edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Brownlee Gerry: Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — Third Reading 
Brownlee Gerry: Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:11920] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Economic Development) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Finance 
: I move  
That the Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill be now read a third time 
. 
Bill read a third time.
Shanks Katrina: Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — Second Readings 
Shanks Katrina: Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — Second Readings 
[Volume:664;Page:11913] 
KATRINA SHANKS (National) 
: 
 It is my pleasure to take a call tonight in this debate. I cannot start this speech without recognising the All Whites and what they achieved this week and I recognise Ricki Herbert and what he has achieved as well. It is about New Zealand standing out from the crowd. When we look at the All Whites and try to analyse why they have done so well over the last 12 months we see that their success started with Bahrain. It started with the Phoenix. It started with the investment that Wellington made in New Zealand Football. 
If we look at that All Whites team as my children and I did at 2 a.m. in the early hours of the morning and reflect back on how they did it what do we reflect back on? Do we look at the outstanding individuals? Do we look at the leader? Do we look at Ricki Herbert and say the team was well managed? Do we look at the captain and say he provided inspiration? Or do we look at the team? And do we say that as a team they all performed? Without the striker they cannot get the goals. Without the goalie they cannot stop the goals. So what actually made this team so successful? What made the All Whites stand out on the night? What made those New Zealanders stand out? When we look at that what do we say? We say it has to be the team—it is the team that got them over the line. 
We hear many people saying they did not even win—the score was one all. But in our eyes they are the greatest winners because in our eyes they did not have the odds with them. The odds were against them. They should never have beaten that team—and they did not; we drew. But a draw for us was extremely successful. A draw for us was aspirational for a sport in which we have never before performed at this level. 
When we look at the All Whites and look at New Zealanders we think about New Zealanders being outstanding people and an outstanding country. Why is New Zealand an outstanding country and why do we punch above our weight continually? Why do we try to lead initiatives and why do New Zealanders take such pride in their country? How do we do it? We have to say right here right now that in John Key we have one of the best leaders this country has ever seen. We have one of the most aspirational leaders. We have a leader who says to the people of New Zealand that being average is just not good enough; we can do so much better. We can raise our standards. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.
Vote: Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — Second Readings 
Vote: Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — Second Readings 
[Volume:664;Page:11919] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment in the name of Hon David Cunliffe be amended by adding the following after “fluctuations”: “and because the Government will not provide for the validation and borrowing by King’s High School Dunedin and the allocation of funds to the repayment of loans relating to the Performance Arts Centre at no net cost to the Crown”. 
Ayes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Noes 68 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 4; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment to the amendment not agreed to.
Shanks Katrina: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Shanks Katrina: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:11880] 
11. 
KATRINA SHANKS (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Energy and Resources 
: How much of New Zealand’s electricity generated in the March 2010 quarter came from renewable sources? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Energy and Resources) 
: 
 Seventy-three percent.
English Bill: Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — First Reading 
English Bill: Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:11881] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill be now read a first time. 
Bill read a first time.
Smith Lockwood: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
Smith Lockwood: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
[Volume:664;Page:11866] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The House has heard the debate in good humour and I do not think we should depart from the normal practice for something that is—[ 
Interruption 
] The member should resume his seat for the moment. To me it is unfortunate to end it like this. If I call the honourable member then any other member of the House can seek a call which I do not think is in the spirit of the debate at all. I ask the member to just reflect on that over the next moment. 
Motion agreed to.
Hide Rodney: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
Hide Rodney: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
[Volume:664;Page:11864] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 What a game! What a match! Every now and then Kiwis show the world that we can as a people punch way above our weight. What the All Whites have done for us is to remind us that we can set big goals we can take on the world and we can beat them. What the All Whites did in beating the current FIFA World Cup holders was absolutely a miracle. I say “beating” them because I want to record in Parliament that as far as the ACT Party goes it was 1-0 to the All Whites and we have every reason to believe that we will beat Paraguay too.
