edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Vote: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21820] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clauses 1 and 2 and Parts 1 and 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 105 
New Zealand National 57; New Zealand Labour 41; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 14 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Mana 1. 
Clauses 1 and 2 and Parts 1 and 2 agreed to. 
The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 105 Noes 15. 
Bill reported without amendment. 
Report adopted.
Vote: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21820] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 14 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Mana 1. 
Noes 105 
New Zealand National 57; New Zealand Labour 41; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 15 Noes 105.
Hutchison Paul: Sleepover Wages (Settlement) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Hutchison Paul: Sleepover Wages (Settlement) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21834] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to take a very short call on the Sleepover Wages (Settlement) Bill. It is important to emphasise that the three parties that were involved with this settlement all worked in good faith and that the Minister of Health the Hon Tony Ryall worked particularly skilfully to facilitate this happening. It is also important to say the Health Committee worked extremely well in collaborating in a positive way to bring about some amendments to ensure that this bill was as good as it could possibly be. I emphasise also the very fact that if this had not come to be it would have meant the insolvency of provider organisations and therefore the disruption of services to thousands of very very vulnerable people. 
The select committee heard three oral submissions and there were also two other submissions: one from Business New Zealand and the other from the Employers’ Chamber of Commerce Central. IDEA Services pointed out that it was keen to get out of statutory management that it would cost it $33 million and that it would have to borrow for this. It pointed out that this was something it wanted to see as a long-term solution and that the training of carers would be a very important issue for the future. It also pointed out that it catered for something like 250000 sleepovers per year and it mentioned that for 95 percent of that time the carers were asleep which is very important in regard to the court decisions. But I did want to make the point that John Ryall of the Service and Food Workers Union made the comment— 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: No relation. 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON 
: —he is not related to Tony Ryall—that the carers were very passionate and dedicated about helping the disabled to lead an ordinary life as was pointed out by Darien Fenton. His colleague Peter Cranney noted that one of the carers who was asked during the court case why he did not leave his job with the very poor wages he was paid said he did not leave because he knew the disruption that would happen to that household might last for up to 2 years. That really encapsulates the passion and dedication with which those carers do their jobs. He mentioned that IDEA Services was a magnificent organisation. 
With that this bill legislates a practical solution to a very difficult situation. It is worth celebrating. It is indeed a very positive bill on which to end the year.
Vote: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21811] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 105 
New Zealand National 57; New Zealand Labour 41; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 14 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Mana 1. 
Bill read a second time.
Fenton Darien: Sleepover Wages (Settlement) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Fenton Darien: Sleepover Wages (Settlement) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21836] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 I start by thanking the officials and the Health Committee for their very speedy work and also those involved in the negotiations and in the drafting of the Sleepover Wages (Settlement) Bill. I am thankful for the way in which the process was conducted. I know of course that the unions were involved and were very pleased and checked off any changes that the select committee made or suggested as well. So I think it was a good process even if it was very short. I appreciate the hard work that went into this. 
This bill is about respect. It is about respecting the work that is done in this very very difficult sector—a sector that is very very hard to work in. It is also about respecting the people who are being cared for in the community who we all say should stay there and should be able to live as normal a life as possible. It is about respecting as my colleague Grant Robertson said the role of unions and the absolutely wonderful and constructive role they played in reaching this settlement. As I said before they have made a significant concession. They have not taken this to the wire. It could have gone to the Supreme Court as was being proposed and wasted more time and money. They have made a concession. They have been very pragmatic and as they said their interest now is to see things in the sector move forward. They want to see proper competencies required proper training proper skills and proper pay. Even though the settlement has been reached for minimum wage for sleepovers it is still a low-paid sector. There are still issues to be resolved. 
This bill is about respecting the roles but if we are to give the workers and the people cared for proper respect there are other issues we will have to deal with in the next Parliament. I hope that we are able to do that in the spirit in which consideration of this bill has been conducted. 
