edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5930. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National): My question is to the Minister for Economic—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! Both sides of the House need to settle. I have called question No. 4—[Interruption] Order! The member Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi has every right to have his question heard.
Carter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5930. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I disagree entirely with the member and furthermore although he said that he was raising a fresh point of order he has taken the opportunity simply to relitigate a decision that I have made. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to proceed with the question he can do so. If he does not want to proceed with the question then we will move immediately to question No. 4. It is in the hands of the Leader of the Opposition.
Robertson Grant: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5930. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I want to refer you to Speaker’s ruling 168/2 from Speaker Smith where it does state as you say that the Government is entitled to transfer questions. However it does say that the Speaker would be concerned if this were anathema to the obtaining of information and if the Minister or Prime Minister being questioned were the only person who had the particular information. The first leg of this question is about a statement made by the Prime Minister. We simply cannot see how any other Minister can have that information. I think this is a clear case where Speaker’s ruling 168/2 comes into play. How can a Minister—
Carter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5930. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! No. I invite members to have a careful read of the Speakers’ rulings on both pages 168 and 169. It has been a long-held convention that the Government has the right to decide where a question will be directed. The only involvement from me as Speaker would be to intervene in that process if I saw it as a deliberate attempt by the Government to not be accountable to the question being asked. In this case I do not see that at all. We will postpone—Grant Robertson: Point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Again I have ruled tightly on this matter so we are not addressing that. If it is a fresh point of order I am happy to take it.
Brownlee Gerry: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5930. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I think the point is that although the shadow leader may say that the Labour Party is asking questions that require a high degree of specificity in order for it to get good information equally it is the Government’s desire that the Opposition does get good information. Therefore the question has been transferred to the Minister who is likely to have far more at her fingertips than the general information that might come in preparation for those closed-off questions. [Interruption]
Carter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5930. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: No. I need no further assistance—Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: I will hear from the Hon Gerry Brownlee.
Hipkins Chris: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5930. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour): The point of order is this: it is the tension that the Opposition finds between asking general primary questions and more specific primary questions. What we are endeavouring to do now in most of our questions—rather than asking “Does he stand by all of his statements?”—is to actually be more specific and give an indication of the direction of travel of the supplementary questions. The risk of doing this is that now under this arrangement the Prime Minister could in fact answer next to no questions because as soon as we give an indication of the nature of the question he has grounds to transfer it. [Interruption]
Carter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5930. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! This is a point of order.
Carter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The last comment—[Interruption] Order! I am on my feet for the benefit of all members. The last comment from the Leader of the House was unhelpful to the order of the House but in regard to the point—[Interruption] Order! In regard to the point raised by Chris Hipkins there are plenty of opportunities for the Leader of the Opposition to ask questions of the Prime Minister and that has been used on a very regular basis through most question times. When I look at the wording of this particular question it is very much about the workings of the Overseas Investment Office and therefore I see no difficulty at all with the fact that it has been transferred. I do not think in any way that it will lessen the quality of the answer. The answer therefore is that in the future if the Leader of the Opposition wants to target a question to the Prime Minister he needs to change the wording and in this case not refer so much to the portfolio of the Overseas Investment Office.Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.[Interruption]
Brownlee Gerry: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Quite apart from the fact that the appropriate delegation does lie with the Minister who was going to answer the question today referring to the previous Government’s arrangements simply points to the fact that when it came to Helen Clark she was head and shoulders above anybody else in that Government in competence.
Hipkins Chris: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I anticipated that this was going to arise because of the transfer of the question so I went back and reviewed all of the Hansard from the last Labour Government when the then Leader of the Opposition John Key was putting down questions to the then Prime Minister Helen Clark and I could not find any examples of where the Prime Minister transferred a question from the Leader of the Opposition—from the Leader of the Opposition. Therefore I ask that the House give consideration to whether the ruling that you have referred to should actually apply in this circumstance. There has to be an ability for the Opposition to question the Prime Minister on a range of issues. The Prime Minister is ultimately responsible for all issues around the Government’s policy and progress.
