edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Tolley Anne: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Tolley Anne: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:662;Page:10306] 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I think it is outrageous that this issue has come to the Committee in this manner. I am really disappointed on behalf of the school that Mr Mallard has chosen to do this in this manner in the Chamber. But let us put out some information. 
I am advised that in 2005 contrary to ministry advice King’s High School in Dunedin built a performing arts centre. It was encouraged to do so as I understand it by Mr Mallard himself. The school built a performing arts centre that was 60 percent larger than was required for the size of the school and it paid a square metre rate that was 168 percent higher than the industry benchmark for that type of facility. King’s High School paid almost $4.5 million for its performing arts centre which compares with the Ministry of Education’s current valuation for it of $1.275 million. This was a conscious decision made by a board of trustees and we entrust boards of trustees to make these sorts of decisions. Mr Mallard himself when discussing this with me has admitted to the part that he played in getting the board into this situation. But it was a conscious decision that the board made and the board knew that it would have to borrow money in order to complete the centre. 
I am not sure where the idea came from that the board had received wrong advice from the ministry about the idea that the 5-yearly agreement funding could be used but it was incorrect information. If the board had listened to the ministry it would have known that it could not use the 5-yearly agreement funding to repay a loan. That 5-yearly agreement funding is provided to refurbish existing property; that is what it is appropriated for. Under the Public Finance Act it cannot then be used for another purpose—in this case to repay a loan. We have been down that track and I have explained that to Mr Mallard. In fact in fairness I tell the Committee that Mr Mallard asked his colleagues the former Ministers of Education—both Minister Maharey and Minister Carter—to do a similar thing to what he is asking this Committee to condone tonight and they declined to do so. They declined because other schools have also made similar decisions around borrowing to build property that is outside what is provided by the ministry. If we allow one school to come back later and say: “Oh hang on a minute. We didn’t do this properly and now we would like to remedy this because we are paying for a loan from our operations grant.” we will open the floodgates and destroy our policy. 
But I say in mitigation because we do have some sympathy for a school— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the honourable Minister but the time has come for me to report progress. 
Progress reported. 
Report adopted.
Vote: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:662;Page:10304] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 113 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Part 1 agreed to.
Vote: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:662;Page:10304] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Noes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Vote: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:662;Page:10304] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Noes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Grant Robertson to Part 1 be agreed to: 
to insert the following new clause: 
60AExercise of certain powers of Authority 
Section 260(7) is amended by omitting “laid before” and substituting “presented to”.
Vote: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:662;Page:10303] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Noes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Grant Robertson to Part 1 be agreed to: 
to insert the following new clause:  
20AGuidance and counselling 
Section 77(a) is amended by inserting “ including guidance and counselling on career choices and career pathways” after “counselling”.
Vote: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:662;Page:10302] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Noes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Grant Robertson to Part 1 be agreed to: 
to insert the following new clause: 
5BRequirement for Minister to advise House of Representatives of changes to criteria for enrolment in Correspondence School 
Section 7(1) is amended by adding the following new paragraph after paragraph (c): 
“(d)upon making such notice the Minister must as soon as reasonably possible present such notice to the House of Representatives.”
Mallard Trevor: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Mallard Trevor: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:662;Page:10301] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairman. I know it is very irregular. Without there being any further debate from our side I seek leave for the Minister to say yes or no on that very minor technical question. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The member is seeking leave? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I seek leave for the Minister to— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Sorry we have moved beyond that. We still have Part 2 to debate.
Goodhew Jo: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Goodhew Jo: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:662;Page:10301] 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Tremain Chris: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Tremain Chris: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:662;Page:10299] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10289] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 58 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Mapp Wayne: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Mapp Wayne: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10289] 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP (Minister of Defence) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Trade 
: 
 I move  
That the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee consider the Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill 
 that the committee report finally to the House on or before 15 June 2010 and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during questions for oral answer) 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).
Vote: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10289] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 108 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 14 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 5. 
Bill read a first time.
Vote: Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10269] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 117 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 5 
ACT New Zealand 5. 
