edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Vote: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Vote: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6090] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to. 
Part 1 agreed to.
Gilmore Aaron: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Gilmore Aaron: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6090] 
AARON GILMORE (National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
English Bill: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
English Bill: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6089] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 There have been a couple of questions. Firstly there has been the question of why the Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill is going through the House in this form. There is a simple reason for that. It is the need for maximum certainty particularly in respect of listed entities and any institutions that may be under financial pressure currently. A judgment was made and I do not pretend that it is any more than a judgment that the process we are using is the best way to ensure that certainty. 
With regard to consultation through the mechanism of the Reserve Bank consultation with non-bank deposit takers over the new regulatory structure—actually there was a significant discussion with the sector about this particular issue over time—it became quite apparent that with only a bit more than a year to go until the end of the existing guarantee it was quite important for the Government to move with some speed to create certainty. Members might see in the regulatory impact statement a graph that shows the build-up of deposits against the end date of the guarantee. That was clearly going to become a pressure of instability in the sector. 
On balance the Government made the judgment that it should get on with making a decision about the extension of the guarantee and to execute that extension as quickly as is reasonable. The Government appreciates the support of Parliament in doing that.
Foss Craig: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Foss Craig: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6086] 
CRAIG FOSS (National—Tukituki) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Goodhew Jo: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Goodhew Jo: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6085] 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Lee Melissa: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Lee Melissa: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6069] 
MELISSA LEE (National) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to rise and take a short call on the Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill. Already many members have spoken on this bill but I want to add my tuppence worth to make a couple of points. I was trying to get to the House this afternoon to watch some of the debate that was happening and I was quite appalled. Let me start by saying what a load of hogwash from Labour! Apparently it is supporting this bill and it feels the need to blame others. Let me remind members opposite that the mass financial company failures—some 30 financial institutions—happened on its watch when Labour was in Government. I ask members whether we are all glad that the 9 long years of Labour taking New Zealand around the bend and then down the gurgler of the OECD rankings are over and that we have a great Prime Minister a fabulous Cabinet and a caucus who are focused—yes focused—on getting New Zealand back on track. 
Hon Parekura Horomia 
: What are you talking about? 
MELISSA LEE 
: Yes the member does not know what we are talking about because Labour was concerned about putting New Zealand down the gurgler. We are on the way up. 
Katrina Shanks 
: 9 long years! 
MELISSA LEE 
: That is right—9 long years. We are on the way back up and on track. 
If the approval rating of our Prime Minister is any indication the National Government is doing a sterling job—a fantastic job. What percentage did the Leader of the Opposition have? I believe it was a single figure—a single digit. This retail deposit guarantee scheme was a direct response to international financial market turbulence. The National Government is extending the scheme while tightening some of the conditions. 
Compared to other speakers I have no background in finance or banking. There are some hints that the concerns about the stability of the financial systems are now abating. Some countries are even announcing economic growth. For me as a mother not a financial person or a banker as a daughter and as a business owner responsible for paying staff I like to know that my deposits are safe and that I will not lose my hard-earned money and the moneys for my family and my staff members. I like to know that it is safe and that this Government is guaranteeing the deposit. It is a prop up for the country’s financial system but until we are back on track I like to know that the Government guarantees it and the thousands of retail depositors—the ma and pa depositors of this country who want a better future for themselves and their families—will agree with me. 
The new scheme starts on 13 October 2010 when the current scheme ends which is the day before and it continues until 31 December 2011. The planned extension will maintain confidence and help both the depositors and institutions to adjust back to a more normal business environment. What a fantastic thing that will be. New Zealand will be back on track. I commend this bill to the House.
Shanks Katrina: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Shanks Katrina: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6068] 
KATRINA SHANKS (National) 
: 
 It is my pleasure to take a call tonight on the Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill. This is an interesting bill because it is a continuation of a scheme that we already have in place to address the issues around the confidence that our investors have with the banks that they deposit with. We know that a year ago there was real concern around the viability of many of the overseas banks and financial institutions. There was concern that investors were withdrawing their money and that they did not have any confidence in the banking system. 
