edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Barker Rick: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
Barker Rick: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:8943] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister for Courts) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6) — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6) — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:7090] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 55 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Green Party 8. 
Noes 60 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Keith Locke to insert new clause 21N be agreed to: 
to insert after clause 21M the following clause: 
21NNew section 312R inserted 
The 
principal Act is amended by inserting after section 312Q the following section: 
312R Ombudsman to audit 
The Ombudsman is to conduct an annual audit of all telecommunications’ interceptions carried out by police in the previous year.
Benson-Pope David: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Benson-Pope David: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21397] 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Minister of Fisheries) 
: 
 I am pleased to rise in support of this bill.
Clark Helen: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Clark Helen: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:612;Page:8966] 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 I thank Mr Prebble for what he said because I believe he drew the House’s attention to the fact that once someone puts his or her details in the arena the Government has no way of responding unless it puts the facts out there. My advice is that the woman concerned will be operated on as soon as she has a clearance. The advice I have is that she does not have it.
Robertson H V Ross: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
Robertson H V Ross: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:20988] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: There are a number of amendments in the name of the honourable member Marc Alexander to clause 26. They are out of order but I will go through them one by one. The first to omit and substitute paragraph (i) of subclause (3)(a) 7 months is out of order because it is inconsistent with a decision on a clause 21 amendment. The next to omit and substitute paragraph (i) of subclause (3)(a) 8 months is out of order because it is inconsistent with the decision on a clause 21 amendment. The amendment to omit and substitute paragraph (i) of subclause 3(a) 9 months is out of order because it is inconsistent with a decision on a clause 21 amendment. An amendment to omit and substitute paragraph (i) of subclause (3)(a) 12 months is out of order because it is inconsistent with a decision on a clause 21 amendment. An amendment to omit and substitute paragraph (i) of subclause (3)(a) 16 months is out of order because it is inconsistent with a decision on a clause 21 amendment. An amendment to omit and substitute paragraph (i) of subclause (3)(a) 18 months is out of order because it is inconsistent with a decision on a clause 21 amendment. An amendment to omit and substitute paragraph (i) of (3)(a) 24 months is out of order because it is also inconsistent with a decision on a clause 21 amendment. 
The third amendment to clause 30 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 372 in the name of Marc Alexander is to omit words from subclause (2). The first and second amendments to that clause on the Supplementary Order Paper have been ruled out of order. The subclause was numbered (1) in error; it should be subclause (2). 
The question was put that the following amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 372 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 30 be agreed to: 
to omit from subclause (2) the words “withheld from the accused or the offender and”.
Carter John: Urgent Debates — Police 111 System—Review 
Carter John: Urgent Debates — Police 111 System—Review 
[Volume:625;Page:20470] 
JOHN CARTER (National—Northland) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Do you as the Speaker have the authority to direct the Minister whose department is being debated to be present in the House to debate? Because Mr Hawkins should be here. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: No that is not a point of order.
Vote: Corrections Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Vote: Corrections Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:13164] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 51 
New Zealand National 24; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 6; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 1 be agreed to: 
to omit the words “This Act is the Corrections Act 2002” and substitute the words “This Act is the State Management of Corrections Act”.
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates — Member for TamakiMakaurau—Standing Down as Minister 
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates — Member for TamakiMakaurau—Standing Down as Minister 
[Volume:621;Page:16233] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received two letters from Rodney Hide seeking debates under Standing Order 373. The first relates to the standing down of the Hon John Tamihere as a Minister. The second relates to the inquiry into allegations surrounding Mr Tamihere and the Waipareira Trust. Both letters relate to particular matters of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility and I would have been inclined to accept either one. In these circumstances the application first received by me is the one that will take priority. However as the two cases are interrelated members will be able to refer to the inquiry in debating the standing down of the Minister. I therefore accept the application relating to the standing down of the Hon John Tamihere. I call on the member to move the appropriate motion.
Brownlee Gerry: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Brownlee Gerry: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:17078] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I just wondered whether you had been able to see all the way to the back of the Chamber. Mrs Wong has been trying to take a call for quite some time. She does represent a specific constituency in this country and I think her contribution on this part should be on the record. I know it is usual for the call to alternate from one side of the Committee to the other but given the make-up today with all parties contributing I do not think it would hurt to give two calls to this side then perhaps conclude the debate on the part.
