edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Hartley Ann: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — First Reading Instruction to Finance and Expenditure Committee 
Hartley Ann: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — First Reading Instruction to Finance and Expenditure Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:222] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: I have already told the member that that is not a point of order. [ 
Interruption 
] The member is interrupting me while I am ruling on the point of order. If there is a deliberate failure to address a member properly then yes that would be something. But that is not the case in this instance. It is not up to the Speaker to correct the mispronunciation of a member’s name. The member will now leave the Chamber. 
Rodney Hide withdrew from the Chamber.
Hide Rodney: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — First Reading Instruction to Finance and Expenditure Committee 
Hide Rodney: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — First Reading Instruction to Finance and Expenditure Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:222] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Could you please explain why members in the previous Parliament were constantly pulled up for mispronouncing surnames in this House yet when Mr David Benson-Pope does it in respect of my colleague Tau Henare it is suddenly OK and even raising the matter is not a point of order.
Hartley Ann: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — First Reading Instruction to Finance and Expenditure Committee 
Hartley Ann: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — First Reading Instruction to Finance and Expenditure Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:221] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: The member knows that is not a point of order. 
Rodney Hide 
: It is a point of order. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: The member knows that is not a point of order. 
Rodney Hide 
: It is a point of order Madam Speaker. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: I will give the member one warning. He will please be seated. That is not a point of order and the member knows it. 
Rodney Hide 
: Point of order Madam Speaker. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: I will give the member just one warning. If he relitigates my decision I will have no choice but to ask him to leave.
Hide Rodney: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — First Reading Instruction to Finance and Expenditure Committee 
Hide Rodney: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — First Reading Instruction to Finance and Expenditure Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:221] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I know that the Labour Party does not take Maori seriously but it is a convention in this House that members try to pronounce people’s names appropriately. I think that Mr Benson-Pope should be pulled up for the way he pronounced Tau Henare’s name.
Cullen Michael: Address in Reply 
Cullen Michael: Address in Reply 
[Volume:628;Page:203] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That this debate be now adjourned 
until after consideration of Government order of the day No. 3. 
Motion agreed to.
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:180] 
10.  
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: What steps is the Government taking to encourage skilled expatriate New Zealanders back to New Zealand? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 The recently launched New Zealand Now programme aims to better connect New Zealanders living offshore with opportunities here to make it easier for them to come home and to ensure that those people who intend to return have the information they need to help them. 
Darien Fenton 
: Why is the Government keen to attract expatriates back to New Zealand? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: The Government’s top priority is to see our immigration system serve New Zealand’s interests. As part of this we need to attract back highly skilled New Zealanders and to attract in highly talented individuals from other countries.
Street Maryan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Street Maryan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:176] 
6.  
MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: 
 What progress has been made on protecting young New Zealanders from the meningococcal B disease? 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Health) 
: 
 Very good progress. One million young New Zealanders have now received their first dose of the meningococcal B vaccine. Over 77 percent of all school students have now received all three doses. 
Maryan Street 
: What effect has the vaccination programme had on the meningococcal B epidemic especially in those parts of the country where the roll-out occurred first? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: The first part of the country to receive the full course of vaccinations was Counties Manukau. In the first 9 months of last year there were 17 cases amongst preschoolers in Counties Manukau. In the first 9 months of this year there were two. That is a very clear sign that the campaign will succeed. Many thanks go to many people such as health workers schoolteachers staff parents and many others who have made this campaign the huge success it has been so far. 
Maryan Street 
: In the light of the Minister’s last answer what has been in fact the involvement of schools in ensuring the success of this campaign? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Vaccinating our young people in schools across the country has been a major effort. The campaign has involved 2600 schools 750000 students and the cooperation of tens of thousands of staff members to whom I again pay my respects and give my thanks. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Does the Minister realise that a year since the programme began nationally in November 2004 40 percent of under-5-year-olds have still not yet been fully vaccinated including 60 percent of Maori kids under 5; are not those children the most at-risk young New Zealanders and what is he going to do about that? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Yes they are amongst the most at risk. To answer the third part of the member’s question that is why we have mop-up vaccinations which will proceed until 30 June 2006. If the view is that we need to continue vaccinations even then Cabinet will make a decision to do so well before then.
