edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Vote: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8484] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 11 
Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 108 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 128 in the name of the Hon Matt Robson to clause 67(5)(c) and (d) be agreed to.
Burton Mark: Speaker’s Rulings — Privileges of the House and Speaker’s Actions 
Burton Mark: Speaker’s Rulings — Privileges of the House and Speaker’s Actions 
[Volume:611;Page:8657] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I will say it again: this is an outrageous abuse of parliamentary process. You have made—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Points of order will be heard in silence or members will leave. Every point of order I have insisted will be heard in silence. 
Hon MARK BURTON 
: You have listened to the concerns of members. You have given a ruling that included an assurance to the House that you will come back with a considered response. The further revisiting of the matter is a direct challenge to your ruling and is in breach of the Standing Orders of this House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I want to say again I will come back to the House on this matter.
Duncan Helen: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Duncan Helen: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17880. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
HELEN DUNCAN (Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Hughes Darren: Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee Third Reading 
Hughes Darren: Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21647] 
DARREN HUGHES (Junior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Baldock Larry: Resource Management and Electricity Legislation Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Baldock Larry: Resource Management and Electricity Legislation Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:627;Page:22329] 
LARRY BALDOCK (United Future) 
: 
 Before we move on to speeches on the third reading I would like to make just a few comments in response to Jeanette Fitzsimons’ very clear description of what is taking place within this bill in terms of amendments to allow for appeals on notification to go to the Environment Court. I think she explained the situation very well in that while this bill does allow for those appeals to take place it is unlikely they will ever occur in the future. I think that that is United Future’s position. We would probably rather see the Order in Council for appeals to transfer to the Environment Court never materialise. 
Today I reviewed United Future’s position on this matter going right back to October 2002 when I made a speech concerning the Resource Management (Controlled and Discretionary Activities) Amendment Bill a member’s bill of Owen Jennings and when we first committed to reform within the Resource Management Act. I made it very clear that United Future’s position was that we did not want to see the removal of appeals from the High Court. In fact as I looked I found that it was the Government of the day that removed that provision from the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No. 2) so it was certainly not keen to see that happen. 
In this bill we really do have a great compromise between United Future’s position and the Labour Government’s position as has happened on many occasions—unfortunately not on some of the occasions when we would have liked to see it happen. Certainly in this case we are pleased with the arrangement in this bill—where we have provision for the change to occur but a recognition that it is probably not in the best interests of the overall process for the Environment Court to have to deal with those issues—and we look forward now to the final passage of this bill through its third reading and into law.
Cosgrove Clayton: Reserve Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Cosgrove Clayton: Reserve Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:8020] 
CLAYTON COSGROVE (NZ Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 As chairman of the Finance and Expenditure Committee I follow on from the Minister and Dr Brash by expressing my appreciation especially in respect of the committee which tends to be reasonably political most of the time. This was an example of true bipartisanship and so it should be for this measure. In particular I thank Dr Brash for his expertise in assisting the committee with this legislation. One of the major issues we dealt with was as Dr Cullen has said the use of the terms “bank” “banker” and “banking”. We were struck with a position where we did not want to restrict as Dr Cullen has said legitimate financial institutions that were non-registered banks such as credit unions and building societies. On the other hand we wanted to provide some belts and braces some integrity and security for people who were wanting to engage in legitimate banking activities but did not want to be ripped off by sharks as it were who were pretending to be banks. Mr Donald provided some assistance in trying to gain some clarity especially in respect of the definitions of those terms and I thank him for that. We have put in a disclaimer so that building societies and others have to make it clear that they are not registered banks but they can use those terms because they are engaged in banking transactions and activities. I conclude by thanking the committee. Dr Brash took us through quite a good analysis of the designated payment system and I acknowledge that. This is a sound bill. It does provide some further integrity to the Reserve Bank as an institution in this country.
Carter John: Business Statement 
Carter John: Business Statement 
[Volume:611;Page:8603] 
JOHN CARTER (Senior Whip—NZ National) 
: 
 Just to confirm I ask the Deputy Leader of the House whether there is any chance of urgency next week.