Brownlee Gerry: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Brownlee Gerry: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7730] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In the unusual circumstances that we are dealing with where we know that there is a Privileges Committee report on the Table declaring a seat vacant and we are now in urgency—effectively preventing the report of that committee from being dealt with by the House—retrospectively changing the law so that the conclusions of that report cannot be given any effect it is arguable that with this bill we are being asked to elect an MP. There is no real question about that being the consequence of what we are doing. That would constitute a change in the method of voting as stated in the Electoral Act. That is one of the six or seven—I am not sure which—entrenched provisions in that Act that require the support of 75 percent of the House. It is not a frivolous question that I am asking; it is a serious one and a number of Speakers’ rulings relate to this matter. I wonder whether you Mr Speaker might take whatever time is required to consult the Clerk and others and to give us a ruling on why in fact this is not a bill—given the effect of it—that requires the support of 75 percent of Parliament. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member has asked me to give thought to it. I will.
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:620;Page:15590] 
1.  
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Fisheries and Other Sea-related Legislation Committee 
: How much time has the committee set aside to listen to submissions on the Foreshore and Seabed Bill? 
RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (Chairperson of the Fisheries and Other Sea-related Legislation Committee) 
: 
 Yesterday the committee confirmed the dates of 15 September 16 September 20 September and 4 October to hear submissions. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: On which of those dates will Labour MP Nanaia Mahuta present her oral submission to the committee? 
RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER 
: The committee resolved to receive late submissions with a cut-off date of 12 August and to receive no submissions after that. Ms Mahuta’s submission was received on 26 August. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member was asked on what date the submission would be heard. 
RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER 
: It was received outside the parameters set by the committee so at this stage there is no date set. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: Could the chairman tell the House how Nanaia Mahuta’s submission managed to meet the criteria when some 3000 submitters were denied the opportunity to be heard by the committee? 
RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER 
: It did not meet the criteria. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member said that it was not going to be heard. He said it did not meet the criteria.
Barker Rick: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading 
Barker Rick: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20353] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister for Courts) 
: 
 It is with great pleasure that I rise to speak on this bill’s second reading. I thank the Law and Order Committee for its excellent work in reviewing this bill. It has made some very helpful amendments. 
Debate interrupted.
Vote: Identity (Citizenship and Travel Documents) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Identity (Citizenship and Travel Documents) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20121] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 34 
New Zealand National 25; Green Party 8; Other: Robson. 
Noes 80 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8; Progressive 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Pansy Wong to clause 17 be agreed to: 
to omit from paragraph (b) of subclause (3) the words “1 January 2005” and substitute the words “1 May 2005”.
Simich Clem: General Debate 
Simich Clem: General Debate 
[Volume:625;Page:20240] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I thank the member for raising that but it was unnecessary; I had dealt with the matter. I have no doubt that the list he has in front of him is the same as the one I have here and I also have no doubt that he will be able to follow it from here on. [ 
Interruption 
] No further explanations need be made. None will be made. This arrangement is perfectly in order.
Vote: Crimes (Drug Rape) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Crimes (Drug Rape) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:12681] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Crimes (Drug Rape) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 104 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; Progressive 2; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 16 
ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Bill read a first time and referred to the Law and Order Committee.
Peters Winston: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Peters Winston: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:17170] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I understand the member’s point of order to be that he wants to know when the Government will move the closure motion—despite the fact that those members were going to fight this with all the fibre of their being. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: No—  
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: I am signifying that we have members who are yet to speak.  
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: What I would say to the member is that there are many criteria the Chairperson takes into account. One of them is obviously proportionality. That will be dealt with as it is always dealt with—in a proper and fair way.
Mark Ron: Budget Debate 
Mark Ron: Budget Debate 
[Volume:626;Page:20866] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I wish to achieve a bit of brevity. I recall in my time here as a whip which was some time ago listening to the Rt Hon David Lange lamenting how members in the House had lost the ability to orate with skill. Might I suggest that rather than subject the House to readings of speeches pre-prepared by Ministers Government back-bench members might like to save us time by tabling those speeches and letting the Opposition get on with the real debate. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I thank the member but that is an issue for another place.
