edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Anderton Jim: Tabling of Documents — Income Distribution—1998-2008 
Anderton Jim: Tabling of Documents — Income Distribution—1998-2008 
[Volume:663;Page:11072] 
Hon JIM ANDERTON (Leader—Progressive) 
: 
 I gave notice in my Budget speech that I would seek leave and I do now to table three graphs from the Ministry of Social Development that demonstrate that the gap between rich and poor in New Zealand narrowed not widened under the last Government contrary to what was stated in the House yesterday by the Prime Minister Mr Key. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought to table those papers. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? 
Craig Foss 
: Are they Ministry of Social Development reports that have been tabled in the House in some form or are they from a select committee? 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: We have gotten into the habit of finding out precisely the nature and the origin of documents. Have they already been tabled? Are they public documents? 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: I cannot ascertain that. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: I will put the leave anyway. Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? It appears not. 
Jo Goodhew 
: Yes. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: It is too late. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Dunne Peter: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Dunne Peter: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11088] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Finance 
: I move  
That the Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill be now read a second time 
. I will not traverse the ground that I covered in my first reading speech; I simply make the observation that over the last year there has been a great deal of public debate about our tax system. The Government has responded to that debate with the measures announced in the Budget this afternoon. It is now time to put the results of that into action so that we have a tax system that supports growth encourages productivity and moves us away from the consumption and distorted investment decisions of the past. 
In order to achieve those purposes this bill introduces what we describe as a balanced packet of changes. Lower income tax rates not only will provide greater incentives for people to work and save but also will help to attract skilled people to our workforce and encourage New Zealanders to stay and contribute to our economy. In this regard it is interesting to note that outside Ireland and Luxembourg we among OECD countries have the highest rate of skilled citizenry living overseas—about one in five New Zealanders. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Why? Why! 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: There are a number of reasons for that but the fact is that if we want to attract those citizens back we have to have a competitive tax environment in this country and that is what this bill is seeking to establish. The lower company tax rate that it ushers in will encourage productive investment throughout New Zealand thereby increasing productivity and contributing to raising wage levels. Lifting the amount of GST will help shift the current economic balance away from consumption and spending and will channel efforts towards saving and investment. As part of the rebalancing of the tax system certain rules will be tightened and strengthened to make the system more equitable so that everyone pays his or her fair share of tax. In making these substantial changes to our tax system the Government has been mindful of those New Zealanders who will need support as a result of the rise in the GST rate. As has been indicated compensation will be an immediate and permanent part of these changes. 
In summary these are the main features of the tax reforms proposed in the bill. They were well aired in the earlier debate and in the Budget presentation this afternoon. Taken together they offer a fairer more balanced system which will better support the efforts of New Zealanders to get ahead and for that reason I am very happy to commend this bill to the House.
English Bill: Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill — First Reading 
English Bill: Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:663;Page:11039] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill be now read a first time. 
Bill read a first time.
Henare Tau: Points of Order — Chamber Lobbies and Galleries—Audio System 
Henare Tau: Points of Order — Chamber Lobbies and Galleries—Audio System 
[Volume:663;Page:11039] 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Some of us at the back cannot hear. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The sound technicians will be aware of the concerns of the member and will do their best to improve the situation. I apologise but I expect improvements will be made before the Minister commences the second reading.
English Bill: Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — Procedure 
English Bill: Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:663;Page:11039] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I hereby present the Supplementary Estimates of Appropriations for the Government of New Zealand and supporting information for the year ending 30 June 2010 (B.7). 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That paper is published under the authority of the House.
Tabling of Documents — Income Distribution—1998-2008 
Tabling of Documents — Income Distribution—1998-2008 
[Volume:663;Page:11072] 
Tabling of Documents 
Income Distribution—1998-2008 
Hon JIM ANDERTON (Leader—Progressive) 
: 
 I gave notice in my Budget speech that I would seek leave and I do now to table three graphs from the Ministry of Social Development that demonstrate that the gap between rich and poor in New Zealand narrowed not widened under the last Government contrary to what was stated in the House yesterday by the Prime Minister Mr Key. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought to table those papers. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? 