[Volume:628;Page:167] 
14 November 2005
Authority to Administer Oath 
Authority to Administer Oath 
[Volume:628;Page:167] 
Authority to Administer Oath 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Members the following authorisation has been received by the Deputy Speaker from Her Excellency the Governor-General to administer the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to be taken or made by members of the House. It reads: 
Pursuant to section 11 of the Constitution Act 1986 I The Honourable Dame Silvia Cartwright Governor-General of New Zealand hereby authorise you 
The Honourable Clem Rudolph Simich 
Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives 
to administer to members of Parliament the Oath or Affirmation of Allegiance to Her Majesty The Queen required to be taken or made by every such member before that member shall be permitted to sit or vote in the House of Representatives. 
Helen Clark Prime Minister 
Silvia Cartwright 
Governor-General 
14 November 2005
[Volume:628;Page:167] 
Governor-General
[Volume:628;Page:167] 
Silvia Cartwright
[Volume:628;Page:167] 
Helen Clark Prime Minister
[Volume:628;Page:167] 
to administer to members of Parliament the Oath or Affirmation of Allegiance to Her Majesty The Queen required to be taken or made by every such member before that member shall be permitted to sit or vote in the House of Representatives.
[Volume:628;Page:167] 
Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives
[Volume:628;Page:167] 
The Honourable Clem Rudolph Simich
Wilson Margaret: Authority to Administer Oath 
Wilson Margaret: Authority to Administer Oath 
[Volume:628;Page:167] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Members the following authorisation has been received by the Deputy Speaker from Her Excellency the Governor-General to administer the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to be taken or made by members of the House. It reads:
[Volume:628;Page:167] 
Pursuant to section 11 of the Constitution Act 1986 I The Honourable Dame Silvia Cartwright Governor-General of New Zealand hereby authorise you
Event: Members Sworn 
Event: Members Sworn 
[Volume:628;Page:167] 
Members Sworn 
Nandor Steven Tanczos was presented to the Speaker made the affirmation required by law and took his seat in the House.
Members Sworn 
Members Sworn 
[Volume:628;Page:167] 
Wednesday 16 November 2005 
Madam Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Members Sworn 
Nandor Steven Tanczos was presented to the Speaker made the affirmation required by law and took his seat in the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Address in Reply 
Tisch Lindsay: Address in Reply 
[Volume:628;Page:295] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I seek leave that should my colleague Kate Wilkinson’s maiden speech go slightly beyond 6 p.m. she is able to complete her speech without interruption. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is not.
Event: Members Sworn 
Event: Members Sworn 
[Volume:628;Page:277] 
Members Sworn 
James Robert Sutton was presented to the Speaker made the affirmation required by law and took his seat in the House.
Members Sworn 
Members Sworn 
[Volume:628;Page:277] 
Members Sworn 
James Robert Sutton was presented to the Speaker made the affirmation required by law and took his seat in the House.
O'Connor Damien: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 12 to Minister 
O'Connor Damien: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 12 to Minister 
[Volume:628;Page:268] 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Associate Minister of Health) 
: 
 I seek leave of the House to clarify a point in response to an oral question asked today. I used the date of December 2000 when the Government first heard of the need for Tamiflu. The date is indeed December 2004. I apologise to the House.
Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 12 to Minister 
Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 12 to Minister 
[Volume:628;Page:268] 
Amended Answers to Oral Questions 
Question No. 12 to Minister 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Associate Minister of Health) 
: 
 I seek leave of the House to clarify a point in response to an oral question asked today. I used the date of December 2000 when the Government first heard of the need for Tamiflu. The date is indeed December 2004. I apologise to the House.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:266] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 In light of my earlier question I seek leave to table the annual report of the Education Review Office 2005 if that is appropriate. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Normally leave is sought at the end of the question but I will put it. Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is.
Fairbrother Russell: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fairbrother Russell: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:262] 
9.  
RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: What steps if any is the Government taking through immigration policy to assist orchardists in the Hawke’s Bay? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Associate Minister of Immigration) 
 on behalf of the 
 Minister of Immigration 
: The Government and the horticulture and viticulture industries have in partnership developed for the first time a seasonal strategy which will be formally launched by the Government next month. Given that New Zealand has the lowest unemployment rate in the OECD and having satisfied ourselves that there is a genuine labour shortage the Government has approved in principle the recruitment of 450 overseas workers for the horticulture industry in the Hawke’s Bay region. 
Russell Fairbrother 
: What is the aim of the seasonal labour strategy? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: The aim of the strategy is to ensure that there is an emphasis on employing New Zealanders first and using immigration as a secondary option where there is a genuine shortage. That approach has been welcomed enthusiastically by the industry and is another example of this Government working in partnership with industry for the benefit of New Zealand. 