Bill read a second time.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Prison Wiri—Commissioning UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Prison Wiri—Commissioning UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
[Volume:662;Page:10251] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Hon Clayton Cosgrove seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the Government’s intention to commission a new prison at Wiri which will be designed built and operated under a public-private partnership. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. The test for whether a particular case requires the attention of the House is a high one. The decision to commission the new prison follows the passage of the Corrections (Contract Management of Prisons) Amendment Bill which was given its third reading on 24 November last year. The House has only recently considered the issue in principle. Every subsequent decision made under the legislation will not necessarily be of sufficient importance to justify setting aside the business of the House. I am not persuaded that the matter deserves the immediate attention of the House by way of an urgent debate today. There will be other occasions on which it can be debated. The application is therefore declined. 
I have also received a letter from the Hon Rodney Hide seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the decision of the New Zealand Government to reverse our previous opposition to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility of the Government. However a Minister cannot raise a matter for debate under Standing Order 380—I refer to Speakers’ ruling 171/3. A debate on a matter of urgent public importance is an opportunity for a member to hold the Government to account. The application is therefore declined.
Smith Lockwood: Speaker’s Statements — Chamber Lobbies and Galleries—Audio System Faulty Microphones 
Smith Lockwood: Speaker’s Statements — Chamber Lobbies and Galleries—Audio System Faulty Microphones 
[Volume:662;Page:10251] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before I go on to the next item of business—and I have received a couple of letters from members about this matter—I want to apologise again to members in the back quarter of the House on the Government side. The speakers were tested prior to the House sitting today and they were operating properly prior to the House sitting. It seems that maybe something was disconnected when members came into the House. The technicians cannot come into the House at the moment to remedy that so I apologise to members. We will just have to do the best we can. Members should feel free to move elsewhere if their own microphones are not working.
Goodhew Jo: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Goodhew Jo: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:662;Page:10250] 
12. 
JO GOODHEW (National—Rangitata) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: When do nominations close for the 2010 school trustee elections? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Nominations close this Friday—on 23 April. I encourage all those who want to stand to ensure that their nomination is in by this Friday to make sure that they can be involved in the upcoming elections. These elections are about finding trustees who are able to provide high-quality leadership for schools and it is important that people put themselves forward for the challenge of providing this service to their local community. 
Jo Goodhew 
: When will the school trustee elections be held? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: Parents around the country will vote on 7 May to fill more than 15000 trustee places. Over the last 21 years more than 100000 New Zealanders from all walks of life have given their skills and time as school trustees. I look forward to working with the newly formed boards this year.
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:662;Page:10248] 
9. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: Is she aware of and does she understand the intended and unintended consequences of national standards? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Yes I am aware of and understand the intended consequences of national standards. I am also aware that some have suggested unintended consequences but I have found that once the full facts are on the table the unintended consequences seldom stack up. I am sure the member will enlighten me on his view of the unintended consequences. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Is one of the intended consequences of national standards to allow parents to take their students out of schools that do not appear to be performing as well against the standards and send them to another school with better results? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: Parents can do that now. In fact parents throughout New Zealand do that now. We believe that parents should have some choice over where their children are attending school. 
Colin King 
: What reports has she received of unintended consequences as a result of the introduction of national standards? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: I have received a report that suggests that one unintended but quite useful consequence of national standards has been that the Labour Party has put itself offside with 73 percent of parents who support the scheme. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think that answer was entirely gratuitous and not necessary at all. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Is one of the intended consequences of national standards also to partly abolish school zoning so that it is easier for students to shift schools as the  
Otago Daily Times 
 last week reported the Associate Minister of Education Heather Roy as saying? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: No that has nothing to do with the introduction of national standards. If the member examines the speech of the Associate Minister of Education Heather Roy he will see that she was speaking as an ACT member and she was speaking about a report from a working-group that is not Government policy. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Is she therefore ruling out Heather Roy’s suggestion as reported by the  
Otago Daily Times 
 that there will be a partial abolition of school zoning? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: I have stated that I have received the report and I am considering it and taking advice on it.
