edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Robertson H V Ross: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3820] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Could I just remind the member that the amendments are all on the Table. Members have had ample time to look at the amendments and there is no provision for me to read out all of the amendments. I invite the member to come to the Table if she so wishes. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Katherine Rich to clause 31 be agreed to: 
to add the following subclauses: 
(4)Any notice given under this section must be tabled in the House of Representatives within 5 days of dispatch. 
(5)For the avoidance of doubt no direction can be given to the board on any matters of programming or editorial content.
Peters Winston: Motions — Speaker—No Confidence 
Peters Winston: Motions — Speaker—No Confidence 
[Volume:620;Page:15735] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to move without notice a motion of no confidence in the Speaker and to ask that he vacate the Chair whilst we discuss a number of unfortunate events that have occurred in the House recently in which Ministers have elected to frustrate members seeking answers to questions during question time and the Speaker has shown a willingness to allow that to happen—when necessary by the unjustified removal of members from the House in order to further shut down a line of questioning. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is.
Shirley Ken: Points of Order — Urgent Question 
Shirley Ken: Points of Order — Urgent Question 
[Volume:612;Page:8951] 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Deputy Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I lodged with the Clerk’s Office an urgent question at 7 minutes past noon today that related to a speech to be delivered by the American Ambassador; perhaps the most significant speech an American Ambassador has given in this country. I was advised that you declined the acceptance of that question. Could I perhaps have a reason for that?
Cullen Michael: Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Cullen Michael: Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17800. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) that it take the bill part by part. 
Motion agreed to.
Robertson H V Ross: Retirements — Office of the Clerk—Mr Robert O'Hagan 
Robertson H V Ross: Retirements — Office of the Clerk—Mr Robert O'Hagan 
[Volume:621;Page:16317] 
H V ROSS ROBERTSON (Labour—Manukau East) 
: 
 I move  
That this House note the retirement this week of Robert O’Hagan after 38 years of Government service including his work since 1976 in this building for the Legislative Department the Parliamentary Service and the Office of the Clerk where his duties have included getting yellows and greens to members and assisting with indexing and written questions. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I would also like to add my personal congratulations to Mr O’Hagan. 
Motion agreed to.
Cunliffe David: Corrections Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Cunliffe David: Corrections Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:13152] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of State) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17565] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 46 
Adams(P) 
English(P) 
Peters J (P) 
Tisch  
Alexander(P) 
Franks(P) 
Peters W (P) 
Turner(P) 
Baldock (P) 
Gudgeon(P) 
Power(P) 
Wang(P) 
Brash(P) 
Heatley(P) 
Prebble(P) 
Williamson(P) 
Brown(P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Roy  
Woolerton(P) 
Carter D (P) 
Jones  
Ryall(P) 
Worth(P) 
Carter J (P) 
Key(P) 
Scott(P) 
Catchpole(P) 
Mapp(P) 
Shirley(P) 
Coddington(P) 
McNair(P) 
Smith L (P) 
Collins(P) 
Newman(P) 
Smith M (P) 
Connell(P) 
Ogilvy(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Dunne(P) 
Paraone(P) 
Stewart  
Teller: 
Eckhoff(P) 
Perry(P) 
te Heuheu(P) 
Copeland  
Noes 74 
Anderton(P) 
Duynhoven(P) 
Laban(P) 
Simich(P) 
Ardern(P) 
Dyson(P) 
Locke(P) 
Sowry(P) 
Barker(P) 
Ewen-Street(P) 
Mackey J (P) 
Sutton(P) 
Barnett(P) 
Fairbrother(P) 
Mackey M (P) 
Swain(P) 
Benson-Pope  
Field(P) 
Maharey(P) 
Tamihere(P) 
Beyer(P) 
Fitzsimons(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Tanczos(P) 
Bradford(P) 
Gallagher(P) 
Mallard(P) 
Tizard(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mark(P) 
Turei(P) 
Burton(P) 
Gosche(P) 
McCully(P) 
Turia(P) 
Carter C (P) 
Goudie(P) 
O'Connor(P) 
Ward(P) 
Chadwick(P) 
Hartley(P) 
Okeroa(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Choudhary(P) 
Hawkins(P) 
Parker(P) 
Wong(P) 
Clark(P) 
Hereora (P) 
Peck(P) 
Yates (P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Hide(P) 
Pettis  
Cullen(P) 
Hobbs(P) 
Pillay(P) 
Cunliffe(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Rich(P) 
Dalziel(P) 
Horomia (P) 
Ririnui(P) 
Donald(P) 
Hunt(P) 
Robertson (P) 
Donnelly(P) 
Kedgley(P) 
Robson(P) 
Teller: 
Duncan(P) 
King(P) 
Samuels(P) 
Hughes  
Amendment not agreed to.