Carter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! No. I refer the member to Speaker’s ruling 169/5. I am not prepared to put the leave. It is the prerogative of the Government to decide whom the question goes to. It has made that decision. If the member wants to continue asking it as it is on the Order Paper he can do so.
Little Andrew: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLittle Andrew: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This question was originally set down for the Prime Minister and I therefore seek leave of the House to have the question transferred back to the Prime Minister.
Shaw James: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShaw James: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5928. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]2.JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime Minister: Will he stand down Hon Murray McCully as Minister of Foreign Affairs while the Auditor-General investigates the Saudi Arabia Food Security Partnership; if not why not?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): No; because I do not believe that it would be appropriate to do so under the circumstances.James Shaw: Given that the Auditor-General had “insufficient information about the legality” of the Saudi deal how can the Prime Minister continue to have confidence in a Minister who pushed the deal through anyway?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I am not going to go through all the merits of it because it is now before the Auditor-General but I think that the member is actually referring to a statement made quite early on in the piece—there was a lot that happened after that—but I am advised that the officials confirmed that the transaction was lawful and within the scope of the ministry’s appropriation.James Shaw: Does he have concerns about Murray McCully’s involvement in the Saudi sheep deal given that Murray McCully has previously been caught making “unlawful payments” to members of the Tourism Board?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No.James Shaw: Given that Judith Collins resigned prior to an inquiry being launched on the basis of one email why has the Prime Minister not called for Murray McCully’s resignation given that there is now an investigation into his actions?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I note that Ms Collins resigned but I am also advised that officials confirmed that the transaction was lawful within the scope of the ministry’s appropriation in the purview of Cabinet and I am quite happy with the transaction.James Shaw: Given that Phil Heatley resigned over a $70 expense claim why has the Prime Minister not asked Murray McCully to resign for making a $4 million payment of questionable legality?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I am pretty sure that what the Auditor-General will find is that it is not of questionable legality; it is lawful.James Shaw: Given that Ministers have gone down over emails and $70 expense claims does his propping up of Murray McCully show that his own standards are slipping?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No. I am quite comfortable actually that the transaction will bear the scrutiny of the Auditor-General. It was done within the purview of officials it was done lawfully within the authority that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and others had it was signed off by Cabinet and I am very comfortable with the process.James Shaw: Why should Kiwis be represented on the world stage by a Minister who is under investigation for yet another possibly unlawful payment?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The Minister is not under investigation.Grant Robertson: Yes he is.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No he is not. The Minister is not under investigation and he has my 100 percent confidence.
Bishop Chris: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBishop Chris: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5927. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]1.CHRIS BISHOP (National) to the Minister of Finance: How does the Government’s fiscal strategy support the New Zealand economy?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): At the time of the Budget we issued the latest Fiscal Strategy Report setting out the Government’s priorities. These priorities for good management of Government finances underpin the stability and sustainability of Government transfers and services and have been an important part of the sovereign rating provided by credit rating agencies to New Zealand. These priorities are: returning to surplus this year; reducing net debt to 20 percent of GDP by 2020; reducing ACC levies; beginning to reduce income taxes from 2017 with a focus on low and middle-income earners; and using any windfall gains to get debt down to 20 percent by 2020.Chris Bishop: What progress has the Government made on the first of its priorities which is returning to surplus this year?Hon BILL ENGLISH: Four years ago the Government posted the largest deficit that a New Zealand Government has had—$18 billion or 9 percent of GDP—following the global financial crisis and Canterbury earthquakes. The deficit was halved in 2012 halved again in 2013 and reduced to $2.9 billion last year. The Government continues to focus on achieving the surplus target. We will not know for another couple of months whether we will get to surplus in 2014-15. What is clear is that the Government is succeeding in supplying more services and better services to the New Zealand public under relatively tight financial conditions.Chris Bishop: What progress has the Government made in progressing its other fiscal priorities?Hon BILL ENGLISH: We remain on track with the other priorities. In Budget 2015 we signalled another $500 million reduction in annual ACC levies on top of the $1.5 billion reduction since 2011. Our net debt is projected to fall to 19.7 percent of GDP by 2020-21 in line with our long-term target. And if there are any positive revenue surprises which looks a bit less likely now then we would apply those to reducing debt.Chris Bishop: What are the benefits of returning to surplus and paying down debt? [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I have called the Minister of Finance to answer the question.Hon BILL ENGLISH: New Zealand Governments have tried to run low debt for the last 20 or so years in order to ensure that they can deal with significant economic shocks such as the global financial crisis and the Christchurch earthquakes. But achieving lower debt now does mean that for the foreseeable future the Government will have to be quite careful with its spending so that it can generate sufficient surpluses to reduce the debt that we have run up over the past 6 or 7 years.