Finally Mr Deputy Speaker I wish you a very interesting time over the next 6 weeks. I say to all members of the House those returning and those who are not that we will see you on the campaign trail. Thank you.
Finlayson Christopher: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Finlayson Christopher: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21811] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 I seek leave for all the provisions of the Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill to be taken as one question. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Finlayson Christopher: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Finlayson Christopher: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21804] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 I move  
That the Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill be now read a second time 
. I begin by thanking my colleague Chester Borrows for his chairmanship of the Justice and Electoral Committee and the members of the committee for their work. 
The bill we debate this afternoon is a slightly modified form of the bill sent to the select committee last week. Clause 3 states the purpose of the Act which is to preserve the rights of those persons who have the benefit of the judgment of the Supreme Court but otherwise to state the law as it was thought to be prior to 2 September the date of the judgment in Hamed’s case. 
As is now made explicit by clause 3(d) all of the protections available under section 21 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act are left intact. Additionally clause 5 enacts that the provisions of the bill will expire 6 months from the date of commencement rather than 12 months from the date as provided by the bill at the time of its introduction. 
The term “search” is defined in clause 4. It is best expressed in broad terms. The intention is that the term applies to a search when done in connection with a search warrant or otherwise in circumstances where no search warrant is necessary or available. Although the decision of the Supreme Court does not rule on covert surveillance from outside the boundary of a particular private property it has been thought prudent to refer to that form of surveillance in the bill. 
Clause 5 is really the essence of the bill. It provides that where covert video surveillance occurs as part of or in connection with a search whether with a warrant or otherwise the search is not an unlawful search only because of that feature. 
The bill does not assert that a search with the use of covert video surveillance is always lawful. There is an argument that such a rule may have been extracted from the pre-Hamed case law. However the committee has chosen the form of the words used in clause 5 as the least possible interference with the trial rights. The bill still preserves the ability for the police to continue to use the vital tools of covert surveillance in countering serious crime. 
Clause 5A reflects a decision of the committee to make one exception to the rejection of any retrospective element in the bill. The purpose of the amendment is to preclude persons convicted on the basis of evidence to which Hamed applies from gaining an acquittal new trial or appeal for the reason only that evidence admitted at their trial was illegally obtained in terms of Hamed. 
That covers the main points of the bill as it has returned from the select committee. I will make further comments in my third reading speech. I commend the bill to the House.
Robertson Grant: Sleepover Wages (Settlement) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Robertson Grant: Sleepover Wages (Settlement) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21835] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 I will be brief in this call. I really just want to echo the positive comments that have been made by my colleague Darien Fenton and also by members on the other side of the House. This is a great day not only for the workers in the health and disability sector but for the people whom they look after. This work as Dr Hutchison has just alluded to is not work—previous to now anyway—that has been done for the money; it has been done because those workers are dedicated to looking after vulnerable New Zealanders. 
One thing I would say is that the phrase that has been associated with the Sleepover Wages (Settlement) Bill is the sleepover case. I have been uncomfortable with that term right throughout because the people involved are at work. They are working they are doing important things and they are dealing often with difficult situations: seizures people who need to be toileted people who need to be looked after in the middle of the night. That is work; it is not a sleepover. The workers concerned deserve to be paid the minimum wage if not more—certainly more actually—than that. What this settlement does is acknowledge that it is work that it is work involving some of the most vulnerable members of our community and that it is undertaken by some of the lowest-paid members of our community. 
The fact that we can come together as a Parliament on this settlement is excellent. I do believe that the threat of ongoing court action the worry and the concern that the Government was not going to back a settlement took its toll on the workers involved but they stuck at it. We have had some very unfortunate things said in this House about unions by members on the other side during this 3-year term. I believe that this settlement is a victory for the workers for the vulnerable people they look after and for IDEA Services and their humanity and the sense of dignity they see in the people whom they look after. But also it is a victory for the union movement for sticking to their guns and making sure that they advocated on behalf of their members. I believe it to be a victory all round. 