I will address the comments that Russel Norman made earlier and to be honest I do not quite know where to start. At the end of the day it was the strength of our banks down here in New Zealand that helped our economy along. We did not have our banks folding. We had relatively strong banks and the Government got in behind the banks and put in a retail deposit guarantee scheme to ensure that our investors will have confidence in the banking system in New Zealand. 
This bill has extended the current scheme until 31 December 2011 which is an extension of another year. The current scheme was to expire on 12 October 2010. We were finding that there was a lack of confidence around the uncertainty of what would happen to these deposits so we have continued that scheme in order to help out our economy. 
We realised that if people do not invest in our economy then we will not have any growth. That is what it is about. John Key’s Government is about getting some bounce out of this recession so that we can get some good solid growth. It is so that we can be leaders going forward with our very strong economy and our export markets and we can ensure that we get cutting edge technology and cutting edge businesses. We are out there at the front end getting our fair share of the business that we should be getting in those areas. 
It is really interesting to find out that currently there is $120 billion worth of guaranteed deposits in total in existence over 73 institutions. There has been a big take-up of the retail deposit guarantee scheme and this will continue. It was my pleasure to take a call on this bill this evening. Thank you very much Mr Deputy Speaker.
Young Jonathan: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Young Jonathan: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6068] 
JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) 
: 
 Investors and depositors still remain nervous in New Zealand and it is at times such as this time that Governments need to act in order to bring stability. This Government has sought to protect New Zealanders through the turbulent economic times we have been through and continue to face. 
Recently the  
New Zealand Herald  
reported that John Kidd a McDouall Stuart analyst had said “The Government must provide some clarity around the future of the retail deposit guarantee and soon to minimise uncertainty and avoid another looming funding crunch in the beleaguered finance company sector”. The  
New Zealand Herald 
 reported further that “After being starved of retail investor money after a string of high-profile failures in the sector the introduction of the guarantee in October last year saw a flood of cash into finance companies. But there has been no official word on whether the scheme will be extended when it expires in October next year. Because of that investors have been reluctant to invest further in finance companies for terms beyond the scheme’s expiry date.” That is a concern. It is good to note that the Minister of Finance the Hon Bill English is responding not only to the international situation but also to the needs of the finance industry here in New Zealand which will continue to fuel and finance our recovery out of this recession in the years ahead. 
The Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme was instituted in October 2008 in the wake of a growing sense of uncertainty regarding deposits. As we walked in step with Australia New Zealand also under the previous Government set up a retail deposit guarantee scheme. It followed other measures of the Reserve Bank to ensure liquidity at that particular time. Apart from protecting depositors the guarantee also afforded banks and businesses with a sense of stability during those troubled times that we experienced by ensuring investor confidence. A number of changes are coming up in this bill which others no doubt will allude to but some of the changes are to bring some transition back into normal business practice. This means that people or companies such as banks and other institutions that take the step into this extended scheme for a further 14 months will at the end of that period of time come back into normal finance and business practice. 
Thank you Mr Speaker. I am happy to commend this bill to the House.
English Bill: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
English Bill: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6060] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill be now read a second time 
. Members who spoke during the first reading have covered I think the essence of the bill and I welcome the broad support for it in Parliament. 
I want to make just a couple of additional points as we move through the second reading. The first point is to make it clear that in passing this bill it is the Government’s intention to move over time back to normal market conditions in our finance sector. The details of the extension of the guarantee will show that the Government is moving the pricing of the guarantee somewhere towards what market pricing would be. However we have given an extension whereby from today there will be a bit less than 2½ years until the guarantee expires around 2010 or 2011. That should be a clear signal to financial institutions that they should ready themselves for normal market conditions beyond that point. 
