edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Vote: Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:643;Page:12962] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 66 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 48. 
Bill read a first time.
Wong Pansy: Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Bill — First Reading 
Wong Pansy: Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:643;Page:12960] 
PANSY WONG (National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Can I seek leave for the outgoing Labour member Paul Swain to table the excellent tax deduction letter for charitable donations and to table the excellent poster of the handsome and youthful leader John Key please? 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: The member knows that she cannot ask another member to table documents. That is over to the member himself or herself. That is not a point of order.
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:643;Page:12939] 
11.  
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Statistics 
: What is the Government doing to reduce the cost of accessing Statistics New Zealand products? 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Minister of Statistics) 
: 
 In this year’s Budget the Labour-led Government allocated funding to make a further 250 million pieces of information freely available in an easy-to-access form. So far I am pleased to say $5.4 million worth of data that had previously been user-pays has been accessed for free. We have done this after feedback from business leaders and community groups told us that making such data available at no cost could generate real benefits. We listened and we acted and the results show enthusiasm for the Government’s policy. 
Darien Fenton 
: What types of statistical information are now being made freely available? 
Hon DARREN HUGHES 
: A range of information is being made freely available including local and regional demographic information population projections and household expenditure data. This information which includes Digital Boundaries CDs and StreetLink files is helping businesses to identify the size and characteristics of potential markets and helping community groups plan for the better provision of their social services. The Government is committed to giving information that is collected by Statistics New Zealand back to businesses and communities so that informed decisions can be made based on robust data.
Soper Lesley: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Soper Lesley: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:643;Page:12931] 
5.  
LESLEY SOPER (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister for Transport Safety 
: What recent reports has he received about efforts to raise standards in the taxi industry? 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Minister for Transport Safety) 
: 
 Land Transport New Zealand has advised me that members of its newly established taxi enforcement unit have taken part in two major police operations in Auckland over the past month which have been greatly welcomed and commended by the New Zealand Taxi Federation. Although it was disappointing that a proportion of the taxis were found to be non-compliant mostly relating to licensing offences it is very pleasing to see that the impact of the new taxi enforcement team and the pressure that is continuing to be exerted are having an effect on non-compliant operators. 
Lesley Soper 
: What other work has been undertaken by the Government to raise standards in the industry? 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN 
: This Labour-led Government is committed to regulating the taxi industry fairly and firmly in order to protect people. We have set in place a new legislative framework the majority of which came into force in October. It sets in place new requirements for approved taxi organisations including greater recording and reporting requirements particularly around driver behaviour and tougher area knowledge requirements for taxi drivers in Auckland and Wellington—long overdue. Combined with greater enforcement of standards and increasing support and cooperation from the industry it is having a very positive effect.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:643;Page:12925] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I am obliged to the member for correcting me and reminding me that that splendid member the Hon Mark Burton is actually responsible for saving the trout—as no doubt the constituents of the Taupo electorate will save him at the next election.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:643;Page:12925] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I just want to correct the Leader of the House. I think from memory that this particular bill the Conservation (Protection of Trout as a Non-commercial Species) Amendment Bill was actually introduced as a member’s bill by the Hon Mark Burton and then taken over as a Government bill by the Labour Government.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:643;Page:12925] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 No the Government is not riven with either indecision or divisions on this particular matter. I thank the member for reminding me that this bill was introduced by a National Government. I had actually forgotten that fact. So it is a blue trout rather than a red one. I am advised that the trout are still safely non-commercial and the bill does not need to proceed at this point.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:643;Page:12925] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) 
: 
 I wonder whether I could turn the Leader of the House’s attention to item 17 on the Order Paper—an old favourite of mine—the Conservation (Protection of Trout as a Non-commercial Species) Amendment Bill. I note that this bill was introduced on 12 November 1998. On Monday of next week it will have been 9 years on the Order Paper. So I wonder whether the Government has any plans to advance that bill or is it just one of those bills like so many others that sit there not able to progress because the numbers are not quite right yet?
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:643;Page:12925] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week in the House priority will be given to the remaining stages of the Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Bill the Building Amendment Bill the Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill and the Human Tissue Bill.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:643;Page:12925] 
Thursday 8 November 2007 
Madam Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business Statement 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week in the House priority will be given to the remaining stages of the Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Bill the Building Amendment Bill the Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill and the Human Tissue Bill. 
GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) 
: 
 I wonder whether I could turn the Leader of the House’s attention to item 17 on the Order Paper—an old favourite of mine—the Conservation (Protection of Trout as a Non-commercial Species) Amendment Bill. I note that this bill was introduced on 12 November 1998. On Monday of next week it will have been 9 years on the Order Paper. So I wonder whether the Government has any plans to advance that bill or is it just one of those bills like so many others that sit there not able to progress because the numbers are not quite right yet? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 No the Government is not riven with either indecision or divisions on this particular matter. I thank the member for reminding me that this bill was introduced by a National Government. I had actually forgotten that fact. So it is a blue trout rather than a red one. I am advised that the trout are still safely non-commercial and the bill does not need to proceed at this point. 
GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I just want to correct the Leader of the House. I think from memory that this particular bill the Conservation (Protection of Trout as a Non-commercial Species) Amendment Bill was actually introduced as a member’s bill by the Hon Mark Burton and then taken over as a Government bill by the Labour Government. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I am obliged to the member for correcting me and reminding me that that splendid member the Hon Mark Burton is actually responsible for saving the trout—as no doubt the constituents of the Taupo electorate will save him at the next election.
Auchinvole Chris: New Zealand Bill of Rights (Private Property Rights) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Auchinvole Chris: New Zealand Bill of Rights (Private Property Rights) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:643;Page:12923] 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National) 
: 
 The New Zealand Bill of Rights (Private Property Rights) Amendment Bill is a well-intentioned bill. It has no hidden agenda and it seeks to address an exclusion by specifically mentioning private property from the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. The first reading— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Aw! 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE 
: Does the member have a problem? 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Yeah—you. 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE 
: Well long may that last. The member should get used to it now. The first reading debate was on 11 May 2005 a couple of years ago. Members from all sides and from all political flavours seemed to be very much in favour of the bill when it was introduced with the exception of those from the Green Party. Dr Wayne Mapp Dr Michael Cullen Dail Jones Stephen Franks David Parker Georgina te Heuheu and Peter Dunne were all very supportive in their comments about the bill. Even though the party representation was diverse there was a common thread in many of the speeches. 
Debate interrupted.
Dunne Peter: New Zealand Bill of Rights (Private Property Rights) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Dunne Peter: New Zealand Bill of Rights (Private Property Rights) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:643;Page:12922] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 A bit of history is important here. This bill was introduced in 2005 by the member in charge of it at the behest of the United Future caucus and we are a party that believes in consistency and in upholding decisions we made previously. Despite what has gone on this evening we will continue to support this particular piece of legislation because actually being consistent saying what one believes and standing by it are values we hold as particularly important even if some others see them as a tradable commodity. 
There is a bigger issue here. The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act is an important part of our legislative and constitutional framework and the glaring absence from it at the moment is the issue of any form of protection for private property. I have listened very closely to some of the speakers who have taken part in the earlier stages of this debate and some of the concerns they have expressed about the potentially open-ended nature of this provision in the bill some of the risks inherent within it and some of the dangers that the Government might be exposed to if such legislation were to be passed. I think that none of those are insurmountable issues. All of them could be worked through and the reason we are continuing to support this bill in the face of fairly overwhelming opposition in this House is that we think the issues are important and we think that the Government should have taken them on board during the period this bill was before a select committee and indicated a work programme to address them. 
This evening we have heard a number of speakers say that although they sympathise with the concerns that underpin this legislation although they understand the point that is trying to be made and although they believe it does need to be addressed it is just all too difficult at the moment. I do not accept that thinking. I think that if that concern is genuine then the Government should have indicated a work programme enabling these measures to be addressed and some assurance to be provided in the longer term that there would be legislation along these lines. The fact that that has not been the case persuades my caucus that this is an issue we should continue to support despite some of the flip-flops and vacillations of others and we will continue to do so because we believe this is a case where principle is more important that pragmatic practice. 
So I simply conclude as the House is about to rise by indicating our ongoing support for this legislation. That was why we urged its introduction in 2005 and that is why we continue to support it today.
Brown Peter: New Zealand Bill of Rights (Private Property Rights) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Brown Peter: New Zealand Bill of Rights (Private Property Rights) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:643;Page:12920] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I do not intend to speak for any great length on this New Zealand Bill of Rights (Private Property Rights) Amendment Bill— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Good! 
