edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 13 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11130. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua)to theMinister of Veterans’ Affairs: What plans does the Government have to mark the 60th anniversary of the Korean War Armistice in July and recognise the contribution of New Zealand soldiers in the conflict?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister of Veterans’ Affairs):I can announce that next month I will have the honour of leading a delegation which includes 31 New Zealand veterans of that conflict to attend commemorations in the Republic of Korea to mark the 60th anniversary of the Korean War Armistice. New Zealand played an important part in the Korean War with nearly 5000 Kiwis serving as part of K-force and another 1300 on Royal New Zealand Navy vessels. It is pleasing that we are able to help bring these veterans back to Korea to reflect and to pay respects to comrades lost.Dr Paul Hutchison: In what other ways are veterans of the Korean conflict being served by the Government?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: The Government pays a war disablement or surviving spouse pension to more than 770 veterans of that conflict and 300 surviving spouses. On 1 April this year those payments were boosted by an increase of 5 percent on top of the annual CPI increase. The Government recognises the sacrifices our veterans and their families have made for our country and we are committed to providing the support and care they deserve.Iain Lees-Galloway: When will he recognise the contribution of New Zealand soldiers in that conflict and others by finally introducing the legislation to implement the Law Commission’s recommendations from its review of the War Pensions Act which his predecessor Nathan Guy promised would have been done long before now?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: As the member well knows that is a very complex piece of legislation and it is 59 years old. The Government has made decisions about the replacement of that Act and work is under way right now to introduce the bill. The Prime Minister has made a commitment which we certainly support that that bill will be implemented in this term of Parliament and I stand by that commitment.
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 13 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11129. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.DARIEN FENTON (Labour)to theMinister of Labour: When he goes to the International Labour Organization Conference in Geneva does he intend to repeat his comment that New Zealand’s employment law is “unworkable” “sloppy” and “creating real problems”?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Labour):No. I think the member is being a little bit tricky in her quotation. What I actually said was that our employment law is fundamentally sound but certainly there are parts that should be changed to achieve a more flexible and fair labour market and that is exactly what this Government is doing.Darien Fenton: What exactly are the parts of New Zealand’s employment law that he thinks are unworkable sloppy and creating real problems?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: If the member had watched an excellent interview onQ+A she would have been given several examples of moderate centre-right employment policy that this Government is promoting. One was in relation to Part 6A where I made it clear that there are issues around holidays pay and transferring them over which are very difficult to work.Darien Fenton: Will he be asking the opinion of the ILO Director-General Guy Ryder whether he agrees with the Minister’s assessment that New Zealand’s employment law is unworkable sloppy and creating real problems; if so will he share the director-general’s opinion with the rest of New Zealand when he gets back from his trip to Geneva?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: We will see how it goes.Darien Fenton: Does he agree that one of the very sloppy and unworkable parts of New Zealand employment law currently is that there is a $6 an hour gap between the Australian and New Zealand minimum wages; if so will he be following the example of Wellington and promoting a living wage?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: No. The fact of the matter is that our minimum wage as a proportion of the average wage in New Zealand is the highest minimum wage in the OECD.Darien Fenton: Does he agree with the Prime Minister’s comments on 27 May that a law change to allow employers to take on temporary workers when permanent staff are on strike or are locked out was not on the Government’s agenda; if so will he be voting for Jami-Lee Ross’ Employment Relations (Continuity of Labour) Amendment Bill?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: In the wider context of everything I am sure the Prime Minister said I certainly do agree with the Prime Minister.
Sabin Mike: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSabin Mike: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 13 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11129. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.MIKE SABIN (National—Northland)to theMinister of Energy and Resources: What recent announcements have been made about mineral exploration in Northland?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Energy and Resources):Today I announced the results of the Northland 2012 tender which sought interest in exploring for metallic minerals in the region. This was the first major minerals tender and as a result five permits have been offered to three companies. This represents an exciting opportunity for Northland. Past studies have highlighted the potential for mineral resources in the region to create jobs and income. The Government is keen to see regions like Northland reap the benefits of such development.Mike Sabin: What is the value of the minerals sector to the New Zealand economy?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: The minerals sector now contributes around $20 million each year in royalties and over $1.1 billion to GDP. The mining sector directly employs more than 7000 people throughout the country. Total exploration expenditure in New Zealand last year was estimated at almost $50 million which is a new record and points the way to continued growth in mineral exploration.