Turia Tariana: Motions — Poland—Death of President Lech Kaczynski and Other Dignitaries 
Turia Tariana: Motions — Poland—Death of President Lech Kaczynski and Other Dignitaries 
[Volume:662;Page:10228] 
Hon TARIANA TURIA (Co-Leader—Maori Party) 
: 
 The Maori Party stands to share in the collective sorrow of the House as we pay our respects to the people of Poland in their homeland and to the many who have come to call Aotearoa home. This was a national tragedy beyond all proportion. The death of top Polish political and military officials including the President Lech Kacyznski his wife Maria and 94 others has been described as Poland’s worst tragedy since World War II. 
There is poignant irony in the fact that the fatal journey taken by those senior leaders was en route to the 70th anniversary of another severe tragedy in that nation’s memory. As the news filtered through of the tragic plane crash associations were quickly made to the events of 70 years ago when an estimated 22000 prisoners held in Soviet internment camps were murdered under the instruction of Stalin. The senior members of the Polish bureaucracy and the President were travelling to a memorial service in the Katyn Forest to remember and mourn for the lives of those lost 70 years prior. 
There has been no question of the depth of the nation’s grief as we observe the streets of Warsaw lined with thousands of mourners the candles flickering and the simple placards with photographs of the 94 victims who lost their lives. Each simple wreath of flowers reminds us of the personal dimensions to this tragedy. We feel a close association in our own world through the simple placement of a condolence book in Parliament. We have seen the people come to cry to pay their respects and to remember. 
And so our statement is simply one of peoples reaching across the world to others. We pay our respects to the families the children taken before their time families who were robbed of parents and grandparents. May they all rest in peace.
Hide Rodney: Motions — Poland—Death of President Lech Kaczynski and Other Dignitaries 
Hide Rodney: Motions — Poland—Death of President Lech Kaczynski and Other Dignitaries 
[Volume:662;Page:10228] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 On behalf of the ACT Party I rise with the other parties in this Parliament to extend our condolences to the people of Poland to Polish people everywhere and to the families who lost loved ones. Lech Kaczynski made it his life’s work to fight for the thing we value most in this place: democracy. 
Does my voice sound like it is in a bottle? 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Yes it does. 
Hon RODNEY HIDE 
: I will hand over to the Maori Party and will wait to see whether the sound system can be fixed. I do not want to drive everyone nuts.
Norman Russel William: Motions — Poland—Death of President Lech Kaczynski and Other Dignitaries 
Norman Russel William: Motions — Poland—Death of President Lech Kaczynski and Other Dignitaries 
[Volume:662;Page:10228] 
Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 The Green Party extends its deepest condolences to the people of Poland for the loss of their President Lech Kaczynski in this terrible accident. Mr Kaczynski was an important leader for his people and his country and will be sadly missed. 
This tragedy seems particularly cruel in that the people of Poland have lost not only their President but also their First Lady and many outstanding individuals who served in the Polish Government. Such sudden and tragic loss of life is hard to comprehend and we support the people and the Government of Poland as they come to terms with what has happened. 
We send our thoughts to Polish New Zealanders and others here with close connections to Poland and acknowledge the impact that this event will have had on them and to the families and loved ones of all 96 people who lost their lives we send our sincerest aroha and love. Kia kaha. Kia ora.
Goff Phil: Motions — Poland—Death of President Lech Kaczynski and Other Dignitaries 
Goff Phil: Motions — Poland—Death of President Lech Kaczynski and Other Dignitaries 
[Volume:662;Page:10227] 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 The Labour Party extends its deepest sympathy to the people and the Government of Poland as they mourn the loss of not only President Kaczynski and his wife Maria but also 94 other Polish leaders killed tragically in that plane crash. The tragedy took place as those leaders were flying to Russia to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the massacre by the Soviet secret police in 1940 of the Polish officer corps. Some 22000 Polish officers were massacred at that time which has left a lasting and deeply traumatic impact on the people of Poland. For this tragedy to occur on the same day 70 years later adds to that trauma. The loss not only of their President and his wife but also of 15 parliamentarians heads of the armed services independence and Solidarity leaders and in fact the last leader-in-exile from the Second World War has had a deep impact on the Polish people. It truly has been a time of national mourning a time when Polish people from all sectors of the community have come together to grieve and to comfort one another. 