Carter David: Tabling of Documents — Workplace Health and Safety—Letter to ParliamentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Tabling of Documents — Workplace Health and Safety—Letter to Parliament[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5927. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: It is addressed to Parliament itself. Leave is sought to table that particular letter. Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.Document laid on the Table of the House.
Little Andrew: Tabling of Documents — Workplace Health and Safety—Letter to ParliamentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLittle Andrew: Tabling of Documents — Workplace Health and Safety—Letter to Parliament[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5927. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition):I seek leave to table a letter from the families of victims of workplace deaths many of whom were present in Parliament yesterday.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that particular letter. Is there any objection? [Interruption] The member is asking whom the letter is addressed to.ANDREW LITTLE: The letter is addressed to all at large; it is addressed to Parliament in general.
Carter David: Obituaries — Hon George Frederick Gair CMG QSOText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Obituaries — Hon George Frederick Gair CMG QSO[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5927. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I regret to inform the House of the death on 17 August 2015 of the Hon George Frederick Gair CMG QSO who represented the North Shore electorate from 1966 to 1990. From 1972 to 1984 he held a number of portfolios including Minister of Health Minister of Social Welfare and Minister of Transport. I desire on behalf of this House to express our sense of the loss we have sustained and our sympathy for the relatives of the late former member. I now ask members to stand with me and observe a period of silence as a mark of respect for his memory.Honourable members stood as a mark of respect.
Obituaries — Hon George Frederick Gair CMG QSOText is subject to correctionObituaries — Hon George Frederick Gair CMG QSO[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:1. Text is subject to correction.]Wednesday 19 August 2015Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.ObituariesHon George Frederick Gair CMG QSOMr SPEAKER: I regret to inform the House of the death on 17 August 2015 of the Hon George Frederick Gair CMG QSO who represented the North Shore electorate from 1966 to 1990. From 1972 to 1984 he held a number of portfolios including Minister of Health Minister of Social Welfare and Minister of Transport. I desire on behalf of this House to express our sense of the loss we have sustained and our sympathy for the relatives of the late former member. I now ask members to stand with me and observe a period of silence as a mark of respect for his memory.Honourable members stood as a mark of respect.
Health Practitioners (Replacement of Statutory References to Medical Practitioners) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHealth Practitioners (Replacement of Statutory References to Medical Practitioners) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5957. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Health Practitioners (Replacement of Statutory References to Medical Practitioners) BillFirst ReadingDebate resumed from 18 August.Bill read a first time.Bill referred to the Health Committee.
Tabling of Documents — Workplace Health and Safety—Letter to ParliamentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTabling of Documents — Workplace Health and Safety—Letter to Parliament[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5927. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Tabling of DocumentsWorkplace Health and Safety—Letter to ParliamentANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition):I seek leave to table a letter from the families of victims of workplace deaths many of whom were present in Parliament yesterday.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that particular letter. Is there any objection? [Interruption] The member is asking whom the letter is addressed to.ANDREW LITTLE: The letter is addressed to all at large; it is addressed to Parliament in general.Mr SPEAKER: It is addressed to Parliament itself. Leave is sought to table that particular letter. Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.Document laid on the Table of the House.