Simich Clem: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Simich Clem: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17565] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: The next amendment is to omit words from subclause (3) of clause 29 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 314 in the name of Richard Worth. It is out of order as it is inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee. 
The question was put that the following amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 314 in the name of Richard Worth to clause 29 be agreed to: 
to omit subclause (4).
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17929] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 315 in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen to Part 7 be agreed to.
Ogilvy Bernie: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Ogilvy Bernie: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 15 October 2003. Volume:612;Page:9182. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
2.  
BERNIE OGILVY (United Future) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee 
: How long has the committee spent on its inquiry into teacher education? 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY (Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee): 
 The committee has spent 11 hours 3 minutes hearing evidence during its inquiry into teacher education and 1 hour 17 minutes in consideration—that is a subtotal thus far of 12 hours 20 minutes. 
Bernie Ogilvy 
: When does the chairman expect that the committee will be ready to report back to the House on this inquiry in light of the fact that the inquiry into decile funding for State and integrated schools has already taken some time? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The first part of the question can be answered. 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: The precise answer to that question is: when it is finished. The committee has set no deadline for the completion of its inquiry recognising the complexity of the issues before it. 
Simon Power 
: Will the Education and Science Committee be calling for more evidence in its inquiry into teacher education; if not why not? 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: Yes. As occasions arise the committee has the capacity within its own right to be able to call upon more evidence and has already taken the opportunity to do so.
Hartley Ann: Financial Review Debate — Procedure In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Hartley Ann: Financial Review Debate — Procedure In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:616;Page:11860] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Mr Speaker you were recalled by the House because I had given a ruling on a member Dr Nick Smith. I asked him to leave the House. I asked him to withdraw and apologise which he did. He then commented on my ruling. I then asked him to leave the House. You have been recalled to rule on that matter.
Newman Muriel: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Newman Muriel: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:606;Page:3438] 
Dr MURIEL NEWMAN (ACT NZ) 
: 
 I seek leave to table the information that shows the increase in gang activities since Labour has been in power. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Cunliffe David: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — Second Reading 
Cunliffe David: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:3936] 
DAVID CUNLIFFE (NZ Labour—New Lynn) 
: 
 I defend the right of the speaker who has just resumed his seat to express the views that he has expressed. As another member has commented that is the fruit of living in a democracy. But democracy has to be protected and I have a newsflash for the Green Party: security agencies do work in secret to achieve their aim. That is the whole point of having them. If they did not work in secret they would not need to be secret agencies. 
Rodney Hide 
: What’s wrong with the secret police that Stalin had? 
DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: Well there we are—the born-again liberal Mr Hide is piping up. 
Rodney Hide 
: Classical liberal not born-again. 
DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: The member has not been born again? He should try that in the next life! 
The aim of this bill is to define the objective and functions of the Government Communications Security Bureau while at the same time increasing its ability to respond to the dynamic and changing international environment. Sadly that environment is forever etched in our memories with the destruction of the twin towers on 11 September 2001. It is regrettable that the events that those terrorist attacks set in motion are still with us even today. 
But I wish to offer some reassurance to members of the New Zealand public in case they are rushing to their phones on the basis of the previous speech thinking that the Government Communications Security Bureau will be tapping those phones in search of anti – genetic modification protesters or people protesting at Mr Howard’s visit. The point is that one needs a warrant or an authorisation to invade the privacy of New Zealanders and those warrant processes are answerable to the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition and to other members of the Intelligence and Security Committee. There are safeguards; this remains a democracy.