PETER BROWN 
: —I am glad I have made someone happy; I like making people happy—because New Zealand First was not represented on the Justice and Electoral Committee. There is a concept here—a principle if you like—that we think should have been looked at in some detail. 
If people own property and that property is taken from them then they are entitled to compensation. It is as basic as that. If the State or somebody else takes something from somebody then that person is entitled to compensation. We think that this bill with the Government’s resources—and I accept what the Minister of Justice Annette King has just said—needed some tidying up or amendment to get it right. 
Hon Annette King 
: They tried at the select committee but they couldn’t. 
PETER BROWN 
: I say to the Minister that I accept that also but I think a little bit more effort could have gone into it because it is a very important concept and a very important principle. 
I sympathise with Gordon Copeland to the extent that he has tried very very hard to have this bill examined fully. He has waited patiently for some considerable length of time to get it through the select committee. 
I think he has been let down by the National Party. I listened to Chris Finlayson. When that member talks he puts legal language into everyday language and he makes quite a lot of sense. But I think his contribution tonight was a long-winded way of saying that National could not really care a stuff about Mr Copeland. It has his proxy vote and it is not prepared— 
Chris Auchinvole 
: That is not fair at all. 
PETER BROWN 
: Those were not the actions of a party that believes as it states in the select committee report that it strongly supports property rights. That is what that party over there says and what does it do with a bill that could well have been amended? National with its resources could have been of assistance to Gordon Copeland and it could have made this bill much more acceptable. 
 I just want to say that New Zealand First believes that Gordon Copeland has been let down. I do not want to go into his past or what he has done. I am simply saying that Parliament has let him down. We could have done more for him. We will support this bill but we realise now that with National and Labour opposing it it is a dead duck so to speak. 
Gordon Copeland has touched on a principle that I think should be close to everybody’s heart. It certainly should be close to the hearts of people who believe in free enterprise and believe in private property rights. I simply say that we collectively—this Parliament—could have done better with this bill and I think we should go home tonight thinking that but New Zealand First will support it.
Vote: Human Tissue (Organ Donation) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Human Tissue (Organ Donation) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:643;Page:12913] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Human Tissue (Organ Donation) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 49 
New Zealand National 48; Independent: Copeland. 
Noes 70 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Motion not agreed to.
Vote: Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:643;Page:12896] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 7 
New Zealand First 7. 
Noes 112 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand National 48; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independents: Copeland Field. 
Motion not agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:643;Page:12877] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That new clause 8 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand National 48; Independent: Copeland. 
New clause 8 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:643;Page:12877] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment to proposed new clause 8 be agreed to. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand National 48; Independent: Copeland. 
Amendment to new clause 8 agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 153 in the name of the Hon Ruth Dyson to add new clause 8 as amended be agreed to.
Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:643;Page:12874] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 I want to speak on a relatively narrow matter: the Supplementary Order Paper of my colleague Ruth Dyson and my amendment to it. I indicate to members that it is the position of the Government and I think the sponsor of the bill that this process not be an endless one that goes from court to court to court or from the authority to court to court. 
The difference between my Supplementary Order Paper and that of the Hon Ruth Dyson is that my Supplementary Order Paper leaves open the possibility of judicial review which would have been removed under her Supplementary Order Paper. It is the Government’s view that leaving that possibility open is appropriate and gets things within the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and other judicial and legislative approaches that are appropriate without opening out for employers the possibility of things going on and on. 
I just say to members opposite that even if they are opposed to the legislation—and it is very hard to understand why they would be—the employers are quite keen on having this sort of restriction. Having this restriction opposed like it was by—was it Kate Wilkinson? Who was the one who was speaking? 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: Paula Bennett. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Paula Bennett’s opposition to this is something that I think will be shared with employers around the country. 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: Yes we’ll tell them. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: We will not only tell them we will send them a copy of  
Hansard 
 to show what she was saying about it. This is something that the employers want— 
Paula Bennett 
: This will get you back in. This is the decider! 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Well I think in fact that if we are looking at the talent of the National Party—as I understand it Paula Bennett has been described as the future of the National Party and one of its brighter members—sharing what she says on this with employers will be very very good.
Hartley Ann: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Hartley Ann: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:643;Page:12871] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: When the Committee was last considering the bill the question before the Committee was that new clause 8 as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 153 in the name of the Hon Ruth Dyson be agreed to. Since then an amendment to that amendment has been received from the Hon Trevor Mallard. It is set out on Supplementary Order Paper 160 in his name.