Norman Russel William: Points of Order — Visit of Chinese Vice-President—Protest 
Norman Russel William: Points of Order — Visit of Chinese Vice-President—Protest 
[Volume:664;Page:11866] 
Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is a tradition in this House to allow free speech and for members to make points of order. I once again— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will resume his seat immediately. The member has every right to seek leave to make a personal explanation. It is up to the House to decide whether that leave is granted. The House on this occasion chose not to grant it.
English Bill: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
English Bill: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
[Volume:664;Page:11863] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Acting Prime Minister) 
: 
 I seek leave to move a motion without notice congratulating the All Whites. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There is no objection. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I move  
That the House congratulate the All Whites on their stunning result in drawing one-all with Italy at the Football World Cup in South Africa 
. The All Whites showed all the courage ability and character that we know they possess to achieve New Zealand’s best result yet in world football. They ran themselves to a standstill in what was a nail-biting and tremendously exciting game. They can take great pride in their result and I am sure that all New Zealanders will join with me in saying how proud we are of them. The Prime Minister was in Nelspruit South Africa for the game and personally congratulated coach Ricki Herbert captain Ryan Nelsen and the team. Sport is very important to New Zealand and New Zealanders. With sport we can celebrate passion skill hard work dedication team building and success—all attributes demonstrated so well by the All Whites. 
On behalf of the Government I wish the All Whites all the best for their game against Paraguay. I know they will play their hearts out for us and I believe they have the ability and determination to win and make it through to the next round. More than 4 million Kiwis will be cheering them on all the way.
Smith Lockwood: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
Smith Lockwood: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
[Volume:664;Page:11866] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It is a tradition that the party leaders normally speak in these debates.
Mallard Trevor: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
Mallard Trevor: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
[Volume:664;Page:11866] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 Mr Speaker—
Goff Phil: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
Goff Phil: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
[Volume:664;Page:11863] 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 On behalf of the New Zealand Labour Party I join with the Government in supporting this motion and join with Kiwis all over the world in congratulating Ricki Herbert and the magnificent All Whites. It was an amazing result yesterday and it caused the world to sit up and take notice of a superbly performing New Zealand sports team. 
But Monday was just the latest stage in a momentous journey by the All Whites. I had the privilege last year of being at Westpac Stadium to see the All Whites beat Bahrain to win a place in the World Cup. That at the time felt like a victory—a victory that saw the All Whites going to the Football World Cup for the first time in 28 years. But then they just kept on performing. There was the win in the warm-up round against Serbia; there was the draw with Slovakia; and of course on Monday there was that fantastic one-all draw against Italy—the world champions the fifth-ranked side in the world and a team packed with stars from European clubs all over the Continent. 
It was a fantastic result and it was great to see the European media who had been disparaging about New Zealand chances having to eat their words and describe the fantastic performance of the All Whites as it was. We know we are doing well in the world when even the Aussies try to bask in the reflected glory and praise the Australasian success in the World Cup. 
There is no doubt that New Zealand started as the underdog in this competition. People said we could never do it. But with character with commitment with determination and with courage the All Whites have done us proud. To Ricki Herbert—who I have to say is from my and David Shearer’s old school of Papatoetoe High School; all of us want to bask in that reflected glory—to Ryan Nelsen the captain who has done just an absolutely brilliant job; to Mark Paston who was outstanding as goalkeeper; and to all the team we say: “Well done lads.” The dream is still alive and everyone in this Chamber wishes you well for a victory over Paraguay on Friday.
Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — Third Reading 
Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:11920] 
Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill 
Third Reading 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Economic Development) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Finance 
: I move  
That the Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill be now read a third time 
. 
Bill read a third time.
Barker Rick: Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — Second Readings 
Barker Rick: Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — Second Readings 
[Volume:664;Page:11919] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: We now come to an amendment moved by the Hon David Cunliffe.
Business of the House 
Business of the House 
[Volume:664;Page:11940] 
Business of the House 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for there to be a question time at 2 p.m. on Wednesday 23 June and on Thursday 24 June 2010 and for questions to be lodged in the normal manner pursuant to Standing Order 372 notwithstanding the fact that the House is in urgency. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is no objection.