Vote: Care of Children Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Care of Children Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:16693] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 60 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9. 
Noes 54 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 8; Maori Party 1. 
Schedule 2 agreed to.
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:608;Page:5087] 
2.  
DAVID CUNLIFFE (NZ Labour—New Lynn) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What reports has he received regarding the response to the recent announcement by the Reserve Bank of New Zealand? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 Business New Zealand described it as prudent the Council of Trade Unions said that it was a step in the right direction WestpacTrust said that a stitch in time saves nine and compared it to the more reactive responses seen in some earlier cycles and the Opposition spokesperson said he had not expected the bank to move at that time which indicated that he would not have done so had he stayed being the Reserve Bank Governor. 
David Cunliffe 
: What moves has the Government made to allow the conduct of monetary policy to be more accommodating of growth? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: There were three changes to the monetary policy framework—those in the policy targets agreement requiring the bank to avoid unnecessary economic instability requiring the bank to take a medium-term focus rather than be distracted by temporary fluctuations and adjusting the inflation band to 1 to 3 percent. Those are all well supported by the business sector in New Zealand and by informed commentators and financial analysts overseas. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Given that one of his express aims in changing the policy targets agreement with the Reserve Bank Governor in both 1999 and last year was to “minimise excessive appreciation of the New Zealand dollar’’ how does the Minister reconcile his claim that the changes have been successful with the fact that the New Zealand dollar has appreciated faster during the last year than at any other time since the currency was floated in March 1985? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The primary factor is that we have enjoyed the highest growth rate in the OECD which has attracted money into New Zealand. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Has the Minister received any reports of the enormous cost to New Zealand’s economy over the last 7 years of the Reserve Bank Governor having previously failed to take anything other than a blind ideological approach to this issue at a great cost to the New Zealand borrower? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I saw many comments in particular last Thursday about a lack of proactive responses in earlier periods and therefore a tendency to both ratchet up too early on the upside and ratchet down too slowly on the downside of the economy and welcoming a more proactive approach by the new management of the Reserve Bank.
Hunt Jonathan: New Plymouth District Council (Land Vesting) Bill — Discharge 
Hunt Jonathan: New Plymouth District Council (Land Vesting) Bill — Discharge 
[Volume:617;Page:12539] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received advice dated 21 April 2004 from the New Plymouth District Council the promoter of the bill withdrawing the New Plymouth District Council (Land Vesting) Bill pursuant to Standing Order 272. The bill is consequently discharged from further consideration by the House.
Visitors — Papua New Guinea—Minister of Defence 
Visitors — Papua New Guinea—Minister of Defence 
[Volume:617;Page:12621] 
Wednesday 5 May 2004 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Papua New Guinea—Minister of Defence 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing honourable members that the Hon Kappa Yarka Minister of Defence Papua New Guinea is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed. 
The Hon Kappa Yarka accompanied by the Hon Mark Burton entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
Jones Dail: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — In Committee 
Jones Dail: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:624;Page:19132] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 On behalf of New Zealand First I want to make the point at the closing stages of the Committee stage and with the third reading still to go that New Zealand First is voting totally with all 13 members against this bill. That should not be a surprise ultimately because that is what we said we would do before the last election. So it is not as if we were somehow or other block voting or something like that; it is what we said we would do. We gave every indication we would do that at the last election and that is what we are doing. It was on our Labour Party debit card to which I have already referred during the course of the Committee stage. 
I have said many things during the course of this debate and I am fed up with the debate. I am actually sick and tired of the whole thing. This bill should go into the rubbish bin and we should not have anything more to do with it. I really do not want to say all that yet again and bore myself as much as I might bore everybody else.
Hunt Jonathan: Naming and Suspension of Member 
Hunt Jonathan: Naming and Suspension of Member 
[Volume:609;Page:6634] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I name the member. The question is  
That Rodney Hide be suspended from the service of the House 
.
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13023] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:621;Page:16381] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 No. We will simply use urgency moderately to get business through the House.