Event: Education (Establishment of Universities of Technology) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Event: Education (Establishment of Universities of Technology) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:643;Page:12871] 
Education (Establishment of Universities of Technology) Amendment Bill 
First Reading 
Debate resumed from 5 September. 
Bill read a first time.  
Bill referred to the Education and Science Committee.
Hughes Darren: Business of the House 
Hughes Darren: Business of the House 
[Volume:643;Page:12871] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 Pursuant to agreement at the Business Committee I seek leave for members’ orders of the day Nos 1 to 5 to be postponed until after members’ order of the day No. 6 and for the question on the first reading of the Education (Establishment of Universities of Technology) Amendment Bill to be put without further debate. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is none.
Hughes Darren: General Debate 
Hughes Darren: General Debate 
[Volume:643;Page:12871] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Minister of Statistics) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a list of the schools in my electorate that are receiving increased funding as a result of the decile ratings that the list member just referred to. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is. 
The debate having concluded the motion lapsed.
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:643;Page:12852] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That is true actually. Would the member please read the question as it is on the Order Paper.
Cullen Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Cullen Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:643;Page:12852] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. If we are going to be insisting on questions being done exactly correctly I point out that that was not the question as it is on the Order Paper.
Heatley Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Heatley Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:643;Page:12852] 
PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) 
: 
 My question is to the Minister of Housing and asks: does the Minister have confidence in Housing New Zealand Corporation; if so why?
Fairbrother Russell: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fairbrother Russell: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:643;Page:12851] 
8.  
RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Tourism 
: What initiatives for the development of the tourism industry has he received recently? 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Minister of Tourism) 
: 
 The New Zealand Tourism Strategy 2015 was launched today. The strategy provides a framework for the growth and development of tourism in New Zealand to 2015. The industry has set new targets to boost visitor satisfaction and to increase the amount of money that each and every visitor to this country spends. Implementing the strategy which is a joint Government and industry initiative will ensure that tourism is valued as the leading contributor to a sustainable New Zealand in 2015. And can I say that my benchmate Darren Hughes was very enthusiastic about the cover of the document. 
Darien Fenton 
: How will this new initiative contribute to the Government’s sustainability objectives? 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR 
: Sustainability is at the forefront of this Government’s agenda. The strategy sets new targets to help us measure our progress in delivering our ultimate goal which is sustainable tourism. The strategy encourages the tourism sector to take a lead role in protecting and enhancing our environment. This includes improving energy efficiency and reducing waste.
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:643;Page:12851] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No the advice is that the member cannot ask it. So I will ask Russell Fairbrother to please ask the question.
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:643;Page:12851] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Can you tell us where the Standing Orders allow this particular arrangement because this would be a new ruling on your part?
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:643;Page:12851] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I was also a little taken by surprise myself but the question has been asked. It is appropriate. Would the Minister now please address it.
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:643;Page:12851] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I am just a little confused. The question on the sheet is in the name of Russell Fairbrother. Mr Fairbrother is here. Why then is the question being asked by a colleague? The rules are pretty straightforward I would have thought.
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:643;Page:12851] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 My question is to the Minister of Tourism and asks: what initiatives for the development of the tourism industry has he received recently?
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:643;Page:12849] 
6.  
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What reports has he received on the success of the 20 hours’ free early childhood education policy? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I have had wonderful news. The latest figures on the uptake of the 20 free hours of early childhood education show that after just 4 months of the scheme’s operation all kindergartens in New Zealand are now offering the free hours. Eighty-three percent of eligible 3 and 4-year-olds are now getting their free hours and 72 percent of teacher-led services are offering the policy. There has been a 13 percent increase in enrolled children since the policy began in July. It is a great success. 
Moana Mackey 
: What reports has he seen about alternative approaches to early childhood education? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: I have seen very interesting reports. Some members of the National Party vow they would end this historic and visionary policy. Paula Bennett told Radio New Zealand News on 22 June that National would not offer the policy and that National members vowed not to continue it if they won the next election. However her leader John Key told Television One news on 26 March: “We want these young kids to be able to have their 20 free hours.” Almost 77000 children are currently benefiting from this policy. Just what is National’s policy and could National be planning to stop the long-term educational gains our young students are enjoying? 