Lee Melissa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLee Melissa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 13 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11127. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.MELISSA LEE (National)to theMinister for Social Development: What announcements has she made to support the ongoing resolution of historic abuse claims?Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development):As part of Budget 2013 the Government has committed $16 million over the next 4 years to continue the Ministry of Social Development’s successful historical claims resolution process for those abused in care. To date more than 400 historical claims have been resolved. Only 55 were resolved prior to 2008 but we have done more than 350 since then.Melissa Lee: What else is the Government doing to support people who were abused in care?Hon PAULA BENNETT: The Government has committed a further $1.9 million over 2 years to continue the Confidential Listening and Assistance Service. The Confidential Listening and Assistance Service provides a forum for people who allege abuse or neglect or have concerns about their time in State care in the health child welfare or special education sectors. The service has provided support to more than 700 people so far and another 2 years is necessary.Melissa Lee: What steps are being taken to fully resolve these historical claims?Hon PAULA BENNETT: In addition to this further funding I have asked the ministry to develop a comprehensive plan that will aim to resolve all historical claims by 2020. Further work will be completed over the coming months. The historical claims process established in 2006 includes those who first came into State care before 31 December 1992.
Brownlee Gerry: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Business Statement[Sitting date: 13 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11121. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):Next week the House is in a 1-week adjournment. When the House resumes on Tuesday 25 June the Government will look to make progress on the State Sector and Public Finance Reform Bill the Appropriation (2012/13 Supplementary Estimates) Bill and a number of other second readings on the Order Paper.
Appropriation (2012/13 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeAppropriation (2012/13 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 13 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11133. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Appropriation (2012/13 Supplementary Estimates) BillFirst ReadingHon STEVEN JOYCE (Associate Minister of Finance)on behalf of theMinister of Finance: I moveThat the Appropriation (2012/13 Supplementary Estimates) Bill be now read a first time.A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Appropriation (2012/13 Supplementary Estimates) Bill be now read a first time.Ayes63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes53New Zealand Labour 30; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Bill read a first time.
Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 3 to MinisterText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeAmended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 3 to Minister[Sitting date: 13 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11133. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Amended Answers to Oral QuestionsQuestion No. 3 to MinisterHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):I seek the leave of the House to correct an answer that I gave on behalf of the Prime Minister to the last supplementary question from Grant Robertson.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to correct that answer. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is none.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Highlighting the difficulty I guess of a Minister answering on behalf of another Minister I have made inquiries so I can better answer that question on behalf of the Prime Minister. The answer I gave on behalf of the Prime Minister was no. What I should have said is yes there were several conversations about the matter meaning the entire inquiry.
Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBusiness Statement[Sitting date: 13 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11121. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Thursday 13 June 2013Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.Business StatementHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):Next week the House is in a 1-week adjournment. When the House resumes on Tuesday 25 June the Government will look to make progress on the State Sector and Public Finance Reform Bill the Appropriation (2012/13 Supplementary Estimates) Bill and a number of other second readings on the Order Paper.
Mitchell Mark: Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Mark: Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11118. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney):I just wanted to quickly respond to a couple of other issues that have been brought up in relation to the Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Bill. I would like to address some of the comments made by Andrew Little in his impassioned speech. I appreciate the fact that Mr Little would like to see this bill extended. He would like to see it cover beaches and playgrounds but unfortunately we are restricted. We have to be focused on the fact that this is going to cover Government buildings. Eventually I would love to see a bill passed in this House that would ban gang patches anywhere in the country but that is not going to happen with this one unfortunately. But those are very good points from Mr Little and they are taken on board.I would just like to comment in relation to the comments that Mr Faafoi made about Jami-Lee Ross. I think that the message that sadly the Labour Party is sending tonight is that actually you are not supportive of the police and you are being soft on gangs because this piece of legislation very clearly—and through the select committee process Kris you have to acknowledge that we had—The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): Order! You must use the member’s full name.MARK MITCHELL: —yes sorry Mr Chair you are right—the Police Association come in and give evidence or make a submission in front of the Law and Order Committee. The Police Association spends a great deal of time digging into these things to see whether or not there is going to be genuine real benefit to its members. It came in front of the select committee and it very clearly stated that this is a good piece of legislation and there is going to be a positive benefit for its members for our serving police officers on the front line so why you are not supporting this bill is beyond me. If you support the police then you would support this bill. You would give them another tool that they can use in the fight against organised crime serious crime and gangs. I just want to support the comments that Jami-Lee Ross was making because that is the point that he was actually trying to get across.Those are the two issues that I really felt compelled to address and I will now allow Mr Goff to speak.
