edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Kaye Nikki: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Kaye Nikki: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:667;Page:14415] 
4. 
NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: What progress has the Government made on its key environment and resource management policies? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 The Government completed its first phase of resource management reforms in simplifying and streamlining the Act last year. We are making good progress on the second phase of reforms with bills on aquaculture heritage and the Environmental Protection Authority currently being drafted with introduction planned for next month. Last night I launched with the new mayor-elect Len Brown a further set of proposals for reform on urban design and infrastructure. I am encouraged by the comments of the new Auckland mayor and his commitment to work with the Government on ensuring these reforms work for Auckland. 
Nikki Kaye 
: What are the important changes recommended by the two technical advisory groups on improving urban design and infrastructure provisions? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: First they propose fewer plans. Current regulations require Auckland to have a regional policy statement a regional plan a regional land transport strategy a long-term community plan and a city or district plan. These planning documents currently top over 1 metre in height. We are proposing fewer and more focused plans with the new spatial plan consolidating the existing regional policy statement and the regional land transport strategy in a more integrated document. I note Mayor Len Brown’s commitment to advance this work as quickly as possible. More than 50 changes are recommended in terms of strengthening the way in which we plan as part of this Government’s commitment to building Auckland into a competitive city internationally. 
Nikki Kaye 
: What steps has the Government taken to ensure New Zealand’s clean green brand is reinforced during the hosting of the Rugby World Cup 2011? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Today I announced a $2 million recycling programme which will see more than 700 Love NZ recycling facilities installed at stadiums fan zones main streets airports railway stations bus terminals and popular tourist attractions. They will divert more than 8000 tonnes of Rugby World Cup waste and ensure that the 85000 visitors and 2500 international media have an experience that is consistent with New Zealand’s “100% Pure New Zealand” brand.
Street Maryan: Motions — Burma—Human Rights 
Street Maryan: Motions — Burma—Human Rights 
[Volume:667;Page:14407] 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate relating to freedom of expression and assembly in Burma. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is no objection. 
Hon MARYAN STREET 
: I move  
That the House call on the Burmese authorities to guarantee the three freedoms of expression association and peaceful assembly and call for the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners arrested for their peaceful opposition to the regime. 
Motion agreed to.
Resignations — Hon Luamanuvao Winnie Laban Labour 
Resignations — Hon Luamanuvao Winnie Laban Labour 
[Volume:667;Page:14543] 
Tuesday 19 October 2010 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Resignations 
Hon Luamanuvao Winnie Laban Labour 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I wish to advise the House that I have received a letter from Winifred Alexandra Laban resigning her seat in the House with effect at midnight on Friday 15 October 2010.
Tabling of Documents — Aged Care—Labour Green and Grey Power Report 
Tabling of Documents — Aged Care—Labour Green and Grey Power Report 
[Volume:667;Page:14543] 
Tabling of Documents 
Aged Care—Labour Green and Grey Power Report 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to table the Labour Green and Grey Power report into the future of aged care containing 14 recommendations for the Government to consider. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Sittings of the House 
Sittings of the House 
[Volume:667;Page:14488] 
Sittings of the House 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I seek leave for the House to now rise for the evening having sustained excellent progress. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought for the House to rise. Is there any objection to that course of action? There appears not to be. Leave is granted.
New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill — In Committee 
New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:667;Page:14457] 
New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill 
In Committee 
Part 1 Amendments to principal Act 
The question was put that the following amendments in the name of Kevin Hague to clause 13 be agreed to: 
to omit from subclause (1) “and HQSC”; and 
to add the following subclause: 
(3)Section 66 is amended by inserting the following subsection after subsection (1): 
“(1A)Subsection (1) does not apply to HQSC in respect of costs which are to be met by the Ministry of Health in a financially responsible manner that allows HQSC to carry out its functions to a high standard.” 
Amendments agreed to. 
Part 1 agreed to. 
Part 2 agreed to.  
Clause 1 agreed to.  
Clause 2 agreed to.  
Clause 3 agreed to.  
Bill reported with amendment. 
Report adopted. 
Report corrected having originally been reported as without amendment.
Motions — Burma—Human Rights 
Motions — Burma—Human Rights 
[Volume:667;Page:14407] 
Wednesday 13 October 2010 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Motions 
Burma—Human Rights 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate relating to freedom of expression and assembly in Burma. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is no objection. 