The Health Committee made some minor changes but they are ones that I believe will assist this bill to be implemented. The possibility exists for extension into other parts of the health and disability sector and other sectors. We have facilitated a process for that. I am grateful for the fact that we stand here at the end of the parliamentary sitting knowing that some of the lowest-paid workers in New Zealand will be receiving before Christmas back-pay and on going through to the end of 2012 they will finally get what they deserve for the excellent work they did. 
Bill read a second time.
Vote: Urgency 
Vote: Urgency 
[Volume:676;Page:21804] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That urgency be accorded. 
Ayes 110 
New Zealand National 57; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 10 
Green Party 9; Mana 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Power Simon: Urgency 
Power Simon: Urgency 
[Volume:676;Page:21804] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the passing through their remaining stages of the Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill and the Sleepover Wages (Settlement) Bill and the adjournment debate.  
Last week I outlined with some particularity the reasons why these bills required the urgent attention of the House.
Finlayson Christopher: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Finlayson Christopher: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21811] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 I listened very carefully to what Mr Locke said and there are just two matters I want to bring to his attention that may allay some of his fears. 
The first point relates to clause 3(d). Although strictly speaking from a legal point of view the subclause was not needed it has been inserted to emphasise to those reading and dealing with this legislation that section 21 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act is unaffected. That is very very important. 
The second point relates to what he said about the breadth of clause 5. I will emphasise certain words in clause 5(2) and it is important to read them. The use of this type of surveillance “does not of itself render the search unlawful.” Of course I acknowledge that when the preliminary consultation exposure draft went out for consultation there were the words “or unreasonable” in there. Those were deleted at the time the bill was introduced. It is important to emphasise those words “does not of itself” because it could be unlawful on other grounds. It could also be unreasonable depending on the circumstances. So to take a particular hypothetical there might be a prosecution body that commences this type of surveillance for an offence that clearly does not warrant that degree of intrusive surveillance and it could be challenged on section 30 of the Evidence Act grounds at some stage as being unreasonable. It is very important—and I hope this helps the member—that that unreasonableness limb is there and that in appropriate circumstances even if this type of surveillance is not of itself unlawful it may still be unreasonable.
Hughes Gareth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hughes Gareth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:676;Page:21802] 
GARETH HUGHES (Green) 
: 
 Kia ora Mr Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture and I ask— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I apologise to the member. I say to the National backbench now that I must be able to hear the question.
Urgency 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Urgency 
[Volume:676;Page:21804] 
Urgency 
Hon SIMON POWER (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the passing through their remaining stages of the Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill and the Sleepover Wages (Settlement) Bill and the adjournment debate.  
Last week I outlined with some particularity the reasons why these bills required the urgent attention of the House. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That urgency be accorded. 
Ayes 110 
New Zealand National 57; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 10 
Green Party 9; Mana 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Davis Kelvin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Davis Kelvin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:676;Page:21800] 
10. 
SUE MORONEY (Labour) 
 on behalf of  
KELVIN DAVIS (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: Does she stand by all the statements that she made and that were made on her behalf yesterday? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Yes. 
Sue Moroney 
: Why did she say that the claim a suspended principal was a student achievement practitioner was completely false when Deborah Mutu gave a presentation as a student achievement practitioner to a meeting of Northland principals and Ministry of Education staff at the ministry’s offices in Whangarei on 31 August the same Deborah Mutu whom the  
Northern Advocate 
 reported in May 2008 as having been suspended from her role as principal of Te Kura Kaupapa Maori o Kaikohe? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: Because the  
Northern Advocate 
 was incorrect. 
Sue Moroney 
: Is she aware then that Deborah Mutu’s teacher registration has not been renewed following her suspension nor was her employment as principal reinstated? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: What I do know is that that principal has never been suspended. 