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:625;Page:20044] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to table a document dated 30 November 1993 describing how Mike Moore supporters stood outside Ruth Dyson’s house and demonstrated with some foul placards. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? Yes there is. It will not be tabled.
Burton Mark: Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Burton Mark: Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12284] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Hughes Darren: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — In Committee 
Hughes Darren: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:624;Page:19098] 
DARREN HUGHES (Junior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
Motion agreed to.
Vote: Third Readings 
Vote: Third Readings 
[Volume:607;Page:4344] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Child Support Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 71 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 47 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Bill read a third time.
Vote: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15938] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 106 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 22; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; Progressive 2; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 14 
New Zealand National 5; United Future 8; Maori Party 1. 
Amendments as amended agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 270 in the name of Dr Paul Hutchison to clause 62(2) be agreed to.
Gosche Mark: Immigration Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Gosche Mark: Immigration Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:611;Page:8420] 
Hon MARK GOSCHE (NZ Labour—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 I withdraw and apologise to the House.
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:620;Page:15873] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (National—Clutha-Southland) 
: 
 I seek leave to table 20 written parliamentary questions asking for information from 2003 about these courses which have not yet been provided. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table those questions. Is there any objection? There is.
Vote: Border Security Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Border Security Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:13289] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 13 
New Zealand First 13. 
Noes 104 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 6; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Peter Brown to clause 7B be agreed to: 
to omit subsection (5) of section 34A and substitute the following new subsection: 
(5)Nothing in subsection (4) requires consultation in relation to specific fees or charges or the specific levels of fees or charges so long as the fees or charges set are reasonably within the purview of any previous consultation.
Vote: Masterton District Council (Montfort Trimble Foundation) Bill — Procedure 
Vote: Masterton District Council (Montfort Trimble Foundation) Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:613;Page:9967] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand National 24; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Motion agreed to.
Hughes Darren: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Hughes Darren: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17543] 
DARREN HUGHES (Junior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 Mr Chairperson just before you start putting the questions to the Committee and further to the conversations that have been held with whips from the other parties in the Chamber I seek leave for voting to be suspended between the hours of 1 p.m. and 2 p.m.
Simich Clem: Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Simich Clem: Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:618;Page:14278] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: The next amendment to clause 54 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 236 in the name of Marc Alexander is to omit and substitute subclause (4). This amendment is out of order as it is the same in substance as that of the Hon Tony Ryall which has already been decided. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 236 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 55(2) be agreed to. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 236 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 55(3) be agreed to. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 236 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 55(4) be agreed to. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 236 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 56 be agreed to. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Papers 225 and 235 in the name of the Hon Phil Goff be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to and clauses 1 to 78 and schedules 1 to 3 as amended agreed to. 
Bill reported with amendment.
Wang Kenneth: Budget Debate 
Wang Kenneth: Budget Debate 
[Volume:626;Page:21066] 
KENNETH WANG (ACT) 
: 
 We are debating Budget 2005 and I wish to draw members’ attention to the point that a group of important New Zealanders in our society are being overlooked. They are the small-business owners. Members on one side of the House are saying that cutting tax rates would be beneficial for the rich and members on the other side say that tax cuts are good for the economy. We often overlook those small businesses that form 90 percent of our economy. 
Maybe I can qualify what is being said because I am the member of the House who knows best about those people who run their own businesses day and night. I wonder how many members of the current Labour Government know how hard it is to run one’s own business and how many members including our Minister of Finance did run their own businesses. As a small-business owner I used to work day and night. I know how hard it is to keep the life of both one’s business and one’s family going. I know that the first obligation is to satisfy the taxman because everyone knows what happens if we do not. 
I would also like to draw members’ attention to the anxious expectation in our society before the Budget was released. The  
National Business Review 
 at the end of April this year quoted that the latest NBR - Phillips Fox poll showed that over 62 percent of people thought the current tax rates were too high. The public has spoken. They wish to have a lower tax system that would allow them to get on with their lives—particularly those people who are running their own businesses. 
If we say that this Budget is a great opportunity missed I would say it is a nightmare for business owners. Not only will they miss out on the results of a so-called booming economy but they are facing a much chillier winter season coming. Our Government is now predicting much slower economic growth and much harder conditions for them to run their own businesses. 