The second point I want to mention is one that is often overlooked and has occasionally been confused in commentaries and in some speeches. The previous Government following on from the finance company collapses passed into law a new regulatory regime for the non-bank deposit-taking institutions. That regime will come into place over the next 6 months or so. The regime involves more direct supervision by the Reserve Bank liquidity requirements and capital ratio requirements as well as a requirement for credit ratings. It is quite important to understand that that process is separate from the guarantee. It will require those institutions to meet higher prudential standards than they did before. So the extension of the guarantee will raise the hurdle but that does not occur until after October next year. Between now and then credit unions building societies and finance companies will be required to meet the standards set by the non-bank deposit-taking regime. That has been the subject of extensive consultation with the industry which was begun by the last Government and has been continued by the Reserve Bank under this Government. The sector is fully aware of what kind of requirements there will be. It has had the opportunity to discuss and in some cases disagree with them. 
It is important to understand that those two processes although related are actually separate. I expect that the challenge posed by the non-bank deposit-taking regime is more immediate than the change in the conditions of the retail deposit guarantee that we are legislating for today.
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6059] 
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 I wish to take a short call on the Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill. A number of speakers before me have touched on the advantages of the bill around giving certainty to financial institutions and maintaining confidence in our financial system. 
I will raise a couple of points that have been put forward by members opposite particularly around the financial inquiry they held in the last month. While they have been grandstanding by setting up bogus inquiries members of this Government have been travelling the country and talking to financial institutions; we have been actually visiting the financial institutions that are the heartbeat of our economy. We have been talking to and listening to those financial companies and one of the biggest things on their agenda has been the extension of this deposit guarantee scheme. So we have acted. I commend the Minister of Finance for taking this bill through Parliament early in order to give our financial companies a level of certainty in terms of the extension of the deposit guarantee scheme. 
The scheme is about minimising the exposure of the taxpayer. Although members opposite would like to see some sort of socialised banking whereby everyone pays a fee the way it works in reality is that there is a risk-return trade-off. Mr Parker referred to the big end of town benefiting from this bill but it will actually benefit a number of financial institutions such as South Canterbury Finance which has a rating of BB+ and lends to a number of rural and urban customers. It will benefit them by allowing our businesses to expand and grow particularly in the export sector and by providing employment opportunities which this country desperately needs. So this measure is not about supporting just the big end of town but middle-tier finance companies that are highly reliant at the moment on this deposit guarantee scheme. 
The bill is about protecting financial institutions but not to the extent that those financial institutions are buffered from the commercial realities of business restructurings and business failures. It is about supporting the finance sector through this difficult time and it is about the rough edges of the economy. We have seen a recent Treasury report that talked about a turn-round in this economy but that turn-round has not yet eventuated. We are yet to see economic growth quarter on quarter but we look forward optimistically to it. 
I support this bill. It is a good bill. I think it addresses the uncertainty in the finance sector at the right time. Thank you. 
Bill read a first time.
Vote: Urgency 
Vote: Urgency 
[Volume:657;Page:6039] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That urgency be accorded. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
[Volume:657;Page:6038] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the introduction and passing of the Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill the second reading and remaining stages of the Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill the introduction and first reading of the Biosecurity Amendment Bill and the second reading of the Student Loan Scheme (Repayment Bonus) Amendment Bill. 
The first bill that we intend to deal with under urgency today is the Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill and that is because of the commercial sensitivity that could exist around the issue of the guarantee of retail deposits in New Zealand. This provision has been widely supported in the past as being good for the economy in these difficult times and it is important that the legislation is passed through the House in a continuum so that commercial interests may be best protected through this mechanism. The Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill is a measure that is very much awaited by many people in New Zealand who have projects that may well contribute to economic growth. Therefore having the legislation in place well and truly before 1 October is a good idea. The Biosecurity Amendment Bill to be introduced today has similar aspects to it. It is important that we get that bill referred to a select committee for due consideration promptly. We want to make progress on the Student Loan Scheme (Repayment Bonus) Bill because this is the time of year when many young people are planning their futures and they need to know exactly how that loan regime will be put in place. 