Sittings of the House 
Sittings of the House 
[Volume:664;Page:11939] 
Sittings of the House 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Following discussion at the Business Committee earlier today I seek leave for the House to sit on the ringing of the bell on Tuesday 29 June 2010. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Business of the House 
Business of the House 
[Volume:664;Page:11939] 
Business of the House 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Further to a Business Committee decision today I seek leave for the bills divided from the Statutes Amendment Bill at the Committee of the whole House to be set down for third reading forthwith. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Urgency 
Urgency 
[Volume:664;Page:11940] 
Urgency 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the second reading and remaining stages of the Financial Service Providers (Pre-Implementation Adjustments) Bill and any bills into which that bill may be divided; the passing through all stages of the Civil Aviation (Cape Town Convention and Other Matters) Amendment Bill and the Policing (Involvement in Local Authority Elections) Amendment Bill; the second reading and remaining stages of the Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims (Expiry and Application Dates) Amendment Bill; the interrupted first reading of the Tariff (New Zealand-Hong Kong China Closer Economic Partnership Agreement) Amendment Bill; the second reading and remaining stages of the Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill; the second readings of the Motor Vehicle Sales Amendment Bill and the Taxation (Annual Rates Trans-Tasman Savings Portability KiwiSaver and Remedial Matters) Bill; the Committee stage and third reading of the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill; and the second reading of the Insurance (Prudential Supervision) Bill.  
Some weeks ago I advised the Business Committee that in this week we would be likely to put the House into urgency to consider a number of bills that were on the Order Paper and that needed to make progress in order to meet a 1 July implementation date. The list that I have just read out was circulated to all parties earlier in the week and I understand that although parties will not necessarily support the Government taking urgency there is considerable support for most of the bills that are in this urgency motion. One of the problems that the House faces is the limited hours that we have to deal with legislation and successive Government have wrestled with this. I have put a motion on the Order Paper that may or may not be considered by the House at some time to create some extra space. But in the meantime it has been my hope that the Business Committee itself may be able to take a stronger role in deciding which bills might progress through urgency motions of this nature. So without prejudice to the Government’s right to take urgency for any matter that sees fit I think that having a greater discussion about some of these things and better notification will allow for the proper debate that the House should have. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That urgency be accorded. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Sharples Pita: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
Sharples Pita: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
[Volume:664;Page:11865] 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES (Co-Leader—Maori Party) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Speaker tena tatou katoa te Whare nei. He honore maku ki te tu ki te mihi atu ki to tatou Tima Ma i tenei rangi. He whakatauaki ta te iwi Maori mo tenei momo takaro: “Katahi te takaro ataahua!”. I tenei wiki i kite matou i tenei te ataahua o te mahi o to tatou tima ara ko te All Whites. Na reira tino tu whakahihi tatou ka tu tatou i te ahua rangatira i te mahi kua mahia e ratou i roto i tenei momo takaro mai i te wa o te kemu i a Bahrain i tera Noema. I wikitoria ratou kia haere katoa te tima ki Awherika ki te Tonga mo tenei kapu koura. Na reira he mihi tenei ki a ratou a me te ki he mihi nui ki tera tamaiti o Ngati Porou a Rory Fallon i tera mahi i te kemu kia taea e te tima ki te haere ki Awherika. Na ka tu mai tetahi Maori i Awherika ki te Tonga ara a Winston Wiremu Reid nana te koura i a Slovakia. Na reira he honore tenei kia mihi atu ki te tima katoa nga mea i tae katoa ki reira kia kawe ai te mana o Aotearoa i reira kia pukumahi ratou ki te kemu i reira.  
I tera marama mai i tona kainga i Denmark ka puta te korero mai a Winston Reid mo tona hiahia kia hoki mai ki Aotearoa kia uru atu ki roto i te Tima Ma to tatou tima o Aotearoa nei. Ko tona take kia haere ki Awherika ki te Tonga mo Aotearoa tuatahi tuarua kia tu ia hai tauira mo nga tamariki Maori kia uru atu ratou ki roto i te kemu whutupaora.  