Paula Bennett 
: Does the Minister support playcentres as a quality early childhood option; if so how does he respond to Coromandel Playcentre which may now close because enrolments have dropped by 50 percent because it is not included in the Government’s policy; and is parental involvement not recognised as being important by this Government? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: Parental involvement is valued by this Government but this policy is available to teacher-led centres. I remind the House that 77000 children are now getting their 20 free hours. That was an interesting question from a member who says she wants to abolish the scheme. But she is arguing for a centre to get into it. That does seem to be rather confusing.
Education (Establishment of Universities of Technology) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Education (Establishment of Universities of Technology) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:643;Page:12871] 
Education (Establishment of Universities of Technology) Amendment Bill 
First Reading 
Debate resumed from 5 September. 
Bill read a first time.  
Bill referred to the Education and Science Committee.
Business of the House 
Business of the House 
[Volume:643;Page:12871] 
Business of the House 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 Pursuant to agreement at the Business Committee I seek leave for members’ orders of the day Nos 1 to 5 to be postponed until after members’ order of the day No. 6 and for the question on the first reading of the Education (Establishment of Universities of Technology) Amendment Bill to be put without further debate. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is none.
[Volume:642;Page:12334] 
Motion agreed to.
Paraone Pita: Statutes Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Paraone Pita: Statutes Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:642;Page:12111] 
PITA PARAONE (NZ First) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Deputy Speaker. On behalf of New Zealand First I would like to make my party’s contribution to this debate. I should say from the outset that New Zealand First will certainly support this bill going to the Government Administration Committee. We have always believed it is important that the people of New Zealand should be given the opportunity to express their views on any legislation and what it might be all about. By referring the bill to a select committee we give the people of New Zealand that opportunity. I know that a number of people around the country are interested in the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 2). These people include Barry Hegley in Howick; Mr and Mrs Jim Stewart who are also in Howick; and Reene Peach in the Piako electorate. They all seek the opportunity to have a say in the formulation of the laws of our land and by referring this bill to a select committee we give those people and everyone else that opportunity. 
I note the citation from the National Party speaker in regard to the Law Commission’s comment about statute law being untidy. I am not in a position to question that comment and I certainly do not question the Law Commission but if an august body like the Law Commission should make comments about the statute laws of New Zealand then it is certainly incumbent on this Parliament to do something about it. I think this bill addresses that concern—probably not in its entirety but it is certainly going in the right direction. 
The bill amends a number of Acts and I am particularly interested in one or two of the statutes that this bill seeks to amend. I make reference to the Fisheries Act 1996 and the amendment that will allow the Minister of Fisheries to make a decision in terms of particular species particularly where those species are under threat. I hope that as part of the select committee process the issue surrounding the authority that is intended to be extended to the Minister—over and above his present authority—will be discussed and given due consideration by the committee. 
The other amendment that I am particularly interested in is the one regarding the Veterinarians Act 2005. It is good to know that the amendment intends that those wanting to enter the profession will not only have to have the qualifications but also have to satisfy the profession’s own council before being able to practice. 
I do not have too much to say on the bill other than that it will help to keep our laws up to date thus hopefully making our legislation more appropriate and relevant to today’s needs. On behalf of New Zealand First I say that we support the bill being referred to a select committee.
Wilson Margaret: Urgent Debates — Emissions Trading Scheme—Government Announcement 
Wilson Margaret: Urgent Debates — Emissions Trading Scheme—Government Announcement 
[Volume:642;Page:12088] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from Jeannette Fitzsimons seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the Government’s announcement of a framework for the emissions trading scheme. The announcement is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. Given the importance of the policy issues involved I consider it a matter that justifies the immediate attention of the House. I am therefore prepared to accept the application.
Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:642;Page:12088] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I seek leave of the House to table two documents. One is a letter from the New Zealand Police to a constituent saying that it unfortunately would not be able to investigate— 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
RON MARK 
: The second is a Hansard 
transcript of the select committee meeting where Mr Bradshaw says even a $10000 loss— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? Yes there is objection.
Finlayson Christopher: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Finlayson Christopher: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:642;Page:12084] 
10.  
CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National) 
 to the  
Associate Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage 
: Does she stand by her statement that “I am very happy to go to any event”? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
 on behalf of the  
Associate Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage 
: The Minister says that she is happy to attend any event relating to her portfolio her role in this Labour-led Government or her electorate. 