Vote: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21582] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 81 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 20; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 27 
New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; Green Party 8; Maori Party 1. 
Amendments agreed to.
Gosche Mark: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Gosche Mark: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:619;Page:14799] 
6.  
Hon MARK GOSCHE (Labour—Maungakiekie) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: How many jobs have been created since the election of the Labour-led Government? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 The Labour-Progressive Government has been doing well on this matter. The June 2004 household labour force survey released by the Government Statistician yesterday indicates that there are now 211000 more people in employment than there were at the beginning of the year 2000. That is an increase of nearly 12 percent in 4¼ years taking the number of people in employment to above 2 million for the first time. That has reduced unemployment to the rate of 4 percent the equal-lowest rate in the nearly 20 years that New Zealand has had a labour force survey and the second-lowest level of unemployment in the developed world. 
Hon Mark Gosche 
: I apologise to my constituent Mr Robson for the previous question being worded in that manner but my supplementary question to the Minister is this: what has been the effect of this employment growth on groups and regions traditionally disadvantaged in terms of employment? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Mr Robson will be proud to know that he is part of these kinds of examples: Maori employment has increased by 32800 or by 22 percent reducing Maori unemployment to 8.8 percent; Pacific employment has increased by 16500 or 23 percent reducing that unemployment rate to 7.4 percent; employment for 15 to 24-year-olds has increased by 13.5 percent; and employment for over 55-year-olds has increased by 41 percent. In a place like Northland employment has increased by 3100 and in the Bay of Plenty by 6500. All around this House I am sure there are extremely happy electorate MPs. 
Peter Brown 
: Noting the Minister has given us those answers in percentages will the Minister tell the House what percentage of the newly created jobs are full-time permanent part-time permanent and casual jobs? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I have not actually got that specific breakdown but I can say to the member that overwhelmingly the jobs being created are full-time jobs. That is one of the strong things that is happening here. People are getting real jobs and real wages at the rate they want to earn. 
Judy Turner 
: Is he claiming that this Government is in some way responsible for the sharp fall in unemployment; if so how does he reconcile that with the speech made by the Minister of Finance last month when he said: “I’m not claiming that Government policies have been the major driver of this development”. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Natural modesty.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Privilege—Hon Harry Duynhoven 
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Privilege—Hon Harry Duynhoven 
[Volume:610;Page:7292] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I would like to get things a bit clearer because it seems that in answers to both Mr Prebble’s and Dr Mapp’s points of order there has come from you a suggestion that you may not be put in a position of having to make that determination because of some expectation that the Government might be about to change the law. Surely the situation with regard to Mr Duynhoven exists now so the question arises: why the long wait? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I decide on the present law—nothing else. I decide on the present law. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is my party’s concern as to what your answer was in respect of Mr Mapp’s question because if that is your answer then by a very unfortunate circumstance and without recourse for us to have the ability to correct that circumstance I am bound to say that you are bound to come to a certain decision—which would be very very adverse for Mr Duynhoven and which I do not believe—I cannot speak for other members—is fair or right. So in reality one of the options you must surely keep open for yourself is the capacity of this House to correct the situation by way of retrospective legislation. In which event sadly your answer to Mr Mapp cannot stand. All I am asking is are you prepared to avail yourself of the opportunity to take the decision of the Privileges Committee and Parliament on this matter?
Pillay Lynne: Minimum Wage Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Pillay Lynne: Minimum Wage Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5162] 
LYNNE PILLAY (NZ Labour—Waitakere) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:625;Page:20315] 
8.  
DAVID PARKER (Labour—Otago) 
 to the  
Minister of Local Government 
: What new measures is the Government taking to help smaller councils improve drinking water systems? 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister for Courts) 
 on behalf of the 
 Minister of Local Government 
: I am delighted to announce that the Government is establishing a fund of $136 million to help improve drinking water systems for New Zealand communities. The fund will be of particular benefit to smaller communities where the provision of safe drinking water is more expensive on a per capita basis. It is important that everyone has good access to good-quality drinking water. 