I have been told constantly by members on the other side of the House that tax cuts will benefit the rich. I would like to challenge the definition. Those people who run their own businesses be it a shop working as a plumber or an electrician or even working in a small business like I had which employed four or five people are qualified as rich. These are what the members on that side of the House call the honest members of our society. They value family values in that they are very very responsible and they are certainly sensible members of the public. They should not be qualified as being rich because they know they are at the bottom of the list of what has been considered the “rich list”. They have to satisfy the taxman and they have to pay their own employees their wages first before they can pay their own family members. Yet they have been qualified as rich and they are being put at the bottom of the list in this Government’s Budget. They should be located at the top.
Hunt Jonathan: Standing Orders 
Hunt Jonathan: Standing Orders 
[Volume:614;Page:10735] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Please be seated. 
Dail Jones 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You can’t say that. I did not agree to that.
Vote: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:619;Page:14866] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 36 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 7; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Amendment to the amendment agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 241 in the name of the Hon John Tamihere to Part 5 as amended be agreed to.
Vote: Aquaculture Reform Bill — Second Reading Instructions to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Aquaculture Reform Bill — Second Reading Instructions to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17719] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 36 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 9. 
Noes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Phil Heatley to clause 21 be agreed to: 
to omit subclause (2) of new section 165ZF.
Points of Order — Noise in the Chamber Business Committee Discussion: Iraq 
Points of Order — Noise in the Chamber Business Committee Discussion: Iraq 
[Volume:606;Page:3685] 
Points of Order 
Noise in the Chamber 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Deputy Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am afraid that down at this end of House at least no one can hear a word that was spoken in that very important report from our Clerk. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member has made a very valid point. It is incumbent on all members to listen when the Clerk is speaking. I will pay particular attention to that over the next few days. Would the member like it repeated? 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY 
: Yes I would. I suspect there are some things of incredible importance to the House in that report. 
Business Committee Discussion: Iraq 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Deputy Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Last week at the Business Committee the ACT party raised an issue of importance. I wonder whether the Leader of the House has had a chance to reflect on that and report to us—that is in keeping with all other Parliaments around the world that this Parliament should debate the situation of Iraq. Can the Leader of the House give us a response to that request from the ACT party? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order. That matter can be raised at further meetings in the Business Committee.
Robertson H V Ross: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
Robertson H V Ross: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9392] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I ask members to reflect on what is actually happening here. The reality is that the vote has been taken. I have already said to members that I recognise that they want to make contributions during the Committee stage and they will be given adequate time to do that. Because the vote has been taken and the Speaker has agreed to it the matter rests there. I would now like to move on.
Vote: Holidays Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Holidays Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:614;Page:10530] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 76 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 44 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Hunt Jonathan: Standing Orders 
Hunt Jonathan: Standing Orders 
[Volume:614;Page:10736] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If that was the case I apologise to the member. I made a mistake.
Vote: Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14042] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 5 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 36 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Schedule 5 as amended agreed to.
Pettis Jill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Pettis Jill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:608;Page:5823] 
6.  
JILL PETTIS (NZ Labour—Whanganui) 
 to the  
Minister of Agriculture 
: What is the Government doing to support farmers in the lower North Island affected by drought? 
Hon JIM SUTTON (Minister of Agriculture) 
: 
 The Government has agreed to match community contributions up to $11000 to fund lower North Island rural coordinators. The Government has also approved the provision of rural assistance special-needs grants to farmers in affected areas. 
Jill Pettis 
: How is it planned that the funds for rural coordinators will be spent? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: The Rural Family Support Trust Manawatu-Rangitikei Federated Farmers and Rural Women New Zealand have developed the Farmers Helping Farmers project. Farmers can ring 0508 DROUGHT to seek support and advice from the trust or obtain help with locating sources of feed. Seminars have been organised to help farmers deal with financial feeding and animal welfare issues. Similar programmes of support are being provided in Tararua Wairarapa and Taranaki. 
Hon David Carter 
: Why is the rural assistance available for only 3 months—that is until the end of August—and does the Minister seriously think the effects of drought are as short lived as that? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: Funding is provided until the end of August this time. If there is still a problem and a need consideration to further funding will be given. 