Craig Foss 
: Is the Minister aware of the approximately 18 approved immigration permits submitted by Hawke’s Bay growers in the past 12 months the majority of which have been given up on by the applicants due to inaction by the Minister and the remainder of which appear simply to have vanished and can he explain how that type of ineptitude assists the orchardists of Hawke’s Bay? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: This strategy has taken some 18 months to put together and the reason for that is that we have developed it in partnership which has involved dialogue between Government agencies and industry members. I would have thought the member would welcome the fact that we have answered the industry’s need identified a genuine labour shortage and put together a strategy that will ensure the sustainability of that industry. 
R Doug Woolerton 
: Has the impact on the projected number of overstayers as a result of this policy shift been analysed by the New Zealand Immigration Service; if so what is the projected impact and if not why not especially in the light of a recent daytime brawl in the Hawke’s Bay involving 10 overstayers armed with meat cleavers and iron bars combined with the fact that the Immigration Service managed to lose an entire Tongan rugby team in 2004? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: All countries have overstayers and it is a problem in New Zealand as well—we acknowledge that. In terms of ensuring repatriation I can say to the member that it is in the interests of the employers themselves if they are to revisit an approval in principle next year firstly that they have to guarantee that the workers will be repatriated and secondly that the employers have guaranteed that by meeting the costs associated with repatriation up to $3000 per worker.
Copeland Gordon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Copeland Gordon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:259] 
7.  
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
 to the  
Minister of Revenue 
: Does he agree with Inland Revenue Department advice that particularly in relation to the 33 percent and 39 percent personal tax rates there is growing evidence of income splitting within families who are self-employed and that this leads to perceptions of unfairness in the tax system? 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue) 
: 
 Yes I do agree with that advice. The briefing paper notes that slower or negative growth rates for higher-income individuals in the $60000-$100000 income bracket are probably likely evidence that significant numbers of those with substantial amounts to gain through income splitting are doing so. That inevitably will lead to perceptions of unfairness because not all taxpayers will be able to take advantage of such opportunities. 
Gordon Copeland 
: Does the Minister have any plans to deal with the issue? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: Under the confidence and supply agreement between United Future and the Labour-led Government and consistent also with the generic tax policy process there will be a consultative paper on income splitting prepared that will address those and related issues. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Does the Minister support Dr Cullen’s proposal to scrap the income tax threshold adjustments in 2008 if Labour’s carbon tax does not proceed; if so why? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: That is hardly related to this question. As far as I am aware from questions asked earlier in the House this afternoon it does not have the status of a proposal. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: If—and Dr Cullen indicated to the House this afternoon this is highly likely—the carbon tax does not proceed and the Government does go ahead with that proposal to scrap the threshold adjustments in 2008 can the Minister confirm comments that that will represent a breach of the support and supply agreement? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: The provisions of our agreement relate to there being an independent analysis of the carbon tax proposal before any decision is made about whether it proceeds. That work is commencing and any decisions that flow from that will be made at the appropriate time. 
Gordon Copeland 
: How many couples with dependent children would benefit in tax savings if income splitting were introduced? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: The best estimate we have based on couples with dependent children 18 years and under is that some 325000 couples would benefit from such a policy.
Gallagher Martin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Gallagher Martin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:256] 
5.  
MARTIN GALLAGHER (Labour—Hamilton West) 
 to the  
Minister for Courts 
: What initiatives has he put in place to improve the level of pathology services to coroners and police? 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister for Courts) 
: 
 Retirements and resignations in recent years created a critical shortage of forensic pathologists who are essential to the police for forensic support. To ensure a quality service a specialist unit of forensic pathologists has been created. That is supported by the Auckland District Health Board to provide services across New Zealand. The new structure will ensure good governance and good advice and provide training to ensure a quality service over time. 
Martin Gallagher 
: How effective have those initiatives been? 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: Very effective. Police and coroners are now assured of a 24-hour 7-day-a-week nationwide full-time specialist forensic pathology service for homicides and suspicious death cases to perform post-mortems attend crime scenes and appear as expert witnesses in criminal prosecutions. We will now provide training professional development and a career structure for forensic pathology and collegial support for the wider coronial pathology service—something we could not previously guarantee.