David Parker 
: What are the expected benefits from the Drinking Water Subsidy Fund? 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: There are two major benefits: firstly there will be a reduction in waterborne disease which is estimated to cost the New Zealand economy about $15 billion a year; secondly we are not only ensuring better-quality water but also easing the cost to those communities and ratepayers of their meeting their basic infrastructure needs.
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21006] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: The amendment in the name of Stephen Franks to add new clause 74 is out of order. It is outside the scope of the bill in that it amends an Act not being amended by the bill in a manner that is not consequential.
Yates Dianne: Holidays Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Yates Dianne: Holidays Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:614;Page:10549] 
DIANNE YATES (Labour—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6287] 
A party vote was called for on the question T 
hat the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13 ACT New Zealand 8. 
Noes 71 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 4 be agreed to: 
to omit paragraph (b)(ii).
Robertson H V Ross: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
Robertson H V Ross: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12398] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Just before I put the question on that motion an amendment has been put forward by the honourable member Gerrard Eckhoff. It is an amendment to add the words “ 
 and that the committee will not meet when the House is in urgency 
.” 
Amendment agreed to.
Cullen Michael: Business of Select Committees — Reporting Dates Membership 
Cullen Michael: Business of Select Committees — Reporting Dates Membership 
[Volume:607;Page:4953] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the time by which the Local Government and Environment Committee must finally report the Resource Management (Costs) Amendment Bill to be extended to 30 October 2003 and for the time by which the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee must finally report the Volunteers Employment Protection Amendment Bill to be extended to 29 August 2003. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none.
Carter John: Points of Order — Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate Parliament Building—Media Access Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate 
Carter John: Points of Order — Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate Parliament Building—Media Access Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate 
[Volume:624;Page:19716] 
JOHN CARTER (National—Northland) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Can I have some clarification that no one objected so that means that the bill can be considered? Does that mean immediately? 
Hon George Hawkins 
: I did. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Was there objection? There was. I am sorry I did not hear it. There was objection I say to Mr Carter.
Vote: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21509] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 13 
New Zealand First 13. 
Noes 103 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 26; ACT New Zealand 9; Green Party 7; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to and schedule 1 agreed to.
Vote: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21591] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 81 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 20; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 28 
New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; Green Party 8; Maori Party 1. 
Clause 1 agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Rod Donald to clause 2 be agreed to: 
to insert in subclause (1) after the words “Order in Council” the words “but not before 30 June 2006”.
Benson-Pope David: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — First Reading 
Benson-Pope David: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:613;Page:9833] 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (Labour—Dunedin South) 
: 
 I am delighted to rise in support of this legislation. I commend it to the House and congratulate my colleague the Hon Pete Hodgson on its introduction.
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:20986] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 21 be agreed to: 
to omit subparagraph (i) of paragraph (b) and substitute the following new subparagraph: 
(i)the close of the day that is 8 months after the sending date of the previous notice; and.
Third Readings 
Third Readings 
[Volume:612;Page:9283] 
Third Readings 
Hon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I move  
That the Administration Amendment Bill the Armed Forces Discipline Amendment Bill the Bail Amendment Bill (No 2) the Births Deaths and Marriages Registration Amendment Bill (No 2) the Building Amendment Bill (No 2) the Burial and Cremation Amendment Bill the Business Development Boards Act Repeal Bill the Conservation Amendment Bill the Construction Contracts Amendment Bill the Coroners Amendment Bill the Courts Martial Appeals Amendment Bill the Defence Amendment Bill the District Courts Amendment Bill (No 2) the Domestic Violence Amendment Bill the Electricity Amendment Bill the Flags Emblems and Names Protection Amendment Bill the Gas Amendment Bill the Government Superannuation Fund Amendment Bill (No 3) the Health and Disability Services (Safety) Amendment Bill the Health Research Council Amendment Bill the Industrial and Provident Societies Amendment Bill the Industry Training Amendment Bill (No 2) the Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 2) the Legal Services Amendment Bill the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Amendment Bill the Local Government (Rating) Amendment Bill the Medicines Amendment Bill (No 3) the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill the New Zealand Railways Corporation Amendment Bill the Ngati Turangitukua Claims Settlement Amendment Bill the Official Information Amendment Bill the Ombudsmen Amendment Bill the Passports Amendment Bill the Police Amendment Bill (No 3) the Privacy Amendment Bill (No 2) the Private Investigators and Security Guards Amendment Bill the Queen Elizabeth the Second National Trust Amendment Bill the Standards Amendment Bill the State Sector Amendment Bill (No 2) the Tokelau Amendment Bill the Trade Marks Amendment Bill the Unit Titles Amendment Bill the War Funds Act Repeal Bill and the Wildlife Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Bills read a third time.