Craig Foss 
: Are they Ministry of Social Development reports that have been tabled in the House in some form or are they from a select committee? 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: We have gotten into the habit of finding out precisely the nature and the origin of documents. Have they already been tabled? Are they public documents? 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: I cannot ascertain that. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: I will put the leave anyway. Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? It appears not. 
Jo Goodhew 
: Yes. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: It is too late. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Points of Order — Chamber Lobbies and Galleries—Audio System 
Points of Order — Chamber Lobbies and Galleries—Audio System 
[Volume:663;Page:11039] 
Points of Order 
Chamber Lobbies and Galleries—Audio System 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Some of us at the back cannot hear. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The sound technicians will be aware of the concerns of the member and will do their best to improve the situation. I apologise but I expect improvements will be made before the Minister commences the second reading.
Hughes Darren: Urgency 
Hughes Darren: Urgency 
[Volume:663;Page:11067] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That simple explanation would have been helpful without all the extra bits that caused the member trouble down the track. The case is that the legislation comes into effect on 1 October and it is only May now so it is not an urgent matter that the House has to deal with straight away under Standing Order 54(3).
Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill — Procedure 
Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:663;Page:11039] 
Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill 
Procedure 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I hereby present the Budget 2010 Minister’s Executive Summary the speech the Fiscal Strategy Report the Economic and Fiscal Update (B.2 and B.3) the Estimates of Appropriations for the Government of New Zealand for the year ending 30 June 2011 (B.5) the information supporting the Estimates of Appropriations for the Government of New Zealand for the year ending 30 June 2011 (B.5A Volumes 1-10) and the departmental statements of intent. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Those papers are published under the authority of the House.
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
[Volume:663;Page:11067] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Perhaps it would help— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: It looks like Mr Brownlee now will respond. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I just want to keep good order in the House. I suggest the member takes the rather large blue book that was handed to him this afternoon sets aside his colouring pencils and reads some of the text which will give him all the answers he requires.
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
[Volume:663;Page:11066] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the introduction and passing of the Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill.  
The simple reason 
is that this bill gives life to the announcements in today’s Budget speech around personal tax cuts company tax cuts and a range of provisions that relate to the taxation of New Zealand business activities. As the previous speaker the Hon Peter Dunne mentioned these provisions have been very well received by the commentariat so far. It is also important to have them locked into place so that there can be sufficient planning in order for there to be a smooth transition to those new arrangements by the date prescribed in the bill.
Brownlee Gerry: Budget Statement — Budget Debate 
Brownlee Gerry: Budget Statement — Budget Debate 
[Volume:663;Page:11066] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That this debate be now adjourned 
. 
Motion agreed to.
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11087] 
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 I rise to support the Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill for 2010. The previous speaker Stuart Nash asked about facts. I tell that member that the one fact he has not got quite clear in his head is that his tie is an ugly detestable tie and he should not wear it 2 days in a row in this House. 
The member talked about electricity prices going up. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I was waiting for you to intervene on the personal nature of the comments just made by that member about the dress of a member on this side. If we started criticising members opposite for their dress sense you would intervene pretty quickly. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I am actually quite fashion conscious on some of these matters so I did not take offence. I did not take offence myself but if the member took offence I apologise for not interrupting earlier. Possibly if someone has taken offence our clothing might be something to be mindful of. 
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA 
: I apologise to the member. I described his tie in such a way only because he— 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: No I have already ruled on this. It has been very clear that exception was taken and I ruled on it. Do not mention it again. 