R Doug Woolerton 
: Why has the Minister taken this long to act in such a pathetic way? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: The first application was received from Federated Farmers on 4 April. The situation was analysed by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and I approved the funds on 11 April.
Cunliffe David: Crown Minerals Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Cunliffe David: Crown Minerals Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7626] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of State) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Simich Clem: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Simich Clem: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17574] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I thank members for that and particularly Mr Prebble for raising the matter. Members will be in no doubt now if they were before—and I am not saying they were; but if they were—that if they are present in the Chamber or the lobbies they must vote. They absolutely must vote. 
The results of the votes have been declared and if members had points to raise they should have raised them before that. At this point all votes have been declared and accepted. I have no evidence that any of those votes contravenes any of our procedures. But in respect of the last vote and the revote on it I believe that was correctly done.
Vote: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16041] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 49 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Abstentions 8 
United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 278 in the name of Dr Wayne Mapp to clause 3 be agreed to.
Vote: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17768. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 7 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 37 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 9; Maori Party 1. 
Part 7 as amended agreed to.
Duynhoven Harry: Personal Explanations — Civil Aviation Authority—Allegations 
Duynhoven Harry: Personal Explanations — Civil Aviation Authority—Allegations 
[Volume:619;Page:14593] 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Minister for Transport Safety) 
: 
 I seek leave to make a personal statement in relation to allegations made yesterday by Mr Hide that I had misled this House over the matter of the Civil Aviation Authority’s alleged taping of telephone calls. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There is objection.
Prebble Richard: Speaker’s Rulings — Contempt Finding—Hon Dr Nick Smith 
Prebble Richard: Speaker’s Rulings — Contempt Finding—Hon Dr Nick Smith 
[Volume:616;Page:12365] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sure that I will find that that ruling is correct when I come to read it but I would be intrigued to know how you can make that ruling when the ruling on the Hon Harry Duynhoven was just as clear and you were just as able to make a decision then but in that case you referred it to the Privileges Committee and in this case you did not. I would like to know what principle you follow as to when you send things to the Privileges Committee and when you do not.
Simich Clem: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
Simich Clem: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15862] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Yes they have been aggregated as is normal. I thank the member for raising that. The amendments were agreed to.
Shirley Ken: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question No. 5 to Minister Questions to Members 
Shirley Ken: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question No. 5 to Minister Questions to Members 
[Volume:607;Page:4970] 
9.  
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Deputy Leader—ACT NZ) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Was her formal prime ministerial apology conveyed to the United States last week unprecedented for New Zealand; if not what knowledge does she have of any previous prime ministerial apologies to the United States? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 As diplomatic exchanges are usually kept confidential I do not know what other apologies or expressions of regret may have been conveyed although given one of the personalities involved I think it is unlikely one was. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: In the light of her response how does she explain her statement to the House earlier today when she said that Prime Minister Muldoon refused to apologise for his “peanut farmer” comment? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I would be extraordinarily surprised if he did. 
Hon Bill English 
: Does the Prime Minister stand by her comment that her statements were detached and perfectly reasonable comments in their context; if so does she agree with the description of her by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade as a “foreign affairs commentator”? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: As I said earlier my comments in their context were matters of opinion which have been misinterpreted. 
Hon Bill English 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked the Prime Minister whether she stood by her statement that her comments were detached and perfectly reasonable comments in their context. It is a direct question which she has an obligation to answer. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No she addressed the question. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: Has she denied that the New Zealand Ambassador in Washington was called in by the State Department; if so does she accept that such a denial is misleading because in fact our ambassador was called in by the US administration; he was called in by the National Security Council which is based in the White House and chaired by the President? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: My statement that he was not called in by the State Department is absolutely correct.
Parker David: Meat Board Restructuring Bill — Second Reading 
Parker David: Meat Board Restructuring Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:618;Page:14075] 
DAVID PARKER (Labour—Otago) 
: 
 I rise to speak in support of the Meat Board Restructuring Bill a bill where the Labour-led Government is doing what farmers want. 