I also extend my sympathy to members of the Polish community in New Zealand. I have a very special connection with that community: my sister-in-law is the daughter of two Polish refugees from the 1940s. I know that the president of the Polish Association in New Zealand Eric Lepionka and the association’s members are feeling this tragedy very deeply. We extend our sympathies to them and to the Polish Ambassador and her family. 
I acknowledge that this comes against a background of suffering by people in Poland who for centuries have been the victims of oppression by large countries to their west and to their east. I acknowledge also the courage of the Polish people in their fight for democracy and freedom. The one positive thing that may come from this tragedy is the warming of the relationship between the people of Russia and Poland as they together mourn the loss of the people who were killed. Our sympathy and our thoughts are with the Polish people today.
Key John: Motions — Poland—Death of President Lech Kaczynski and Other Dignitaries 
Key John: Motions — Poland—Death of President Lech Kaczynski and Other Dignitaries 
[Volume:662;Page:10227] 
Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 I seek leave to move a motion without notice on the recent plane crash that claimed the lives of the Polish President and other dignitaries. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There is none. 
Hon JOHN KEY 
: I move  
That the House express its sympathy and concern to the people of Poland following the recent plane crash that claimed the lives of the Polish President and other dignitaries 
. On 10 April 2010 Polish President Lech Kaczynski his wife and many respected senior Government officials lost their lives in a place crash in western Russia. The presidential party was on its way to commemorations for the 70th anniversary of the massacre of some 22000 Polish officers during World War II. The sudden passing of 96 people is a tragedy for Poland. It has been deeply felt by the Polish people and by the Polish community in New Zealand. President Kaczynski was admired for his strong leadership and commitment to his country and he will be greatly missed.  
The New Zealand Government extends its condolences and thoughts to the Polish people as they grieve. We cherish our warm relationship and the values we share with Poland. Many of the senior Government figures and officials who died had met New Zealand Ministers and had assisted in furthering ties between our two countries. Some had links to the New Zealand Polish community.  
New Zealand’s acceptance of more than 700 Polish orphans in 1944 who were known as the Pahiatua children holds a special resonance in both countries. Some of the officials who lost their lives had worked with our Government on celebrations and book publications for the Pahiatua children. Last September the Minister of Veterans’ Affairs Judith Collins visited Poland to mark the 70th anniversary of the start of World War II. Her visit shows the strong links between our two countries. When the Germans invaded Poland’s Baltic coast in 1939 at the beginning of World War II New Zealand did not hesitate to respond. About 140000 New Zealanders served overseas during that war.  
There has been an outpouring of grief throughout Poland since this tragic plane crash. Our thoughts and heartfelt sympathy are with the people of Poland as they mourn the loss of so many lives.
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:662;Page:10244] 
6. 
JOHN BOSCAWEN (ACT) 
 to the  
Minister for Climate Change Issues 
: What will be the cost applied to the average dairy herd by the emissions trading scheme from 1 July this year? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Climate Change Issues) 
: 
 Dairy herd methane emissions have grown from 5000 million tonnes in 1990 to 9000 million tonnes today. Although this is a cost to New Zealand under the Kyoto Protocol it is not being borne by farmers. This Government has deferred the entry of agriculture for 2 years because of competitiveness issues. Dairy farmers like all New Zealanders will face a price impact for fuel of 3.5c per litre and for power of 1.2c per kilowatt hour from 1 July. This cost was halved by National’s moderation of the emissions trading scheme. The cost of that scheme for dairy companies is estimated to be 1.8c per kilogram of milkfat which amounts to $2100 for the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry’s model farm on an average milk income of $820000 or 0.2 percent of turnover. 