Na reira ka tautoko au i nga korero i tenei rangi ki to tatou tima All Whites i roto i a ratou mahi. Na reira tena tatou katoa. 
[ 
Greetings to you Mr Speaker and to us all in this House. It is an honour for me to rise and acknowledge our All Whites team today. Maoridom has a saying for this kind of play: “What a beauty of a match!”. We witnessed the brilliance of our team the All Whites this week. We stand proud at the way they went about this challenge from the time they played Bahrain last November. They won and that enabled the whole team to go to South Africa for this gold cup. So this is an acknowledgment to them and to Rory Fallon the Ngati Porou lad whose efforts in that match made it possible for the team to go. Then up steps a Maori Winston Wiremu Reid in South Africa with his goal against Slovakia. So it is a privilege to congratulate the whole team all of the ones who went there to carry New Zealand’s might. They worked hard there in the match.  
From his home in Denmark last month emerged a statement that Winston Reid wanted to return to New Zealand to qualify for the All Whites our team here in New Zealand. His purpose in the first instance was to go to South Africa as a representative of New Zealand and secondly to be a role model for Maori children to become involved in the game of soccer.  
I endorse the tributes today to our All Whites team and their efforts. Greetings to us all. 
]
Norman Russel William: Points of Order — Visit of Chinese Vice-President—Protest 
Norman Russel William: Points of Order — Visit of Chinese Vice-President—Protest 
[Volume:664;Page:11866] 
Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I seek leave to make a personal explanation regarding the incident in front of Parliament involving the Chinese Vice-President on Friday. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Points of Order — Visit of Chinese Vice-President—Protest 
Points of Order — Visit of Chinese Vice-President—Protest 
[Volume:664;Page:11866] 
Points of Order 
Visit of Chinese Vice-President—Protest 
Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I seek leave to make a personal explanation regarding the incident in front of Parliament involving the Chinese Vice-President on Friday. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is a tradition in this House to allow free speech and for members to make points of order. I once again— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will resume his seat immediately. The member has every right to seek leave to make a personal explanation. It is up to the House to decide whether that leave is granted. The House on this occasion chose not to grant it.
Quinn Paul: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
Quinn Paul: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12373] 
PAUL QUINN (National) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to stand up in the Committee stage to speak on the Courts (Remote Participation) Bill. I remind the previous speaker Gareth Hughes that the total bill has not been condemned as he suggested. In fact the only area of contention is clause 9 and some of the associations with regard to that. Principally the contentious clause is clause 9. 
However I thought that in this call I might focus on some of the other clauses because I was becoming a little afraid that the Chairman might rule that the speeches were being repetitive and would therefore close down the debate. I know that a number of other clauses need to be discussed. 
One aspect that I will particularly focus on in this call anyway is the efficiency that the audiovisual system might bring to procedural matters particularly in respect of interlocutory procedures and setting court dates and those sorts of things. The use of modern technology will be a most efficient thing. Figuratively speaking one will be there in person but via a video link. I think we have been getting hung up a little bit about the 18th century definition of “in person”. Time and technology have moved on. 
Getting back to this particular aspect the Green member of the Justice and Electoral Committee Dr Kennedy Graham has made and continues to make a valuable contribution to the discussions on not only this bill but also other bills. He agrees that the only clause of contention is clause 9 but the rest of this bill we all unanimously support. In fact the leader of the Labour Party team on the select committee the Hon David Parker who also always makes useful contributions agreed that the only contentious part of this bill is clause 9. 
In respect of civil proceedings the bill will progress efficiency particularly where the people involved are overseas or are at other ends of the country. I think we should focus on those good aspects of the bill and I look forward to the ongoing discussion.
Power Simon: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
Power Simon: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12373] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I have listened closely to this debate both during the second reading of the bill and during the Committee of the whole House. I have been in my office listening to the contributions of a wide range of speakers from a number of parties on this issue and I have been persuaded by the Committee of the whole House that we need to make amendment to the issue that has been the subject of considerable debate this evening this afternoon and during the second reading. To that end I have tabled and the Chair will put the question at the appropriate moment the following amendment to clause 9: to add as subclause (2) after line 26 on page 6 the following subclause: “(2) Despite subsection (1) AVL must not be used for the appearance of the defendant in a trial that determines his or her guilt or innocence unless the defendant consents to the use.” 