Robertson H V Ross: Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11107. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): I was almost going to call the Hon Bill Jeffries but I see that it is actually Richard Prosser. I call the honourable member.
Mitchell Mark: Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Mark: Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11101. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney):Firstly I would like to acknowledge the author of this bill the Hon Todd McClay. Obviously congratulations to him on becoming our new Minister of Revenue and Associate Minister of Health. I am lucky enough to now sponsor this Prohibition of Gang Insignia in Government Premises Bill and shepherd it through the House. It is a very good bill. I sit on the Law and OrderCommittee and we were very pleased to receive it. I see that I have some of my select committee colleagues here tonight—Mr Goff and Mr Faafoi. I am sure I look forward to your contributions tonight and I will be taking calls on the bill.I would just like to run through the provisions of this bill very quickly and then give my colleagues an opportunity to speak. The main provisions of the bill are to prohibit the display of gang insignia in premises or departments of the Public Service Crown entities the police local authorities and schools in New Zealand. The list of named specific gangs to be covered by the legislation is to be futureproofed by allowing the Minister of Police to add gangs to the prohibited list through regulation-setting powers. The bill covers all signs symbols or representations commonly displayed to denote membership of an affiliation with or support for a gang not including tattoos and it includes any items of clothing to which a sign symbol or representation is affixed. It includes all offices buildings and facilities both permanent and temporary under the authority of the departments of the Public Service as defined in schedule 1 of the State Sector Act 1988 and of Crown entities as defined in schedule 1 of the Crown Entities Act 2004.This is a very good bill. As Kiwis as New Zealanders we should actually be prepared to say that there is no room in this beautiful country of ours for gangs. Although this bill is not the panacea although it is not the silver bullet it does go a long way towards giving the police some additional tools to send a clear message to gangs and that is that we do not tolerate them. Thank you.
Vote: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11101. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill be now read a first time.Ayes116New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Noes4Māori Party 3; Mana 1.Bill read a first time.Billreferred to the Local Government and Environment Committee.
Roy Eric: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11101. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes and I have already confessed to the fact that I did not hear the member calling and so that was in part my error and probably in part the error of the person for not being loud and robust. Let us learn from the experience.
Mallard Trevor: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11101. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I sort of hate to push this too hard but my understanding is that people can call for a party vote only if they disagree with the way that you have ruled and in fact you ruled that the Ayes had it.
Roy Eric: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11101. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: It is my understanding that that does not apply under the party vote and people charged with a proxy have the right to call that vote. I must confess that I did not hear the member when I initially declared the vote which might have led to the confusion. But members who are charged with a proxy to vote alternatively have the right to call for a party vote.
Mallard Trevor: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11101. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There have been a number of Speakers’ rulings which I have not looked up because it has been quite a long time since they have been used because they were used mainly in the time when there was physical voting and there is an old rule in this House that vote follows voice. We appear to have had some sort of error. It may be that with this new party vote system that we have had for the last 20 years or so that no longer applies but it used to be the case that it was an obligation on members to vote physically in the way that they had voted with their voices.
