the same now as it was in 2005 not the unemployment rate as measured by the household labour force survey.
Blue Jackie: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Blue Jackie: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:5568] 
Dr JACKIE BLUE (National) 
: 
 In October 2008 National announced its policy to fund 12 months’ Herceptin treatment. That decision was not made lightly. We knew we would be accused of interfering politically in what should not be a political decision but we simply could not stand back. We were concerned that Pharmac’s decision to fund 9 weeks’ treatment was flawed as cancer specialists in New Zealand overwhelmingly backed 12 months’ treatment. Following the election the new National Government moved quickly to put into action its election promise. We knew there would be women who would have recently completed a publicly funded course of 9 weeks or recently discontinued a private 12-month course of Herceptin treatment and would be in limbo waiting for the National policy to be implemented. 
The New Zealand Breast Cancer Special Interest Group a group of independent experts considered a recent international review of the 12-month and 9-week data. That group considers that the update further confirms the validity of the 12 months while casting serious doubts on the 9-week treatment. 
Those experts also questioned the viability of the international Study of Letrozole Extension trial comparing 9 weeks’ treatment versus 12 months’ treatment. To date only 23 New Zealand women from two centres have elected to participate in the Study of Letrozole Extension trial with only a few hundred internationally. Two thousand women need to be recruited into the trial to get any meaningful data and I predict that is most unlikely to happen. The New Zealand Breast Cancer Special Interest Group is quite right to question the viability of that trial and the money we have sunk into it to date. I understand that from 2008 to the end of May 2009 135 women took a 12-month course. These women of course had the international standard of care. I am proud of my Government’s decision to fund 12 months of Herceptin treatment. 
One of the consequences of the Herceptin debate was that the spotlight went on the pharmaceutical budget which over the last several years had not kept up with inflation and the mechanism of how high-cost medicines were evaluated and funded. In May 2009 the National Government announced a total of $185 million in new funding for subsidised medicines over the next 4 years. Shortly afterwards the Government also announced a three-person panel to review access to highly specialised medicines to review funding mechanisms and to work with stakeholders to recommend ways to improve access—
Bennett David: Road User Charges Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Bennett David: Road User Charges Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:656;Page:5567] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I take just a short call on the Road User Charges Amendment Bill. We have debated it at length over a number of days and we have gone through all the big issues that could be debated. It is revolutionary legislation in the sense that we are supporting electric vehicles and showing leadership on environmental and transport issues. 
Chris Hipkins 
: Revolutionary in that they’re supporting the environment for a change. 
DAVID BENNETT 
: Some members of other parties have not been able to stomach that but they do not realise the importance of showing that leadership on those issues. The National Government is quite happy to do that and our Minister of Transport is quite happy to provide that direction. This bill will be for the benefit of New Zealanders going forward. It is well overdue it is in our best interests and we commend it to the House. 
Bill read a third time.
Woodhouse Michael: Road User Charges Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Woodhouse Michael: Road User Charges Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:656;Page:5560] 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) 
: 
 I will take a quick call on the third reading of the Road User Charges Amendment Bill because in fact all of that which can be said about this bill already has been—and quite a bit more besides I have to say. I will touch on one issue and it is an issue that the member for Dunedin North has discussed and I want to give a slightly different perspective on the matter of consultation. As Mr Hodgson rightly recalls there was considerable disquiet around the announcement of the increase in the road-user charges made last year by the previous Minister of Transport and there is no doubt that the road transport industry in the face of increasing diesel charges and other increases in the costs of doing business was quite annoyed about that. But there is a bit of rewriting of history going on about the trigger that caused the truck protest which caused gridlock in the Octagon and in the main streets of just about every city in New Zealand. That was around— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Pretty good to have trucks in the Octagon. 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE 
: It was a very impressive display I have to say. There were trucks of all shapes and sizes around both sides of the Octagon and Moray Place and it brought the centre of the city to a standstill. The reason it happened was not that the road-user charges went up; the reason was that the Minister promised in 2007 that she would give the industry a month’s notice. Then she justified not doing that by saying that people would have rushed out and bought lots of road-user charge licences. The point was that she said she would do something and she did not. That is what got people so angry. As long as Labour Opposition members continue to deny that that was the cause of the problem and continue to rewrite history then my suggestion is that they will be sitting on that side of the Chamber for a very long time to come. 
But I acknowledge as Mr Hodgson and others on the other side have that this is good legislation. I do not believe it is timid; I think it is a very sensible response to a situation. It balances the needs of the Crown to avoid the sort of arbitrage that could go on with the need of road users to have plenty of time to plan for any future increases. I congratulate the Minister—one more flight of sycophancy before I sit down! I certainly commend the bill to the House.
Blue Jackie: Road User Charges Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Blue Jackie: Road User Charges Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:656;Page:5558] 
Dr JACKIE BLUE (National) 
: 
 I am pleased to take a short call in the third reading of the Road User Charges Amendment Bill. There is a global movement towards the use of cleaner greener cars and that includes electric cars. The Government has a role to play in this change. It needs to take a lead and through this bill the Government is making a start. 
