edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Dyson Ruth: Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dyson Ruth: Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18338. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for Disability Issues) 
:  
I want to take a brief call in the Committee stage of the Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill but before I do that I thank the Committee for agreeing to have this debate in one part.  
The reason I want to take a brief call is to say first of all I have two Supplementary Order Papers in my name and I want to ensure that members are aware of their production and their content. Given that every party has signed up to supporting them this is probably an exercise in futility because we have already ensured that. But I would like to do that formally and put it on the record. Supplementary Order Papers 234 and 235 will be voted on as part of the bill.  
The second reason I want to take a brief call is to acknowledge the comments made by Christopher Finlayson in the second reading in which he acknowledged the huge amount of work that has been undertaken by officials and others in order to prepare what is actually quite a small bill. I thank Mr Finlayson for his acknowledgment of the officials. A huge amount of work has gone into a very small bill. As well as the officials of course we have had disabled people themselves being part of the discussion from the very start of the process that is the reason why we have this bill. We have developed a convention that we want to ratify and the role of disabled people in actually developing the convention was not only a reflection of the principles of the Disability Strategy but also a role model and it changed the way the United Nations operated. I just want to put that on the record.  
The final point I want to make is that the reason I want my contribution to be short is that the people who are listening to this debate have a life and actually they want to spend some of it tonight by sleeping There is no debate to be had; every single party is in agreement with this bill. I urge its rapid progress.
Simich Clem: Speaker’s Rulings — Maori Affairs Committee—Attendance 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Simich Clem: Speaker’s Rulings — Maori Affairs Committee—Attendance 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18334. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Before I call the next speaker I will deal with a matter that was raised before the dinner break by way of a point of order. The Hon Tau Henare raised a point of order immediately before the Committee stage of the Biofuel Bill. I indicated that I would consider the matter and I have done so. The House has no cognisance of anything taking place before a select committee unless it is reported to the House. It is not in order for a member to raise a point of order in the House on a matter taking place in a select committee. If a committee requires a Speaker’s ruling it should resolve to obtain the ruling and the chairperson should do so privately. I refer the member to Speakers’ rulings 82/4-5 and 83/1-4. The member should raise his concern with the chairperson of the select committee. The Speaker has no authority to become involved. However I am advised that the meeting the member referred to is at 1 p.m. tomorrow. Nothing prevents a chairperson from calling a meeting at that time.
Chauvel Charles: Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Chauvel Charles: Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18339. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
: 
 I want to take just a brief call because Dr Hutchison made one comment that I really cannot let pass—and I am sorry to spoil what has been a multipartisan mood in the House. The Human Rights Act 1993 is excellent legislation but members opposite have no right to claim any credit for its pedigree as far as disability is concerned. The Minister of Justice at the time Doug Graham would not put disability in the Act as a ground of prohibited discrimination. It took the courage of Katherine O’Regan to put forward a Supplementary Order Paper to put that ground as well as that of sexual orientation into the Human Rights Act as the National Government of the time would not do it. Let it not be forgotten that that Supplementary Order Paper went through only due to the support of most members on this side of the House. 
I am sorry to say it but the debate I have heard tonight from members opposite is really disappointing. Those members still do not get it—this is not about trout and it is not about river boards. When there are people in the gallery whose quality of life is at stake it is really insulting to go on about the minutiae of bills like this. This is about their rights and those members need to get that. 
Part 1 agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 234 in the name of the Hon Ruth Dyson to Part 2 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to. 
Part 3 agreed to. 
Clause 1 agreed to. 
Clause 2 agreed to. 
The Committee divided the bill into the Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill and the Human Rights Amendment Bill (No 2) pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper235. 
Bill reported with amendment. 
Report adopted.
Brown Peter: Third Readings — 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Brown Peter: Third Readings — 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18312. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 When this legislation was first introduced New Zealand First was of the opinion that biofuels would be of some advantage to our environment but to what degree? Well frankly we did not know and we thought that some of the concerns we had would outweigh those advantages. 