Hon MARYAN STREET 
: I move  
That the House call on the Burmese authorities to guarantee the three freedoms of expression association and peaceful assembly and call for the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners arrested for their peaceful opposition to the regime. 
Motion agreed to.
King Colin: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — First Reading 
King Colin: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14250] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to speak on the Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill. I take on board all the glowing comments made by previous speakers about the value of the humanities the social sciences and such like. When we look at the functionality of this bill we see that it is structured in a way that will advance collectively not only the fundamental sciences but also the humanities. I have to confess that although science may not have been a great subject at Ruapehu College when the chairman of the Education and Science Committee was there I had to do a bit of research to find out what humanities were. I would say that a lot of people in New Zealand would need to go to Google or something like that and inquire as to what humanities are. It is quite interesting that humanities are described as academic disciplines that study the human condition using methods that are primarily analytical critical and speculative as distinguished from the mainly empirical approaches of the natural and social sciences. So I learnt something there. 
When we sit down at the Education and Science Committee and go through this bill I am sure that there will be a fair amount of collegiality on it. I am certainly looking forward to that. I certainly can attest too to what the chairman was saying before about the Royal Society of New Zealand’s sponsored lectures in Parliament the Speaker’s lectures. They were a great series and they certainly covered an enormous range. It surprised me just how broad the Royal Society of New Zealand was in its context so it will be very interesting to see what comes out of the humanities’ involvement with the society and their incorporation into it. We look forward to this bill coming to the select committee. I am sure that it will not take too long for us to go through the process and take advice on board. On that basis I support the bill and look forward to receiving it at the select committee.
Vote: Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14272] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 53 
Anderton (P) 
Dyson (P) 
Kedgley 
Robertson G 
Ardern J (P) 
Fenton (P) 
King A (P) 
Robertson R (P) 
Barker (P) 
Flavell 
Laban 
Sepuloni (P) 
Beaumont (P) 
Goff (P) 
Lees-Galloway (P) 
Sharples 
Burns (P) 
Graham 
Locke 
Shearer (P) 
Chauvel (P) 
Hague 
Mackey (P) 
Sio (P) 
Choudhary (P) 
Harawira 
Mahuta (P) 
Street (P) 
Clendon 
Hawkins 
Nash 
Turei 
Cosgrove (P) 
Hipkins (P) 
Norman 
Turia 
Cunliffe (P) 
Hodgson (P) 
O’Connor 
Twyford (P) 
Curran (P) 
Hughes D (P) 
Parker (P) 
Dalziel (P) 
Hughes G 
Pillay (P) 
Davis 
Huo (P) 
Prasad (P) 
Teller: 
Delahunty 
Katene 
Ririnui (P) 
Chadwick 
Noes 61 
Adams 
Dean (P) 
Key (P) 
Smith N 
Ardern S (P) 
Douglas (P) 
King C (P) 
te Heuheu (P) 
Auchinvole (P) 
English (P) 
Lee 
Tisch (P) 
Bakshi (P) 
Finlayson (P) 
Lotu-Iiga (P) 
Tolley (P) 
Bennett D (P) 
Foss (P) 
Macindoe (P) 
Tremain (P) 
Bennett P (P) 
Gilmore (P) 
Mapp (P) 
Upston (P) 
Blue (P) 
Goudie 
McClay (P) 
Wagner (P) 
Borrows (P) 
Groser (P) 
Parata (P) 
Wilkinson (P) 
Boscawen 
Guy (P) 
Peachey (P) 
Williamson 
Bridges (P) 
Hayes (P) 
Power (P) 
Wong (P) 
Brownlee (P) 
Heatley 
Quinn (P) 
Woodhouse (P) 
Calder (P) 
Henare (P) 
Roy E (P) 
Young (P) 
Carter D (P) 
Hide (P) 
Roy H (P) 
Carter J (P) 
Hutchison (P) 
Ryall 
Coleman (P) 
Joyce (P) 
Shanks (P) 
Teller: 
Collins (P) 
Kaye (P) 
Smith L (P) 
Goodhew 
Motion not agreed to.
Hawkins George: Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Hawkins George: Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14272] 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Labour—Manurewa) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I request a personal vote be taken. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: OK let us have a personal vote.
Robertson Grant: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Robertson Grant: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14253] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 This is just a brief call in reply to thank members for their support of the Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill in its first reading. It has been fascinating to hear of the qualifications and scientific expertise of members across the House. 