Pettis Jill: Education (Export Education Levy) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Pettis Jill: Education (Export Education Levy) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10686] 
JILL PETTIS (Labour—Whanganui) 
: 
 I too join with my colleague Helen Duncan and all other Labour and Progressive colleagues in supporting this bill. We should get on and get it passed.
Stewart Barbara: Families Commission Bill — Second Reading 
Stewart Barbara: Families Commission Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:613;Page:10239] 
BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Last night the Minister said that there was a Supplementary Order Paper on this bill and that it would be tabled today. It is not on the Table. I wonder when the Opposition can expect to have it tabled. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order. Would the member please consult with the Clerk.
Robertson H V Ross: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16482] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The question is that Part 2 stand part. Part 2 includes clauses 23 to 31 and I remind members that it also includes debate on new schedule 2 as added by Supplementary Order Paper 279.
Catchpole Brent: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Catchpole Brent: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12247] 
BRENT CATCHPOLE (NZ First) 
: 
 It is a shame that Shane Ardern did not get his opportunity to put his positive spin on this bit! But I must thank the Acting Minister for taking a call and showing us just what this Government really does think. It is extraordinary. In fact how ironic how inconsistent how bizarre and how “Steve Maharey” this bill is. This Government and this Prime Minister refused to acknowledge grace before a State dinner. This Government and this Prime Minister refuse to acknowledge the Queen as the head of the Anglican Church. 
Hon Damien O'Connor 
: Who cares? 
BRENT CATCHPOLE 
: There we go—we have a member of the Government calling out “Who cares?”. This Government has put a motion to this Parliament to have the prayer removed from Parliament. I really must ask members how ironic one can get when one has a Government that asks for the prayer to be removed from the proceedings of Parliament. There they are putting into this legislation the words “spiritual” and “ethical”. If Mr Benson-Pope thinks that that will overcome the irony of what this Government represents then I really wonder what he has in mind for those two words. In reality this is a Government that does not recognise grace before a State dinner it does not recognise the Queen as the head of the Anglican Church and it does not want the prayer said before this Parliament. Yet the Government puts two words into a clause in this bill that expects us all to have an input into the spiritual and ethical side of Radio New Zealand. 
It is unnecessary to put those words into the legislation. The Minister should seriously consider having those words taken out considering the irony of this Government’s approach to the way it runs Parliament the way it runs the State and the way it considers the spiritual and ethical state of this country.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:624;Page:19303] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
:  
I wonder whether the Leader of the House might tell us how many third readings he currently has on the Order Paper and intends to complete in the next short while and also whether the much-promised Resource Management Act bill will see the light of day on the Order Paper before the House rises for an event later this year.
Hartley Ann: Corrections Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Hartley Ann: Corrections Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:13157] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Mr Speaker you have been recalled because members have expressed concern about the closure motion on the title debate. I have made my ruling. I have taken nine speakers in this debate which I considered had covered the issue. The Chairperson presiding when Part 3 was debated said he would take into consideration the need for more speeches. I have done that in calling nine speeches.