Chadwick Steve: State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
Chadwick Steve: State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10638] 
STEVE CHADWICK (Labour—Rotorua) 
: 
 I rise to support the State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3). It corrects an anomaly that can arise out of the mergers of schools and the treatment of employees by boards of trustees so I am pleased to support this bill.
Locke Keith: Gisborne District Council (Alfred Cox Park)  Validation Bill — First Reading 
Locke Keith: Gisborne District Council (Alfred Cox Park)  Validation Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:627;Page:22071] 
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party will be supporting this bill too. After all the excitement generated around this bill and Alfred Cox Park I hope that members will try to visit the park when they visit Gisborne because I am informed by the Green members in Gisborne—and I convey this information particularly to the National members—that the flea market whether it is weekly biweekly twice weekly or whenever it is held sells the best organic produce in Gisborne. So it is a very good source of that product. Alfred Cox Park is the centre of a lot of the cultural life of Gisborne. It may even have one or two cosmopolitan events but a lot of social events and a lot of organisations use its facilities. Alfred Cox Park is a central part of the culture of Gisborne. It is very good that everything will be square in legal terms after we pass this bill. 
I do pay tribute to Janet Mackey as she did indicate this will be her second-to-last speech in Parliament. We do wait for her valedictory but it is good that she has been able to bring this bill from the Gisborne people to Parliament as one of her last acts. She has done sterling work from the local level at Gisborne through to her work on the Inter-Parliamentary Union too. I pay tribute to her for taking the time and effort to perform on the international stage. 
I would like to indicate that Gisborne will probably be increasing its representation in the next Parliament because we have at No. 9 on the Green Party list Catherine Delahunty. She may get in on the list as we have nine MPs already so we need only to hold our present position in order for her to get in. Catherine Delahunty will either come in that way or as the new MP for Gisborne. But who knows how that will go? I see that Moana Mackey is looking at me a bit strangely on that question. As long as Catherine comes into Parliament—and I am sure she will do so on the list with the support of people throughout New Zealand—that will be of great assistance to the people of Gisborne. I am sure that Maurice Williamson will be very pleased about that and very pleased when he visits Alfred Cox Park. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: All the speaking slots have been used on this first reading of a local bill. However members are free to seek the leave of the House if they want to speak.
Ryall Tony: Urgency 
Ryall Tony: Urgency 
[Volume:622;Page:17686] 
Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay Of Plenty) 
: 
 A couple of points of order—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will be seated or he will leave. 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: A couple of points of order ago the House denied leave for Mr Peters to have his Immigration Amendment Bill considered. The National Party considers matters of national security to be of the highest importance. We presume that the Government objects to Mr Peters’ bill on the basis of its retrospective nature. Therefore I seek leave for the House to include in the motion the Immigration Amendment Bill in the name of Mr Peters without the retrospective clause. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that. Is there any objection? There is.
Brownlee Gerry: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Brownlee Gerry: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises 
[Sitting date: 10 June 2003. Volume:609;Page:6108. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Notwithstanding your list let me tell you with certainty and as an absolute fact that the Business Committee has agreed that various parties will have a certain number of speaking spots. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: This comes off the member’s time; this is a 3-hour set debate. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: That is OK—one could say it comes off the Government’s time. It is not appropriate for the Government to think that it can organise through the Chair who speaks when. The Standing Orders are very clear. They state that if a person wants to speak he or she should seek a call but a point of order is quite a different thing.
Benson-Pope David: State Sector Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Benson-Pope David: State Sector Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7329] 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (Senior Whip—NZ Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Shirley Ken: Points of Order — Tabling of Document—Hon Phil Goff 
Shirley Ken: Points of Order — Tabling of Document—Hon Phil Goff 
[Volume:627;Page:22262] 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Whip—ACT) 
: 
 No what Mr Goff tabled yesterday was a very minor quotation from the document. I believe he had the full document here today and I request that he table the full document he was quoting from. The member needs to come up to speed with the Standing Orders. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The member has indicated the paper he was reading from.