I also say that it is not widely known that the House sits for only 17 hours a week. When we take out question time the general debate and quite often the overrun of question time or special debates such as were requested today we get to the situation whereby between now and Christmas the scheduled sitting days available to the House are such that we have just 115-odd hours available for the passing of legislation. That means that from time to time the Government needs to seek extended hours which is exactly what is being sought here through the provision of urgency.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — SAS—Deployment to Afghanistan New Zealand Police—Review of Property Portfolio 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — SAS—Deployment to Afghanistan New Zealand Police—Review of Property Portfolio 
[Volume:657;Page:6038] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Leader of the Opposition seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 media reports of a decision by Cabinet not to accept the advice of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade on the issue of deploying Special Air Service personnel to Afghanistan. The decision to recommit SAS personnel was made last month and the House held a debate on the decision on 18 August. For there now to be a particular case of recent occurrence there must be a new situation of importance or a new development in an existing situation of sufficient importance in itself to warrant a debate being held. An urgent debate cannot be granted on the basis of media speculation. I am not persuaded that the matter warrants the House again setting aside its business. The application is therefore declined. 
I have also received a letter from the Hon Clayton Cosgrove seeking to debate the review of the New Zealand Police property portfolio. The review may well be a case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility but the member has provided no authenticating material. That in itself is sufficient ground to decline an application; I refer the member to Speaker’s ruling 170/5. In addition the setting up of a review rarely justifies an urgent debate. When a review is reported there may be exceptional circumstances that will justify a debate but even then this is not always the case; I refer to Speaker’s ruling 177/1. The application is therefore also declined.
Shanks Katrina: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Shanks Katrina: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:657;Page:6033] 
9.  
KATRINA SHANKS (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Senior Citizens 
: What is the Government doing to be kept informed on issues that affect older New Zealanders? 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: Becoming one! 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Minister for Senior Citizens) 
: 
 Apart from reaching the age as the Minister for Senior Citizens I meet regularly with national organisations that advocate for and represent older people such as Grey Power and Age Concern New Zealand. This engagement allows me to keep up to date with issues of national importance for older people. I am also fortunate to have a group of 50 people called Volunteer Community Co-ordinators who live from Cape Reinga to the Bluff and who keep me informed on issues that affect their communities. Not only do they provide me with the opinions of older people but also they contribute to the development of policy and services that impact on senior citizens. 
Katrina Shanks 
: How does this information and policy advice assist the Government? 
Hon JOHN CARTER 
: Volunteer Community Co-ordinators recently helped the Ministry of Social Development redevelop the department’s forms that older people most frequently use and told us how it would like the ministry to deliver services to older people. However Volunteer Community Co-ordinators is not limited to its work with the Ministry of Social Development. For example it recently prepared a submission to Pharmac’s consumer advisory committee on its review of its terms of reference which the Minister of Health was very pleased to acknowledge. It also works with local district councils to promote positive ageing and is heavily involved in planning the International Day of Older Persons.
Auchinvole Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Auchinvole Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:657;Page:6029] 
7.  
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National—West Coast - Tasman) 
 to the  
Minister for Building and Construction 
: What is he doing to improve building quality and reduce unnecessary bureaucracy? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister for Building and Construction) 
: 
 On 27 August I announced two major initiatives. The first was a release of the terms of reference for a review of the Building Act 2004 and the second was quite substantial changes to the licensed building practitioner regime. 
Hon Shane Jones 
: Labour policy. 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: No they were not Labour policy I say to Mr Jones. They were quite increased enhancements on original policy. Both of these initiatives will try to address a sector that is currently drowning in red tape and dying from over-regulation and bureaucracy. They will try to enhance quality and take away all the additional costs that the sector has been suffering from for a long time. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: What has been the response to these announcements? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: I have to say it is an unusual experience for me but for the first time in relation to any announcement I have ever made over the many many years I have been an MP or a Minister no statement has been made by anybody in opposition to these announcements. The Certified Builders Association thinks this move is wonderful and said that this will be a really good step towards reducing red tape and bureaucracy. The Chief Executive Officer of the Registered Master Builders Federation Warwick Quinn said that this was a fantastic step forward in addressing issues that have been holding the industry back. Even John Gray the President of the Home Owners and Buyers Association said that this was the building blocks towards improving the standards in the industry that were long overdue.