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:249] 
1. MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What reports has he received on the performance of New Zealand schools? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister for Economic Development) 
 on behalf of the 
 Minister of Education 
: The  
Schools Report 2004 
 shows that the proportion of students leaving school with a level 3 qualification or scholarship has increased by nearly 20 percent to nearly one-third of all school-leavers. The proportion of school-leavers with little or no attainment has dropped by 30 percent to one-eighth of all school-leavers over a 3-year period. 
Moana Mackey 
: What does the report state about the financial position of schools? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The report states that most schools are in a good financial position with 92 percent of schools having a healthy working capita ratio. Government funding of schools was increased by 7.4 percent per student in 2004 making us the third-highest spender on schools in the OECD. Locally raised funds increased by 2.6 percent per student which is more or less the rate of inflation. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister tell the House what proportion of students leaving year 8—that is primary and intermediate schools—has sufficient literacy and numeracy to allow them to make progress at secondary school? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: In a good secondary school they all do. 
Hon Bill English 
: Is the Minister aware that if he approaches the Parliamentary Library or the Ministry of Education he will find that there is no information at all on what proportion of students leaving primary and intermediate schools is sufficiently literate and numerate to progress at secondary school? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I have not asked those organisations. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: E ai ki ta te Ripoata a-Tau o Te Tari Arotake Matauranga e rua tekau pai heneti o nga tauira kei te ngoikore i nga kaupapa matauranga. He ake nga kaupapa ka whaia e te Kawanatanga hei whakatikatika i tenei tu ahua. Kei te whakaaro ranei te Kawanatanga he pai ke ake te hanga whare herehere mo enei tauira? 
[An interpretation in English was given to the House.] 
[ 
According to the Annual Report of the Education Review Office 20 percent of students are “currently not succeeding in our education system”. What is the Government proposing to put into place to address this situation? Or does the Government think that much more will be gained by building prisons for students like these? 
]  
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I am very surprised that that member asked that question given the enormous amount of work he did before he came to Parliament towards making progress for Maori students who are a big part of that group. He knows that Maori literacy rates are much better now as a result of the work that he and others have done in the last 5 years.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:628;Page:249] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 On the latter at the least before September 2008; on the former I suspect that will be done in the first week in December though if anyone has a problem we could rush it through all its stages earlier if that is required.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:628;Page:249] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 Can the Leader of the House indicate to Parliament when he would expect the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill to be before the House and could he also indicate when the House would expect to legislate for the intention to close off historic grievances concerning the Treaty of Waitangi by September 2008?
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:628;Page:249] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week the House will complete the Address in Reply debate. At the conclusion of this debate it is the Government’s intention to pass the Imprest Supply (Third for 2005/06) Bill. Priority will probably also be given to first readings on the Order Paper should time allow.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:628;Page:249] 
Thursday 17 November 2005 
Madam Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business Statement 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week the House will complete the Address in Reply debate. At the conclusion of this debate it is the Government’s intention to pass the Imprest Supply (Third for 2005/06) Bill. Priority will probably also be given to first readings on the Order Paper should time allow. 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 Can the Leader of the House indicate to Parliament when he would expect the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill to be before the House and could he also indicate when the House would expect to legislate for the intention to close off historic grievances concerning the Treaty of Waitangi by September 2008? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 On the latter at the least before September 2008; on the former I suspect that will be done in the first week in December though if anyone has a problem we could rush it through all its stages earlier if that is required.
Hartley Ann: Address in Reply 
Hartley Ann: Address in Reply 
[Volume:628;Page:329] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: The member is quite wrong. That is not a point of order. The member was making a speech. That is not the ruling on repetition.
Hayes John: Address in Reply 
Hayes John: Address in Reply 
[Volume:628;Page:329] 
JOHN HAYES (National—Wairarapa) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I am mindful of the Standing Orders which I am looking at. I see that Standing Order 107(2) does not allow tedious repetition. The points being made by the Minister have already been made by the Prime Minister earlier today.
Roy Heather: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Roy Heather: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:628;Page:317] 
1.  
HEATHER ROY (Deputy Leader—ACT) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Social Services Committee 
: Is the Social Services Committee conducting a financial review of the Department of Child Youth and Family Services; if so on what date will evidence be heard? 
GEORGINA BEYER (Chairperson of the Social Services Committee): 
 I am pleased to inform the ACT party representative on the Social Services Committee that yes evidence will be heard on Wednesday 23 November 2005 at 11.30 a.m. I look forward to seeing the member there. 