Vote: Border Security Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Border Security Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:13177] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Border Security Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 24; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 6. 
Bill read a second time.
Peters Winston: Speaker’s Rulings — Donna Awatere Huata 
Peters Winston: Speaker’s Rulings — Donna Awatere Huata 
[Volume:613;Page:9837] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That was my point of order. The error was clearly a case of wishful thinking on the part of some people or a typographical error. But when I get up for a point of order I expect you if I am asking for one at the same time as another member to respect the issue of seniority in this House.
McNair Craig: Motions — Reserve Bank Funding Agreement—Ratification 
McNair Craig: Motions — Reserve Bank Funding Agreement—Ratification 
[Volume:627;Page:21935] 
CRAIG McNAIR (NZ First) 
: 
 On behalf of New Zealand First I want to speak briefly to this funding agreement entered into by the Minister of Finance and the Governor of the Reserve Bank pursuant to section 159 of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Act 1989. I note that this is not the only agreement between the Minister of Finance and the Governor of the Reserve Bank. I note that the policy targets agreement is also a major agreement between the two parties. New Zealand First will address the policy targets agreement when the opportunity arises. 
The funding agreement the subject of today’s debate is something of concern to New Zealand First although we will support this motion. 
Clayton Cosgrove 
: Are you sure about that? 
CRAIG McNAIR 
: We do absolutely. We see the importance of supporting our Reserve Bank. But I want to express our concern at the amount of money being appropriated—$34 million commencing in July 2006 and then $43 million in 2009. The amount of money being appropriated to the Reserve Bank also represents the increasing amount of money that is going into our bureaucracy. New Zealand First is the only party that is willing to put its money where its mouth is on this issue. We are the only party that has a policy to reduce the number of MPs to 99. The people of New Zealand resoundingly want a reduction in the number of MPs and we are the only party that is supportive of that wish. National is screaming and saying that too much money is going into agreements like this one. But New Zealand First is the only party that is willing to say no to having 120 MPs. It represents the fact that when we have a concern about the amount of funding going into agreements such as this one we really mean it when we say we will address those issues. 
In closing New Zealand First supports the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Act funding agreement because we see the need to have a thriving strong transparent Reserve Bank. But like I said there are issues that New Zealand First will address when given that opportunity. We support this motion. 
Motion agreed to.
Gallagher Martin: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Gallagher Martin: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4674] 
MARTIN GALLAGHER (NZ Labour—Hamilton West) 
: 
 By and large I totally agree with the observations made by the previous speaker. I have to say how depressing it is to see the vision for public radio that is held by National and ACT in particular. If they had their way they would replace the independent New Zealand – owned public radio network that is beholden only to the people of this country and hand it over the media moguls in Ottawa Sydney London or wherever. 
That is their vision. I find it absolutely amazing that parties that presume to represent the people of this country would be happy to do that. I support Radio New Zealand and want to take this opportunity to thank it for the excellent work it does in reflecting the diversity the vitality and the richness of this nation. Well might people in ACT and the National Party sneer and jeer; frankly if members want a definition of patriotism then thank the people who work at Radio New Zealand who reflect the nation’s way of life to us. 
We want to get this bill through. I compliment the select committee on the work it has done and I compliment all those who work for our excellent public radio network.
Ryall Tony: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Ryall Tony: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:612;Page:8885] 
12.  