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA 
: This tax bill is about compensating ordinary Kiwis for a rise in GST by cutting personal income tax rates increasing superannuation payments and increasing Working for Families payments and benefits—something Labour did not do last time it increased GST. Labour says that this bill compensates only the rich. The previous speaker wanted facts; I will give him facts. Seventy-three percent of income earners will have a top tax rate of 17.5 percent or less. Two-thirds of the tax cuts will apply to people on an income below $48000—two-thirds. They are low to middle income earners. 
This is a Budget that has delivered for New Zealanders. It builds on the good work that has been done in the past 18 months of this Government. It will secure prosperity for New Zealanders. It lowers tax rates. It allows exporters to get on with producing and selling goods and services overseas. The company tax rate is being decreased from 30 percent to 28 percent. We are encouraging savings through various changes in portfolio investment entity rates and personal income tax rates. This Budget will deliver surpluses sooner rather than later. We inherited a bad economy and a bad recession from the previous Government. This Government is about taking action about investing in New Zealanders’ future and about the prosperity of our people. I support this bill and I look forward to the second and third readings. Thank you.
Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill — First Reading 
Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:663;Page:11039] 
Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill 
First Reading 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill be now read a first time. 
Bill read a first time.
English Bill: Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill — Procedure 
English Bill: Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:663;Page:11039] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I hereby present the Budget 2010 Minister’s Executive Summary the speech the Fiscal Strategy Report the Economic and Fiscal Update (B.2 and B.3) the Estimates of Appropriations for the Government of New Zealand for the year ending 30 June 2011 (B.5) the information supporting the Estimates of Appropriations for the Government of New Zealand for the year ending 30 June 2011 (B.5A Volumes 1-10) and the departmental statements of intent. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Those papers are published under the authority of the House.
Tremain Chris: Sittings of the House 
Tremain Chris: Sittings of the House 
[Volume:663;Page:11641] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 The House has made good progress on the Auckland governance legislation. I seek leave for the House to rise. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Auchinvole Chris: Budget Debate 
Auchinvole Chris: Budget Debate 
[Volume:663;Page:11618] 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National—West Coast - Tasman) 
: 
 I move  
That this debate be now adjourned 
. 
Motion agreed to.
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:663;Page:11609] 
1. 
JOHN BOSCAWEN (ACT) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Commerce Committee 
: What progress has been made on the committee’s consideration of the  
Report from the Controller and Auditor-General on Electricity Commission: Review of the first five years 
? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Chairperson of the Commerce Committee): 
 The Commerce Committee met on 6 August 2009 to consider this report and it agreed unanimously at that meeting to conclude its consideration of the report without report to the House. Standing Order 387(2) requires committees only to consider reports from Officers of Parliament; they do not have to report their findings to the House. 
John Boscawen 
: Can the chair confirm that the committee has received a letter from me regarding the recent increases in the price of electricity; and what options does the committee have? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not believe that this question relates to a matter before the committee and therefore I do not see how the chair of the committee can answer. If the chair indicates that I am wrong I am very happy to sit down but I believe that the chair of the committee can answer questions related only to matters before the committee. Whether someone has written a letter to the committee is not a matter before the committee. I stand to be corrected if the chair of the committee thinks that I am wrong. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I am not sure that you are wrong. However I wonder whether it would be in order for me to respond to the question but not by referring to whether the letter has been received. Although it is not out of order for the member to say he has written a letter it may be out of order for me to say that it has been received. Perhaps it would be of assistance for me simply to say what the options would be if such a letter had been received. I do not think that would be— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That may be helpful to the House. [ 
Interruption 
] I think we should stick with the proper procedures of the House. Members cannot ask questions about matters that are not before the committee. I regret that the supplementary question cannot be answered. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think it might be useful to sort this matter out for future questions. I think the chair is saying that a letter has been received and it will be on the agenda for the next meeting of the Commerce Committee. [ 
Interruption 
] It is before the committee at the present time. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: This is a matter of some interest. I am looking at Speaker’s ruling 149/2: “A question to a chairperson of a select committee can only be for information on a matter for which the committee has charge—that is on a matter referred from the House or that the committee has resolved to inquire into.” On this occasion the matter has certainly not been referred from the House and I do not believe that the committee has resolved to inquire into it. That is why such a question cannot be asked of the chair of a committee.