John Boscawen 
: How does the Minister reconcile his answer with Meat and Wool New Zealand’s analysis that the emissions trading scheme will cost the average dairy farmer $3900 per annum from 1 July this year another $3900 per annum from 1 January 2013 and finally a further $2400—a total of $10200 per annum—from 1 January 2015? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I will make three points. The first is that I have not seen the analysis that the member has referred to but I note that the largest emissions from farms are those for methane and nitrous oxide which are not to be applied from 1 July. In fact this Government has deferred their cost by 2 years. In respect of the cost for fuel and power the cost for a dairy farmer will be exactly the same as for all New Zealanders. In respect of the analysis I have seen the cost to dairy companies will be 1.8c per kilogram of milkfat—the price of which at the moment I think is 680c per kilogram—or 0.2 percent of a dairy farmer’s turnover. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: What advice has the Minister received on the overall cost of the emissions trading scheme to consumers and businesses in its first year; and how does this compare with the value of the allocation this year to the forestry sector? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The overall cost to consumers and businesses of the emissions trading scheme in the first year will be $400 million. It is estimated though that in the same first year $1.1 billion will be allocated in carbon credits to the forestry sector. By honouring commitments to give credits to the forestry sector and by softening the costs to consumers and businesses the Government will be making a significant loss on the emissions trading scheme. Those advocating deferring the emissions trading scheme need to acknowledge that they would be interfering in the property rights of foresters who in good faith have planted trees since 1990 thus offsetting New Zealand’s 23 percent increase in gross emissions.
Dunne Peter: Ministerial Statements — UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
Dunne Peter: Ministerial Statements — UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
[Volume:662;Page:10236] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 There is an extraordinary irony in this debate on the rights of indigenous people. Over the years in this House on many occasions we have had discussions about United Nation conventions and the very people who today are standing up to decry this decision have in the past lauded agreements like the international convention that outlaws political discrimination and the conventions on the rights of women the rights of children and the ending of racial discrimination. Those members said it was our responsibility as good international citizens to be part of those causes and part of the institution that New Zealand was proud to be in the vanguard of establishing: the United Nations. Now today when the rights of indigenous people are up for discussion and when a number of basic democratic rights that all of us take for granted will be conferred on them we start to see games being played. 
This decision does not impact upon New Zealand’s domestic law in any way. It is an aspirational decision in the same way that all of the other conventions to which I made reference also are. The point is that New Zealand puts its mark alongside those of other countries in saying we believe that the rights of indigenous people in this instance have some validity and ought to be recognised. It is interesting to note that as a result of today’s decision only the United States and one other country—Canada I think although I am not sure about that—have yet to sign the convention. If we are so out of step with other nations as Mr Anderton said we are why is it that today only the United States and Canada are yet to join the international community in recognising the rights of their indigenous people? 
This country has a proud record of upholding and of being part of United Nation’s decisions. This is one more step in that line of progress and should simply be viewed as such. I find it richly ironic that those who have for so long held up the UN as a vanguard and as a mantle now turn round when it comes to honouring the rights of our indigenous people to say this decision is irresponsible dangerous and unacceptable.
Anderton Jim: Ministerial Statements — UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
Anderton Jim: Ministerial Statements — UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
[Volume:662;Page:10235] 
Hon JIM ANDERTON (Leader—Progressive) 
: 
 We are told that there was a standing ovation for Pita Sharples’ speech from members of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues. I wonder whether the following countries stood up and whether Pita Sharples noticed: Zimbabwe Ethiopia Fiji Iran Israel Burma Rwanda and Somalia. We do not need in this country any lessons from countries like those on how to treat indigenous peoples. We need no lessons whatever. It is egregious for the Prime Minister and others to crawl to the likes of that forum with that membership and to tell us that things will change. Nothing will change. These are just idle words that mean nothing whatsoever. New Zealand has done more for the indigenous peoples of this country than all of those countries have done put together twice over. We did not need any lessons from the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues to do that. New Zealand is honoured around the world for the way in which it introduced Waitangi Tribunal resolutions and the way in which we have settled grievances with the indigenous people of this country. For us to seek the solace of countries like those on that list and many more makes me ashamed of the Parliament of this country. It makes me ashamed that we would debate with some kind of glee the fact that we received a standing ovation at the UN from countries like those. 