There is no doubt that road-user charges have been a barrier to the uptake of electric cars. An increase in the number of electric cars on our roads will reduce the greenhouse gases produced by the transport sector as well as the harmful emissions affecting air quality. It will also decrease reliance on imported fossil fuels and improve energy security. 
This bill provides for 42 days’ notice of a road-user charge increase. That has been done to minimise the potential harm and revenue loss caused by the pre-purchasing of road-user charges by the heavy motor vehicle industry following notification of a road-user charge increase. The bill provides that heavy vehicle road-user charge licences will expire 1 month after an increase comes into effect. The changes in road-user charge rates that cannot be passed on to consumers in a timely manner impacts on their businesses. I commend this bill to the House.
Dyson Ruth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Dyson Ruth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:656;Page:5554] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Could I have a clarification that under the Standing Orders Ministers are still required to correct incorrect information given in an answer at the earliest possible opportunity after that information has been corrected? Is that still the Standing Order? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It is a matter for the Minister and it should be done at the earliest opportunity. There are other remedies if the member believes that a Minister has deliberately misled the House but once the Minister is aware that an answer that was given was incorrect he or she should—although it is up to him or her—seek to correct the answer.
Bennett Paula: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Bennett Paula: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:656;Page:5551] 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 I seek leave to table the household labour force survey for 2008 where for three consecutive quarters the unemployment rate rose under the previous Labour Government. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? I heard objection. There is objection to that document being tabled.
Dyson Ruth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Dyson Ruth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:656;Page:5551] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 In answer to a supplementary question during question No. 3 the Acting Prime Minister advised the House that New Zealand’s unemployment rate in 2005 was as it is today—6 percent. I seek leave to table the household labour force survey for 2005. The survey shows that in the first quarter the unemployment rate was 4.3 percent in the second quarter it was 3.7 percent in the third quarter it was 3.7 percent and in the fourth quarter it was 3.6 percent. 
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. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: I seek leave to table the household labour force survey from June 2000 which is the last time— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member should not go on for too long on these matters. She has sought leave to table the household labour force survey from June 2000. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:656;Page:5544] 
10.  
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he stand by his statement “We may not always agree with what you say but we will always listen”? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Acting Prime Minister) 
: Yes. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Does the Prime Minister agree with Keisha Castle-Hughes that telling her to “stick to acting” is really odd given that he had previously encouraged her to make a submission to the Minister for Climate Change Issues on New Zealand’s pollution reduction target? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The Prime Minister wholeheartedly supports Ms Castle-Hughes’ right to have a view about New Zealand’s climate change policy and her right to publicise that view. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Does the Prime Minister think that actors Lucy Lawless Robyn Malcolm and Cliff Curtis who are also participating in the Sign On campaign should “stick to acting” and has he advised Michael Jones to stick to rugby and keep out of politics or do different rules apply to potential National Party recruits? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: They are all eminent New Zealand actors and sticking to acting may well be a recipe for further success for them. However an advertising campaign is not a replacement for serious analysis of the impact of a 40 percent reduction in carbon emissions by 2020. Any serious analysis would tell us that such a reduction would have a very negative impact on our economy and on people’s livelihoods. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Should New Zealanders now assume from the Prime Minister’s put-down of Keisha Castle-Hughes and from Paula Bennett’s release of private information about two sole parents that it is OK for Ministers to attack people who disagree with them and is that what he meant when he said he would set high standards for himself and his Ministers? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I would have thought that that member would know as much as anyone about the bullying shut-down tactics of his colleagues given that he announced his promotion to Parliamentary Under-Secretary only to find it pulled back the next day. 
John Boscawen 
: Will the Prime Minister listen to the people of New Zealand and adopt my member’s bill which introduces the Chester Borrows amendment as a Government bill; if not why not? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The Prime Minister is a very good listener to the New Zealand people.
Young Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Young Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:656;Page:5542] 
8.  
JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) 
 to the  
Minister of Police 
: Has she received any progress reports on the Government’s promise to provide 300 extra police for Counties-Manukau? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Police) 
: 
 Yes. I am pleased to advise that the number of front-line police in the Counties-Manukau Police District has increased by 66 since 30 November 2008. In addition 41 of the 80 recruits due to graduate on 20 August will go to Counties-Manukau. The Government provided $182.5 million in Budget 2009 for extra police and I am pleased with the progress to date. 
Jonathan Young 
: Has she received any reports regarding the recruitment of extra police for Counties-Manukau? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Yes. The New Zealand Police advises that recruitment marketing statistics indicate that the level of interest in policing in Counties-Manukau has never been higher. During the latest Counties-Manukau recruitment campaign 1940 people registered for recruitment seminars. This was 77 percent higher than the number of seminar registrations during the same period in 2008. That is a fantastic result. 