I did not attend Ruapehu College; I went to a high school in Dunedin. I did not take science classes for very long and it is much to my regret that I did not because it is a subject that I greatly enjoy. I am a graduate in the humanities and I look to my fellow graduate in the humanities across the House the Hon Judith Collins for support. I have an honours degree in political science. 
Political science is not on the current list of humanities subjects in the bill. Obviously when the bill finds its way to the select committee we may need to discuss that matter although I do note that the bill states “includes” those subjects. Perhaps it is simply taken as read that political science is one of the leading humanities subjects. 
In all seriousness I take on board the comments made by Te Ururoa Flavell. I am sure that the Royal Society of New Zealand will be listening to this debate and they may well contact Mr Flavell to discuss his suggestions. I am sure that the committee will be interested to talk about them. I thank colleagues for their support for the bill and I look forward to its quick progress through the House. 
Bill read a first time.  
Bill referred to the Education and Science Committee.
Upston Louise: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Upston Louise: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14253] 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
: 
 I am pleased to stand in support of the Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill in the name of Grant Robertson. He was so disappointed I did not continue my speech on the Franklin District Council (Contribution to Funding of Museums) Amendment Bill that I wanted to rise and make sure that he was able to hear some more of what I have to contribute to the House. 
I acknowledge the clarity with which the member for Wellington Central explained the purpose of this bill so I will not go into a lot of the detail other than to say that it is tidy-up legislation at the request of the Royal Society of New Zealand. I think one of the interesting things is that in effect this bill brings the humanities or the social sciences into the world of the Royal Society of New Zealand. We have heard about the potential that could occur with such a blend. I think one of the members of the House referred to it as the difference between coming from Venus and coming from Mars. It might also be seen as blending oil and water depending on one’s perspective. But I do not think anyone will disagree with me that this is an important step forward for the development of the Royal Society with the inclusion of the humanities and social sciences in its strive to foster another wing of science in New Zealand. I believe that it will enhance the work that the society already does in terms of excellence in research and science. 
I also agree with Allan Peachey the chair of the Education and Science Committee and former student of Ruapehu College that we will have a good discussion when the bill gets to the select committee. I shall look forward to seeing whether there are any additions that Mr Robertson might want to put forward in terms of aspects of the humanities that might be extended to be included. This is a bill that I believe we will all support. It is important to note that $500000 from Vote Research Science and Technology goes to the society each year to support its objectives and functions. This is a Government that supports science and technology and I am proud to support this bill.
Peachey Allan: Franklin District Council (Contribution to Funding of Museums) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Peachey Allan: Franklin District Council (Contribution to Funding of Museums) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14237] 
ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tamaki) 
: 
 I commend the member for Hunua Dr Paul Hutchison for the logic reason and structure that he took in his introductory speech on the Franklin District Council (Contribution to Funding of Museums) Amendment Bill. I contrast that with the irrelevance of the speech from the Labour list member Steve Chadwick. 
I wonder whether I can continue with the theme of my speech about Christ’s College and devote the next 5 minutes to the governance of Ruapehu College. Maybe in 5 minutes time I will have achieved my objective for the day in getting the name of my old school mentioned in  
Hansard 
 more often than that fine school in Canterbury. 
I seem to recall that I spoke in the first reading of this bill in favour of it being referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee. I now find myself speaking in support of the select committee’s recommendation that this bill not be passed because of the restructuring of governance in the wider Auckland area. 
The need for this bill came about in the first place because of two pieces of legislation the Auckland War Memorial Museum Act 1996 and the Museum of Transport and Technology Act 2000. They required the Franklin district to make a contribution on the basis of population to the running costs of both of those institutions. 
The select committee came to the view as I have said that this bill is no longer required. I note with interest and empathy Dr Hutchison’s very strong support for the area and his sense of representing his community in this House in the very best possible way. He has done that and all credit to him for it but it really is a simple matter: since this bill was introduced there has been a major restructuring of the governance of the Auckland region. 
I think the elections for the new council have started. I seem to recall that my ballot papers arrived on Monday. I will no doubt exercise my democratic right cast my vote and ensure that as many candidates as possible who identify with the left of politics in New Zealand do not get elected. I guess that was one of the great things about going to Ruapehu College—that the school was always represented in an electorate that returned a National member year after year after year. 
In conclusion I say that this bill will not be passed. There is no longer any necessity for it to be passed and I think it can now be dispatched reasonably quickly. Thank you.