Borrows Chester: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Borrows Chester: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:657;Page:6025] 
3.  
CHESTER BORROWS (National—Whanganui) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: What recent announcements has he made regarding legal aid? 
Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 On 1 September I announced the release of the discussion paper  
Improving the Legal Aid System 
. The discussion paper is the first stage in a fundamental review of the legal aid system led by Dame Margaret Bazley. The purpose of the review is to consider how the system can best be structured so that it delivers effective services to those who need them most in a way that is cost-effective and sustainable. Dame Margaret Bazley will provide me with a final report from the review in November. 
Chester Borrows 
: How can the public have their say on the future of the legal aid system? 
Hon SIMON POWER 
: Public submissions on the discussion paper are open until 9 October. I note that in a press release the Hon Lianne Dalziel and Charles Chauvel indicated they would be making a submission on the discussion document. I look forward to receiving that. I encourage members of the public in particular as well as members of the profession to read the discussion paper which can be found on the Ministry of Justice’s website. They should all make a submission if possible. 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: Is the Minister disappointed in the lack of opportunity for expanding the Public Defence Service that this paper presents in light of his public endorsement of the service; and will the Government consider the expansion of the service beyond the very limited suggestion in the discussion document where it is limited to improving standards where there are particular problems? 
Hon SIMON POWER 
: No I am not disappointed at all with the discussion document. As the member knows the Budget itself announced an expansion in the Public Defence Service. I am on the record as saying I am very impressed with it and I am sure it will have a role. 
Rahui Katene 
: What progress has been made to co-locate advice and information services with other social services in order to address the underlying problems that the discussion document says are being faced by Maori and Pacific peoples and by other groups of people at risk of social exclusion? 
Hon SIMON POWER 
: Well although we await Dame Margaret’s final report on the issue of the proposed future shape of the legal aid system including whether that system should be integrated with other social services I can say on first hearing the suggestion that it is something I would be prepared to have a look at.
Smith Lockwood: Speaker’s Rulings — Select Committees—Status of Reports and Proceedings 
Smith Lockwood: Speaker’s Rulings — Select Committees—Status of Reports and Proceedings 
[Volume:657;Page:6021] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am very happy to look further into that particular issue but I believe that such a matter is actually in the first case one for the committee and then at the end of the day it is one for the authority of the House. The Speaker can only enforce the Standing Orders and it would be my interpretation having looked fairly carefully at this issue that a Speaker could require that a report be presented only where the House has set a deadline for that. Ultimately it is the House that must rule on these matters. The Speaker cannot set a deadline for that. I have looked fairly carefully at the Standing Orders and at Speakers’ rulings on these issues and that is why I have outlined the two mechanisms that I believe are available to members to ensure that a committee chair presents a report. Once the majority of the House rules on the matter then of course the Speaker can enforce it that the report be presented by that deadline.
Parker David: Speaker’s Rulings — Select Committees—Status of Reports and Proceedings 
Parker David: Speaker’s Rulings — Select Committees—Status of Reports and Proceedings 
[Volume:657;Page:6021] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I accept your ruling particularly in respect of the committee itself not being functus officio which was not a point that I had made. The third way in which that problem could be resolved would be on a point of order for the Speaker to enforce the Standing Orders and to require that the report be produced forthwith. It does not seem to me that it is a matter where members have discretion as to whether those reports are eventually tabled; the Standing Orders require that they are. So it becomes an enforcement issue for you rather than an issue of the discretion of the House I would suggest.