Mitchell Mark: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Mark: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11094. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney):I wish I could say it is a pleasure to take a call on this bill the Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill but I am very pleased to stand in support of my colleague Mike Sabin. It is obvious that there have been fundamental failures and mistakes made in the management of both the finances and the projects of the Kaipara District Council. This has been exacerbated by what appears to be an utter failure by the auditors to do theirjob properly. It is now the job of the Government to try to reach the best solution for what is a very bad situation.It would be much easier for Mike Sabin to walk away from the sponsorship of this bill but he is doing the right thing for the right reasons and that is to allow forward momentum to begin through a thorough public consultation process and the vehicle to do that will be the Local Government and Environment Committee. If he does not do this then the clear and present danger is that there is no forward movement towards a resolution. Without forward movement of some sort all that will be created is more frustration and uncertainty for those whom it directly affects.There are many different interest groups external commentators and local government experts who have expressed views and opinions and they will all have a contribution to make. However the people who really need to be listened to are the Kaipara ratepayers and up until this time many have felt that there has been no real opportunity to be heard or consulted with properly. So I feel strongly that the select committee will provide a very good platform for ratepayers to make their submissions and to be heard. The select committee chair Nicky Wagner has agreed that the committee will sit in Kaipara to ensure that people have easy access for submissions.Let me make it clear that the coming consultation will provide clarity for both the committee and the community as to whether this is the right path to take or whether there is another option or options available. The Kaipara community must be given the opportunity to present their own proposals and their own solutions to this situation.Finally I would like to acknowledge Minister Tremain and the work that is currently being undertaken to strengthen local government governance and accountability so that something like this does not happen again. Thank you.
Roy Eric: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11094. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: It is normally a call to another party but I will give it to Mark Mitchell. He is the only one seeking the call.
Graham Kennedy: Privilege — Consideration of Report of Privileges Committee Question of Privilege Concerning the Defamation Action Attorney-General and Gow v Leigh Consideration of Interim Report of Privileges Committee Question of Privilege Concerning the Agreements for Policing Execution of Search Warrants and Collection and Retention of Information by the NZSISText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGraham Kennedy: Privilege — Consideration of Report of Privileges Committee Question of Privilege Concerning the Defamation Action Attorney-General and Gow v Leigh Consideration of Interim Report of Privileges Committee Question of Privilege Concerning the Agreements for Policing Execution of Search Warrants and Collection and Retention of Information by the NZSIS[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11079. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green):In the interests of the procedure of the House I will be very brief indeed. I just say that the Green Party is prepared to support this recommendation of the Privileges Committee of which I am a member on the interim report on the question of privilege concerning the three agreements. We support the recommendation made to the House but on the understanding that it in no way prejudices the Green Party position in respect of the issues at stake that will no doubt come out in the final report. It will not be lost on members that at least part of the genesis for this inquiry and the final report is occasioned by a complaint laid by a member of the Green caucus in the 49th Parliament and the Green Party has its views on this matter.There is a huge difference between the nature of the issue that we have discussed in the previous itemAttorney-General and Gow v Leigh  where the relationship between the judiciary and the legislature have two large searchlights mutually shining on each other and there is a fair bit of transparency in that relationship and this case where the relationship between the two identities you might say—the legislature and the SIS—is one that is absolutely shrouded in a veil of mystery a lot of which is artificially induced. So we have our views. We will support this particular interim report for the sake of the relevant committee and we will have more to say on the substance of the matter later.
Robertson H V Ross: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: General Debate[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11065. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Thank you Mr Mallard.
Robertson H V Ross: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: General Debate[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11065. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Well I do not need any help. She is absolutely correct. I should not have let it go but I did because I did not think there was any malice in it. But I take the point that the Minister has made.