Obituaries — Hon George Frederick Gair CMG QSOText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeObituaries — Hon George Frederick Gair CMG QSO[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5927. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Wednesday 19 August 2015Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.ObituariesHon George Frederick Gair CMG QSOMr SPEAKER: I regret to inform the House of the death on 17 August 2015 of the Hon George Frederick Gair CMG QSO who represented the North Shore electorate from 1966 to 1990. From 1972 to 1984 he held a number of portfolios including Minister of Health Minister of Social Welfare and Minister of Transport. I desire on behalf of this House to express our sense of the loss we have sustained and our sympathy for the relatives of the late former member. I now ask members to stand with me and observe a period of silence as a mark of respect for his memory.Honourable members stood as a mark of respect.
Vote: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5835. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 56New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 12; New Zealand First 12.Bill read a third time.
Vote: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5812. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That clauses 1 to 10 and schedules 1 to 5be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 13; New Zealand First 12.Clauses 1 to 10 and schedules 1 to 5 agreed to.Bill reported without amendment.Report adopted.
Vote: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5812. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That Vote Building and Housing and Vote Social Development be agreed to.Ayes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 13; New Zealand First 12.Votes agreed to.
Tisch Lindsay: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5835. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Leave is sought for the House to rise early. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Hayes Joanne: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5835. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (Third Whip—National): The House has made good progress this week. I seek leave for the House to rise early.
Tisch Lindsay: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5831. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The Hon Nanaia Mahuta—5 minutes.
Tisch Lindsay: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5830. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. Jenny Salesa—5 minutes.
Tisch Lindsay: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5826. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Marama Fox—5 minutes.
Tisch Lindsay: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5825. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. I call Dr Russel Norman.
Graham Kennedy: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGraham Kennedy: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5821. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green): With this third reading we the representatives of the New Zealand people have delivered ourselves of our collective wisdom on the issue of the New Zealand flag debate. We are about to conclude our part of the exercise. We have been voting and will no doubt vote again—today perhaps—by 63 to 58 to proceed with the two referendums on the basis of the piece of legislation that is in front of us.We have expended a quantum of hot air on this issue on both sides of the House on behalf of the people we represent. The 63 members who are about to support the legislation have argued that the original idea was a good one that the dual process for the national decision is appropriate that the cross-party panel is legitimately empowered to decide the four options and that the expenditure is worthwhile.The 58 members about to oppose the legislation have argued different things. New Zealand First opposes the fundamental idea of any change to the New Zealand flag. The people should not be offered a choice. Labour supported the idea of potential change but although many members among them cheerfully indicated they would support a new flag they rejected the process and proposed a different one. Individual members of that party have felt the need to convey to the public their personal views.We in the Green Party maintain that changing the flag is in itself an insufficiently important constitutional thing to be pursued by itself alone. It is we have said essentially a matter of optics and not worth proceeding with unless it were accompanied by other far-reaching constitutional reform.In the first reading I identified the inconsistencies as we saw them on the part of the Prime Minister in personally proposing the process for a change of flag. He claimed there was a mandate for change offered an unsolicited personal view in favour of change and then acknowledged there was a need for a public debate and that there was no presumption of change. So the public could be forgiven for being a trifle confused. With all of this flying around on both sides of the debate it is no surprise that party politics has subsumed the substantive issue of the debate following the Canadians half a century later and altering—should we decide as a people to do so—the emblem of who we are and what we stand for.Meanwhile the panel has worked with professionalism and the designers have worked with creativity and passion. We have some 40 options and will soon have just four from which to choose and I believe that the panel will make an informed judgment as to the final four. It remains then simply for the people to speak and having spoken—by definition infallibly—we can move on to the truly important constitutional issues confronting the Realm of New Zealand that continue to cry out for attention.
Mallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5812. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): I am prepared to put the leave but I just want to express some doubt about whether it is something that we will get a proper ruling on as I have a feeling the leave is unlikely to be granted. But I am not sure about the ability of the Committee to overrule an agreement that has already been entered into in the House. The question is that leave is sought for the allocation of calls that were agreed to by the Business Committee albeit within this limited time to be completed. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Hipkins Chris: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5812. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour): When the Business Committee discussed the new format for this debate an agreed allocation of calls within the time frame for the debate was established. I am aware that as the debate has progressed that time frame has slipped. I therefore seek the leave of the Committee for the number of calls allocated to each party to be completed before the debate is ended.
Mallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5811. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): The time for this debate has expired.
Naylor Jono: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNaylor Jono: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5811. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JONO NAYLOR (National): I realise that the time is about to expire on this debate but I just want to get in a few quick points before this debate does conclude. This is the end of the Committee of the whole House stage on the appropriations. We are focusing on the social aspects of them today. I still want to reiterate at the end of this that this Budget that provided these appropriations provided these estimates of what is going to be spent over the next little while will be transformational for New Zealand. It will be transformational for those people who are the most vulnerable in New Zealand. For the first time in so many years—so many years—families who are on benefits and who have children living in their homes are going to see a rise in their benefits. It is this Government that is bringing this into place.It is this Government that is helping to support our teen parents. We saw some legislation go through just the other day to extend the age for the young people who are at a high risk of staying on benefits for long periods of time and also for teen parents. What we know is that these people who find themselves in a position where they are on a benefit either as a teen parent or with other high-risk factors around them will spend on average up to 13 years on benefits. This Government is absolutely aspirational for those people. It aspires to see them achieve so much more.
Mallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5810. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): I did not hear him but the member’s time has now expired.
Williams Poto: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilliams Poto: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5803. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]POTO WILLIAMS (Labour—Christchurch East): Just to round off my last call I want to say that the estimates debate is all about transparency it is all about openness and it is all about accountability. In the case of moving over $15 million from the Christchurch Housing Accord for affordable housing without telling the people of Christchurch or even its own partner the Christchurch City Council this fails to meet any test of accountability.I would ask the Minister for Building and Housing to come to the Chamber and tell us why he chose to do that without suitable notification to not even the people of Christchurch or the Christchurch City Council. This fails to meet any test of accountability of transparency or of openness and I suggest that the Minister be held to account for that.
Mallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5803. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): The Chamber is in Committee for consideration of the Appropriation (2015/16 Estimates) Bill. Members when we were last progressing the estimates debate we were debating the votes for the social development and housing sector—volume B.5 and volume 10—Vote Building and Housing and Vote Social Development. Poto Williams had the call and she has 1 minute remaining.
Carter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Solid Energy—Voluntary AdministrationText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Solid Energy—Voluntary Administration[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5803. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I have received letters from Richard Prosser the Hon Clayton Cosgrove and Gareth Hughes seeking to debate under Standing Order 389 the announcement today that Solid Energy has been placed in voluntary administration. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. The announcement makes it clear that Solid Energy has been placed into temporary voluntary administration and that in the meantime it will continue to operate normally under its existing board of directors. It has been reported that there are no plans for redundancies during the period of administration. Although being placed in voluntary administration is significant the longer-term outcome of that decision is not yet known.The business of the House should not be set aside just because an announcement has been made even though it may be important. There must be such an element of urgency that the matter must take precedence over other business. In this instance I am not persuaded that there is an element of urgency that warrants the setting aside of the business of the House. The application is therefore declined.
Barclay Todd: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBarclay Todd: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5802. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]12.TODD BARCLAY (National—Clutha-Southland) to the Minister for Food Safety: What announcements has the Government made that will help our primary sector have greater access to the latest technologies and agricultural products?Hon JO GOODHEW (Minister for Food Safety): This week the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill was introduced to the House. The bill will increase the data protection period for companies registering innovative agricultural products. It means that our primary sector will have better access to the new products that it needs in order to manage plant and animal pests and to keep farm animals healthy.Todd Barclay: How will this bill increase New Zealand’s access to agricultural products?Hon JO GOODHEW: The New Zealand market is a small one and suppliers need time to recover their product development costs before their data can be accessed by competitors. This bill will encourage overseas suppliers to register new products while still allowing for robust competition in the New Zealand market place.