The quality of the contributions from all parties on this issue this evening has caused me to think carefully about this very delicate issue. As somebody who regards himself as having a view from time to time on what justice should look like I am persuaded that indeed when it comes to a substantive matter in respect of a trial we are not discounting the use of an audiovisual link being applied but if the defendant does not consent to its use at that substantive level then he or she should have the ability to require a physical presence at the time that the matter is heard. 
I want to reassure our parliamentary colleagues of the plan from this point if the bill proceeds from the Committee of the whole House and through the third reading. I thank representatives from each of the political parties who have indicated that with the tabling of this amendment they will now see fit to change their view and support the legislation. I acknowledge Labour’s Lianne Dalziel Kennedy Graham Hone Harawira and David Garrett from the ACT Party for taking part in some discussions as they say in other jurisdictions behind the Speaker’s Chair. This is a worthwhile step. I will say that the initial trial period in which the audiovisual link will be rolled out in Auckland will concentrate on procedural matters alone. It will be interesting to see how it develops. I am not ruling out coming back and having a further debate about whether it is appropriate to expand the use of an audiovisual link at some later time. I think that is appropriate once we see how the system beds in. 
But this is one of those moments in the Committee of the whole House when the quality of debate has been high. It is a rare moment I have to say—after 10½ years although it feels longer. I am persuaded that the amendment should proceed and I hope now that members who have felt strongly about this issue are reassured that the matter is addressed and they will see fit to support the bill from this point.
Wagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Wagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:11878] 
9. 
NICKY WAGNER (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage 
: What is the Government doing to preserve New Zealand’s film heritage? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage) 
: 
 In Budget 2010 the Government announced a one-off injection of $2 million extra funding for the Film Archive for crucial film preservation work. Delays in doing this work over the years have placed many historic films documenting New Zealand’s history and culture at serious risk of being lost for ever. This Government recognises the importance of film to New Zealand’s cultural heritage. 
Nicky Wagner 
: What other work is the Film Archive doing to preserve rare motion pictures? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: The Film Archive has entered into a partnership with the United States National Film Preservation Foundation to repatriate and preserve 75 historic American motion pictures. These rare nitrate films including John Ford’s full-length feature  
Upstream 
 will be accessible to both American and New Zealand audiences. The partnership and the importance of these films were reflected in recent widespread international media coverage from the  
New York Times 
 to the  
Guardian 
—which should please the Labour Party—and that shows why this Government’s investment in preserving our film history is so important. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: On what date can we expect the Minister to release the Government review of the New Zealand Film Commission? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: I understand from Sir Peter Jackson that he is heading off overseas on 23 June and it will be available on or before that date.
Graham Kennedy: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
Graham Kennedy: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12374] 
Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green) 
: 
 I rise firstly to thank the Minister and reassure him that what in our view had been arguably the most worrying day in the forty-ninth Parliament has transformed into the most reassuring example of parliamentary democracy in action. There has been reasoned debate impassioned debate and a very constructive response from the Minister and we appreciate that very much. In light of his proposal to which we give our assent I hereby withdraw my Supplementary Order Paper 150 amending clause 9.
Pillay Lynne: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
Pillay Lynne: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12374] 
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour) 
: 
 Along with my colleague I congratulate the Minister in the chair the Minister of Justice and say that this is a good start for some progressive moves on the Government’s part. As Simon Bridges pointed out I was very choked when I gave my speech. Simon Power probably noticed in his office too.— 
Hon Simon Power 
: Sorry I didn’t. 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: He did not. I was very choked during my speech. It is very good to see some progress. 
Simon Bridges 
: It was emotional. 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: It was emotional. It is very good to see some progress. Thank you.