Smith Lockwood: Speaker’s Rulings — Select Committees—Status of Reports and Proceedings 
Smith Lockwood: Speaker’s Rulings — Select Committees—Status of Reports and Proceedings 
[Volume:657;Page:6020] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member raises a perfectly fair point of order. This is not a well-defined area in the Standing Orders and Speakers’ rulings. What is quite clear is that the chair has responsibility to report to the House although at the end of the day if the chair refuses for whatever reason to present to the House the report of the committee the House can order that it be done and the question then becomes how the House goes about ordering that. 
It seems to me that there are two possible mechanisms. The first is for a member to raise it by way of a point of order and to seek leave that the House require the report to be presented. Of course the danger with that procedure is that it takes only one member to dissent and then the House cannot order the report to be presented. A second more complex procedure that would perhaps give a more certain result is for a notice of motion to be lodged which would be a debatable motion obviously and which would ultimately be voted on. Then the majority of the House could order that the report be presented. There are those two mechanisms and certainly the second of those two mechanisms although more complicated has the certainty of following the will of the majority of the House.
Hughes Darren: Speaker’s Rulings — Select Committees—Status of Reports and Proceedings 
Hughes Darren: Speaker’s Rulings — Select Committees—Status of Reports and Proceedings 
[Volume:657;Page:6020] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Thank you very much for that very thorough ruling which I think is very helpful on the issues that we considered on that Thursday and we will reflect on what you have said. The one immediate question that the Opposition would raise is that you said a week is quite an acceptable period for delay but you also said the delay of a presentation of a report to the House is not a matter for the House itself in the first instance. In the specific case that led to this ruling from you I understand there was a delay of 2 weeks and 1 day between the committee resolving to take a course of action and the report finally being presented. I wonder at what point members can bring it to you for your intervention once that week which you have signalled is a reasonable period of delay has been breached to the extent that this report was.
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Indonesia—Speaker House of Representatives Brazil—Joint Parliamentary Delegation National Congress 
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Indonesia—Speaker House of Representatives Brazil—Joint Parliamentary Delegation National Congress 
[Volume:657;Page:6019] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that a joint parliamentary delegation from the National Congress of Brazil led by Senator Heraclito Fortes First Secretary of the Senate is also present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish that the delegation be welcomed also.
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Indonesia—Speaker House of Representatives Brazil—Joint Parliamentary Delegation National Congress 
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Indonesia—Speaker House of Representatives Brazil—Joint Parliamentary Delegation National Congress 
[Volume:657;Page:6019] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that the Hon Agung Laksono Soemono Speaker of the House of Representatives of Indonesia is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure members would wish that he be welcomed and accorded a seat on the left of the Chair. 
Hon Agung Laksono Soemono accompanied by the Deputy Speaker entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
Urgency 
Urgency 
[Volume:657;Page:6038] 
Urgency 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the introduction and passing of the Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill the second reading and remaining stages of the Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill the introduction and first reading of the Biosecurity Amendment Bill and the second reading of the Student Loan Scheme (Repayment Bonus) Amendment Bill. 
The first bill that we intend to deal with under urgency today is the Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme Bill and that is because of the commercial sensitivity that could exist around the issue of the guarantee of retail deposits in New Zealand. This provision has been widely supported in the past as being good for the economy in these difficult times and it is important that the legislation is passed through the House in a continuum so that commercial interests may be best protected through this mechanism. The Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill is a measure that is very much awaited by many people in New Zealand who have projects that may well contribute to economic growth. Therefore having the legislation in place well and truly before 1 October is a good idea. The Biosecurity Amendment Bill to be introduced today has similar aspects to it. It is important that we get that bill referred to a select committee for due consideration promptly. We want to make progress on the Student Loan Scheme (Repayment Bonus) Bill because this is the time of year when many young people are planning their futures and they need to know exactly how that loan regime will be put in place. 