Visitors — Republic of Ireland—Minister of State 
Visitors — Republic of Ireland—Minister of State 
[Volume:624;Page:19147] 
Tuesday 15 March 2005 
Madam Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Republic of Ireland—Minister of State 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that Mr Conor Lenihan TD Minister of State from the Republic of Ireland is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed and accorded a seat on the left of the Chair. 
Mr Conor Lenihan accompanied by the Minister of Communications entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
Chadwick Steve: Biosecurity Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Chadwick Steve: Biosecurity Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:7067] 
STEVE CHADWICK (NZ Labour—Rotorua) 
: I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Cunliffe David: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Cunliffe David: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4657] 
DAVID CUNLIFFE (NZ Labour—New Lynn) 
: 
 That was a particularly disappointing speech even by ACT standards. It dealt firstly with some absolute contradictions of fact. Let me demonstrate several of them. The member who has resumed her seat said that this bill is anti-business. It is not. It upholds intellectual property rights. The member tried to squirm out of that contention by drawing a distinction between a rental right and a copyright. That is splitting hairs. No members of the public really care about that particular definition or term; they care about the big point. The big point is this: an intellectual property right rewards the producer of the intellectual property for his or her labour in producing that property. In that it creates an incentive for the production of further intellectual property just as this Government has successfully done through the film fund that produced the smash hit  
Whale Rider. 
The second point the Opposition got wrong was that a 9-month parallel importing ban would somehow restrain the ability of the public to access parallel-imported films or DVDs. Plainly it would not. The whole point of that ban is to allow an orderly dissemination of products through the industry through retail chains and through cinema chains in a way that is compatible with the legitimate interests of the producers of those films and the orderly management of the industry itself. 
Thirdly that member suggested the Government has been too far-reaching in this bill in direct contradiction to other members of the Opposition who say we have not gone far enough. Well the Opposition cannot have it both ways. We have either gone too far or not far enough. We cannot have done both. The fact is that we consulted widely on this bill. We took soundings and commissioned independent economic research and it suggested a very moderate and incremental approach to this protection measure. It is only a 9-month parallel importing ban which just allows the industry the time it needs to get itself in order. This is a moderate sensible pro-business pro-growth pro - creative industries pro - New Zealand bill and it is time this House passed it.
Duncan Helen: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Duncan Helen: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8510] 
HELEN DUNCAN (NZ Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
Vote: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
[Volume:624;Page:19192] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the Child Support Amendment Bill (No 3) be now read a third time. 
Ayes 76 
Anderton(P) 
Duynhoven   
Laban(P) 
Samuels(P) 
Barker(P) 
Dyson(P) 
Locke (P) 
Shirley(P) 
Barnett (P) 
Ewen-Street(P) 
Mackey J (P) 
Simich(P) 
Benson-Pope(P) 
Fairbrother(P) 
Mackey M 
Sowry(P) 
Beyer   
Fitzsimons(P) 
Maharey(P) 
Sutton(P) 
Bradford(P) 
Gallagher(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Swain(P) 
Burton(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mallard(P) 
Tamihere(P) 
Carter C (P) 
Gosche(P) 
Mapp(P) 
Tanczos(P) 
Chadwick(P) 
Hartley(P) 
Mark(P) 
Tizard   
Choudhary(P) 
Hawkins(P) 
McCully(P) 
Turei 
Clark(P) 
Hereora(P) 
O'Connor(P) 
Ward(P) 
Coddington(P) 
Hide(P) 
Okeroa(P) 
Williamson(P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Hobbs(P) 
Parker(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Cullen(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Peck(P) 
Wong(P) 
Cunliffe(P) 
Horomia(P) 
Pillay(P) 
Yates (P) 
Dalziel(P) 
Hughes(P) 
Rich(P) 
Donald(P) 
Hunt(P) 
Ririnui(P) 
Donnelly(P) 
Kedgley(P) 
Robertson(P) 
Duncan(P) 
Key(P) 
Robson(P) 
Teller: 
Dunne(P) 
King(P) 
Roy(P) 
Pettis   
Noes 44 
Adams   
Copeland(P) 
Ogilvy(P) 
Stewart(P) 
Alexander(P) 
Eckhoff(P) 
Paraone(P) 
te Heuheu(P) 
Ardern(P) 
English(P) 
Perry(P) 
Turia(P) 
Baldock(P) 
Field(P) 
Peters J (P) 
Turner(P) 
Brash(P) 
Franks   
Peters W (P) 
Wang(P) 
Brown (P) 
Goudie(P) 
Power(P) 
Woolerton(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Gudgeon(P) 
Prebble(P) 
Worth(P) 
Carter D (P) 
Heatley(P) 
Ryall(P) 
Carter J (P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Scott(P) 
Catchpole   
Jones   
Smith L (P) 
Collins(P) 
McNair(P) 
Smith M (P) 
Teller: 
Connell(P) 
Newman(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Tisch   
Bill read a third time.