McClay Todd: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
McClay Todd: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:663;Page:11608] 
12. 
TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) 
 to the  
Minister for Communications and Information Technology 
: What response has the Government received to the Rural Broadband Initiative? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Communications and Information Technology) 
: 
 I am pleased to report that the Government has received 39 responses to its call for expressions of interest in the Rural Broadband Initiative. Interest has come from a range of infrastructure companies in New Zealand and abroad and includes nine substantial expressions of interest covering rural areas across the entire country. The responses contain some innovative ideas for the deployment of fast broadband to rural communities and schools and Ministry of Economic Development officials will now consider them. 
Todd McClay 
: What benefits will rural communities receive as a result of this policy? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: The Rural Broadband Initiative will see 93 percent of rural schools connected to the Internet by fibre within 6 years allowing them to interact with specialist teachers by videoconferencing view high-definition documentaries and access international collections of educational resources. In addition most rural communities will receive fast broadband speeds of at least 5 megabits per second delivering an end to dial-up Internet and allowing online accounting farm management banking tools third-generation mobile services and access to popular video sites like YouTube and Parliament TV on both of which people can see their parliamentary representatives in action. 
Clare Curran 
: Will the Minister guarantee that his Government will meet the targets of the Rural Broadband Initiative given it is investing just $48 million of taxpayers’ money in its rural scheme compared with $1.5 billion in its urban scheme? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: The new telecommunications development levy together with the direct Government investment will be around the $300 million mark. I point out once again to the member that we cannot directly compare the urban and rural policies because the urban amount is an investment that the Government ultimately expects to have returned to it whereas the rural network amount is a grant. The urban and rural networks start from different points. Many rural households and businesses are struggling on dial-up whereas the urban network is an investment in ultra-fast broadband. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Further to the Minister’s reference to YouTube I note that only four people have viewed his Federated Farmers speech on YouTube compared with 18000 who have viewed the analysis in this House of his academic record—is that why he wants to upgrade rural broadband? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I confirm that I am very flattered to have my academic record not only celebrated in this House but also viewed by so many people around the country and around the world in celebration of my zoology degree which included the study of animal behaviour and the mating behaviour of the mallard duck.
Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:663;Page:11607] 
11. 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
 to the  
Minister of Internal Affairs 
: Will the positions of National Librarian and Chief Archivist be employees of the Chief Executive of the Department of Internal Affairs and be accountable to him under the proposed merger of National Library and Archives New Zealand into the Department of Internal Affairs? 
Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister of Internal Affairs) 
: 
 Once integration of the three departments is complete the individuals holding the statutory positions will be employees of the Chief Executive of the Department of Internal Affairs instead of the State Services Commissioner as is currently the case. The independence and integrity of the Chief Archivist will be preserved. The status of the statutory role of the National Librarian will also be preserved. 
Grant Robertson 
: In light of that answer how does the Minister think that the Chief Archivist will be able to maintain his or her important constitutional role to compel chief executives to deposit and maintain Government records if he or she is subordinate to another chief executive? 
Hon NATHAN GUY 
: The statutory roles and functions of the Chief Archivist will be preserved and protected. I remind the member that when he looks around the world he will see that in Australia the archives function sits within the Prime Minister and Cabinet portfolio in the United Kingdom it sits within the Ministry of Justice and in Ireland the Chief Archivist sits within the Department of Tourism Culture and Sport. Those officials continue to have statutory independence. 
Grant Robertson 
: Does the Minister think it is appropriate that the historic and constitutionally significant Alexander Turnbull Library will be led by a third-tier manager in the Department of Internal Affairs under the proposed arrangements; if so why? 
Hon NATHAN GUY 
: I reassure that member that there will be a full select committee process through the change and the operational details of the merger are currently being worked through by the three very capable chief executives with some support from the State Services Commission. 