Hon TONY RYALL (NZ National—Bay of Plenty) 
 to the  
Minister of Police 
: Has he received any reports from the New Zealand Police on the effectiveness of the Proceeds of Crime Act 1991; if so what do those reports say? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Minister of Police) 
: 
 Yes. The Police has advised me that in the year to date eight restraining orders have been obtained to the value of $1.468 million. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Noting that cash is the lifeblood of criminal gangs can the Minister explain why drug-dealing gangs are escaping unscathed from the Proceeds of Crime Act when official documents from the Government show that so far this year not one dollar has been confiscated from a convicted drug dealer—not one dollar? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: I think that the member should have listened to the original answer. Can I say that since 2000 about $3 million has been obtained as a result of restraining orders. That will probably be the case this year as well. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Noting the Minister’s boast about collecting $3 million since 2000 and noting that $3 million was collected in 1999 alone is the Government’s support for decriminalising cannabis interfering with its decision making in dealing with drug-dealing gangs considering that the Government promised to do this within its first 6 months of office? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: Marijuana is not getting in the way of the police doing their job. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I want the Minister to give a little bit of a further answer to that. 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: The police do concentrate on serious crime. They take a very tough line on drugs of all sorts. In fact the police have just finished a major methamphetamine bust called Operation Choker where they have made approximately 30 arrests. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: If the Government is seriously reviewing the Proceeds of Crime Act will it consider the features of the highly successful Western Australian Proceeds of Crime Act where the police and the Parliament have got serious on dealing with the criminal underworld who are responsible for the P scourge infesting our country? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: I hope to have a report in 2 or 3 months on options that the police have. We are looking at all sorts of options— 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Four years. 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: Well Tony Ryall can wave but it is not much good. I can tell the House that we are looking at all options. Western Australia is not the only one—we are looking at Europe. We will come up with a law that is tougher than the 1991 Act that that member’s party introduced. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: I seek leave to table the statement of Mr Goff in 1999 that: “The Proceeds of Crimes Act has not worked effectively against organised crime and the public will not be impressed at the belated recognition of this.” 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:610;Page:7135] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The first comment from the Government on this issue was made by the Prime Minister. My question was asked of the Prime Minister; accordingly I want to know what it is doing in the name of the Minister of Justice. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It was transferred by the Government as the Government is entitled to do. Would the member please ask the question.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:615;Page:11504] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think there is some difficulty with your answer in that we are no wiser as to what the course of action should be for a member to take. In this circumstance if for example someone says that he or she intends to table Shakespeare and tables something entirely different from the document that was described what is the course of action that the House should take in respect of that member?
Dunne Peter: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Dunne Peter: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7955] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. Could you just check those figures as there is a general air of amazement around the Chamber at what you have just announced. 
Hon David Carter 
: We voted in favour. 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: National voted in favour? Well we have a long way to go yet. [ 
Interruption 
] The National Party voted in favour of it? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Yes. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 1 be agreed to 
. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. Before you took the Chair there was actually a split vote on the matter we were dealing with so we would like to cast two votes. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Well I expected you to do that.
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Urgent Question 
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Urgent Question 
[Volume:612;Page:8951] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I looked at the question and worked out whether it was an ordinary or urgent question. It did not appear to be one that could not be asked quite properly tomorrow.
Hartley Ann: Charities Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Hartley Ann: Charities Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19972] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: My advice is that they still have to be voted down. I now put the question  
That schedules 1 2 and 3 be agreed to. 
Schedules 1 2 and 3 not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 357 in the name of the Hon Judith Tizard to schedule 4 be agreed to.
Vote: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading 
Vote: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20178] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments recommended by the Health Committee by majority be agreed to. 
Ayes 111 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 8 
ACT New Zealand 8. 
Question agreed to.
Vote: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16042] 
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 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to.
[Volume:613;Page:9907] 
We were urged to consider keeping the opt-off provision. We called the Minister back to the select committee because we were very much concerned about the access into primary health records. All of us wondered how we could have a robust evaluation of cervical screening that looked only at the hospital record. It was crazy to be looking at just cytology results in a hospital and not getting access to some critical information held on the primary record. All of us to a T agreed that women needed to be aware of what the evaluators would have access to in their file. We called the Minister back for that very reason. She assured us about the access into that primary file which could be a midwifes’ file as well not just the file of a general practitioner or an obstetrician and gynaecologist. When we were given that assurance we were more than happy to support this bill as it has been reported back today. Subsequent to that I do believe some clinicians were concerned about informed consent.
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:20132] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 33 
New Zealand National 24; 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 amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 359 in the name of the Hon George Hawkins to clause 2 be agreed to.