Let me say that New Zealand is already widely acknowledged as a world leader in recognising such rights and it has a longstanding process through the Waitangi Tribunal for putting that recognition into practical effect to the very real advantage of righting past injustices of the Maori indigenous people of this country. The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples on the other hand is simply an expression of pious hopes without any necessary practical effect whatever. It has no practical effect; it is not binding. In fact Mr Power the Minister of Justice told Parliament that the Government is considering the different meanings of the aspirational text. Well which meaning did the Government sign up to? Did it not know? Has the Government read it? Does it know what it means? The answer to all those questions is no. It has nothing to do with it. It is to do with the deal between National and the Maori Party to get the Maori Party to run alongside the Government. 
It is idle for the Maori Party to claim some kind of great triumph for getting the countries I mentioned earlier to stand up. The Maori Party should be ashamed of itself for thinking that this declaration is some kind of triumph. It is part of the agony that we have to watch and see this take place.
Katene Rahui: Ministerial Statements — UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
Katene Rahui: Ministerial Statements — UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
[Volume:662;Page:10235] 
RAHUI KATENE (Maori Party—Te Tai Tonga) 
: 
 This morning in our early dawn over in New York more than 2000 indigenous people rose to their feet to give a rousing ovation for the historic decision of New Zealand to support the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Immediately the wires were hot proclaiming that New Zealand backs indigenous rights. It is time now to celebrate to consolidate and to be proud to stand alongside some 143 other nations throughout the world that are prepared to back indigenous peoples. 
Today is a historic day on which we finally right the wrong that was done on 14 September 2007: the previous Labour Government’s bizarre decision to oppose a declaration that at its very essence sets a minimum standard of human rights for indigenous peoples. Today is a day on which we mihi to those champions—the indigenous advocates the Maori leaders activists and academics who have devoted so much of their time and resources to achieving the outlawing of discrimination against indigenous peoples. We think of all those who have passed on before experiencing this incredible moment: Erihapeti Rehu-Murchie Alec Kaihau and Dame Mira Szaszy. We think of those of our people who have lived with the declaration for nigh on 22 years: Nganeko Minhinnick who was there at the very beginning; Aroha Mead; and Moana Jackson who was the chair of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues for 5 important years. We also recognise our own Hone Harawira who has been such a passionate advocate within the larger movement. Many more people in our thoughts today can claim the success as theirs and can be proud that they have stood tall to support the rights of indigenous peoples to maintain and strengthen their institutions cultures and traditions. We join with people who have been sending emails all day who are celebrating this day and who are so happy about this day. We congratulate the Government on taking this important step. 
This is a very important day for our Parliament. We are somewhat surprised however that an issue has been raised about how the declaration sits within domestic laws. This was a statement built into the text of the declaration when it was adopted in 2007 by way of article 46 so it is a non-issue. I also say that the previous Labour Government had its chance to water down the declaration and it took every chance that it could to water it down. The only thing Labour regrets is that it was not able to water it down any further. 
This is a day for celebration a day when Aotearoa is proud to move forward on the path of justice dignity and fundamental freedoms for all.
Hughes Darren: Ministerial Statements — UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
Hughes Darren: Ministerial Statements — UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
[Volume:662;Page:10235] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There are two points I would like to raise with you. Firstly I would like an assurance that Mr Hide’s time was not truncated by his musical chairs arrangement. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I can assure the honourable member that I allowed extra time for that. 
Hon DARREN HUGHES 
: There was a lot of interjection on the member as he was not speaking from his normal seat in the House. I seek leave for an additional 2 minutes to be given to Mr Hide to make his contribution. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for an additional 2 minutes to be granted to the member. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is objection.