Christopher Finlayson 
: Can the Minister confirm that she has racked up the second-highest ministerial bill for domestic flights since 2000; and how much will it cost the New Zealand taxpayer to offset the carbon emissions she generates from all the domestic travel she currently undertakes? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I can confirm that the Minister is extremely well-travelled and also travels extremely well I may say. But in addition to that I am not able to give the member advice on what her travel will cost in terms of carbon emission offsets. 
Christopher Finlayson 
: Does the Minister’s focus on seeing every part of New Zealand other than Auckland help explain why she did not follow her own advice to New Zealanders: “We need to reduce our carbon emissions and we need to do it now.” in attending the same Royal New Zealand Ballet performance of  
Trinity  
in two different cities? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The Minister is the Associate Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage. That involves supporting the performances of the arts in New Zealand. 
Christopher Finlayson 
: Does the Minister stand by her statement to  
One News 
 in June last year that she was appointed a Minister not to do any paperwork; if so what exactly was she appointed for other than to generate carbon emissions? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The Associate Minister is extraordinarily well-known for supporting the arts culture and heritage in New Zealand. I have heard reports that there has been a recent resurgence of interest by National MPs many of whom are turning up to events but most of whom show no sign of understanding what is going on at them. 
Christopher Finlayson 
: What bold new policy is the Government developing to make her carbon neutral? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: If the member carries on like that I suspect the Associate Minister will plant him as a means of achieving carbon neutrality.
Choudhary Ashraf: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Choudhary Ashraf: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:642;Page:12084] 
9.  
Dr ASHRAF CHOUDHARY (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Research Science and Technology 
: What reports has he received on the level of investment in research and development in New Zealand? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Research Science and Technology) 
: 
 I have some excellent news. On Monday Statistics New Zealand released new figures showing that there has been a 7 percent increase in research staff since 2004. Total research and development is up 10 percent—[ 
Interruption 
]—the member might listen to this; this is very very good news—to $1.8 billion. Of particular note is that there was a 22 percent increase in health research between 2004 and 2006. This Government is committed to increasing New Zealand’s investment in research and development. That is why we announced in this year’s Budget a $73.7 million Government funding increase and a 15 percent tax credit for private sector research and development spending—outstandingly good policies. 
Dr Ashraf Choudhary 
: What reports has the Minister received on New Zealand’s level of investment in climate change research? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: In August the Government announced an additional $6.7 million investment in climate change research. This extra funding is focused on helping us maintain the effects of climate change in our primary industries our towns our cities and our transport energy and communication infrastructure. In the latest $44 million Marsden Fund round a range of climate change initiatives were funded. These include research into the historic collapse of the Ross Iceshelf in warmer temperatures and the growth of the Antarctic ice sheet over New Zealand and Antarctica 60 million years ago. These kinds of projects give us the kinds of insights we need into the future of climate change. 
R Doug Woolerton 
: Does the Minister agree that improving the level of investment in research and development has long been advocated by New Zealand First and is key to boosting the future prospects of New Zealand exporters by increasing the value and innovation of our traditional food-based exports? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I can confirm exactly that.
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:642;Page:12078] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister responsible for Climate Change Issues) 
:  
I seek leave to table a document entitled “Emissions regime proposals look sound” which is a National Party press release. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:642;Page:12078] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I know that you try to clamp down on the practice of people seeking leave to table documents and then wanting to make a speech about them. But a few moments ago when Paula Bennett sought to table a document she said: “I seek leave to table a document from the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 which clearly states—” and at that point the microphone went dead. The House cannot possibly have known what it was about. I just ask you Madam Speaker although I think you are on the right track to perhaps give people an opportunity to say exactly what it is they are trying to table. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I thank the member for his comment. It is noted.
Dunne Peter: Points of Order — Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Amendment Bill—Leave to Introduce 
Dunne Peter: Points of Order — Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Amendment Bill—Leave to Introduce 
[Volume:642;Page:12078] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue) 
: 
 I seek leave for the introduction of the Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Amendment Bill. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Is this bill in the name of the member? Because of course if it is it becomes a Government bill as the member is a Minister. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave has been sought. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Question time resumed.
Dunne Peter: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Dunne Peter: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:642;Page:12077] 
5.  