Clayton Cosgrove 
: He represents a rural constituency. 
DAVID PARKER 
: I represent a rural constituency. There was a day when the National Party represented all the rural constituencies. There was a day when it had all the farmers. Why is that we do what farmers want? Because we have more farmers on this side: Parekura Horomia Mita Ririnui Jim Sutton Damien O’Connor. The farmers are on this side and that is why the farmers vote for us—[ 
Interruption 
] In contrast we have Mr Connell speaking up the member for Rakaia. He is an East Street farmer. The National Party used to have the occasional Queen Street farmer but it has lost even them. It is down to East Street farmers. 
In any event this is good legislation in contrast to what the previous National Government used to do. What did it do to the fruit industry? Exactly what the fruit industry did not want it to do and it ended in tears. The farmers in my area want this legislation. They want the meat industry restructured in the way that we are doing with this bill. I commend this legislation to the House and I remind those tired members opposite that the reason their former voters voted-in me and this Government was that they knew that this Government would back farmers. Farmers do better under this Government and that is why I am here.
Hawkins George: Care of Children Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Hawkins George: Care of Children Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:16683] 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Minister of Police) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Barker Rick: Police Complaints Authority (Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Barker Rick: Police Complaints Authority (Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:12873] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice) 
: 
 We have had a very good discussion so far and it is very interesting to see that there is no disagreement on the purpose of the bill. There is no disagreement on the need to maintain the confidentiality of the information and to maintain the integrity of the Police Complaints Authority. Similarly there is no disagreement that there needs to be public confidence in the commission of inquiry. We agree on all those things and that is quite remarkable in Parliament. What we have a slight disagreement about is simply the issue of style.Members want to be assured that when the commission of inquiry gets the information from the Police Complaints Authority the public can be assured today and in the future that the information they give to the Police Complaints Authority in confidence will remain in confidence. The Law and Order Committee has been very helpful in that respect. It has made changes to the definition to ensure that when the bill refers to police officers it refers to police officers who help the commission rather than to police officers in general. I think the select committee has done a very good job. 
The issue then is where we move to from here. We have two amendments on the floor. It seems to me that Parliament is reaching a consensus around the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 209 in the name of Mr Stephen Franks. It enables the commission of inquiry to go about its business but provides that when the commission of inquiry gets information from the Police Complaints Authority it does so understanding the nature of that information. It seems the Committee is generally agreed that that amendment will offer confidence to the public—to those who make submissions to the Police Complaints Authority in the future—that their advice will be treated confidentially. I think there has been very good work by the Committee of the whole House. The matter will be dealt with very speedily and I am sure the public will be very reassured. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 207 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 6 be agreed to.
Locke Keith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Locke Keith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:609;Page:6260] 
11.  
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
 to the  
Minister for Sport and Recreation 
: What does the Government regard as the most appropriate memorial to sailor Sir Peter Blake? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
 on behalf of the Minister for Sport and Recreation 
: 
 New Zealanders will have different views about how best to remember Sir Peter. He himself donated NZL32 to Te Papa for display. The Blake family have expressed a variety of views and Te Papa will hold a conference call over the next 36 hours to establish their views. It does however appear that differences relate to design details not to the principle of showing the boat in Auckland. 
Keith Locke 
: How can a glass mausoleum on the Auckland waterfront as supported by the Minister be a more appropriate memorial to Sir Peter Blake than a wonderful new island reserve—Kaikoura Island—which was supported by 72 percent of New Zealanders in a poll reported on Television One last night? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The fact remains the boat is the matter that is identified with Sir Peter—it was his great success in winning the America’s Cup. He wanted  
Black Magic 
 on display so that all New Zealanders could see the yacht that first brought the cup to New Zealand. I do not believe that all New Zealanders would easily find their way to an island in the Hauraki Gulf compared with finding their way to the boat in the viaduct area. 
Mark Gosche 
: Can the Minister explain how this proposal came about? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The proposal was developed by a group of people including Te Papa the National Maritime Museum the Auckland City Council and Sir Peter’s close friend Ross Blackman. Pippa Lady Blake welcomed the proposed exhibition “Blue Water Black Magic” saying it was a fitting tribute to Peter’s life and works.