Tolley Anne: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTolley Anne: General Debate[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11065. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Corrections):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I did not want to interrupt the member while he was speaking but I do want to take a point of order that all members of this House should be addressed correctly. On a number of occasions during the previous member’s speech he referred to Dunne Key and Banks. They are actually the Rt Hon John Key the Hon John Banks and the Hon Peter Dunne. And the three members of the Māori Party caucus are the Hon Pita Sharples the Hon Tariana Turia and Te Ururoa Flavell and they are entitled to be addressed by their full names too.Hon Trevor Mallard: Speaking to the point of order—
Dean Jacqui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDean Jacqui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11050. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki)to theMinister of Corrections: What announcements has she made around using audio-visual links technology to improve public safety?Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Corrections):Today the Minister for Courts the Hon Chester Borrows and I announced a $27.8 million expansion of audiovisual links between prisons and courts. Over the next 2 years a further 14 district courts and nine prisons will have audiovisual links installed allowing a greater number of prisoners to appear in court while physically behind the wire. The risks—to the publicto corrections staff and to court staff—associated with transporting prisoners outside the wire are completely removed with the use of this technology along with any risk of escape. Audiovisual links also improve the security of our prisons because they reduce the opportunity for prisoners to smuggle contraband back behind the wire after appearing in court.Jacqui Dean: What other benefits will the use of audiovisual links bring to the corrections system?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Approximately 40000 remand court appearances are made every year and where installed audiovisual links are expected to be used in a significant number of these. Audiovisual links mean that corrections staff do not have to spend time planning and carrying out escorts from prison to court and back again and they also reduce the cost to the taxpayer because it means the Department of Corrections does not have to spend money needlessly transporting prisoners back and forth from court.Jacqui Dean: What prisons already use audiovisual links to connect to courts and what benefits have been seen?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: The audiovisual links are a joint initiative between the Department of Corrections and the Ministry of Justice. Mt Eden prison Waikeria Prison Christchurch Men’s Prison and Whanganui Prison are already connected to the Hamilton Manukau and Christchurch district courts by audiovisual links. This technology has seen to date a saving of over 8000 external trips for prisoners to and from courts. This means that corrections staff can focus more on prison security and reducing reoffending rather than transporting prisoners to court for administrative matters.
Cosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11049. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour):My question is to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises and asks: does he agree with the finding of the Deloitte report on Treasury’s monitoring of Solid Energy that—Hon Steven Joyce: How was the beer and the sausage rolls?Hon Gerry Brownlee: Good old trotters.Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE: Well you did not get an invitation because there was not enough tucker.Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is what happens when we get interjections when a member is attempting to read out a question. Would the member please start again.
Horan Brendan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHoran Brendan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11047. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.BRENDAN HORAN (Independent)to theMinister of Health: Has MedSafe received users medical device incident reports in respect of CareSens blood glucose meters; if so how many reports were received in 2012 and in 2013 year-to-date?Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health):I am advised that of the 90000 patients who have switched to CareSens blood glucose meters which includes 93 percent of eligible patients for a fully funded meter Medsafe has received 14 incident reports: three in 2012 and 11 in the 2013 year to date. For 12 of these reports no further action has been taken I am advised by Medsafe. Two of the reports remain open while further information is being requested. Pharmac has worked closely with the specialist diabetes subcommittee of the Pharmacology and Therapeutics Advisory Committee to obtain clinical advice on the CareSens meters. Their experts advise that the meters are clinically acceptable. All three of the CareSens meters have been tested in New Zealand for accuracy and precision. Each meter has also met regulatory standards required in the United States and Europe.Brendan Horan: Given that the reports are exponentially increasing is the Minister confident that when diabetics either submit incident reports or email the diabetesfeedback@pharmac.govt.nz email address regarding CareSens they receive responses that are clinically appropriate and focused on patient safety rather than bureaucratic box-ticking?Hon TONY RYALL: There have been 14 incident reports: three in 2012 11 in 2013. I suppose you could describe that as an exponential increase but there have been 90000 patients who have switched to the meters. Managing diabetes is an incredibly personal thing and of course many people do not like changing the devices that they have used. But the devices have been approved as safe by Pharmac’s advisers and all concerns and complaints are being dealt with.Brendan Horan: Is the Minister willing to work cooperatively with people including this member of Parliament to ensure that his officials Medsafe and Pharmac work with diabetics who have CareSens problems and to ensure that the focus is on patients’ safety and welfare?Hon TONY RYALL: I think it has been made very clear to Pharmac and everybody who is involved in this that patient safety is of the utmost priority. That is the reason why we have a number of systems such as the medical device incident reports so that complaints can be dealt with and investigated.Brendan Horan: I seek leave to table an email sent from the diabetesfeedback@pharmacy.govt.nz email account highlighting that if the meter is incorrect because it is too cold to warm it up under the armpit.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that email. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11047. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I felt it was repeated—Rt Hon Winston Peters: I felt it was not because he added in the word “the” before CareSens blood glucose.Mr SPEAKER: Then on that basis—[Interruption ] Order! On that basis I will ask Brendan Horan to please repeat the question. I did not pick up that minor iteration.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11047. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. When a question is put down in this form for an oral question on any given day that question must be repeated exactly how it is written.