King Colin: Christ’s College (Canterbury) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
King Colin: Christ’s College (Canterbury) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14233] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to speak during this second reading of the Christ’s College (Canterbury) Amendment Bill and I must pay my respects to all those who have spoken before me. I also recognise those families in North Canterbury which is the bottom end of the Kaikoura electorate who still—to this very day—seek out such colleges to send their children to. No doubt they include families whose bequests have brought about the situation we are now confronted with with regard to this particular bill. I also thank the Government Administration Committee members for their diligence and there is no doubt that their advice which was taken and applied to new section 5(4) inserted by clause 5 of this legislation is very appropriate. If we just turn our minds back to clause 4 earlier in the legislation about the purpose we understand just how important it is to tie in things in a seemly way and I am quite confident that the integrity of the trustees principal and teachers at Christ’s College will ensure that. One has to marvel at the strength of the old boys’ network that emanates out of Christ’s College. No doubt there will be a very strong connection with families to ensure that the provisions of this particular bill will not be abused. 
When one thinks about the time that Christ’s College has been in existence one might think that some 100000 pupils had gone through that college but in fact about 13000 pupils have gone through. Today there are some 660 students at that college: 220 boarders who live there and no doubt travel from all over the country to get there and 440 day boys as they are described. As a college it certainly measures up well with regard to any other schools throughout the country. The school is a product of the Anglican settlement of Canterbury in the 1850s and in fact when we look around the Parliament building that we have here today we see that the college dates from the very beginning of our democracy. So there is great history in Christ’s College and it is one that we are particularly proud of. 
When we look at the structure of the philanthropy that has been displayed towards Christ’s College we understand that the solution we are dealing with here will be sensible and pragmatic. There are 28 trusts. If we consider the Charitable Trusts Act 1957 we find a provision there to seek a variation from the original trust deed but that would require trustees to go to the High Court for that approval not just once for all the 28 trusts but for each variation to each trust deed. One would be required effectively to seek 28 High Court decisions to get the changes that are necessary. It is with great pleasure that I see Dr Hutchison arriving and on that basis I have great passion and enthusiasm for the Christ’s College (Canterbury) Amendment Bill to proceed. Thank you very much. 
Bill read a second time.
Burns Brendon: Christ’s College (Canterbury) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Burns Brendon: Christ’s College (Canterbury) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14223] 
BRENDON BURNS (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 I am very pleased to support the second reading of the Christ’s College (Canterbury) Amendment Bill and to note firstly how important it is that Christ’s College one of the great important façades and institutions of my electorate of Christchurch Central has come through the quake with only modest damage. It is important to know that an institution like that is up and operating. That is important for Parliament and for the nation to know. Of course even though Christ’s College has had some earthquake strengthening that was no guarantee that it would come through a force 7.1 quake. 
I note that the Catholic Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament which has had $700000 spent on it in the last 3 or 4 years is still closed and may be closed for another year. Many other churches in particular and other buildings across our city centre have suffered much worse than Christ’s College has. 
Christ’s College is an independent school finely led by the headmaster Simon Leese. The purpose of this bill is to acknowledge that changes are required to the trusts that have been supporting the college from its founding days in the 19th century. There have been changes in the nature of those trusts and this bill acknowledges that. This bill is parallel to another bill that I brought through the House last year for the Methodist Church which is also headquartered in the Christchurch Central electorate and which similarly faced trusts that were out of date. The process to take change through the High Court was enormously difficult complex and expensive. This bill seeks to assist that issue. 
We the Labour Opposition support this bill but I note that through the course of the Government Administration Committee process changes were made and those changes were quite important. They were on the issue of what the college’s trustees were able to do in introducing new purposes for a trust. There were concerns about that; we wanted to ensure that those purposes would still be charitable purposes. I understand that those changes are recognised and accepted by the Christ’s College Board of Trustees; that is appropriate and was in the legal advice to them. That issue reflects similar concerns about the Methodist Church of New Zealand Trusts Bill. It is a very important principle that when a trust is established albeit that could have been a century ago or thereabouts the people setting up that trust have very clear intent about what they want it used for. Although we as a Parliament want to change a trust’s purpose where it is no longer appropriate at all we do want to generally ensure that the moneys still are directed towards the kind of intent that the people who founded the trusts envisaged a considerable number of decades ago. 
So the Labour Opposition supports the second reading of the bill and its progress through Parliament. Thank you.