Sue Moroney 
: What information can the Minister provide to Parliament today to show that the  
Northern Advocate 
 report was in fact false when it said that she had been suspended as the principal of the Kaikohe kura? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: I am advised that the Ministry of Education in advertising for the student achievement practitioners—these expert advisers of whom 46 have been employed—has done extensive research into the background of the over 500 applicants who wanted to take part in this National-led initiative to support the increasing of student achievement in our schools as a result of national standards. The ministry has done extensive research and checked out the backgrounds of all the applicants and certainly has given advice to me in the last 24 hours that no one has been employed who was a suspended principal. 
Sue Moroney 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked specifically what information the Minister could put before Parliament. She has failed to provide any evidence— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Forgive me but I think I heard the Minister say that the advice she has received from the Ministry of Education was such and such. I think advice from the Ministry of Education is evidence indeed. 
Sue Moroney 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If the Minister was in fact referring to an official document could she table that document please? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I did not see the Minister reading. Was the Minister reading from an official document? The Minister is saying she was not.
Macindoe Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Macindoe Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:676;Page:21799] 
9. 
TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: What practical environmental improvements has this Government achieved for households? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 A total of 120000 homes have been insulated with Government support in this term of Parliament. That is four times the number in the last term. Also 26500 homes have been converted with Government support to clean heating to reduce air pollution this term. That compares with only 800 in the last term. In addition 6740 homes have been converted with Government support to solar water heating in the last term as compared with 200. This last month 28000 home televisions were recycled under a new scheme piloted by the Government. These are just four examples of successful practical programmes in which this Government is making real achievements for the environment. 
Tim Macindoe 
: What benefits have flowed on from these and other programmes for the New Zealand environment? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: There have been real benefits with cleaner air fewer greenhouse gas emissions and healthier homes as well as cost savings for households from these programmes. Old dirty fires and log burners are the greatest source of air pollution. These programmes alongside the tighter fuel and vehicle standards have contributed to New Zealand in the last year having the cleanest air on record. It is also encouraging that the proportion of renewable power hit a 10-year high and that for 2 years running greenhouse gas emissions have declined when in the previous decade they had consistently gone up. This Government’s practical environmental programmes are making a real difference for New Zealand.
Wagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Wagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:676;Page:21797] 
7. 
NICKY WAGNER (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: What improvement has there been for patients needing elective surgery over the last three years? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) 
: 
 Mr Speaker— 
Hon Annette King 
: Oh more good news. 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: —more good news. When this Government came to office elective surgery numbers had flat-lined over 9 years. In fact access had been cut. The number of operations did not keep up with population growth according to the Ministry of Health. Since 2008 elective surgery in New Zealand has grown by 22 percent. A total of 27000 extra people a year are now getting the operations they need. This is a fantastic achievement and I thank the many doctors nurses and other health professionals who have helped deliver this result. This is what happens when we focus on patients instead of on strategies plans visions missions and frameworks. 
Nicky Wagner 
: How has this huge increase in elective surgery been achieved? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: This Government inherited a public health service in disarray. People were left waiting for months and months for treatment and 30000 people were culled from hospital waiting lists. This Government has put an average of $500 million a year extra into the health service 800 extra doctors and 2000 extra nurses and we have had an unwavering focus on improving services for patients in New Zealand. 
Grant Robertson 
: How much of the average $500 million the Minister is claiming that the Government put into the health system was actually reprioritised money? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The Government has made it very clear that we have put $1.5 billion of new money into the health service over three Budgets. It is an extraordinary investment in the most difficult of economic times.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:676;Page:21796] 
5. 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
 to the  
Minister of Police 
: Kua whiwhi i a ia he ripoata no te Ropu Whakatika Pirihimana e pa ana ki to ratou uiui rangahau i nga raweketanga tika tangata pea a nga pirihimana i Te Urewera i te 15 o Whiringa-a-nuku 2007? 
[ 
Has she received any reports about the Independent Police Conduct Authority investigating possible violations of human rights that occurred from actions taken by the Police in the Urewera on 15 October 2007? 