I also say that it is not widely known that the House sits for only 17 hours a week. When we take out question time the general debate and quite often the overrun of question time or special debates such as were requested today we get to the situation whereby between now and Christmas the scheduled sitting days available to the House are such that we have just 115-odd hours available for the passing of legislation. That means that from time to time the Government needs to seek extended hours which is exactly what is being sought here through the provision of urgency. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That urgency be accorded. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Urgent Debates Declined — SAS—Deployment to Afghanistan New Zealand Police—Review of Property Portfolio 
Urgent Debates Declined — SAS—Deployment to Afghanistan New Zealand Police—Review of Property Portfolio 
[Volume:657;Page:6038] 
Urgent Debates Declined 
SAS—Deployment to Afghanistan 
New Zealand Police—Review of Property Portfolio 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Leader of the Opposition seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 media reports of a decision by Cabinet not to accept the advice of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade on the issue of deploying Special Air Service personnel to Afghanistan. The decision to recommit SAS personnel was made last month and the House held a debate on the decision on 18 August. For there now to be a particular case of recent occurrence there must be a new situation of importance or a new development in an existing situation of sufficient importance in itself to warrant a debate being held. An urgent debate cannot be granted on the basis of media speculation. I am not persuaded that the matter warrants the House again setting aside its business. The application is therefore declined. 
I have also received a letter from the Hon Clayton Cosgrove seeking to debate the review of the New Zealand Police property portfolio. The review may well be a case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility but the member has provided no authenticating material. That in itself is sufficient ground to decline an application; I refer the member to Speaker’s ruling 170/5. In addition the setting up of a review rarely justifies an urgent debate. When a review is reported there may be exceptional circumstances that will justify a debate but even then this is not always the case; I refer to Speaker’s ruling 177/1. The application is therefore also declined.
Visitors — Indonesia—Speaker House of Representatives Brazil—Joint Parliamentary Delegation National Congress 
Visitors — Indonesia—Speaker House of Representatives Brazil—Joint Parliamentary Delegation National Congress 
[Volume:657;Page:6019] 
Tuesday 8 September 2009 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Indonesia—Speaker House of Representatives 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that the Hon Agung Laksono Soemono Speaker of the House of Representatives of Indonesia is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure members would wish that he be welcomed and accorded a seat on the left of the Chair. 
Hon Agung Laksono Soemono accompanied by the Deputy Speaker entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair. 
Brazil—Joint Parliamentary Delegation National Congress 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that a joint parliamentary delegation from the National Congress of Brazil led by Senator Heraclito Fortes First Secretary of the Senate is also present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish that the delegation be welcomed also.
Mallard Trevor: Motor Vehicle Sales Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Mallard Trevor: Motor Vehicle Sales Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:655;Page:4706] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I hope members will forgive me for following on in a slightly personal manner. Last week I was sitting here with Doug Graham on my right and hearing Kennedy Graham speak from the end of the Chamber. 
Hon Simon Power 
: Stereo. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Frankly that is exactly right. One would have sworn from one’s experience that it was Doug Graham who was speaking. They were saying more or less the same thing and their voices were indivisible. But in this particular case at midpoint in Jonathan Young’s speech my eyes started to drift somewhat and I went back 25 years. It could have been his father speaking. His father was a member of Parliament when I was first a member of Parliament. His voice was very similar. I think his father had slightly more enthusiasm later in his career than Jonathan has now but it was the same solid tradesman-like “we will get through this speech” type of approach. I congratulate the member because—to make a serious comment—I think Venn Young was one of the institutions in this Parliament and someone whose integrity and solidness were well known. I was then going to work on the segue into talking about Jim Bolger and his wonderful comments yesterday about wide boys and flash financial people who lose millions of dollars or billions of dollars for countries around the world. There is a parallel between the image of the used-car salesmen of the past and some of them currently and the image the world has now of the people who have been leading the financial markets around the world. 