Grant Robertson 
: Can the Minister confirm that significant damage was done to the original copy of the Treaty of Waitangi the last time Archives New Zealand was part of the Department of Internal Affairs; if so why would he want to repeat that disastrous mistake? 
Hon NATHAN GUY 
: I cannot confirm that for the member. I can confirm that since the 1990s there have been two Acts that will continue to be enforced—the Public Records Act 2005 and the National Library of New Zealand (Te Puna Matauranga o Aotearoa) Act 2003 which the National Party supported through this process.
O'Connor Damien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
O'Connor Damien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:663;Page:11604] 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR (Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to table two documents. The first one is an article from Alan Emerson claiming that— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: When the member says it is an article from Alan Emerson does he mean an article in a publication? 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR 
: Yes it is. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Which publication? 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR 
: The publication is the  
New Zealand Farmers Weekly  
magazine. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It is readily available. 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR 
: I seek leave to table the second document. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: What is the other document? 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR 
: It is Wellington Police District crime statistics showing that crime rates in the Wairarapa are going up and resolution rates are going down. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? Yes there is objection.
Quinn Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Quinn Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:663;Page:11604] 
8. 
PAUL QUINN (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Corrections 
: Can she provide an update on any major initiatives to avert the prison capacity crisis? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 Talofa lava. Yes today at Rimutaka Prison I was delighted to open the first prison unit in New Zealand built using pre-loved shipping containers. Due to a lack of planning and action from the previous Government we were forecast to run out of baseline prison beds this year. The use of containers to provide prison beds as well as the expansion of double-bunking has successfully averted the crisis. We have also taken action to manage future growth in the prison muster through the redevelopment of Auckland Central Remand Prison in Mount Eden and the proposed public-private partnership at Wiri in South Auckland. 
Paul Quinn 
: What are the main advantages of using container cells to house prisoners? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: The 60-bed unit was built in half the time and cost 30 percent less than a traditionally built unit. The unit was commissioned in August 2009 and only 9 months later we had the unit ready for its first occupants. Although the cells are basic and austere they are of much better quality than many of the cells in many of our older prisons. They also provide an effective plug in plug out option. If prison capacity is needed elsewhere the containers can simply be unplugged from their current location and plugged in where they are needed.
O'Connor Damien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
O'Connor Damien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:663;Page:11603] 
7. 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Agriculture 
: Did he or his office contact New Zealand Police about  
Farmers Weekly 
 journalist Alan Emerson relating to the incident in his office on 17 May; if so what information was passed to police? 
Hon DAVID CARTER (Minister of Agriculture) 
: 
 No definitely not. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: Did he or his office contact the media and provide Alan Emerson’s name; if so does he think that compromised the ability of the police to investigate the cluster fly bomb incident? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: No definitely not. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: How then does he explain Alan Emerson’s assertion that TV had been provided by his ministerial office with Mr Emerson’s name and is he attempting to clarify the actions undertaken by his office? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: This matter is an open police investigation. I do not think that it is in the public interest for me to comment on that question or on any allegations from Mr Emerson. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The answer that the Minister gave would be correct if the matter were before the courts as then it would be improper for any member to speak about it. Mr O’Connor asked the Minister a question about something that is merely a matter of inquiry. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister has an absolute right to assert that it is not in the public interest to answer a particular question; the Minister has asserted that and that is where the matter lies. Only the Minister can judge that. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: Given that the bomb turned out to be a box of dead flies does the Minister consider that the response by the police was warranted when local rural people in the Wairarapa cannot get support from police for love nor money to address the many serious crime issues that are facing the region? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: As I answered before as this matter is now under an active police investigation it is not in the public interest for me to comment further.
Macindoe Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Macindoe Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:663;Page:11600] 
4. 
TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: Why has the Government doubled the number of Job Ops for young people? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 Because Job Ops has been a huge success. We have added an extra 6000 places which takes the total number of Job Ops to 12000. This Government is committed to backing young people including those with low to no skills into opportunities to work every time. 
Tim Macindoe 
: What have been some of the successes for young people on Job Ops? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: I advise that 1300 young people have finished their Job Ops and 86 percent of them have not gone back on to a benefit. Those are early results. Even those who did not complete their Job Ops have predominantly stayed off a benefit. We are still working with these young people but the initial data indicate we are making a real difference for them. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: Can she confirm that as per her answers to written questions a third of the young people who have completed Job Ops no longer have a job and have rejoined the 60000 already unemployed young people; if so what is she doing about them? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: As already indicated 86 percent of those who have finished their Job Ops have not gone on to a benefit. I can break that down for the member if she likes. Of those who left their Job Ops early 77 percent have not gone on to a benefit and I think that is really positive. Job Ops is really discovering opportunities for young people. I think another 6000 places are very much needed. 
Darien Fenton 
: Talofa lava. Is it fair that employers can receive a subsidy of up to $5000 through Job Ops presumably in recognition of their help in bringing down youth unemployment but now due to a change made by her Government they can fire that subsidised worker within 90 days with no fear of an appeal against unfair dismissal? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: The member may not understand Job Ops. What happens is employers get $2000 upfront and they get $3000 at the end of the 6 months. If for whatever reason that young person does not stay for the whole 6 months the employer does not get the payment at the end. Job Ops is about opportunities. Employers are stepping up and taking on young people. We will back them every time to do that. And the 90-day trial period is working for them.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Prime Ministerial Responsibility for Pecuniary Conflicts of Interest 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Prime Ministerial Responsibility for Pecuniary Conflicts of Interest 
[Volume:663;Page:11596] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the honourable member. The problem with the question asked yesterday was that it asked the Prime Minister about something that he as Prime Minister was not responsible for. The Prime Minister pointed that out. Speaker’s ruling 148/2 rules that a question that merely asks a member to confirm his or her private affairs is not in order. In the particular case of yesterday the question related to a matter that I suggest is even less of the Prime Minister’s responsibility than that because it asked about a company that the Prime Minister clearly has no responsibility for. The Prime Minister told the House that. I am not sure whether I need to reflect further on anything. I do not immediately see the difficulty. However that is not to say I will not think about it; I will undertake to do so.
Hodgson Pete: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Prime Ministerial Responsibility for Pecuniary Conflicts of Interest 
Hodgson Pete: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Prime Ministerial Responsibility for Pecuniary Conflicts of Interest 
[Volume:663;Page:11595] 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Labour—Dunedin North) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It concerns question No. 8 yesterday and the issue of ministerial responsibility. At the time you ruled—absolutely correctly in my view—that the Prime Minister’s word as to whether he has responsibility ought to be accepted by the House. Mr Speaker you went on to say: “it is better for Ministers to tell the House where they have no responsibility rather than the Speaker intervene too much.” That is where the matter lay and that is where we left it. 
But you may want to take the matter into consideration and I am asking you to do so. It seems to me that the cascade of logic goes something like this: the Prime Minister is clearly responsible for the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet therefore he is clearly responsible for issues arising from the  
Cabinet Manual 
 and therefore he is responsible for issues that come under the issue of conflict of interest. One of the many ways of managing a conflict of interest is through a declaration of interests to the pecuniary interests register and it seems to me that as far as Ministers are concerned—though not I suspect backbenchers—the Prime Minister has some obligation in that regard as well. I invite you Mr Speaker to reflect on that and perhaps either offer some sort of a ruling or reflect on it and not offer us a ruling and we will see how we get on in the coming session.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:663;Page:11595] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 The Government’s intentions with regard to legislation will be well signalled in that regard.
Hughes Darren: Business Statement 
Hughes Darren: Business Statement 
[Volume:663;Page:11595] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 When the House has completed its responsibilities with regard to the Budget debate and the financial review debates for Crown entities is it the Government’s intention to introduce legislation amending the Crown Minerals Act to take into account the consultation that the Government has been doing on schedule 4 lands?