Heather Roy 
: Will the outgoing Chief Executive of Child Youth and Family Services Paula Tyler appear before the Social Services Committee tomorrow to give evidence? 
GEORGINA BEYER 
: I can confirm that that will be the case. 
Judith Collins 
: Will the outgoing Chief Executive of Child Youth and Family Services Paula Tyler be required to answer questions regarding her failed employment? 
GEORGINA BEYER 
: As chair of the Social Services Committee far be it from me to speculate on what questions members may ask Ms Tyler.
Chadwick Steve: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Chadwick Steve: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:628;Page:316] 
12.  
STEVE CHADWICK (Labour—Rotorua) 
 to the  
Minister of Conservation 
: What progress has the Department of Conservation made in island pest eradication? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 The Department of Conservation is a world leader in developing and applying techniques for eradicating introduced pests on offshore islands. The department has developed the skills and technology to eradicate rodents from large and steep islands. This progress greatly enhances our prospects of saving many of our special endangered species. 
Steve Chadwick 
: Has the special biodiversity project on Secretary Island in Fiordland been successful? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: This week the Department of Conservation announced that Secretary Island has been cleared of stoats. This was a special biodiversity project announced in the 2005 Budget as being completed in record time allowing my department to reintroduce a number of endangered bird species perhaps even in time kakapo—another example of a Labour promise fulfilled.
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:628;Page:315] 
10.  
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
 to the  
Minister of Revenue 
: How much is the Inland Revenue Department paying per square metre for its accommodation in Directories House Christchurch and what is the total cost of the fit-out and move to Directories House? 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue) 
: 
 I cannot disclose those figures because they are the subject of a confidentiality agreement between the commissioner and the building owners. I do not have the total cost of the fit-out and the move to Directories House at this stage simply because those costs have yet to be finalised. 
Rodney Hide 
: Does the Minister consider it acceptable that the Inland Revenue Department moved into temporary accommodation in Christchurch at a cost of $330 a square metre as reported in the  
National Business Review 
 plus a $2 million fit-out when it could have stayed in its present accommodation in Henderson House paying $130 a square metre; if so why does he think it acceptable? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: The Inland Revenue Department could not stay in its current accommodation; that lease was due to terminate in December of this year. Negotiations regarding its renewal commenced in the middle of last year and they were not concluded satisfactorily. 
Rodney Hide 
: Does the Minister believe it was possible for the Inland Revenue Department to stay on in a building owned by a man the previous Minister of Revenue Michael Cullen falsely accused of being “one of the biggest and nastiest tax evaders” and of running “the sex industry in Christchurch”; if so why? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: The member clearly knows Mr Henderson better than I do and is therefore better placed to answer that question. I just make this point: at the time the Inland Revenue Department went into what is now known as Henderson House the building was not in fact owned by Mr Henderson. I understand he acquired it subsequently. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Does the Minister consider his department’s almost 300 percent increase in Christchurch accommodation costs to be an example of Treasury’s recent briefing advice to the Government that “There is little to indicate that New Zealanders are getting more services and better results from the public sector for the large increases in resources provided.”; if not why not? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: No I do not believe that. In fact when the process being embarked upon of reorganising Inland Revenue Department services in Christchurch is complete taxpayers will get an even better service than they currently get.
Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:628;Page:314] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Is this a new point of order? 
RON MARK 
: Yes. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have already ruled. 
RON MARK 
: I accept your ruling Madam Speaker but in respect of Standing Order 166(1): “A member must before participating in the consideration of any item of business declare any financial interest that the member has in that business.” and for the clarification of the House I request that Mr Hide be asked to declare that he has no financial interest whatsoever in dealings with Mr Henderson and that this question is not in any way aimed at helping Mr Henderson. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I thank the member. It is not for the Speaker to ask the member that; it is for the member himself to address the issue.
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:628;Page:314] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 That is not a point of order in any way whatsoever—and I see that the Speaker is agreeing with me. Ron Mark can stand up and make all the complaints he likes but that is not a point of order. There is no conflict of interest and I know that the Speaker will rule accordingly. 