King Colin: Franklin District Council (Contribution to Funding of Museums) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
King Colin: Franklin District Council (Contribution to Funding of Museums) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14240] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to join Dr Paul Hutchison in speaking to the Franklin District Council (Contribution to Funding of Museums) Amendment Bill. We have a situation where the bill has effectively been overtaken by events that have been led by this Government in combining a number of rather fractured and dysfunctional aspects of our major city Auckland. This bill was originally introduced on 13 August 2008. As we know in November 2008 New Zealand had an election. The people of New Zealand voted in a John Key - led National Government supported by the ACT Party and National also appreciates the support we get from the Maori Party. 
However I draw members’ attention to the fractious nature of libraries and museums. Even down at the Hurunui District Council we have problems with distance and the ratings of libraries and museums. At the last local body elections down there the people of Cheviot were particularly concerned about not having access to the library in Amberley. When we stop and think of those distances we realise they are rather short but that is the nature of funding. I think one can see that originally there was a lot of merit in bringing forward this bill. 
Dr Paul Hutchison a very good member took this bill up to ensure that those historical wrongs were put right. However with the speed and the agenda of this Government in working towards having the greater Auckland City go to the local body elections to choose one mayor and one council— 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: One plan. 
COLIN KING 
: —to have one agenda one plan is very important. I believe that the structure that will now affect the Auckland War Memorial Museum and the Museum of Transport and Technology will be a better one. 
It is appropriate that the Franklin District Council wrote to the Local Government and Environment Committee and acknowledged that the bill was redundant in the sense that the events in Auckland had overtaken it. From my point of view the select committee’s recommendation is appropriate. National will vote that this bill does not proceed. On that basis I will say that the bill should not progress and I will sit down.
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:667;Page:14208] 
12. 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Labour 
: Does she stand by all statements that she has made and that have been made on her behalf in relation to the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2)? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Labour 
: Yes. 
Darien Fenton 
: Does she stand by the statement made on her behalf in relation to the 90-day scheme on 16 September 2010 that “The Government has always said that the good-faith requirements to be communicative and responsive with employees … imply and include telling employees why a trial period has not worked out.”? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: Yes. 
Darien Fenton 
: What sanctions apply to an employer who refuses to give a reason for dismissal under the 90-day scheme and what remedies does an employee have available under her proposed law? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: The Government made sure there were adequate protections in the bill in a number of areas in terms of the trial period. 
Hon Members 
: Name them. 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: Requiring any trial period to be entered by written agreement; allowing the trial period only for new employees; retaining good faith which is the aspect the member refers to; protecting employees against discrimination; and ensuring employees on a trial period are treated the same as all other employees regarding leave wages and other entitlements. 
Darien Fenton 
: What remedies are available to an employee who is dismissed under the 90-day scheme and given no reason given that section 113 of the Employment Relations Act says: “If an employee who has been dismissed wishes to challenge that dismissal or any aspect of it for any reason in any court that challenge may be brought only in the Authority under this Part as a personal grievance.” yet section 67B says that a person dismissed under the 90-day scheme “may not bring a personal grievance or legal proceedings in respect of the dismissal.”? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I have to say that my detailed knowledge does not quite extend to all of the matters raised in that supplementary question by the member. In fact I could not possibly remember them all. If the member would like to put her question in writing I am sure that the Minister of Labour will answer it for her.
Upston Louise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Upston Louise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:667;Page:14202] 
7. 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: What progress has the Government made on improving freshwater management in New Zealand and the collaborative process outlined in National’s 2006  
Bluegreen Vision  
document and 2008 election policy? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 Today we marked a significant milestone with 58 diverse organisations with an interest in water coming to an agreed way forward on water reform. This milestone is as significant as the Forest Accord that was struck in the 1980s on the vexed issue of indigenous forests. It is significant that organisations as diverse as Federated Farmers the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society Fish and Game and Fonterra are recommending a way forward on how to progress better management of fresh water. 
Louise Upston 
: Does the Minister accept that proper measurement of water takes is an important part of improving management; if so what steps is the Government taking to ensure that water takes are measured? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: We cannot manage what we do not measure. That is why the Government has moved to provide for—[ 
Interruption 
] Members opposite are interjecting; I think it is out of embarrassment that in 9 years Labour’s programme of action on water went absolutely nowhere. Only 31 percent of water takes by volume were measured. The new regulations coming into effect in November will ensure that 98 percent of water takes by volume will be measured by 2016. 
Louise Upston 
: What financial commitments has the Government already made to improving water quality in New Zealand and how does this compare with spending over the past decade? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: This Government is investing $94 million in the 5 years from 2009 to 2014 in initiatives to clean up some of New Zealand’s iconic waterways—places like Lake Rotorua the Waikato River and Lake Taupo. The $94 million over 5 years compares with just $16 million or one-fifth of that amount spent in the previous 5 years. I think that shows the level of commitment that members on this side of the House have to improving New Zealand’s freshwater quality.