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13026] 
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. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Marc Alexander to be agreed to: 
to insert the following new clause: 
70BSmoking 
Every prisoner in the interests of their health and well-being will be prevented from being permitted to smoke tobacco and/or other products.
Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:621;Page:16229] 
9.  
RON MARK (NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Police 
: Does he have confidence in the police commissioner; if so why? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Minister of Police) 
: 
 Yes because under this Commissioner of Police New Zealand’s crime rate is the lowest since 1983 and high resolution rates have been achieved. 
Ron Mark 
: Does the basis for the Minister’s confidence in the commissioner lie also in the fact that in the last fiscal year only 76 percent of 111 calls were answered within the stipulated 10 seconds and only 71 percent of priority one calls were attended within the 10-minute deadline; does that justify the $70000 pay hike the commissioner received? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: There were 495989 111 calls nationally and of course there were also other calls. The police have been improving their performance. They are not satisfied with it as yet nor am I. 
Tariana Turia 
: Under whose instruction did the Commissioner of Police approach Dr Pita Sharples who had served the New Zealand Police for 32 years as a cultural adviser and ask him to stand down from that position; and what was the reason? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: This is wide of the question. 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: I do not have the details of the reason but I suspect that it was because of his political role. 
Ron Mark 
: What confidence can the public have in a commissioner who allows traffic patrols to silently sit idle not responding to priority one calls; and is that not one reason why one-third of all people who have had contact with the New Zealand Police said they are not satisfied with the service as reported in the Minister’s own report? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: The New Zealand Police have been improving dramatically under this Government. The results are better. When one has a look at where crime was one sees that it is now down to the same rate as it was in 1983. That member should be congratulating the New Zealand Police. 
Tariana Turia 
: How long has it been Government policy that people having political involvement are asked to stand down from their positions more than a year out from an election? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: I do not have that information but I think the New Zealand Police acted correctly. 
Ron Mark 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek some guidance from you. The Minister said that the New Zealand Police’s performance has improved. These two pages show they have not met last year’s targets. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order. 
Ron Mark 
: The point of order is that he is misleading the House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No. That is a matter the member can raise with me by letter if he wishes. 
Ron Mark 
: I seek leave to table pages 44 and 45 which completely contradict everything the Minister just said. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table those pages. Is there any objection? There is.
Sowry Roger: General Debates 
Sowry Roger: General Debates 
[Volume:611;Page:8764] 
Hon ROGER SOWRY (Deputy Leader—NZ National) 
: 
 Over a number weeks I have raised the fact that members opposite change seats and yell and scream right through speeches. Several times the Speaker has ruled that he will clamp down on this but that appears not to be happening. In fact you yourself ruled that this was a robust debate and interjections could carry on so I intend to carry on. [ 
Interruption 
]
Ririnui Mita: Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Ririnui Mita: Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:627;Page:21862] 
Hon MITA RIRINUI (Associate Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 I thank the speakers for their contributions to what I might call a very minor part of the bill and I also thank Dr Wayne Mapp for his 10 minutes’ history lesson on matters totally irrelevant to it. As his colleague described he was probably being overly picky. I remind the previous speakers that basically the preamble is the summary of Nga Rauru Kitahi’s claim describing the tribe’s rohe. It is also a summary of the negotiations it entered into and agreed to with the Crown. 
In the Maori Affairs Committee we had a technical matter to deal with—and I think the ACT member Stephen Franks touched on it—in relation to the use of the Maori language. As a select committee—all the parties on it—we agreed that there were some matters in the Maori text that when translated we did not totally agree upon. We sought to amend them but because of technical reasons parliamentary counsel could not just make amendments; it had to remove the entire text. Following consideration by the committee the text was replaced with what was considered unanimously to be the correct text. So this is basically what the preamble is designed to do—as well as of course to include the title and commencement date of the legislation. 