Vote: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Vote: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20287] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 110 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 9 
ACT New Zealand 9. 
Amendment agreed to.
Vote: Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:16214] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 82 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 34 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 6; Maori Party 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Hughes Darren: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
Hughes Darren: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6887] 
DARREN HUGHES (NZ Labour—Otaki) 
: I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Benson-Pope David: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Benson-Pope David: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10326] 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (Labour—Dunedin South) 
: 
 I am pleased to rise in support of this bill. I think it is good legislation and as many of my parliamentary colleagues would say if they ever had any doubts about it the comments from the previous ACT speaker would convince them that their position must be correct.
Veterinarians Bill — First Reading 
Veterinarians Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:623;Page:18759] 
Veterinarians Bill 
First Reading 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Associate Minister of Agriculture) 
: 
 I move  
That the Veterinarians Bill be now read a first time. 
Debate interrupted.
Carter Chris: Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Carter Chris: Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:6934] 
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Conservation) 
: I stand to support the legislation.
Vote: Urgency 
Vote: Urgency 
[Volume:627;Page:22203] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That urgency be accorded. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand Labour 51; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Green Party 9. 
Motion agreed to.
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:20983] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to 
. 
Ayes 55 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dail Jones to clause 18 be agreed to: 
to omit subclause (3).
Yates Dianne: Judicial Matters Bill — Second Reading 
Yates Dianne: Judicial Matters Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:12806] 
DIANNE YATES (Labour—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I rise to speak on the report back of the Judicial Matters Bill. Although I was not on the Justice and Electoral Committee I am very interested in this bill because I once had a member’s bill on this particular subject. I want to thank those people who have been involved. I thank Margaret Wilson for the work she has done on the bill; Lianne Dalziel who also did a good deal of work on it; and all the good members of the select committee. 
Richard Worth 
: Oh yes. 
DIANNE YATES 
: I note that Richard Worth was on the committee. I also thank those people who put in submissions. I note that there were only 15 submissions but no doubt they were very detailed and good submissions. 
The intention of this bill is to give greater transparency and credibility to the judiciary. It is a very welcome bill. Considerable changes have been made to it. I note that one of the changes is a diagram in the schedules which I think is a very interesting and perhaps very welcome way of presenting matters in a bill. I think schedule 1AA shows the process for judicial conduct and shows how the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and the Judicial Conduct Panel will work. I welcome that type of layout and explanation as to how the system will work. Once again I commend this report to the House and thank all those involved for the work they have done.
Vote: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15606] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 101 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 12; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 17 
Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Mapp Wayne: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
Mapp Wayne: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16135] 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (National—North Shore) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. When this part opened up I raised a point of order about the length of the debate and at the time the Chair did make some comments on it. This debate started at 8.48 last night. It went for 1 hour 5 minutes. It started at 3 minutes to 6 this evening and obviously it has been going for 13 minutes. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: What is the member trying to point out? 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: The point is that so far the debate has been going for a total of 1 hour 18 minutes. Government members are already seeking the call to close this debate. The bill has 117 clauses and it is only reasonable that it should be thoroughly and properly debated. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I thank the member. The Chair is not unaware of what was discussed yesterday. We will see how it goes. Everyone will be treated fairly.