Ron Mark 
: Madam Speaker— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No the member has put his case very well and Mr Hide has responded succinctly. I just note that the prayer is aspirational so no member is disqualified by it; that would certainly be a new ruling. I also point out that Standing Order 165 does not of itself disqualify a question or permit a question to be disallowed so it does not relate to questions. I note however that if in fact Mr Hide does stand to gain financially as a result of asking the question he has to declare it. But that does not make the question itself out of order. So I ask Mr Hide now to proceed to ask the question—
Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:628;Page:314] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I would just ask you to bear with me as I explain my case. I am seeking that you strike out this question on the basis that it is simply coming from Mr Hide and I will explain. I refer you firstly to Standing Order 59 which states that: “… at the commencement of each sitting the Speaker reads a prayer to the House …”. In this prayer the House acknowledges our need for God’s guidance in all things and goes on to say: “Laying aside all private and personal interests we beseech Thee to grant that we may conduct the affairs of this House and of our country to the glory of Thy holy name the maintenance of true religion and justice the honour of the Queen and the public welfare …”. I direct you further to Standing Orders 165(1) and 166(1) which stipulate and re-emphasise the rules regarding conflicts of interest. 
Mr Hide’s question clearly relates to a property owned by a man whom he has described many times in this House as his very good friend Dave “Hendo” Henderson. It involves a situation where a property which Mr Henderson is the owner and landlord of has been vacated by the Inland Revenue Department. This House on many occasions has heard that Mr Hide has received bids from Mr Henderson has possibly received remuneration for doing work for Mr Henderson in Fiji and has represented Mr Henderson on numerous occasions. Mr Henderson is a man who is reported to fund the ACT party and to support Mr Hide personally. Now through the House Mr Hide is seeking to get commercially confidential information that Mr Henderson would not otherwise have access to in order to put together his bid to retain the Inland Revenue Department as a tenant in his building. 
In view of the prayer and the guidance we seek in the way in which we conduct business in this House and in view of Standing Orders 165(1) and 166(1) which Mr Hide has not complied with I say that if this question had been asked by any other member of the House it might well have been acceptable but in its current form coming from Mr Hide—Dave “Hendo” Henderson’s close mate who has represented Mr Henderson in this House countless times—this question is clearly out of order and should not be permitted to be asked by Mr Hide.
Street Maryan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Street Maryan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:628;Page:309] 
6.  
MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: What progress has been made in upgrading New Zealand hospitals? 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Health) 
: 
 This Government is committed to rebuilding the hospital infrastructure of New Zealand from Kaitaiato Invercargill. The Government has under the watch of my predecessor the Hon Annette King shown that commitment by the largest investment in public hospital infrastructure for a generation. 
Maryan Street 
: How does the Government’s hospital upgrades programme then compare with the efforts of previous administrations? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: The Labour-led Government’s historic investment in upgrading hospitals and opening new facilities stands in stark contrast to the previous National Government’s programme of closures and under-investment in New Zealand’s hospitals. Between 1991 and 1999 the National Government closed 38 public hospitals. We are building new ones and the difference between that party and this is that those members have tax cuts on their minds. 
Tariana Turia 
: How can the Minister justify a reduction in the number of beds following the upgrade of Wellington Hospital and what contribution will this reduction make towards reducing waiting lists? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: The number of beds in New Zealand has been reducing for about a century. The new hospital Wellington base hospital being built by this Labour Government will be a modern hospital a good hospital and suitable for the needs of the Wellington Capital and Coast region in the years 2005 and beyond.
Hughes Darren: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Hughes Darren: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:628;Page:303] 
2.  
DARREN HUGHES (Labour—Otaki) 
 to the  
Minister for Sport and Recreation 
: What will be the benefits to New Zealand of hosting the Rugby World Cup 2011? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister for Sport and Recreation) 
: 
 Hosting the Rugby World Cup will be positive not only for New Zealand rugby but also because the tournament will deliver significant economic benefits and tourism spin-offs. It is estimated that it will attract around 60000 extra visitors to New Zealand will generate an extra $400 million for the economy and result in an extra tax take exceeding $90 million. 
Darren Hughes 
: What additional exposure does he expect New Zealand to gain from hosting the Rugby World Cup? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: In addition to the extra visitors we expect to visit New Zealand television-viewing numbers for the last world cup were 3.4 billion. That will be a fantastic opportunity to showcase New Zealand. However I regret to inform the member that it will almost certainly not focus on the Courtesy Ford Levin Domain notwithstanding that member’s representations.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Question for Written Answer—Immigration 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Question for Written Answer—Immigration 
[Volume:628;Page:302] 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I seek your ruling as to whether it is acceptable under the Standing Orders for the Minister of Immigration the Hon David Cunliffe to refuse to answer a series of written questions relating to the representations by the Hon Taito Phillip Field and other Labour members on immigration matters an issue in which there is a considerable level of public interest with the excuse given that: “I do not consider this a good use of my department’s time and resources.” 