I just needed to make that clear to previous speakers because this is one of those bills that did not receive a lot of controversy from other claimant groups that also share boundaries with the claimant group. For that reason I think that we are dealing with one of the very few pieces of legislation that we can describe as having a positive process and outcome. I did hear Dr Wayne Mapp refer to what he considered to be a clean-cut arrangement on the Tainui and Ngai Tahu claims. My recollection in having dealt with those two claims is that the preamble was not unlike the preamble in this bill. So let us say that they are all clean-cut.
Scott Lynda: General Debates 
Scott Lynda: General Debates 
[Volume:610;Page:7927] 
Dr LYNDA SCOTT (NZ National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 Under Standing Order 107 I believe that I was misrepresented by the last speaker. He said that I had said that the Aboriginal people had been treated well. I have never said that. What I said was that Aboriginals and non-Aboriginals in Australia consider themselves to be Australian whatever their ethnic background and we should consider ourselves to be New Zealanders.
Wilson Margaret: Points of Order — Chamber—Absence of Members 
Wilson Margaret: Points of Order — Chamber—Absence of Members 
[Volume:624;Page:19306] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the member please sit down. Mr Hide would you please leave the Chamber. You did not sit down when I rose and asked you to. Would you please leave the Chamber. 
Rodney Hide 
: This is a serious issue. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would you please leave this Chamber. 
Rodney Hide 
: Madam Speaker— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I will ask the Serjeant-at-Arms to assist you. 
Rodney Hide 
: This is hopeless. You will not let the cameras go you will not say what the rules are and you will not let anyone do their job in here. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: It is my job to rule on what is a point of order and to maintain order. 
Rodney Hide withdrew from the Chamber.
Vote: Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Vote: Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6844] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 32 
New Zealand National 25; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Noes 82 
Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Lindsay Tisch to clause 1 be agreed to: 
to omit the words “Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3)” and substitute the words “Fair Trading (Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill”.
Vote: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7781] 
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 8; United Future 8. 
Noes 61 
Labour 50; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Abstentions 1 
Hunt. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Lindsay Tisch to insert new clause 3A be agreed to: 
to insert after clause 3 the followingnew clause: 
3AApplication 
This Act shall apply for the period from 11 June 2003 to 6 August 2003.
Hereora Dave: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — In Committee 
Hereora Dave: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:624;Page:19088] 
DAVE HEREORA (Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Burton Mark: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
Burton Mark: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:15690] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Minister of Defence) 
: 
 I will just briefly comment. It is a pleasure to follow on from that member’s contribution. I agree with her. I think this is an area in which this House may well almost unanimously—if not unanimously—agree. We certainly should find agreement in supporting what is good legislation. 
This bill seeks to address a blight on our society. Anything that we in this House can do to fight that evil should be done. I commend members for the work they have done to progress the legislation and urge the House to support its rapid progress.
Power Simon: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
Power Simon: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17919] 
SIMON POWER (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I missed the vote from United Future and I ask that it be repeated. I apologise.
Pettis Jill: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
Pettis Jill: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
[Volume:624;Page:19190] 
JILL PETTIS (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I would just like to draw attention to the fact that on the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill voting there was an error on the part of the tellers in that we omitted to include Winnie Laban’s name. She had given us her proxy to vote in favour of the bill. I seek leave for that to be corrected. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There appears to be none.
Hide Rodney: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — Procedure 
Hide Rodney: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:620;Page:15845] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am actually not clear. I understand what Mr Prebble said and that Judy Turner said that she agreed with that. However I am interested to know whether Mr Sowry’s point of order described what Judy Turner intended to do as well. Could she clarify whether she agrees with Mr Sowry’s point?
Hawkins George: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 3 to Minister 
Hawkins George: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 3 to Minister 
[Volume:624;Page:19539] 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Minister of Police) 
: 
 I seek leave to correct an answer that I gave earlier today in response to question No. 3. I advised the House that apart from the files in the Counties-Manukau district there were 610 other files across the districts that remained unassigned. That number should have been 643.