] 
Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister of Internal Affairs) 
 on behalf of the Minister of Police: No the Minister has not received any such report. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: Is it appropriate that the people involved in those actions have to wait for 4 years for the release of an Independent Police Conduct Authority report and indeed the Human Rights Commission report on violations of human rights that occurred from the actions taken by police on 15 October 2007; and what actions will she take to deal with the sad saga that continues to hang over those affected by those traumatic actions? 
Hon NATHAN GUY 
: The Independent Police Conduct Authority and the Human Rights Commission are completely independent bodies. Independence means that the authority makes its findings based on the facts and the law. It does not answer to the police or anyone else over those findings. In this way its independence is similar to that of a court. Those agencies are behaving responsibly and in the interest of justice by deferring the release of those reports until the matters before the courts are resolved.
Borrows Chester: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Borrows Chester: Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21806] 
CHESTER BORROWS (National—Whanganui) 
: 
 I think it is important to note that from time to time in response to courts’ rulings the Government has to respond or Parliament has to respond in respect of law and must do so through retrospective legislation. Retrospective legislation is a type that should be applied only with the strictest of criteria. 
It is true that the initial Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill as proposed by the Government was modified somewhat through the select committee process and the Justice and Electoral Committee modified it after discussions across the parties represented in that select committee process. I am also pleased to be able to confirm that in the course of that process 438 submissions were received from the public. Twenty were heard orally and the others were received in a written form and we were able even within the narrow constraints of time to receive a departmental report in respect of those submissions. I thank those parties’ representatives who were involved in the committee for the way in which they engaged with each other. 
Bearing in mind the words of the previous speaker it is correct to note that the Green Party through its representative Keith Locke maintained its position throughout that process. I also acknowledge that although the Green Party was never going to vote or give any support for this legislation the fact is that the member engaged with the committee in the fairest possible and most reasonable way and his arguments were philosophical and never personal. It would have been good if that had been the manner whereby all parties engaged. But I am pleased with the way in which the members of the committee worked on this bill together. 
I also acknowledge the work of the Hon Rodney Hide in that committee process: the questions that he asked and the way that he too was able to engage. I have to align myself with the comments of Charles Chauvel in being a little suspicious as to whether such ACT engagement would continue past this election if we do not find Mr Hide back with us—although some of us have not given up hope on that score. 
I would like to say a thankyou once again to the committee but most of all to the members of the public who within a very short time constraint managed to put aside the duties of their day to be able to engage with the committee in a very reasonable and full way given the narrow constraints of time. I commend the bill.
Power Simon: Member Vacancy — Te Atatu Electoral District—Hon Chris Carter 
Power Simon: Member Vacancy — Te Atatu Electoral District—Hon Chris Carter 
[Volume:676;Page:21803] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That pursuant to section 131(a) of the Electoral Act 1993 a vacancy in the Te Atatu Electoral District having arisen in the period of six months prior to the date of the expiration of this Parliament no writ be issued for the election of a member of Parliament for that Electoral District to supply the vacancy occasioned by the resignation of Chris Joseph Carter. 
Motion agreed to.
Member Vacancy — Te Atatu Electoral District—Hon Chris Carter 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Member Vacancy — Te Atatu Electoral District—Hon Chris Carter 
[Volume:676;Page:21803] 
Member Vacancy 
Te Atatu Electoral District—Hon Chris Carter 
Hon SIMON POWER (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That pursuant to section 131(a) of the Electoral Act 1993 a vacancy in the Te Atatu Electoral District having arisen in the period of six months prior to the date of the expiration of this Parliament no writ be issued for the election of a member of Parliament for that Electoral District to supply the vacancy occasioned by the resignation of Chris Joseph Carter. 
Motion agreed to.