Hudson Brett: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHudson Brett: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5799. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.BRETT HUDSON (National) to the Minister of Energy and Resources: What recent reports has he received on energy trends and growth in New Zealand?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Energy and Resources): Yesterday the annual review of the energy sector Energy in New Zealand 2015 was released. It shows that in 2014 renewable energy made up nearly 40 percent of New Zealand’s total primary energy supply. This is a record high and places us third in the world behind only Iceland and Norway. Also in 2014 renewable electricity generation hit just under 80 percent the highest level since 1996. These are fantastic results showing that we are making real gains transitioning to a lower carbon energy future and making the most of our country’s renewable advantage.Brett Hudson: What insights does Energy in New Zealand 2015 reveal about resource development last year?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Energy in New Zealand 2015—the report that I have been referring to—shows that oil and gas exploration was up in 2014 with over $2 billion spent here by operators; the highest ever level of expenditure in this country. This is a great result and shows that the Government’s approach to encouraging exploration and development is a real success. Energy diversity is the key to achieving energy security affordability and sustainability which is why we take a long-term view with a mixed and a balanced approach pursuing opportunities in both renewable and non-renewable energy.
Mitchell Clayton: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Clayton: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5799. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.CLAYTON MITCHELL (NZ First) to the Minister of Broadcasting: Does she stand by all her statements?Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister of Broadcasting): Yes.Clayton Mitchell: Given that the Minister stated yesterday that rugby is our national sport why will this Government not support New Zealand First’s policy of free-to-air live coverage of games of national significance?Hon AMY ADAMS: Because only the most infantile analysis would not understand that that would come with significant negative consequences for New Zealand.Clayton Mitchell: In light of the Minister’s answer does she think it is fair that Kiwis are behind the eight ball compared with Australia and Britain which guarantee their sports fans under law free live coverage of games of national significance?Hon AMY ADAMS: Mr Speaker—Mr SPEAKER: Order! No I am just waiting for New Zealand First to settle.Hon AMY ADAMS: You will be waiting a long time. The New Zealand market is very different from that of Australia and Great Britain. I do not think New Zealanders would want to see our national sports teams reduced to a situation of such poverty that they would be made up only of people who could not get contracts overseas.Clayton Mitchell: Why when New Zealand taxpayers already fork out $2.9 million to support netball and $3 million for rugby must they then pay again to watch their national teams in both world cups?Hon AMY ADAMS: The member is simply wrong. New Zealanders can watch it for free on Prime and they can watch it live at a number of venues.Clayton Mitchell: Given that the Prime Minister wants to see the silver fern on the flag why has he not already allowed New Zealanders to see our Silver Ferns for free on our State-owned TV for the Netball World Cup?Hon AMY ADAMS: New Zealanders can see it for free on free-to-air television.
Mitchell Mark: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Mark: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5796. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney) to the Minister of Trade: What is the Government doing to reduce what some commentators are saying is an overdependence on trade with China?Hon TIM GROSER (Minister of Trade): The Government is doing numerous things. Mr Joyce has just announced one such measure. Another measure was announced by me in my capacity as Minister of Trade about the information technology agreement in Geneva that will cover tariff elimination on over a billion dollars of exports. We are negotiating numerous agreements including the ASEAN Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership agreement which I will be going up to in the week after next. We are negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement which is $28 trillion of GDP. I look forward to the entire House supporting the passage of the Korea free-trade agreement which will provide additional options to China for our great exporting community.Mark Mitchell: What reports has he seen on the benefits of our current trade agreements?Hon TIM GROSER: Numerous but I will just pick the most recent which is the agreement with Taiwan. It is interesting that when the analysis of what this would do came out with a figure of $78 million of tariffs which is the narrowest measure of trade benefits it said that that would occur at the end of the full phase-in of the trade agreement which goes as far as 12 years from memory. We exceeded that in trade growth in the first 10 months of the agreement. That is how beneficial free-trade agreements are to New Zealand.Mark Mitchell: What other trade agreements is the Government pursuing to lift New Zealand exports?Hon TIM GROSER: In addition to the ones that I have instanced in the Asia-Pacific we are also hopeful—it will be difficult to achieve—that we will establish the beginning of a negotiation with the EU for a free-trade agreement. The Government has prioritised the Pacific alliance—this very new and interesting group in Latin America. So the Government is moving ahead on literally multiple fronts.