Williamson Maurice: Railways Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Williamson Maurice: Railways Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19907] 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National—Pakuranga) 
: 
 I will take one quick call to ask the Minister to give an explanation—and this will be very cooperative I promise members. I thought that stuff would be covered under the Rail Network Bill in terms of the New Zealand Railways Corporation’s ability to close track when there were issues about safety such as bolts having been taken out. The Rail Network Bill would have allowed for that sort of regulation. If the clause is also needed in the Railways Bill as a belt and braces I will live with it because it seems a halfway reasonable explanation but we did not think it was necessary to bring it back into this bill. If the Minister could explain that would be fine.
Tisch Lindsay: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14332] 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: We do not mind the Chairperson calling Vote Social Development first but on the schedule presented to us that is the fourth vote under the Hon Steve Maharey. If the Chairperson wants to take Vote Social Development before the other three we will not object to it. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: We will proceed with Vote Community and Voluntary Sector.
Donald Rod: Retirements — John Lindell O’Sullivan 
Donald Rod: Retirements — John Lindell O’Sullivan 
[Volume:607;Page:4505] 
ROD DONALD (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 On behalf of the Green MPs I would like to join with other parties in the House to thank John for his enormous contribution not just to Parliament but also to the public service. John has been in charge of Parliament at a time of great change. He ensured its smooth transition to MMP which is no mean feat. Parliament is now more truly a House of Representatives and John had to find room for all of us when that change took place. I appreciate all of the services support and advice he has given us in the Green Party since we came to Parliament. Jeanette Fitzsimons and I are especially grateful for John’s assistance after the 1999 election while we were waiting for the special votes to return us to Parliament and for the way he helped our new MPs fit in at the time. 
I have enjoyed working with John on the Parliamentary Service Commission especially in sorting out the allowances and services for members of Parliament and I make a commitment to him that we will continue to progress that after he has gone. I wish John well in his official retirement and I say “official” because we will be continuing to see him around in his role of organising the 150th anniversary of Parliament. I was privileged to know John for many years before I came to this House and in that regard I would like to acknowledge my appreciation of his support for Annette in her commitment to social justice causes. I wish them both well in their retirement.
Prebble Richard: Urgent Debates Declined — Tertiary Education Savings Scheme—Government Policy 
Prebble Richard: Urgent Debates Declined — Tertiary Education Savings Scheme—Government Policy 
[Volume:624;Page:19374] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Like the rest of the House I am obliged to the Minister but if he is going to make that much of a statement why does he not make a ministerial statement and tell us what the real situation is? I am sure the whole House is just waiting to hear.
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8228] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 30 
New Zealand National 23; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Noes 81 
Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 8; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 125 in the name of the Hon Annette King to Part 9 be agreed to.
Adams Paul: Obituaries — Ronald Morrison Barclay Possum Bourne 
Adams Paul: Obituaries — Ronald Morrison Barclay Possum Bourne 
[Volume:608;Page:5163] 
PAUL ADAMS (United Future) 
: 
 New Zealand lost in the early hours of this morning one of its great sporting legends Possum Bourne. I move  
That the House acknowledge the contribution of Possum Bourne not only to New Zealand motor sport but also his role as one of our great sporting ambassadors 
. He will be very sadly missed by many New Zealanders. Our condolences go out to his wife and his family. 
Motion agreed to. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think it would be appropriate if we also observed a period of silence for Mr Bourne. 
Honourable members stood as a mark of respect.
English Bill: Points of Order — Official Information Act Requests—Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Points of Order — Official Information Act Requests—Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:620;Page:15543] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (National—Clutha-Southland) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have raised this matter with you and I would be interested in your consideration of it. I have asked the Associate Minister of Education a series of parliamentary questions relating to a recent decision of the Government about funding for Auckland University. The response I have had is that he will not answer the questions because there is an Official Information Act request on that matter. I know for sure that it was never Parliament’s intention that the Official Information Act would replace the parliamentary question process. They have different purposes and elicit different sorts of information in different ways. I would be interested in your ruling as to whether a Minister can quote the Official Information Act as a statutory barrier to answering parliamentary questions. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member wrote to me this morning. I got the letter and I have actually already replied to it and I have asked the Minister for an explanation. I will most certainly look at this; I regard it as a serious issue.