Jonathan Young 
: Has she received any information about the people who are expressing an interest in a career with the New Zealand Police? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Yes. The New Zealand Police is receiving expressions of interest from a wide range of people. For example the number of people aged 25 and under who have registered for recruitment seminars in Counties-Manukau in the last 2 months stands at 721 which is up from 426 for the same period last year. The number of Maori registrations is 179. That number is up from 73. Pasifika registrations are 387 up from 211. Asian registrations have increased from 103 to 162. Another very good result! 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Is she aware that other police districts around New Zealand are concerned about having to cope with increasing pressure on staff numbers thanks to this Government’s directive to send most of the new police officers promised and funded by the Labour Government to Counties-Manukau leaving only about 75 additional police per year to cover the rest of New Zealand? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: That is why this Government is delivering another 300 police for the rest of New Zealand as well. Well done!
Twyford Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Twyford Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:656;Page:5537] 
PHIL TWYFORD (Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a letter received today from Metro Water employees expressing concern about the release of their personal information to Watercare Services as part of the transition to the new water monopoly in Auckland. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. [ 
Interruption 
] I will put the question again. Leave is sought to table that document. Please make your objection loudly. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Twyford Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Twyford Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:656;Page:5533] 
1. 
PHIL TWYFORD (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Local Government 
: 
Has he received any reports of the release of sensitive personal information from Metro Water Ltd to Watercare Ltd as part of the transitional arrangements under the Local Government (Tamaki Makaurau Reorganisation) Act 2009? 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Minister of Local Government) 
: 
 No. 
Phil Twyford 
: Has the Minister received advice on whether that is a breach of the Privacy Act; if so is he concerned— 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The House has indulged Mr Twyford by allowing him to ask an urgent question. He asked his question and he got the answer “No.” Having got the answer “No.” he now wants to know whether the matter that he was expecting a yes answer to is a breach of the Privacy Act. That is way outside the Standing Orders. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I think this goes to the order in which mail has been opened and read in the Minister of Local Government’s office. Mr Speaker it is not for you to predetermine that the member cannot ask a question about whether the Minister has read a report just because he has not read another one. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I appreciate the member’s contribution to the point of order but I believe that it is not for me to rule out such a question because then I would be getting involved in answers already given. I believe that the Minister of Local Government is perfectly capable of answering such a question and I invite Phil Twyford to ask his supplementary question. 
Phil Twyford 
: Let me rephrase the question. Is the Minister concerned that this action follows controversy over Watercare demanding that Auckland councils sign blanket confidentiality agreements in relation to the transition and requesting dossiers of personal information on council water staff including age sex length of service and whether they are members of the union? 
Hon RODNEY HIDE 
: Thank you Mr Speaker for that very urgent question from the “Minister for Auckland Issues”. I have to say that it would be helpful if Mr Phil Twyford listened to the— 
Hon David Parker 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Mr Twyford is not the Minister for Auckland issues. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think it would be helpful if we heard the answer from the Minister. 
Hon RODNEY HIDE 
: I said he was the spokesperson for Auckland issues from the Labour Party. It would be helpful if the “member for Auckland issues” actually listened to the answer I gave which was that I have had no such reports and I am afraid I have no idea what he is talking about—a bit like the rest of Auckland. 
Phil Twyford 
: Supplementary question— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There are no further supplementary questions to an urgent question.
Twyford Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Twyford Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:656;Page:5533] 
PHIL TWYFORD (Labour) 
: I seek leave to ask a question of the Minister of Local Government. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought by Phil Twyford to ask an urgent question of the Minister of Local Government. Is there any objection? There appears to be no objection.
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:656;Page:5533] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Minister of Local Government) 
: I seek leave of the House to answer an urgent question put down to me by Phil Twyford MP because answering his questions is always so much fun. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The dilemma I have as Speaker is that a member cannot seek leave to answer a question. Only the member wishing to ask the question can seek leave to ask it.
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:656;Page:5531] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I am familiar with the documents to which the ACT member has referred. A reading of them makes it absolutely clear that the emissions trading scheme has significantly reduced deforestation already. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member must resume his seat! What does one do about that! The member knows that that was not a point of order and he is very lucky that I was preoccupied with thinking about the matter. Be that as it may let me come back to the fundamental issue raised. I accept the point the Hon Rodney Hide makes. It is more difficult for smaller parties because they have limited numbers of supplementary questions but the answer is a matter for the member and the Minister. If the Minister is in error then that is a matter for the Minister to rectify. The member can follow it up with the Minister but he should not seek to litigate the answer by way of a point of order. If there is a problem with the answer he can follow it up with the Minister. If in fact the Minister’s answer was in error I am sure the Minister would seek to correct it.
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:656;Page:5530] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I accept your point but smaller parties like the Green Party the ACT Party and the Maori Party do not have the opportunity that other parties have to ask large numbers of questions. We have for example two questions today and if an answer is wrong we have only one or two opportunities to fix it. My understanding is that the Minister’s office accepts that the answer on Tuesday was not correct. We are asking for clear guidance so that we can ask a proper supplementary question today.