 The Minister acknowledged that the information was held by his department but he did not consider it was worth providing it to this Parliament. I submit that that is tantamount to treating this Parliament with contempt and seek your clarification of Parliament’s requirements in respect of ministerial accountability. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I thank the member. I will look at it and get back to him once I have had an opportunity to do so.
Hide Rodney: Motions — Rugby World Cup 2011 
Hide Rodney: Motions — Rugby World Cup 2011 
[Volume:628;Page:302] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 On behalf of the ACT party I rise to congratulate Jock Hobbs and his team and to make special note of the Prime Minister Helen Clark for her efforts on behalf of every New Zealander in winning the rights to host the Rugby World Cup. It is another example of a team continuing against negative comment and succeeding against the odds—and it is fantastic. It will be huge for New Zealand. There will be something like 48 games involving 20 countries across a dozen cities in New Zealand all played in the space of 6 to 7 weeks. I think we should also—and not without some irony—pay tribute to John Minto and Trevor Richards for their efforts as protesters because once South Africa was knocked out the South African Minister of Sport and Recreation Mr Stofile said that South Africa voted for New Zealand because of the efforts of the New Zealanders who protested in support of their efforts in South Africa and I do not think that irony should be lost in New Zealand either. 
It is going to be a huge effort and I am sorry to disappoint Mr Dunne but of course the final will be held in Auckland the sports cultural and commerce capital of New Zealand. It will require a huge effort on behalf of everyone—particularly the Government and particularly this Parliament—to make sure that New Zealand’s infrastructure and Auckland’s infrastructure are up to scratch so that we can indeed have a world cup that we can all be proud of. 
Motion agreed to.
Dunne Peter: Motions — Rugby World Cup 2011 
Dunne Peter: Motions — Rugby World Cup 2011 
[Volume:628;Page:301] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 United Future joins with the other members who have spoken to congratulate Jock Hobbs Chris Moller the New Zealand Rugby Union team and the Prime Minister on their efforts in ensuring that the pleasant news we woke up to on Friday morning was that the Rugby World Cup was coming here. If one had listened to all of the news reports in the preceding days and particularly to the analysis on the preceding evening one would not be mistaken in believing that we had absolutely no chance of achieving this particular victory. It was therefore very pleasant news to wake up to on Friday morning. Our heartiest congratulations go to every member of the team who was involved in securing this coup. 
Three broad challenges lie ahead of the country now though between this point and 2011. The first is the obvious one—to make sure that we are capable of delivering on the commitments that have been made and that we can achieve a popular effective efficient and widely patronised Rugby World Cup. The second challenge has already begun and that is the great sense of inter-provincial rivalry that at the moment is reflected in the debate over where the grand final should be held. I put in a great plug for Westpac Stadium. It is a superb ground and it will have an elite crowd there. The third challenge after all will be to make sure that having secured the hosting of the cup for New Zealand we win it in 2011.
Sharples Pita: Motions — Rugby World Cup 2011 
Sharples Pita: Motions — Rugby World Cup 2011 
[Volume:628;Page:301] 
Dr PITA SHARPLES (Co-Leader—Maori Party) 
: 
 On behalf of the Maori Party I reiterate what we have already published. We give our congratulations to Jock Hobbs and his team on securing the Rugby World Cup to be played in our country. I particularly commend the Prime Minister for her effort because to get out there as the country’s leader and bid for a particular sport shows that on this occasion she is the salt of the earth. I think she has done a magnificent job. 
Hosting the Rugby World Cup here will create the opportunity for us to turn the discussion about political correctness into cultural correctness. Hosting the Rugby World Cup will provide us with an opportunity to authentically welcome all the overseas teams to New Zealand with at least a powhiri in the areas where they will be staying or billeted. That is the least of what we would expect. It would show that New Zealand is prepared to be and enjoys being as one with the tangata whenua in accepting aspects of Maori culture in the same way that we embrace the haka when the team goes on to the field before playing. So for a number of reasons not the least of which being that I am a rugby fanatic I look forward to the Rugby World Cup being played here and thank all those involved.