The first thing we questioned was why we should be world leaders in this sort of issue and with this sort of legislation. But when we checked on that we found that we were not. The USA uses biofuels. Brazil uses biofuels and has been doing so according to Jeanette Fitzsimons for some 40 years. Canada most European countries Australia China India and Thailand have all used biofuels for quite some time as I understand. Frankly Gull is selling biofuels at this moment in Auckland. So we are not world leaders. 
Hon David Parker 
: And at less than petrol prices. 
PETER BROWN 
: And at a lower price than petrol—that is very interesting. So that addressed our concern.  
We were concerned about the effect on car engines and whether the engines would have to be modified. When we checked into that we found that most cars could easily run on a modest or low amount of biofuel be it diesel or petrol. So that was another hurdle that was overcome. We were concerned that bio-diesel might become clogged in engines in cold weather. We understand that tests have been done on that and they have come through quite well—no problems at all in fact. We were concerned that biofuels could get into aeroplane engines with ethanol in the tank—we know that ethanol absorbs water. But the Minister addressed that question in the House this very evening when I put it to him. We were equally concerned about water in outboard motors in leisure boats—that if they were compelled to use biofuels they would hit problems and malfunction and stop but the Minister addressed that in the House tonight. We were concerned that productive land would be used to grow crops on to make bio-ethanol but the Local Government and Environment Committee addressed that and amended the bill accordingly.  
We were concerned about the cost. We have heard figures ranging from 4c to 7c a litre on bio-petrol but the officials tell us that it ranges from 0.2c to 0.4c a litre. And if the price of oil goes up it could well make biofuels cheaper than normal ordinary petrol. That is the cost according to the Minister when spread over 4 years and if spread over a longer term it will be even less.  
So one by one all the concerns that New Zealand First had were addressed. We came to the conclusion that the advantages do outweigh the concerns so New Zealand First will accept that there are advantages to our environment from using biofuels. We understand that to develop them the industry needs certainty and it needs certainty to invest. The only way we can achieve that is by passing this sort of legislation. New Zealand First supports this legislation.
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18293. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 4 be agreed to. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 47; ACT New Zealand 2; Independent: Copeland. 
Schedule 4 agreed to.
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18299. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 50 
New Zealand National 47; ACT New Zealand 2; Independent: Copeland. 
Noes 69 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18292. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 47; ACT New Zealand 2; Independent: Copeland. 
Part 2 agreed to.
Mackey Moana: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Mackey Moana: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18291. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18300. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 47; ACT New Zealand 2; Independent: Copeland. 
Motion agreed to. 
Bill reported without amendment. 
Report adopted.
Peachey Allan: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Peachey Allan: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18285. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tamaki) 
: 
 In the debate on Part 1 of the Biofuel Bill a number of questions were put to the Minister of Energy that he chose more or less to slip over and not answer. That is fine but one thing I wanted to know applies equally to Part 2—although when I look at Part 2 I see some of the answer. What political imperative of the disintegrating Clark-Peters coalition is driving this sort of legislation through the House in the dying days of this Parliament? That question is as valid in the debate on Part 2 as it was in the debate on Part 1. What is the political imperative? What is the urgency? What emergency is this country facing that means that Part 2 has to be driven through Parliament tonight under urgency? What is the imperative? 
Let us look at Part 2. We see definitions of gasoline petrol and goodness knows what else. Then there it is straight in front of us: tax. We see clause 27 “Powers of component authorities to levy petroleum tax” and reference within it to local authorities’ fuel tax. We see clauses headed: “Assessment of tax” “Tax recoverable as a debt” “Penalty for late payment of tax” and “Effect on agreements of imposition or alteration of tax”. We first heard the answer in this Chamber when the Deputy Prime Minister—the Minister of Finance in the disintegrating Clark-Peters coalition—said that this legislation would cost New Zealanders money. At the end of the day is that not what it is all about? It is all about the rush of a Government that has taxed New Zealanders for 9 years to take the opportunity to throw some more taxes at the hard-working people of New Zealand. 
The Deputy Prime Minister did not even have the good grace—nor has the Minister—at least to acknowledge that the impact of Part 2 if passed in its current form will be no more than to steal food from the poor of the world. 