Jim Bolger made comments to and about Mark Weldon as someone who criticised the State-owned enterprises and said in a speech made on behalf of the Prime Minister that they should be privatised. Jim Bolger gave Mark Weldon his beans. From my understanding of what happened Jim Bolger was absolutely right. The idea that John Key’s policy of privatising over a 2 to 5-year period the State-owned enterprises—as Mark Weldon said yesterday at a meeting with Treasury on behalf of John Key—is reminiscent of some of the things that the old-fashioned snake-oiled car salespeople used to say. 
I have one final comment in this area for the member for Tauranga. I ask him whether his favourite car is a Mercury—a Mercury Cougar. 
Debate interrupted.
Vote: ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Bill — In Committee 
Vote: ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:655;Page:4692] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 107 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 14 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 5. 
Clause 2 agreed to. 
The Committee divided the bill into the Tariff (AANZFTA) Amendment Bill and the Customs and Excise (AANZFTA) Amendment Bill pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper28. 
Bill reported with amendment. 
Report adopted.
Vote: ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Bill — In Committee 
Vote: ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:655;Page:4692] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 1 be agreed to.  
Ayes 107 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 14 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 5. 
Clause 1 agreed to.
Vote: ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Bill — In Committee 
Vote: ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:655;Page:4691] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the schedule as amended be agreed to.  
Ayes 107 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 14 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 5. 
Schedule as amended agreed to.
Vote: ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Bill — In Committee 
Vote: ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:655;Page:4691] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 107 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 14 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 5. 
Amendment agreed to.
Vote: ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Bill — In Committee 
Vote: ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:655;Page:4691] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 107 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 14 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 5. 
Part 2 agreed to.
Carter John: ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Bill — In Committee 
Carter John: ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:655;Page:4677] 
JOHN CARTER (Minister of Civil Defence) 
: 
 The Agreement Establishing the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area was signed by New Zealand Australia and ASEAN parties on 27 February 2009. The Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee considered the treaty and reported back to Parliament on 8 April 2009. New Zealand is a small export-driven and trade-dependent economy. This is the source of much of our current and future prosperity. Improving market access for New Zealand firms through a progressive trade agenda including through this agreement will stimulate economic growth and help to create and safeguard the jobs of New Zealanders. The ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area represents a significant economic and strategic achievement for New Zealand. One needs to look only at the statistics to get a sense of the scale of the commercial opportunities this free-trade area creates. New Zealand - ASEAN two-way trade was worth more than $12 billion last year which was 85 percent greater than New Zealand trade with China for the same period. Meanwhile New Zealand exports to the ASEAN region grew at a staggering 24 percent per year over the past 3 years. The ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area eliminates tariffs on New Zealand exports to this important market facilitating even further export growth. Amendments to the existing New Zealand legislation are necessary and they prepare New Zealand for this agreement’s entry into force. 
The ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Bill seeks to amend the Tariff Act 1988 and the Customs and Excise Act 1996. Amendments to the Tariff Act 1988 are required to allow for the application of preferential tariff rates and to provide for traditional safeguard measures to be applied in certain circumstances to imported goods under the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement. Amendments to the Customs and Excise Act 1996 are also required to create a system for issuing bodies to be able to issue the necessary certificates of origin. In summary these amendments will allow New Zealand to grant its ASEAN and Australian partners preferential access to the New Zealand market once they have opened their markets to New Zealand exports. 
Hon Member 
: That’s wonderful John. 
Hon JOHN CARTER 
: I thought so.
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4675] 
3. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee 
: When will the Finance and Expenditure Committee next give consideration or make a decision on the proposed banking inquiry? 
CRAIG FOSS (Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee) 
: 
 The committee is scheduled to consider this matter at its next meeting. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Why was insufficient time provided to the committee to allow it to give full consideration to the matter this week as he indicated to the House would be the case in response to my oral question on 18 June 2009? 
CRAIG FOSS 
: I am sure the member knows it is a very busy committee. Yesterday we dealt with an 830-page tax bill two estimate reviews and two sets of audits. It is a hard-working committee that makes its best endeavours to work its way through the agenda. I am sure that member will participate fully.