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
 to the  
Minister of Transport 
: Does she stand by her comment on 13 September 2007: “I would say to the member that he ought to test this House as to whether it wishes to raise the driving age of young New Zealanders. I think it is probably timely that this House was tested to see whether it would like to see the age raised. It is a question that this House could decide on.”? 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Minister for Transport Safety) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Transport 
: Yes. However the experience of successive Ministers of Transport is that in the past when they have tried to make improvements they have often faced resistance when the time came for Parliament to support a change. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: Has the Minister seen the poll reported in the  
New Zealand Herald 
 a short time ago that showed that 87 percent of New Zealanders favoured a change in the driving age and do I take it from his original answer that he also does? 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN 
: Yes I am aware of the poll and the considerable public opinion on the issue but opinion is divided. Just as an example of this a previous Minister of Transport the Hon Maurice Williamson strongly favoured raising the driving age as I did but Paula Bennett was quoted in the newspaper the other day—another National member—saying no. So that is a very good example of where public opinion is divided. 
Peter Brown 
: Is the Minister aware that the school-leaving age has increased to 16 since the driving age was set at 15 and is it not reasonable to tag the driving age to 16; if he thinks it is reasonable does he believe he has the confidence of his Labour Party colleagues? 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN 
: As the member well knows there are arguments for and against raising the driving age particularly between those living in urban areas and those living in rural areas. There will be various announcements soon concerning young drivers and I look forward to the support of Parliament when those announcements are made. That does not however preclude any member from putting the matter forward as a member’s bill and I am sure the debate would be most interesting. Can I also say that 15-year-old drivers in the years 2004 2005 and 2006 had two crashes per year where the 15-year-old driver was at fault and which caused fatalities. That puts the issue somewhat in perspective. 
Paula Bennett 
: I seek leave to table the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 article which clearly states— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? Yes there is objection. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: I seek leave to table OECD figures on international driving ages for 2006. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Question time interrupted.
Power Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Power Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:642;Page:12076] 
4.  
SIMON POWER (National—Rangitikei) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: Does he have confidence in his ministry; if so why? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Education) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Justice 
: Once again thanks for the welcome. Yes; because they are hard-working and conscientious public servants. 
Simon Power 
: Why has the Ministry of Justice been unable to provide any information about the protection and custody orders involved in the Nai Yin Xue and Qian Xue case except to tell the media “We can’t. It’s part of the rules.” when the police have provided that information? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I understand that the answer the member just read out is the position of the officials. 
Simon Power 
: What responsibility does the Ministry of Justice have for entering a custody order into the Customs Service system to prevent a non-custodial parent from taking a child out of the country when the Customs Service has confirmed that in the case of Nai Yin Xue and Qian Xue it was “not in possession of any information or directions that would enable such intervention”? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Those are the exact questions that have to be explored at the moment; we need to find out exactly what happened. 
Simon Power 
: Has the Minister of Justice received advice that Nai Yin Xue’s passport had been seized by the court and held by the police and was that because under section 77 of the Care of Children Act the court thought there was a risk he might abscond; and what good is the system if he is able to wander into a police station with his daughter and get his passport back? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The member is highlighting exactly what has to be isolated at the present time in relation to how these matters happened and that is what the Minister is doing. 
Simon Power 
: What steps will the Minister of Justice be taking to ensure that the failure to enter custody orders into the Customs Service alert system in this case is not a wider systemic problem in light of a growing number of cases such as those involving Jayden Hedley and Caitlin Jelicich? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: If indeed this matter highlights a trend—and we have yet to isolate exactly those facts—then of course the Minister of Justice will be ensuring that in the future those loopholes are closed down. The member has raised an issue that is a fair one. We need to make sure that we isolate the problems and make sure they are closed.
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:642;Page:12076] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? Yes there is objection.
Power Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Power Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:642;Page:12076] 
SIMON POWER (National—Rangitikei) 
: 
 I seek leave to hold this question over until the Minister of Justice returns to the House.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:642;Page:12071] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I think we can be very confident that the drafting will not be done by the next sitting of Parliament. The intention is to introduce the bill obviously before Christmas. It will be clearly a very complex bill.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:642;Page:12071] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) 
: 
 Given the announcements made by the Government today around New Zealand’s response to climate change when will we expect to see the emissions trading scheme legislation brought to the House—in the next sitting or the one after?
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:642;Page:12071] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 When the House resumes after the 2-week adjournment on Tuesday 9 October priority will be given to the third readings of the Health (Drinking Water) Amendment Bill the Arbitration Amendment Bill and the Succession (Homicide) Bill; the first reading of the Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) which will be ready by that point and the remaining stages of the Armed Forces Law Reform Bill and the Crimes (Repeal of Seditious Offences) Amendment Bill.