Horan Brendan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHoran Brendan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11047. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRENDAN HORAN (Independent):To the Minister of Health has MedSafe received users medical device incident reports in respect of the CareSens blood glucose meters; if so how many reports were received in 2012 and in the 2013 year-to-date?
McKelvie Ian: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMcKelvie Ian: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11044. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei)to theMinister of Science and Innovation: How is the Primary Growth Partnership helping to boost productivity in New Zealand’s primary sector?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Science and Innovation):On Monday night I was privileged to attend a function alongside the Minister for Primary Industries to mark 3 years of the Primary Growth Partnership which has so far committed $658 million of combined public and private funding for 13 different projects designed to boost productivity in New Zealand’s farming forestry fisheries and food sectors. The potential benefit to the wider economy from these projects is over $7 billion per year by 2025. The Primary Growth Partnership is a key part of the Government’s Business Growth Agenda. These investments in productivity will play a big part in achieving the Government’s goal of doubling primary exports by 2025 as well as leading to improved environmental outcomes.Ian McKelvie: What are some examples of projects funded by the Primary Growth Partnership?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: There are many but let me focus on just two for the House. The Primary Growth Partnership is funding a $171 million programme over 7 years aimed at transforming the dairy value chain by creating new products increasing on-farm productivity reducing environmental impacts and improving agricultural education. The Primary Growth Partnership is also funding a programme along with Aotearoa Fisheries Sanford and the Sealord Group to develop a new wild fishharvesting technology that will result in more precise catches allowing fish to be landed fresher in better condition and of higher value. Both of these projects have the potential to significantly improve productivity in the dairy and fishing industries.Ian McKelvie: How much is the Government investing in business-related science innovation and research?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Science and innovation are key drivers of economic growth and international competitiveness. That is why the Government is now investing hundreds of millions of dollars annually in co-funding business research and development across all sectors including food and beverage manufacturing digital technologies health technologies high-tech manufacturing and agricultural technologies. Overall the Government’s total cross-portfolio funding for science innovation and research has increased 28 percent over the last 4 years up to $1.36 billion in 2013-14.
Carter David: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political PartiesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political Parties[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11035. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have heard sufficient to rule on this matter as at the moment. As I gave a ruling last week I have interpreted that we are charting new waters in the fact that we had a party that was recognised at the start of this Parliament legitimately and according to the Standing Orders that then has subsequently become deregistered. So I am treading carefully in that we are charting new waters. The second point I want to make is that when I ruled last week I was expecting a timetable of 6 to 8 weeks. I am watching current developments that may extend that time line and may potentially extend it substantially. On that basis I will certainly give consideration to the points that have been raised particularly by the Hon Trevor Mallard and I will come back to the House when I have done so.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political PartiesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political Parties[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11034. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):I do not think the member who just spoke can reasonably leave out the qualification in Standing Order 34(1) which is “elected at the preceding general election”. That Mr Speaker was the position that was taken by the Speaker back in 2002 when you had Mr Anderton’s Alliance breaking up. You had Mr Grover who claimed to be the leader of the Liberal Party in fact recognised as an Independent. You had the Green Party members at that time also recognised as Independents because the Green Party was part of the Alliance at the preceding election and not elected as the Green Party.Hon David Parker: But they were registered parties.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: No they were not recognised in Parliament even though they were registered outside.