Hide Rodney: Ministerial Statements — UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
Hide Rodney: Ministerial Statements — UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
[Volume:662;Page:10234] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 Mr Speaker—[ 
Interruption 
] I wonder whether I can move to another seat. I am in your hands Mr Speaker as to where I can speak from. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I ask members to be reasonable. There is a difficulty with the microphones in that quarter of the House. The member can speak from any seat at all and I ask members to be reasonable about that. If the member relocates to a seat that is reasonably convenient let us see whether we can get the sound system working properly. 
Hon RODNEY HIDE 
: The ACT Party is both shocked and appalled to find itself supporting a Government that has covertly given recognition to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The declaration asserts that Maori have rights and privileges not enjoyed by other New Zealanders. The declaration is the very antithesis of ACT’s policy of one law for all New Zealanders. It is the antithesis of the policy that we should have one law regardless of people’s religion their race the colour of their skin their ethnicity their culture or indeed their degree of indigeneity. The declaration is divisive and is a further step for New Zealand down the path towards being a divided nation. The declaration clearly splits New Zealand into two rather than bringing New Zealand together as one. 
The UN declaration sets us up to enable foreigners from the UN to come to New Zealand to pontificate and to criticise New Zealand’s race relations policies laws and processes. For these and for other reasons the former Prime Minister Helen Clark refused to ratify the declaration. At the time the Hon Parekura Horomia said that the declaration was incompatible with New Zealand’s laws and democratic processes and that it ignored reality and would be difficult to implement. Helen Clark and Parekura Horomia were both right. 
I am very disappointed that the Prime Minister John Key has covertly foisted the declaration on New Zealand and I consider the statement that the recognition of this declaration has no practical effect to be naive in the extreme. I am very disappointed that the Prime Minister has failed to honour our no-surprises policy set out in the ACT-National confidence and supply agreement. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The honourable member has had the additional time that I—[ 
Interruption 
] It may have escaped honourable members’ attention but I am on my feet. I gave members a fair indication of how I intended to interpret the leave granted by the House. The member has had just over the extra minute of time to make his statement in response to the ministerial statement.
Smith Lockwood: Ministerial Statements — UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
Smith Lockwood: Ministerial Statements — UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
[Volume:662;Page:10231] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before I call the next member I will give members guidance as to how I intend to interpret the leave granted by the House. The Government Minister took 2 minutes more than the norm in making his address to the House; I propose that the parties that would normally have 5 minutes to speak have up to 7 minutes should they choose to use it and that the parties that would normally have 2 minutes to speak have up to 3 minutes should they choose to use it.
Dunne Peter: Motions — Poland—Death of President Lech Kaczynski and Other Dignitaries 
Dunne Peter: Motions — Poland—Death of President Lech Kaczynski and Other Dignitaries 
[Volume:662;Page:10229] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 United Future joins with the other parties that have spoken in this debate to express sympathy and sorrow on the death of President Lech Kacyznski and his party on route to the Katyn massacre commemorations in western Russia recently. 
It is very hard for us to comprehend the magnitude of a tragedy that takes out in one fell swoop as it were virtually the entire infrastructure of a nation. The looks of grief that my colleague referred to and the shock and horror on the faces of the people of Warsaw and other cities as they have come to grips with that bring home I think the enormity of what has happened the high regard in which the president was held by his people and in many senses the historic suffering of the people of Poland. In this country we have our own history with the Pahiatua children the Prime Minister referred to. 
Poland in many senses has always been at the forefront of international suffering; the irony of the massacre being that it took place on the day on which this tragedy occurred. The president played an important part in Poland’s liberation from communism in the early 1980s. All these things add up to an image of a country that was starting to flourish as a centre of culture and democracy and a real haven for its people in a way that perhaps had not been the case for a long period of time. So the tragedy is a doubly serious one for the people. I simply want to put on record my condolences and my sympathy with the people of Poland the Polish community in New Zealand and all those who have been affected by this tragedy. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before I put the question I must apologise to members that their ability to speak in the House has been compromised by the sound system playing up. I apologise to members. I take it very seriously when a member’s ability to speak is affected. 