Locke Keith: Motions — Rugby World Cup 2011 
Locke Keith: Motions — Rugby World Cup 2011 
[Volume:628;Page:301] 
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party joins the previous speakers in congratulating both the New Zealand Rugby Union and the Government—in particular Helen Clark and Trevor Mallard—on beating the odds and bringing the Rugby World Cup to New Zealand. We all have to do our bit between now and 2011. It is a great opportunity to showcase what is best in New Zealand. 
As an Auckland MP I will have to work with the other MPs from Auckland to make sure that not only is Eden Park up to scratch but our public transport system is humming like an All Black backline so that we get people to the game on time and provide an example to the world. We have to show collectively the same passion focus and teamwork that the New Zealand Rugby Union has shown in getting the Rugby World Cup to New Zealand help it to make this Rugby World Cup a great success and get our infrastructure in place.
Mark Ron: Motions — Rugby World Cup 2011 
Mark Ron: Motions — Rugby World Cup 2011 
[Volume:628;Page:300] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 As the new spokesperson on sport and recreation for New Zealand First may I take the opportunity on behalf of New Zealand First to congratulate firstly the New Zealand Rugby Union and its team on successfully winning the rights to host the 2011 Rugby World Cup. I also take the opportunity to congratulate the Prime Minister on the part she played in that bid on behalf of New Zealand as a whole. 
It is at times like these that New Zealand First truly laments the loss of the titles “Dame” and “Sir”. I can think of no people more deserving to receive the title of “Sir” than Chris Moller and Jock Hobbs once what will be an absolutely splendid event has taken place and the country has had the opportunity to enjoy having the Rugby World Cup here in our hands and having had the opportunity to show off the beauty of New Zealand to the 60000-odd visitors whom we anticipate will grace our shores. The economic windfall for this nation will be huge. The tourism exposure again will be massive. More important the boost in terms of morale to our nation as a whole as we all take the opportunity to show off this country of ours to show off our proud rugby heritage will be immeasurable. 
 I also if I can be forgiven just add a note of caution and say that from now until 2011 we also need to focus seriously on our security commitments. It has not escaped me that although we are a much-favoured little country in the world there are people whom no doubt the Prime Minister’s office and security people will need to be mindful of as we plan and work our way towards this wonderful event. 
In closing I say again that we just wish that in time we could refer to Jock Hobbs and Chris Moller by the titles that they deserve—“Sir Jock” and “Sir Chris”. Our congratulations once again to the entire team.
McCully Murray: Motions — Rugby World Cup 2011 
McCully Murray: Motions — Rugby World Cup 2011 
[Volume:628;Page:300] 
Hon MURRAY McCULLY (National—East Coast Bays) 
: 
 On behalf of the National Party I join the Minister and the Government in congratulating those responsible for the successful bid for the 2011 Rugby World Cup. This is a huge win not just for New Zealand rugby but for the New Zealand economy and for our ability to profile ourselves on the world stage. I think the recent Lions tour gave us just a small taste of what lies ahead. It is especially pleasing to participate in this motion today because many of us believe that had we not been successful in procuring the 2011 event then we would never again have the capacity to get back in the race. That is my personal view. 
I pay a special tribute to Jock Hobbs who as the Minister has mentioned has a very high personal standing in the world of rugby. I am absolutely convinced that his personal mana played a very considerable part in the success of the bid. I also want to congratulate all of the others involved in the New Zealand Rugby Union on the bid committee and in other agencies involved. 
As the Minister has told the House this was a bid in which the Government was a partner with the Rugby Union. I want to commend the Minister and the Government for making the substantial commitment that was required to that partnership. As the Minister knows the Government did so with the unambiguous support of the National Party and I want to tell the House that as the Minister has informed the House already when the International Rugby Board officials were in New Zealand prior to the election wanting to meet separately with the Minister and myself at his suggestion we conducted that interview together so that we were able to emphasise that in this country rugby is bigger than party politics. 
I want to recognise the role played by the Prime Minister especially the trouble she went to in order to be part of the formal presentation in Dublin. Given the significance of this event to our country I think it was fitting that our Prime Minister should be there and I want to thank her for making the substantial personal effort that was required to do so. 
Finally the International Rugby Board made it clear when it was here that the appointment of a Minister to take responsibility for the Rugby World Cup would be an important consideration on its part. In view of what I have read in this morning’s newspapers I guess I should congratulate Mr Mallard—who if he is not already appointed is to be appointed to that role. May I reassure the House that given the fact there will be at least one election between now and 2011 there is no shortage of suitable candidates on this side of the House should any of us be called upon to serve.