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:663;Page:11595] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 The House will lift this afternoon for a 1-week adjournment. When the House resumes on Tuesday 15 June priority will be given to completing debate on the Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill the Tariff (New Zealand-Hong Kong China Closer Economic Partnership Agreement) Amendment Bill and the Policing (Involvement in Local Authority Elections) Amendment Bill. It is expected that Wednesday 16 June will be a members’ day.
Smith Lockwood: Speaker’s Statements — Chamber Lobbies and Galleries—Audio System Technical Review 
Smith Lockwood: Speaker’s Statements — Chamber Lobbies and Galleries—Audio System Technical Review 
[Volume:663;Page:11595] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: As I foreshadowed earlier in the week there will be sound technicians on the floor of the House today. I would particularly like to thank those members who have moved seats in order to make crucial seats available in the House for the technicians to hear firsthand the sound problems that we have been experiencing. I ask members to resist the temptation to have a neighbourly chat because the technicians need to focus very much on the sound quality while they are in the House.
Sittings of the House 
Sittings of the House 
[Volume:663;Page:11641] 
Sittings of the House 
CHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 The House has made good progress on the Auckland governance legislation. I seek leave for the House to rise. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:663;Page:11595] 
Business Statement 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 The House will lift this afternoon for a 1-week adjournment. When the House resumes on Tuesday 15 June priority will be given to completing debate on the Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill the Tariff (New Zealand-Hong Kong China Closer Economic Partnership Agreement) Amendment Bill and the Policing (Involvement in Local Authority Elections) Amendment Bill. It is expected that Wednesday 16 June will be a members’ day. 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 When the House has completed its responsibilities with regard to the Budget debate and the financial review debates for Crown entities is it the Government’s intention to introduce legislation amending the Crown Minerals Act to take into account the consultation that the Government has been doing on schedule 4 lands? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 The Government’s intentions with regard to legislation will be well signalled in that regard.
Vote: Local Government (Tamaki Makaurau Reorganisation) Amendment Bill Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Bill — Third Readings 
Vote: Local Government (Tamaki Makaurau Reorganisation) Amendment Bill Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:663;Page:11641] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Local Government (Tamaki Makaurau Reorganisation) Amendment Bill the Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill and the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 63 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 7; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Bills read a third time.
Speaker’s Statements — Chamber Lobbies and Galleries—Audio System Technical Review 
Speaker’s Statements — Chamber Lobbies and Galleries—Audio System Technical Review 
[Volume:663;Page:11595] 
Thursday 3 June 2010 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Speaker’s Statements 
Chamber Lobbies and Galleries—Audio System Technical Review 
Mr SPEAKER 
: As I foreshadowed earlier in the week there will be sound technicians on the floor of the House today. I would particularly like to thank those members who have moved seats in order to make crucial seats available in the House for the technicians to hear firsthand the sound problems that we have been experiencing. I ask members to resist the temptation to have a neighbourly chat because the technicians need to focus very much on the sound quality while they are in the House.
Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Prime Ministerial Responsibility for Pecuniary Conflicts of Interest 
Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Prime Ministerial Responsibility for Pecuniary Conflicts of Interest 
[Volume:663;Page:11595] 
Points of Order 
Questions for Oral Answer—Prime Ministerial Responsibility for Pecuniary Conflicts of Interest 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Labour—Dunedin North) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It concerns question No. 8 yesterday and the issue of ministerial responsibility. At the time you ruled—absolutely correctly in my view—that the Prime Minister’s word as to whether he has responsibility ought to be accepted by the House. Mr Speaker you went on to say: “it is better for Ministers to tell the House where they have no responsibility rather than the Speaker intervene too much.” That is where the matter lay and that is where we left it. 