Carter David: Points of Order — World War II and Victory in Japan—Leave to Move Motion Without NoticeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — World War II and Victory in Japan—Leave to Move Motion Without Notice[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5789. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not a point of order. Any member can object. It is not then appropriate for the member to rise and identify the member. That creates disorder in this House and frankly the member knows it.
Mark Ron: Points of Order — World War II and Victory in Japan—Leave to Move Motion Without NoticeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMark Ron: Points of Order — World War II and Victory in Japan—Leave to Move Motion Without Notice[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5789. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]RON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I take it the Hansard will record that the Minister of Defence objected?
Carter David: Points of Order — World War II and Victory in Japan—Leave to Move Motion Without NoticeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — World War II and Victory in Japan—Leave to Move Motion Without Notice[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5789. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that particular purpose. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Mark Ron: Points of Order — World War II and Victory in Japan—Leave to Move Motion Without NoticeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMark Ron: Points of Order — World War II and Victory in Japan—Leave to Move Motion Without Notice[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5789. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]RON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move a motion without notice regarding the 70th anniversary of victory in Japan and the end of the Second World War which will fall this Saturday this weekend.Mr SPEAKER: Before I put the leave can I just clarify that this is a debatable motion that the member is seeking.RON MARK: Yes.
Upston Louise: Motions — Silver Ferns—2015 Netball World CupText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeUpston Louise: Motions — Silver Ferns—2015 Netball World Cup[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5789. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Women): I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate to congratulate the Silver Ferns on their success at the Netball World Cup to date.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is none.Hon LOUISE UPSTON: I move That the House congratulate the Silver Ferns on their success at the Netball World Cup to dateand wish them well for the remainder of the competition while noting that the New Zealand parliamentary netball team co-captained by myself and Louisa Wall will travel to Australia this week to support the World Cup tournament and to play an inaugural game against Australian counterparts in recognition of the WW100 ANZAC events.Motion agreed to.
McClay Todd: Ministerial Statements — Solid Energy—Voluntary AdministrationText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMcClay Todd: Ministerial Statements — Solid Energy—Voluntary Administration[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5788. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TODD McCLAY (Minister for State Owned Enterprises): I thank my colleagues for their comments and I have welcomed this debate.The Government has intensively been involved with the Solid Energy board over an extended period of time but the reality is that a previous board made investment decisions at a time when the coal price was very high—indeed when that price was at the top of the market. That price has gone from $220 a tonne down to $85 a tonne this week.With the debts and the price forecast this is no longer sustainable but indeed this is a worldwide problem. There is coal on the seas on ships at the moment that people do not want to buy. A year or so ago a coalmine in Australia was bought by an American company for $1 billion. Last week that company was sold for $1.These districts are resilient. The proposed agreement means that the businesses will be paid and they continue to trade. It also means that employees will be able to go to work tomorrow. But I would caution the House that over the next 5-week period if the creditors do not agree to the proposal then there are very few options left available to the Solid Energy board.
Brownlee Gerry: Ministerial Statements — Solid Energy—Voluntary AdministrationText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Ministerial Statements — Solid Energy—Voluntary Administration[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5784. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Well yes it is because the shadow Leader of the House did say that he was seeking some assurance. I think the comment that has been made by the Minister concerned is reassuring. It is always our practice to comply as much as possible as the Standing Orders require of us. I hope that he accepts also that I have tried very much in the time that I have been in my current role as Leader of the House to ensure that parliamentary procedure is as inclusive as is possible of all those who are a part of it. So this is a bit disappointing. It now appears that perhaps some other communication might not have occurred that should have. In any event I hope that the House accepts that we are not trying to be in any way obfuscating our responsibilities. Indeed that is why we are having a ministerial statement.