Katene Rahui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Katene Rahui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:667;Page:14199] 
5. 
RAHUI KATENE (Maori Party—Te Tai Tonga) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: Does he agree with the  
Fresh Start for Freshwater 
 report that sustainable reform must reflect the values and interests of both Treaty partners and what strategies does he have in mind to recognise this? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 The Government is very mindful of the huge interest from Maori in issues regarding fresh water. That is why we initiated in consultation with the Maori Party a separate process of engagement with Maori through the Iwi Leadership Group. I met with the group yesterday; during the meeting we received the sad news regarding Sir Archie Taiaroa. We agreed out of respect to defer our discussions on the Land and Water Forum report until November. I note though that the iwi leaders indicated to me a strong level of support for the report. 
Rahui Katene 
: What guarantee can the Minister give to iwi that a national land and water commission will be established in co-governance with iwi as recommended by the forum? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: That is one of the 53 recommendations of the Land and Water Forum. The Government received the final report only today and has not had the opportunity to consider that or the other recommendations. I am keen to firstly have a dialogue with New Zealanders through public consultation on the report. We are keen to have direct dialogue with the Iwi Leadership Group and I also welcome a dialogue with parties in this Parliament including the Maori Party. 
Rahui Katene 
: Does the Minister agree that the transition to any new system of water allocation should proceed hand in hand with Crown-iwi discussions on iwi rights and interests in water management; and what progress can he report on discussions with iwi about water rights and interests? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: In discussions on Waitangi Day and many other discussions the Government has had with iwi leaders their huge interest in water has been repeatedly highlighted. I also say that in the discussions I have had with the Minister of Maori Affairs he too has made the claim that water is a very significant issue for iwi. The Government specifically has established and worked with the Iwi Leadership Group on water policy. Those discussions have progressed very constructively and we have scheduled a further meeting in November to specifically consider the recommendations of the Land and Water Forum.
Gilmore Aaron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Gilmore Aaron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:667;Page:14198] 
AARON GILMORE (National) 
: 
 My question is to the Minister of Finance [ 
Interruption 
]— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I apologise to Aaron Gilmore but again both front benches will cease interjection; the previous question has been dealt with. Members will show some courtesy to the member seeking to ask question No. 4 Aaron Gilmore.
Sittings of the House 
Sittings of the House 
[Volume:667;Page:14272] 
Sittings of the House 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 Given that we have made excellent progress I seek leave for the House to now rise until next sitting day. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is none.
Goodhew Jo: Sittings of the House 
Goodhew Jo: Sittings of the House 
[Volume:667;Page:14272] 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 Given that we have made excellent progress I seek leave for the House to now rise until next sitting day. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is none.
Business of the House 
Business of the House 
[Volume:667;Page:14191] 
Wednesday 22 September 2010 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business of the House 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 Subject to Standing Order 350(2) I seek the leave of the House for the member for Mana the Hon Luamanuvao Winnie Laban to make a valedictory statement on Tuesday 12 October at 5.30 p.m. I have consulted the Leader of the House about this time and it suits the Government as well as the Hon Winnie Laban. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is none.
Upston Louise: Franklin District Council (Contribution to Funding of Museums) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Upston Louise: Franklin District Council (Contribution to Funding of Museums) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14242] 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
: 
 I rise to speak on the Franklin District Council (Contribution to Funding of Museums) Amendment Bill which was brought before the House by the very hard-working National member of Parliament for Hunua Dr Paul Hutchison. I believe that he has represented his constituents very well in bringing forward this issue which is concerned with a rating anomaly. Members on the other side have gone into a variety of rants about changes to the Auckland super-city that are not relevant to this legislation. This bill arose because of a rating anomaly associated with two Acts of Parliament that allowed for levies to be raised for the Auckland War Memorial Museum and the Museum of Transport and Technology on the basis of the population of the Franklin District. 
We have had quite a wide-ranging discussion on the super-city. It was interesting to hear Labour members criticise the Government for the decisions that were made about Franklin. I can understand that Franklin has had a period of uncertainty and now a period of change with the super-city but I want to put on record that Labour did not support Franklin’s decision to have a unitary council which was its preference. Labour is suggesting that it would have been fully behind Franklin but it was not fully behind that proposal and did not support it. In effect Pukekohe and the rest of Franklin would have been divided by the Waikato River boundary. Anyway we are not talking about the super-city; we are here to talk about the challenge the Franklin District has with funding. The hard-working Local Government and Environment Committee came to the conclusion that this problem could not be solved by Parliament. When the bill was introduced in 2008 clearly a problem existed. However times have moved on. 