But you may want to take the matter into consideration and I am asking you to do so. It seems to me that the cascade of logic goes something like this: the Prime Minister is clearly responsible for the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet therefore he is clearly responsible for issues arising from the  
Cabinet Manual 
 and therefore he is responsible for issues that come under the issue of conflict of interest. One of the many ways of managing a conflict of interest is through a declaration of interests to the pecuniary interests register and it seems to me that as far as Ministers are concerned—though not I suspect backbenchers—the Prime Minister has some obligation in that regard as well. I invite you Mr Speaker to reflect on that and perhaps either offer some sort of a ruling or reflect on it and not offer us a ruling and we will see how we get on in the coming session. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the honourable member. The problem with the question asked yesterday was that it asked the Prime Minister about something that he as Prime Minister was not responsible for. The Prime Minister pointed that out. Speaker’s ruling 148/2 rules that a question that merely asks a member to confirm his or her private affairs is not in order. In the particular case of yesterday the question related to a matter that I suggest is even less of the Prime Minister’s responsibility than that because it asked about a company that the Prime Minister clearly has no responsibility for. The Prime Minister told the House that. I am not sure whether I need to reflect further on anything. I do not immediately see the difficulty. However that is not to say I will not think about it; I will undertake to do so.
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11582] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 8; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Amendment to the amendment agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments as amended set out on Supplementary Order Papers 136 and 138 in the name of the Hon Rodney Hide (except the amendment to new section 75(2)(d) in clause 45 the heading and subclauses (1) and (2) of clause 74 the heading to clause 74A and clause 110) and the following amendments in his name be agreed to: 
to insert in clause 47AB the following definition after the definition of “existing local authority”: 
local board 
 has the same meaning as in section 4(1) of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009; 
to omit from the heading and subclauses (1) (1)(b) (2) and (3)(b) of clause 74 “trades” and substitute “trade”; 
to omit from clause 107(2)(b) “(c)” and substitute “(d)”; and 
to omit from clause 110 “council-controlled organisation or other entity of the estate or the interest of the existing council-controlled organisation or entity” and substitute “local authority existing council-controlled organisation or other entity of the estate or interest of the existing local authority council-controlled organisation or entity”.
Barker Rick: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
Barker Rick: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11582] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: It has now gone 9.20. As I understand it leave was sought for this debate to conclude at 9.20. The time for this debate is now completed. For those members who are interested in statistics we have had by my rough count 110 calls on this bill. 
We come to the amendments. Again my understanding is that it has been agreed that the amendments are to be taken in blocks starting with the Minister’s amendments. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 139 in the name of the Hon Rodney Hide to the proposed amendment to clause 2 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 136 in his name be agreed to.
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11590] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 8; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to. 
Bill reported with amendment. 
Report adopted.
Hide Rodney: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
Hide Rodney: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11590] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I move  
That the Committee divide the bill into the Local Government (Tamaki Makaurau Reorganisation) Amendment Bill Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Bill  
pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper 137 
.
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11590] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 8; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: We now come to the amendment in the name of Carol Beaumont a typescript amendment to insert new clause 62A. This is ruled out of order as it is the same in substance as the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 128.
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11589] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 8; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Carmel Sepuloni to schedule 3 be agreed to: 
to omit “Section 77: repeal” from the item relating to the Local Government Amendment Act 1992 (1992 No 42).
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11589] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 8; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendments not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr Rajen Prasad to clause 111 be agreed to: 
to omit subclauses (4) and (5).
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11588] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 8; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendments in the name of Su’a William Sio to clause 111 be agreed to: 
to omit subclause (1)(c); and 
to insert the following subclause after subclause (1): 
(1A)The mayor of Auckland Council must not later than 31 March 2011 appoint members of the Pacific Peoples Advisory panel and the Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel in collaboration with representatives of the respective communities.
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11587] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 5 
Maori Party 5. 
Noes 116 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 8; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 132 in the name of Sue Kedgley to clause 34 be agreed to.