Motion agreed to.
Smith Lockwood: Obituaries — James Gladstone (Jim) Edwards 
Smith Lockwood: Obituaries — James Gladstone (Jim) Edwards 
[Volume:662;Page:10227] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I regret to inform the House of the death on 5 April 2010 of James Gladstone (Jim) Edwards QSM who represented the electorate of Napier from 1954 to 1966. 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. I now ask members to stand with me and observe a period of silence as a mark of respect for his memory. 
Honourable members stood as a mark of respect.
Urgent Debates Declined — Prison Wiri—Commissioning UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
Urgent Debates Declined — Prison Wiri—Commissioning UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
[Volume:662;Page:10251] 
Urgent Debates Declined 
Prison Wiri—Commissioning 
UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—Government Support 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Hon Clayton Cosgrove seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the Government’s intention to commission a new prison at Wiri which will be designed built and operated under a public-private partnership. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. The test for whether a particular case requires the attention of the House is a high one. The decision to commission the new prison follows the passage of the Corrections (Contract Management of Prisons) Amendment Bill which was given its third reading on 24 November last year. The House has only recently considered the issue in principle. Every subsequent decision made under the legislation will not necessarily be of sufficient importance to justify setting aside the business of the House. I am not persuaded that the matter deserves the immediate attention of the House by way of an urgent debate today. There will be other occasions on which it can be debated. The application is therefore declined. 
I have also received a letter from the Hon Rodney Hide seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the decision of the New Zealand Government to reverse our previous opposition to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility of the Government. However a Minister cannot raise a matter for debate under Standing Order 380—I refer to Speakers’ ruling 171/3. A debate on a matter of urgent public importance is an opportunity for a member to hold the Government to account. The application is therefore declined.
Speaker’s Statements — Chamber Lobbies and Galleries—Audio System Faulty Microphones 
Speaker’s Statements — Chamber Lobbies and Galleries—Audio System Faulty Microphones 
[Volume:662;Page:10251] 
Speaker’s Statements 
Chamber Lobbies and Galleries—Audio System Faulty Microphones 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before I go on to the next item of business—and I have received a couple of letters from members about this matter—I want to apologise again to members in the back quarter of the House on the Government side. The speakers were tested prior to the House sitting today and they were operating properly prior to the House sitting. It seems that maybe something was disconnected when members came into the House. The technicians cannot come into the House at the moment to remedy that so I apologise to members. We will just have to do the best we can. Members should feel free to move elsewhere if their own microphones are not working.
Obituaries — James Gladstone (Jim) Edwards 
Obituaries — James Gladstone (Jim) Edwards 
[Volume:662;Page:10227] 
Tuesday 20 April 2010 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Obituaries 
James Gladstone (Jim) Edwards 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I regret to inform the House of the death on 5 April 2010 of James Gladstone (Jim) Edwards QSM who represented the electorate of Napier from 1954 to 1966. 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. I now ask members to stand with me and observe a period of silence as a mark of respect for his memory. 
Honourable members stood as a mark of respect.
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:654;Page:4064] 
12.  
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
 to the  
Minister of Fisheries 
: What judgment was handed down recently by the Supreme Court on the management of the kahawai fishery? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY (Minister of Fisheries) 
: 
 The Supreme Court recently ruled on a 2004-05 ministerial decision regarding kahawai stocks. It has ruled that ultimately the question of the allocation between fishers is a matter of judgment for the Minister of Fisheries. This provides clarity for me as the Minister and I would like to assure all fishers—commercial recreational and customary—and the member that I understand the responsibility I have as the Minister to make sound decisions to protect the health of the fish stock and to provide all with fair access to and a fair share of our fisheries. 
Colin King 
: What are the next steps to be taken with regard to the review of the kahawai catch limits? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: I am committed to reviewing the kahawai catch limits and allowances. However there is not enough time left to properly review the catch limits before the start of the next fishing year on 1 October 2009. Given the history and the importance of this fishery I want the review to be done properly. I am not prepared to act in haste.