Borrows Chester: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
Borrows Chester: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12375] 
CHESTER BORROWS (National—Whanganui) 
: 
 I will take this opportunity to acknowledge that this is an occasion when the House can collaborate. I am sure that those members of the public who have taken the time to listen to this debate can take some heart from the fact that a debating chamber that has extreme partisan views across the spectrum on issues in this country is able to work together and that a Government can be persuaded that concessions can be made. We look forward to further discussions in the ways previously outlined by the member Lynne Pillay and debating other issues in due course in the term of this Parliament.
Harawira Hone: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
Harawira Hone: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12375] 
HONE HARAWIRA (Maori Party—Te Tai Tokerau) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Chairman. On behalf of the Maori Party I thank the Minister in the chair the Minister of Justice for agreeing to amend clause 9 in the Courts (Remote Participation) Bill. It was for me and for the whole of the Maori Party a very scary moment before that amendment was introduced. I also wish to thank the Greens and Labour for putting forward those Supplementary Order Papers which gave us the opportunity to debate this matter in such a manner that the Minister gratefully reconsidered the position and agreed to an amendment. Mihi atu ki a tatou kia ora tatou katoa. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Simon Power to clause 9 be agreed to: 
to add the following subclause as subclause (2): 
(2)Despite subsection (1) AVL must not be used for the appearance of the defendant in a trial that determines his or her guilt or innocence unless the defendant consents to that use. 
Amendment agreed to. 
Parts 1 and 2 and clauses 1 and 2 as amended agreed to. 
Bill reported with amendment. 
Report adopted.
Brownlee Gerry: Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — Third Reading 
Brownlee Gerry: Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:11920] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Economic Development) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Finance 
: I move  
That the Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill be now read a third time 
. 
Bill read a third time.
Vote: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Vote: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12349] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Education and Science Committee consider the Education Amendment Bill (No 2) that the committee report finally to the House on or before 1 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 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Mallard Trevor: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Mallard Trevor: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12348] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am not absolutely certain that Mr Harawira’s vote was either translated the right way or that he was properly cognisant of the way that he voted. I think he voted for us when he meant to vote against us. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: That is for the member to decide. We will not pursue that matter further.
Mallard Trevor: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Mallard Trevor: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12348] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have laid on the Table of the House an amendment to that motion. I do not know whether I have to formally move it. It has to be placed on the Table of the House. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I was unaware that there was an amendment to the motion. I have not completed putting the question. Before I put the motion we have an amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard. Is the member going to move the amendment? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I do not think I have to move it formally. I think it has been moved by placing it on the Table of the House. That is the advice I have received. It has now been brought to the attention of the House. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: The member needs to move it. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Just to help my amendment says that after the word “Committee”—and I think it is part-way through what the Minister has moved—the words “and that the committee be instructed to report specifically on whether the provisions in clause 11 could be amended to resolve the outstanding issue relating to the funding of the Performing Arts Centre at King’s High School Dunedin” be inserted.
Vote: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Vote: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12347] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Education Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a first time. 
Ayes 113 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Bill read a first time.
Douglas Roger: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Douglas Roger: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12337] 
Hon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS (ACT) 
: 
 ACT will support the Education Amendment Bill (No 2). Having said that I agree a hundred percent with Kelvin Davis when he said that this bill does little and certainly does not deal with the significant problems we have in the education system. Given that it is the third Government bill on education one would have hoped that it would do a lot more. If we were to give it a mark out of 100 I suppose it would get a two or three in terms of importance—if we stretched it. There is absolutely nothing in this bill that will do anything to improve the quality of education. There is nothing in this bill that will do anything to help the 30 percent of kids who at the present time leave school with a poor education and who are unable to read or write adequately. 
The tragedy is that when we look at schools in poor areas we see that that percentage is much higher. It is the poor who are getting the rawest deal. There is absolutely nothing in this bill that will solve the problem we have in South Auckland where 10 of the schools are currently manned by police. I understand that that scheme has been recently moved into the Bay of Plenty area. There is nothing in this bill that will help the children who this year went to secondary school for the first time at a school in South Auckland a decile 5 or 6 school who had a test where one of the questions asked: “If you have 36 apples and subtract 27 apples how many do you have?” and one in four children got that wrong. 