Duncan Helen: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Duncan Helen: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:616;Page:12515] 
1. HELEN DUNCAN (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: Has he received any reports on the possible introduction of voucher funding for education? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Yes. I have seen a report advocating the devolution of bargaining for teacher employment agreements to individual school boards of trustees a radical move that would go far beyond bulk funding and is a prerequisite for a voucher-type funding model. This proposal has been warmly welcomed and endorsed by the Business Roundtable its early childhood subcommittee and a former Tory MP who now works for private schools. This report is the minority report of the Education and Science Committee on the State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3) and it is the position of the National Party. 
Helen Duncan 
: Does the Minister support the introduction of a voucher-funding system for schooling in New Zealand? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Absolutely not. Voucher-funding does nothing to improve educational outcomes. It effectively privatises education and results in vastly increased gaps between those who can afford to pay tens of thousands of dollars per year in top-up fees to enter former State schools—now elite schools—and middle-income families who live next door to those schools. The gap just keeps on getting bigger and bigger. 
Hon Brian Donnelly 
: Can the Minister confirm that last Wednesday in this House Drs Lockwood Smith and Wayne Mapp both stated that National despite its failure during 9 years in Government to achieve its goals of bulk funding and site bargaining next time round would go the whole hog towards its ultimate goal of coupon education? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I heard them indicate that— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister can respond in a general sense. He is not responsible of course for those members’ comments. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: While I was sitting in the chair last week responsible for a bill going through there were certainly comments made in that direction by two National Party members. The one point that I would make is that they do not go nearly as far as the lengths Dr Brash was promoting. I do agree with the person who said: “The flaw in the voucher scheme is that parental choice would depend on wallet size. Schools would rapidly become stratified based on fee size and free public education would be dead.” Dr Nick Smith said that.
Pettis Jill: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Pettis Jill: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3750] 
JILL PETTIS (Junior Whip—NZ Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Ewen-Street Ian: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
Ewen-Street Ian: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:14554] 
IAN EWEN-STREET (Green) 
: 
 I oppose the imposition of 1 October as the commencement date. This fishery has been fished in a competitive way for about 12 to 14 years. Although simply for ecological reasons I am the last person to say that fishing should continue in a competitive way I feel that the Committee is being pushed into a corner by the Government to say it has to get this issue out of the way. There are no real reasons at all why this measure could not wait for another year. Yes we need to put controls on the fishery; there are no two ways about that. We have to put catch limits on scampi but we do not have to rush like this into making an allocation that we know and everybody in this Committee knows is grossly unfair. It has been shown by the courts to be illegal and unreasonable. Two inquiries have both shown there to be serial incompetence in the Ministry of Fisheries yet members of this Committee are continuing to follow the advice of the same people in the ministry who have shown that incompetence. Why on earth do we need to push this measure through right now? It is crazy. 
Jill Pettis 
: There’s no time like the present. 
IAN EWEN-STREET 
: A stitch in time saves nine as well but if we make a mistake in a hurry then we have a long time to regret it. 
I sincerely hope that when National Party members finally realise the mistake they are making in supporting this bill they will revisit this matter when eventually I presume at some stage in the future they become the Government. This is really bad legislation. There is absolutely no reason for this measure to be pushed through in a hurry except that the Government wants to get it out of the way. We have to ask why the Government wants to get it out of the way. It is not because it is fair to the fisher people. There is a political reason here that I can only speculate upon and I am not prepared to do that speculation publicly. However I can see some nods from Opposition members. They agree that there is a political motive behind this bill that really needs to see the light of day. I suspect that motivation will see the light of day sometime in the next year and maybe if we put off the commencement date until 2005 then those revelations would become public and we would say it was lucky that we did not put scampi into the quota management system as of 2004. 
I strongly oppose the idea that this bill should be put into place in such a hurry. A lot is still to be learnt about scampi and we need to get into that over the next year.