Parker David: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political PartiesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParker David: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political Parties[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11034. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour):Speaking to Mr Brownlee’s contribution the problem in respect of Mr Brownlee’s interpretation of Standing Order 34(1) is that it asserts that the words inside the commas add to the breadth of the primary part of the clause. In my respectful submission that cannot be the case. The Standing Order absolutely says that to be entitled to be recognised as a political party for parliamentary purposes you must be a party registered under Part 4 of the Electoral Act 1993. That is the common-sense and clear interpretation of that clause and it would with respect to Mr Brownlee be a nonsense to interpret it otherwise. What he tries to do is say that the words inside the commas which effectively say “Well you’ve got to be elected for this rule to apply.” somehow extend the definition beyond registered political parties. That with respect Mr Speaker is a nonsense. So I agree with the submission from my colleague Mr Mallard that on the basis of this latest determination you should re-determine your earlier finding.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political PartiesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political Parties[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11034. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):Notwithstanding those pleadings from the two previous speakers it is a fact that the recognition of parties in Parliament by the Speaker and in the Standing Orders is quite separate from the requirements of a political party to become registered under the Electoral Act.Denis O’Rourke: Nonsense.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: That is patently clear for anyone who is capable of reading Mr O’Rourke. If we were to take the—[Interruption ]Mr SPEAKER: Order! This is a point of order and it will be heard in silence.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: It is also a point established by previous Speakers from quite some time back. Standing Order 34(1) makes it clear that if a party is registered under Part 4 of the Electoral Act 1993 and then a member is elected to Parliament from that party they are entitled to be recognised as a party for parliamentary purposes. All of this was gone through in 2002. I think the suggestions that you need to now change your mind Mr Speaker because of a statement either from the Electoral Commission or from the president of the party does not take away from the fact that your prime responsibility is to ensure that members are treated fairly according to the Standing Orders.
Peters Winston: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political PartiesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political Parties[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11033. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First):Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Are you speaking to the same point of order?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I am. New Zealand First also seeks for you to review your 6 June decision. Just to quote you briefly you said: “He has given me an assurance that his party expects to file an application for re-registration early next week.” If you go to the comments by first the Electoral Commission and also the president of UnitedFuture Robin Gunston he has affirmed in his own words “the registration of a brand new party” is being sought. In his words again it is “not one just de-registered”. Then he goes on to say: “for a new party registration [they] will only accept”—and that is what the Electoral Commission which is the statutory body that is applying this law has said. Then you will be reminded that you said that you were giving the party time to sort itself but your purpose at the time was to find that they were re-registering. Demonstrably this is not new. The Electoral Commission though has made it patently clear how the law applies and on that basis I am asking you to review your decision because the party called United Future does not exist.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political PartiesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political Parties[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11033. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I would like to ask you to give a considered ruling and I am going to ask you to review your ruling of last week with regard to the presence of the leadership—whether or not Peter Dunne is recognised as a leader of a party. I do so in light of the revelations that have become apparent today from the Electoral Commission where it has indicated that United Future will be treated as a new party for registration and it will not be a matter of re-registration. My view is that that certainly casts a different light around 34(1) and 34(4) in the Standing Orders.The second point that I would like to make which comes out of there is that the president of the United Future party has said that the commission’s requirements are too difficult for any party because it will require signatures as opposed to the electronic methods that are used for a re-registration process. The question I have got is whether you are prepared to wait until they have gone all the way around their members to get the written signatures from those people as opposed to using electronic methods because that will extend the time. But the most important question is whether when the party is clearly not re-registering but being treated as registering for a first time—which is not how we understood it last week—your ruling can be reconsidered.
Carter David: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political PartiesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political Parties[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11033. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: That is not a helpful point of order.
Peters Winston: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political PartiesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Points of Order — Visitors—Purpose of Visit Electoral Act—Registration and Recognition of Political Parties[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11033. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question is really to you and the Ethics Committee from Queensland and it is to ask why they came here.
Carter David: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11033. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.
Brownlee Gerry: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11033. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):In accordance with discussions at the Business Committee I seek leave for the House to suspend for the dinner break following the maiden statements of Paul Foster-Bell and Claudette Hauiti today.
Carter David: Visitors — Australia—Delegation Parliament of QueenslandText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Visitors — Australia—Delegation Parliament of Queensland[Sitting date: 12 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11033. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members I have much pleasure in informing the House that a delegation from the Parliament of Queensland Australia led by Peter Dowling chair of the Ethics Committee and leader of the delegation is present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish that the delegation be welcomed.