This Government is very effective in getting things done in partnership with the ACT Party and the Maori Party. We are firm believers in delivering for New Zealanders and the changes in Auckland are but one example of that. In effect those changes mean we are not in a position to support this bill. There has clearly been a major restructuring of local government since its introduction. We do not believe that it is Parliament’s role to resolve the issue of the levies in this particular instance. I recognise the local member’s support encouragement and representation of his constituents. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.
Hawkins George: General Debate 
Hawkins George: General Debate 
[Volume:667;Page:14218] 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Labour—Manurewa) 
: 
 I join with my colleagues in expressing my sympathy over the passing of two great leaders of the Maori community. I am sure that all members in the House will join with us in that. Sir Archie Taiaroa was a great New Zealander. 
I will talk today about what is happening in Auckland. Next week many local government workers will find out whether they have their jobs. Many will not have their jobs. Of course the Public Service Association (PSA) has worked for these people and they have redundancy packages. I think that is good—ordinary workers with decent redundancy packages. But there comes a time when things will be hard for all New Zealanders. 
What is surprising is the amount of rumour going around about some of the eight chief executives and what will happen to them. People are saying that they are getting a golden handshake. Some of them will get a six-figure sum. Some of them will get a substantial six-figure sum. These people are at the moment on six-figure contracts. They are being paid that amount of money yet they will get an additional payment. These people are on fixed-term contracts. I challenge Rodney Hide to tell the people of Auckland what is going on. When one is earning more a year than the Prime Minister I ask whether one should be getting a huge payout. 
People will find out next week what has happened to their jobs and they will get a redundancy package that has been negotiated. The PSA has done a good job but people will see that some of those chief executives are doing all right. They are already paid large sums which means that they are required to do the extra yard—go out and do the overtime work on weekends—but now they will get extra rewards. 
I say to the local government Ministers that people in Auckland need to know what is going on. I know that John Carter is busy working as the Minister of Civil Defence and I do not want to distract him from that. But the Minister of Local Government Rodney Hide must know all about this matter. I ask who will pay these six-figure sums. Well elderly people who own their own homes will have to go into their purses to get some money to pay for these huge redundancy handouts golden parachutes—call them what we will. Those people want answers. 
How accurate are the rumours? The challenge for Mr Hide is to tell people exactly what is going on. He should not keep it secret. Mr Hide has a background of keeping things secret but the people of Auckland of course want answers. People are looking around and seeing how unfair the system is. Chief executives might get close to half a million dollars when they clear their desks close the door and walk out of their offices and they will be quite happy. Council workers who do the ordinary jobs that are so important will look at what the PSA has for them. They think that is fine. But when they start to do the comparison they will wonder. They can say to themselves that they worked hard. Many of them went the extra yard. But in the end those people need answers.
Hughes Darren: Business of the House 
Hughes Darren: Business of the House 
[Volume:667;Page:14191] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 Subject to Standing Order 350(2) I seek the leave of the House for the member for Mana the Hon Luamanuvao Winnie Laban to make a valedictory statement on Tuesday 12 October at 5.30 p.m. I have consulted the Leader of the House about this time and it suits the Government as well as the Hon Winnie Laban. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is none.
Upston Louise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Upston Louise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:667;Page:14202] 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
: 
 My question is to the Minister for the Environment—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I know there is a bit of excitement and passion around some of these issues—I understand that—but I have called Louise Upston and the unhelpful interjections should cease.
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:667;Page:14207] 
11. 
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie) 
 to the  
Minister of Transport 
: What progress has been made on developing the commuter rail network in Auckland? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport) 
: 
 Another milestone was passed on Saturday when I and my good friend Mike Lee opened the Onehunga branch line which includes the three new stations of Penrose Te Papapa and Onehunga. This $13.6 million investment will provide 49 weekday services between Onehunga and Britomart offering an easy 25-minute trip. Modern and efficient transport corridors across all modes are vital to ensuring that as Auckland grows its productivity and its economy grow even faster. 
Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga 
: How does the investment in Onehunga fit into the wider commuter network investment? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: Thirty-seven years after commuter services to Onehunga ceased it is once again open for business thanks to the Government’s overall $1.6 billion investment to upgrade and electrify Auckland’s urban rail network. I thank the finance Minister. However I must caution that there remains further work to ensure this new network is financially sustainable in terms of fair revenue and subsidies from ratepayers and the New Zealand Transport Agency. This is very important before new projects to further extend the network could be sensibly considered. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: Given that he boasted with great conviction in a recent speech that “there has been plenty of progress in this area. Over the past 18 months I have attended many project sod turnings and station and line openings and I look forward to attending a few more as projects near completion.” how many of those projects were approved and had funding started on his watch and if the answer is none does he not think it is time to give just a little bit of credit to the previous Labour Government which got these projects going? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I think it is fair to say that transport projects are proceeding much faster under the current Government. I fully expect the trains over time to arrive on time the cars to depart on time and other such positive improvements. I can confirm for example that the electrification of the Auckland railway network has been voted by the current Government and that is heading on towards a $1 billion investment.
O'Connor Damien: Child and Family Protection Bill — In Committee 
O'Connor Damien: Child and Family Protection Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:667;Page:14762] 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR (Labour) 
: 
 Although I was not a member of the Justice and Electoral Committee I can imagine the difficulties the committee members had as they worked through what is arguably one of the most sensitive and challenging areas of constituency representation. 
I guess there is not an MP in this Chamber who has not confronted a domestic violence issue—not themselves personally I am not making that judgment—on behalf of a partner or a child. There are cases as my colleague the Hon Lianne Dalziel said of children who are caught up in international arguments over where their place of residence should be and whom the adoptive parent should be and they are some of the most traumatic issues we deal with. 
It is not for an MP or indeed this House to judge whom the rightful parent should be but it is for us to put in place law that can assist with the process and this is what is happening here. Anything that can increase the protection of partners who are exposed to domestic violence should be welcomed into the House. 
In reading through the notes I saw a question about whether there are any changes to the Immigration Act. 
Progress reported. 
Report adopted.
Vote: Ngati Tuwharetoa Raukawa and Te Arawa River Iwi Waikato River Bill — Third Reading 
Vote: Ngati Tuwharetoa Raukawa and Te Arawa River Iwi Waikato River Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14751] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Ngati Tuwharetoa Raukawa and Te Arawa River Iwi Waikato River Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 113 
New Zealand National 57; New Zealand Labour 40; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 5 
ACT New Zealand 5. 
Bill read a third time. 
Waiata  
“Whakaaria Mai”
Bridges Simon: Ngati Tuwharetoa Raukawa and Te Arawa River Iwi Waikato River Bill — Third Reading 
Bridges Simon: Ngati Tuwharetoa Raukawa and Te Arawa River Iwi Waikato River Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14745] 
SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga) 
: 
 The Hon Tau Henare in his speech to the House on the Ngati Tuwharetoa Raukawa and Te Arawa River Iwi Waikato River Bill made note of how wonderful it is that people crowds indeed turn up to these settlement bills. As he said they do so not for the parliamentary bickies or anything of that nature but to bear witness to a moment of magnitude in history. 
We on the Maori Affairs Committee have seen a lot of crowds turn up. One could almost I say this glibly tell the substance of a settlement by how many people turn up. What we also see is how many of these settlements are occurring and on Tuesday there was another settlement before us in the House. It is a real testament to the Hon Chris Finlayson and his people and the work they are doing to ensure that we settle these matters expeditiously. I acknowledge the work that was done previously by the last Labour Government. I also acknowledge Tau Henare and the Maori Affairs Committee. As he said despite the barneys sometimes we nevertheless get on well and do the business well I think. 
Due to the number of these bills it is tempting—indeed it is too easy—to come along to the House and give a quick perfunctory speech and then sit down. But the reality is that each one is special each one has significance and this one is very special. It involves the Waikato River. As Chris Finlayson said it literally involves flowing water. It is our mightiest I would say our most important river in New Zealand. Through this bill we ensure that we are protecting it enhancing it and cleaning it up—there is no question that it has suffered degradation and pollution over the years. We are providing the funds for that clean-up and we are providing in some ways a novel but nevertheless significant series of models to ensure that it is done in a very good way. 
The Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Chris Finlayson said probably modestly that he was satisfied with this bill. I think we can all—the Crown iwi and participants at whatever level—be more than satisfied. We can be well satisfied with what has been achieved and with what comes to fruition today in one sense but in another sense just starts a journey. With those remarks I commend this bill to the House.