Fairbrother Russell: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Fairbrother Russell: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16961] 
RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (Labour—Napier) 
: 
 The staff of the Fisheries and Other Sea-related Legislation Committee deserve the thanks of the whole House for the work they did over and above the call of duty. Their attitude to the committee was tremendous.
Simich Clem: General Debates 
Simich Clem: General Debates 
[Volume:611;Page:8765] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I thank members. I did not hear that statement but any complaint against it should have been made at the time. I think both sides need to look in the mirror.
Wilson Margaret: Election of Speaker 
Wilson Margaret: Election of Speaker 
[Volume:624;Page:18953] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have to report that accompanied by members I waited upon Her Excellency the Governor-General at Government House on Thursday 3 March when I addressed Her Excellency as follows: 
May it please Your Excellency: 
In obedience to Your Excellency’s request the Members of the House of Representatives in the exercise of their undoubted rights and privileges have proceeded to the election of a Speaker and as the subject of their choice I now present myself to you and submit myself for Your Excellency’s confirmation. 
To which Her Excellency replied as follows: 
Madam Speaker:It is with much pleasure that I confirm the choice that the House of Representatives has made in your person. 
I congratulate you on your election to this distinguished office marking as it does the appreciation of the House of Representatives of your impartiality and ability. 
I have further to report that I also addressed Her Excellency as follows: 
I humbly thank Your Excellency for your confirmation of the choice made by the Members of the House of Representatives of me to be their Speaker. 
I desire to repeat my respectful acknowledgment to the House of the high honour it has done me in electing me to be its Speaker.
Peters Winston: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Peters Winston: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:15203] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. It is your call. You have taken a closure motion when a party having had only one call on the title sought a second call. That is extraordinary. It is your call and I think with respect that you should look at the past record. I cannot remember any political party—and after all our party is No 3 in this House in numbers—getting only one call on the title for such an important issue. It cannot be that 5 minutes is good enough for this bill when it comes to an issue that covers the whole ambit of the legislation before we come out of Committee and go to the third reading. I ask you to think again. 
The senior Government whip said that if I got the call they would all want one. It was clear to her that they did not all want one. Even when a concession was made by the whole of the Opposition to that member she would not concede that it was unfair. I think putting it back to you that you should make it very clear you may have made the call prematurely and that New Zealand First should have one more call. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the member. I know that he is a longstanding member in the House and I appreciate the comments he has made. The reality is though that I have accepted the call and under Speakers’ rulings I have to abide by that. The question is that the question be now put.
Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:624;Page:19565] 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. The question was addressed by the member to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade and signed by a member of his party. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: We will now proceed to the question.
Shirley Ken: Christchurch City Council (Robert McDougall Gallery) Land Vesting Bill — Procedure Second Reading 
Shirley Ken: Christchurch City Council (Robert McDougall Gallery) Land Vesting Bill — Procedure Second Reading 
[Volume:611;Page:8798] 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Deputy Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think there is a way forward—and this is relating to the status of the document that was tabled. Your assertion and your judgment were based on the fact that it would not make any material difference. I think there is way to test that. If you were to invite the Deputy Leader of the House to resubmit the draft to apply for leave to table the draft minutes of the Business Committee then we could test that assertion—whether your assumption that it would not have made any difference is true or false. I put that to you as perhaps a way forward.
Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 2) — Referral to Local Government and Environment Committee referral back to the Local Government and Environment Committee 
Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 2) — Referral to Local Government and Environment Committee referral back to the Local Government and Environment Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3257] 
Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 2) 
Referral to Local Government and Environment Committee referral back to the Local Government and Environment Committee 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for Government order of the day No. 40 relating to consideration of the report on the Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 2) to be discharged and the bill referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee for further consideration and that the committee have the power to consider and if it thinks fit adopt any amendments relating to the control and care of dogs. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? 
Dail Jones 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. We would prefer to have this matter dealt with by way of Supplementary Order Paper and I have prepared a further motion. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Objection has been raised and that is the end of the matter. 
Dail Jones 
: No no. I am not objecting to it; I am just saying that— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Please be seated. Someone has raised objection. That is the end of the matter.