There is something terribly wrong with our education system and it is about time that this House addressed the real issues that we are faced with and not these issues which are largely technical in manner. The fact is that unless a family has the money to shift to another zone and buy a house in it or can pay twice they have no choice in this country. I think we need to do something about that. This bill does extend choice slightly. It allows for the children of parents who went to particular schools to be enrolled at those schools but that in itself will create some anomalies as well. The Education and Science Committee might like to think about that. I think of my own situation where I had a son who went to Auckland Grammar School and a daughter who went to Epsom Girls Grammar School. 
My son’s son will now be able to go to Auckland Grammar School but I take it that my daughter’s son will not qualify. On the other hand my daughter’s daughter will now be able to go to Epsom Girls Grammar School but my son’s daughter will not. 
Overall it is time that we got to grips with the education system in New Zealand. The education system absorbs the total amount of money we raise from GST and I do not think we are getting a particularly good return. In many ways the problems we have now were 70 years in the making and I cannot for the life of me see why we persist with a system that has failed for 70 years. I ask why we do not think again. Thank you.
Dean Jacqui: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Dean Jacqui: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12347] 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) 
: 
 There are some excellent provisions in the Education Amendment Bill (No 2). First of all introducing secondary-tertiary programmes to give greater opportunities for secondary students to spend time learning in a tertiary environment is a fantastic measure particularly for those young men at school who are turned off education. All they want to do is to get out there and build things or take an engine apart and to then build a career as a mechanic or a builder. I think this is a fantastic measure. 
I completely support the exemption of limited attendance centres from early childhood education licensing standards. Does that not just make sense? 
I support entirely the change in refund provisions for international students. If they change their minds after a certain period of time they can have their fees or a portion of them refunded. I support certainly the updating and clarification of the law affecting private schools. 
This is good legislation. I commend this bill to the House.
Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — Third Reading 
Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:11920] 
Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill 
Third Reading 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Economic Development) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Finance 
: I move  
That the Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill be now read a third time 
. 
Bill read a third time.
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12313] 
12. 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Housing 
: Does he believe that all New Zealanders should have access to appropriate and affordable housing? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY (Minister of Housing) 
: 
 Yes. As I have stated repeatedly in the House this Government is committed to assisting those New Zealanders most in need. 
Moana Mackey 
: Why is he axing the Housing New Zealand Corporation’s shared-equity scheme from tomorrow given that before the election he promised to continue it at least until his still-unfunded Gateway Housing scheme was available? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: The shared-equity scheme was a Labour scheme. It was a 2-year pilot that promised 550 homes to new homeowners; over the 2 years it delivered 30 homes. We considered that the pilot did not work. 
Moana Mackey 
: Does he think the low uptake of the shared-equity scheme might have something to do with the fact that according to the Housing New Zealand Corporation’s Senior Communications Adviser Michelle Williams the corporation was told after the change of Government to stop promoting the scheme? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: Yes it would be fair to say that this Government decided we would not spend millions of dollars on advertising that could be spent on homes. 
Moana Mackey 
: Are tax cuts still National’s No. 1 policy for addressing housing unaffordability; if so can he confirm that this year’s tax cuts are meant to compensate for an increase in GST cost of living increases across the board rent increases and now housing unaffordability and how far does he think someone on the minimum wage can stretch $3 a week? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: Certainly delivering more people more money in their back pockets after a day’s work is part of the policy of addressing housing unaffordability because it gives them more money to pay off their mortgage or pay their rent and to make a whole bunch of choices. It is better than a shared-equity scheme that was supposed to deliver 550 houses but ended up delivering 30 houses. 
Rahui Katene 
: What priority has the Minister given to assisting Danielle Koveskali of Titahi Bay into appropriate housing and what action will he take to address the fact that she has had to wait for more than a year for the Housing New Zealand Corporation to address the mouldy State house she lives in even though Danielle who has renal failure and is on dialysis has been told by her doctors that she must be moved for the good of her tenuous health? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: I understand that the Koveskali family is on a high-priority list to be relocated to another 4-bedroom property. However the family has declined properties that have been offered to them in the past as they considered that the properties did not meet their needs. That is fair enough and that is their decision but the Housing New Zealand Corporation can offer them properties in the area only as they become available and we will certainly be doing so.