Vote: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:676;Page:21785] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 63 
New Zealand National 57; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 3; Progressive 1; Mana 1. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 287 in the name of the Hon Steven Joyce to Part 4 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Standing Orders—Debate 
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Standing Orders—Debate 
[Volume:676;Page:21745] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think it is relatively unusual for you to approve of any point of order that looks like it is time-wasting or filling in time but I think it would probably be appropriate if we can use the next 5 minutes until the valedictories are due in some way that is slightly more positive than starting a debate on the Standing Orders for a short time. I think it is better for that to be taken as a coherent whole. So what I might do is get in front of the— 
Hon Simon Power 
: Sing sing. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: No I will explain to the member. 
Grant Robertson 
: Don’t sing don’t sing. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The member says “Don’t sing.” I will explain to the member that when I was in the fourth form the inspectors came to our music class. Noel Lynch was the teacher at the time. He was a good music teacher and a very good English teacher. At the time when the inspectors came we as kids thought the inspectors were inspecting us. Lynch said to me: “Mallard can you go in the back row of the choir please and will you mouth the words.” He had my musical ability right and therefore I will not impose any song on the House. But I think it is important given the fact that we have given a time for the beginning of the valedictories that the—[ 
Interruption 
] That is the 5-minute bell. Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. A 5-minute bell on the— 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: No. We will start them.
Fenton Darien: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
Fenton Darien: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:676;Page:21788] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 Can I say in my opening comments about the title of this bill how disappointed I am with the outgoing chair and other members of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee who sat and listened to submissions from the industry on the Road User Charges Bill yet have said nothing in this debate. I think they have demonstrated their contempt for the industry by not making any contribution. I would have thought that in the last stages of the debate on this bill on the title at least we could have a contribution from David Bennett. But of course we all know that his parliamentary career is a bit limited and he certainly will not be the chair of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. We know that there will be issues after the election. 
David Bennett 
: Me and the Mad Butcher; we’ll get you! 
DARIEN FENTON 
: Now the member has woken up. 
I want to address the issue of the title because clause 1 says: “This Act is the Road User Charges Act 2010.” I ask the Minister in the chair the Acting Minister for Economic Development—I know he is looking at his magazine reading stuff and not really paying attention—whether that is intentional or whether he has not quite caught up with the fact that it is now 2011. It is not 2010 any more; it is now 2011. 
David Bennett 
: Darien Fenton lost 1 percent of the Labour Party vote. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: The member can have his joke but we will talk about that after the election. I have a serious question for the Minister in the chair and he is not answering. I would like him to take a call. Is it 2011 or is it 2010? I do not hear the “ex-chair” of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee pay any attention to— 
Hon Member 
: Say something useful. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: That is right. The chair does not even know it is 2011. He has not even worked out that there is an election this year. He is still living in the past as this bill shows— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the member. The time has come for me to report progress. 
Progress to be reported presently. 
House resumed. 
The Chairperson reported progress on the Road User Charges Bill and no progress on the National Animal Identification and Tracing Bill. 
Report adopted.
Vote: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:676;Page:21785] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 4 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 63 
New Zealand National 57; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 3; Progressive 1; Mana 1. 
Part 4 as amended agreed to.
Guy Nathan: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
Guy Nathan: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:676;Page:21779] 
Hon NATHAN GUY (Associate Minister of Transport) 
: 
 Part 4 is all about enforcement and other matters. I draw the Committee’s attention to clause 79 which will enable regulations on road-user charges to be specified. An important point here is that this clause empowers the making of regulations that set the road-user charges rates. The regulations must be published in the  
Gazette 
 at least 6 weeks before the rates come into force. Also there are administration regulations that need to be set for road-user charges licences; the payment of road-user charges; refunds of road-user charges; regulating the use of information held by electronic service providers; regulating the fitting maintenance and replacement of distance recorders; regulating the management of information downloaded and retained by the road-user charges collector for the vehicle management system; and setting infringement fees. 