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12313] 
11. 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: What recent announcements has the Government made with respect to a bowel cancer screening pilot for New Zealanders? 
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Immigration) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Health 
: In the recent Budget the Government announced a bowel cancer screening pilot costing $24 million over the next 4 years. Bowel cancer is the second-highest cause of cancer death in New Zealand. In 2007 almost 3000 people were diagnosed with bowel cancer and 1252 people died from the disease. A nationwide bowel cancer screening programme could over time reduce the death rate by up to 36 percent saving up to 270 lives per year. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: What will the pilot do and what is the progress to date? 
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN 
: This pilot will give us a clear idea of the sector’s ability to do the required colonoscopies in the future and the costs and benefits of rolling out a full national bowel cancer screening programme. Requests for proposal are about to be issued and the programme should be up and running in 2011. It will cover a minimum of 60000 people aged 50 to 74 and I note that the previous Labour Government despite having 9 years and plenty of money to institute this programme never got around to doing this.
Auchinvole Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Auchinvole Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12311] 
9. 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National—West Coast - Tasman) 
 to the  
Minister for Climate Change Issues 
: What reports has he received on changes in investments that are good for New Zealand and will help reduce emissions? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Climate Change Issues) 
: 
 There has been a marked shift in two areas. First there has been a sharp increase in renewable energy investment. Eighty percent of the new consents lodged—by capacity—are for renewable power whereas prior to 2008 most new investment was for thermal power stations. That is significant because the largest percentage increase in emissions by sector has been in the electricity sector where our emissions are up 120 percent on 1990 levels. The second shift is in forestry. The last decade saw the worst period of deforestation since records began in the 1930s. We are seeing a sharp increase in forestry investment because of the emissions trading scheme with significant increases in forest area over the next 4 years projected by the annual forest intention survey of the University of Canterbury School of Forestry. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: What advice has the Minister received on how much the emissions trading scheme will reduce emissions by and will it enable New Zealand to meet its Kyoto obligations? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I am advised the emissions trading scheme will reduce New Zealand’s emissions by 19 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent and based on current projections will enable New Zealand to meet its Kyoto targets. The saviour for New Zealand is the large expansion of forestry in the 1990s which is offsetting our approximate 25 percent increase in gross emissions. The longer-term concern is that as those forests reach maturity we will be quite exposed. That is why it is so important that we take steps now to constrain emissions growth and encourage new forest plantation. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: What changes did National make to the emissions trading scheme and how does it impact proportionately on the costs borne by businesses and households? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The most significant change we made was reducing by half the cost for both householders and businesses. Without our amendments the price impact on fuel and power prices would have been more than double. That is why I find the cries of concern from the Opposition about the cost impacts of the emissions trading scheme lack credibility. Some people have claimed that our amendments shift the relative burden between households and industry. That is not correct. The costs of both are halved. There is no greater allocation to industry than would have occurred under Labour’s scheme albeit we did as we promised and ensured that small and medium sized businesses are not discriminated against by the support for trade-exposed industries.
Vote: Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — Second Readings 
Vote: Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — Second Readings 
[Volume:664;Page:11920] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill and the Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 68 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 4; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Bills read a second time.
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12302] 
JOHN BOSCAWEN (ACT) 
: 
 My question is to the Minister for Climate Change Issues. Did he tell—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I apologise to the honourable member. I say to the front-benchers of the Opposition as it is the Labour Party this time that the previous question is finished with. The interjections will stop. It is simply unreasonable for interjections to carry on like that when I have called a new question.
Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12298] 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 My question is to the Prime Minister and asks: does he—[ 
Interruption 
]—because that member never answers— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I guess when people interject they are likely to get reactions but the member should not use his open microphone to make that kind of comment. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. When Bill English said: “Why not me?”— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will resume his seat. That is enough of that. [ 
Interruption 
] That is enough of that. The honourable Leader of the Opposition will ask his question.