Finally yesterday I alluded to the exemption in Supplementary Order Paper 287. The paragraph which has several subparagraphs contains the regulation-making powers for the new exemption mechanism for light road-user charges vehicles—that is vehicles that are under 3.5 tonnes and that the owner-operator chooses to operate off the road. Officials will have to consult as they will do on those other parts I have mentioned very widely in terms of exemption. The Ministry of Transport officials advise me that they will be consulting not only through their website but also the stakeholders who have shown an interest through the select committee process: obviously the agriculture and transport sector the likes of the Automobile Association and the Motor Trade Association and also the electronic service providers. So wide consultation is due to occur very soon on the important regulations.
Goodhew Jo: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
Goodhew Jo: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:676;Page:21783] 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Tisch Lindsay: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:676;Page:21779] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The question is that Part 4 clauses 67B to 89 and schedules 2 and 3 stand part.
Vote: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:676;Page:21779] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 63 
New Zealand National 57; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 3; Progressive 1; Mana 1. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 287 in the name of the Hon Steven Joyce to Part 3 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Part 3 as amended agreed to.
Upston Louise: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
Upston Louise: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:676;Page:21779] 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Macindoe Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Macindoe Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:676;Page:21719] 
9. 
TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) 
 to the  
Minister of Corrections 
: Has she received any progress reports on the implementation of the Government’s Prisoner Skills and Employment Strategy? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 The goal of the Prisoner Skills and Employment Strategy launched by this Government in 2009 was to increase the number of prisoners engaged in work training and skills development by 1000 over 3 years. We have achieved this goal a full year ahead of schedule. After 2 years of this strategy 1028 additional prisoners are engaged in skill gaining and employment. This achievement means that there are now record numbers of prisoners engaged in employment and education. We have also seen much better Maori participation rates across the board with more Maori prisoners undertaking employment and educational activities and achieving New Zealand Qualifications Authority credits. Hundreds more prisoners are receiving literacy and numeracy training as part of other employment and training activities. There has been a 46 percent increase in credits achieved under the New Zealand Qualifications Authority framework and a 44 percent increase in the number of national certificates achieved—extremely good results. 
Tim Macindoe 
: Has the Minister been advised of the results of any research on the impact that employment training in prisons has on the rate of recidivism? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Yes. Recent research carried out by the Department of Corrections shows that prisoner employment is resulting in reduced rates of reoffending. The research found that the rate of reconviction within 12 months of a prisoner’s release reduced by 8 percent for those who took part in inmate employment and by 16.7 percent for those who participated in the Release to Work programme. Over the next year the Department of Corrections will double the number of prisoners participating in the Release to Work programme and deliver a range of trade training opportunities to prepare prisoners for the rebuilding of Christchurch. It will also work closely with other agencies and employers to find stable employment for prisoners on their release.
Macindoe Tim: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
Macindoe Tim: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:676;Page:21785] 
TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Upston Louise: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
Upston Louise: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:676;Page:21784] 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:676;Page:21772] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 63 
New Zealand National 57; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 3; Progressive 1; Mana 1. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 287 in the name of the Hon Steven Joyce to Part 2 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Upston Louise: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
Upston Louise: Road User Charges Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:676;Page:21772] 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Power Simon: Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Third Reading 
Power Simon: Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21745] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That the Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) be now read a third time 
. 
Bill read a third time.
Vote: Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Third Reading 
Vote: Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21745] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) be now read a second time. 
Ayes 110 
New Zealand National 57; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 10 
Green Party 9; Mana 1. 
Bill read a second time.
Faafoi Kris: Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Third Reading 
Faafoi Kris: Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21742] 
KRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana) 
: 
 Thank you very much Mr Deputy Speaker for giving me the opportunity to speak to the second reading of the Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3). I begin in the same tone as the previous speaker Kennedy Graham and wish the Minister in charge of this bill the Minister of Justice all the best. I understand he is giving his valedictory later today. Both as a member of Parliament and a former journalist I thank him for his support and wish him all the best. 
It is a pleasure to speak. I also reiterate what Charles Chauvel said earlier about this bill—that it is about scrutiny. We came into contact with this bill in the Regulations Review Committee which I have had the pleasure of sitting on for the last 12 months. I also pass on my thanks to Charles Chauvel and to Tim Macindoe the deputy chair of that select committee for their guidance over the last 12 months. 
This bill looks at 12 orders and one lot of regulations and although those at home might think that during an eventful day in Parliament this may be mundane there are a number of issues of interest contained within this bill. [ 
Interruption 
] Well there are a number of them I tell Dr Prasad and I will go through them now if he gives me the chance. A lot of them concern levies for eggs and tamarillos—levies that we surely do not want to see lapse through the sunset clauses contained in the bill. 
I say in all seriousness that there is a provision in the bill to make sure that excises on tobacco do not expire in the time we are here. If there is one thing I am proud of during my time in Parliament so far it is that this House has taken some serious action towards cutting down on the horrible effect that tobacco has on our community. I think about 21 percent of our population aged 15-plus smoke tobacco. It is responsible for thousands of deaths and about $1.5 billion in costs to our health system. If this bill contains provisions so that we are putting price pressure on tobacco I think that is a good thing. 
There are also a number of other things that I think should be mentioned quickly. The bill has some provisions to prevent the export of pounamu which I think is a good protection for a very precious stone that is relatively unique to New Zealand. There are also some provisions about the export and import of trout which I am sure will be of much interest to the fishing industry. I also say that we have reservations about the process here as Charles Chauvel pointed out but we commend this bill to the House.
Power Simon: Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Third Reading 
Power Simon: Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21740] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That the Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) be now read a second time 
. The bill confirms and validates 12 Orders in Council and one set of regulations made under eight separate Acts. The bill must be enacted by 31 December 2011 to avoid the subordinate legislation lapsing. 
The bill was introduced and read a first time in July this year and referred to the Regulations Review Committee. The committee asked the six relevant Government agencies responsible for administering the legislation to explain why confirmation or validation of the orders is warranted. The committee was satisfied with the responses it received and presented its report on 18 August recommending that the bill be passed without amendment. 
I note the committee’s suggestion that the current process for considering subordinate legislation bills allows for only limited scrutiny although I do not agree that passing the bill “takes up a substantial amount of House time”. I would suggest that the next Government could ask officials to bring forward its proposals for the bill earlier in the year to enable a fuller consideration by the committee. I thank the committee for its expeditious consideration of this bill and commend it to the House.
Flavell Te Ururoa: General Debate 
Flavell Te Ururoa: General Debate 
[Volume:676;Page:21728] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Can I just check that we start the clock about the time I will start shortly or was it started during Mr Williamson’s discussion? 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member will get 5 minutes as per normal.
Boscawen John: General Debate 
Boscawen John: General Debate 
[Volume:676;Page:21726] 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a chart of the New Zealand Exchange index over the last 12 months showing that the indices have dropped and had we borrowed money to invest in New Zealand stocks as the Labour Party is promoting we— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.
Boscawen John: General Debate 
Boscawen John: General Debate 
[Volume:676;Page:21726] 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I was trying to save the House’s time. I will seek leave to table four separate documents in four separate points of order if that would please the House. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action—
Mallard Trevor: General Debate 
Mallard Trevor: General Debate 
[Volume:676;Page:21726] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I apologise for my confusion. There was an application from the member to start with to table I think three documents including stock market indices for an undefined period. But then I think there were two other things. I think the member got leave for the first document but not for the other two and I wonder whether he wanted to finish.
Boscawen John: General Debate 
Boscawen John: General Debate 
[Volume:676;Page:21726] 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I seek leave of the House to table charts of the American stock market Standard and Poor’s index and the  
Financial Times 
 index showing the stock markets— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Where is the information from? 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN 
: I am seeking leave to table the Standard and Poor’s indices for the US stock market the  
Financial Times 
 UK index— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Thank you. Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is none. The member may table. 
Documents by leave laid on the Table of the House.