Hon Members 
: Ah! 
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: The socialist members of the failing Clark-Peters Government can sneer and shout. [ 
Interruption 
] The Minister for whatever from Christchurch can bellow out but it makes no difference. Part 2 will have two impacts. One will be to gather revenue for the Government—tax tax tax. I would have thought that members opposite rather than sneer and bellow across the Chamber would at least be respectful of the impact that this sort of legislation will have on the poor of the world. Some respect at least needs to be shown. 
Let us think about how much Part 2 will cost New Zealand. Officials have told us that an additional $60 million a year will be imposed on New Zealanders through the 1c per litre levy on fuel. 
John Carter 
: That’s just 1c. What about when it goes up to 4c?  
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: That is right I say to Mr Carter. This Labour Government and its coalition partners need to be very very sure that these additional costs are justified and I ask the Minister to address that question.
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18293. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 3 be agreed to. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 47; ACT New Zealand 2; Independent: Copeland. 
Schedule 3 agreed to.
Parker David: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Parker David: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18283. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister of Energy) 
: 
 Before I respond to Mr Brown’s query in respect of Eric Roy’s contribution I contrast that with the position he took in the first reading as recorded in  
Hansard 
 when he said he believed that biofuels are a part of our response to the whole issue of climate change—which seems a little inconsistent with the position Mr Roy has articulated now.  
In terms of Peter Brown’s question the member is correct that ethanol does mix with water so we can get water in ethanol in a way that we cannot with petrol because petrol would float on top of the water. There are issues that ethanol also cannot be used in some transport applications for reasons of safety—for example we do not want it in aircraft because of the propensity of water with ethanol to freeze. How is that avoided? These biofuel blends will not be taken down the lines that are used to deliver jet fuel and the like from the refinery to the major airports so there will not be cross-contamination there. How will it be handled at service stations for people who are filling up for example their outboard motor for a pleasure craft? It is likely that one pump will have a biofuel blend and one will not and there will be some labelling to ensure that people know which choice they are making.  
There are biofuels that are suitable for use in the fishing industry. Indeed I read an article recently about a vessel that has been specially built to run on bio-diesel. It was a fishing vessel that was launched recently in the Lyttelton region so there are some biofuel solutions there too.
Brown Peter: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Brown Peter: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18282. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I will start by responding to John Carter’s comments in regard to my earlier contribution. I outlined the concerns New Zealand First had with this kind of legislation at the time of the first reading and I outlined the solutions that had been put to us by various experts in the field of biofuels. We are quite happy with that. The growing of crops in Africa to sell to the global market is a concern but it is not a concern that New Zealand can address. If we can I would like to know how. If they are growing crops in Africa to produce ethanol to sell in America that is a concern but I am not sure how New Zealand can stop that. I would like to stop it but I do not know how we could. 
I do have a legitimate concern and I invite the Minister of Energy to respond to it. I understand that ethanol absorbs water. I see the Minister’s attention is taken elsewhere but I trust he is listening with his other ear. Ethanol absorbs water. The aviation industry and particularly the leisure boat and maritime industries use fuels that I think would be more effective if they did not contain ethanol because water can get in the fuel tanks of airplanes and it can certainly get into the fuel tank of the outboard motor of a leisure boat. It concerns me that if we are putting ethanol into these products and an airplane or a leisure boat fills its tanks with it there is a high risk that something will go astray—there will be water in the tank the ethanol will absorb it and the engine will stop. That is not too good an experience when one is a pilot in the sky and it is not particularly pleasant when one is in or outside the harbour in a small boat powered by an outboard motor. I invite the Minister to address my concern and tell us how this bill will prevent that problem from occurring. It is a genuine concern. I am an ex-mariner and my son is a pilot so I would like to know exactly how this bill will address that concern.
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18292. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 47; ACT New Zealand 2; Independent: Copeland. 
Schedule 1 agreed to.
Parker David: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Parker David: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18279. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister of Energy) 
: 
 One particular part of Mr Henare’s contribution does need to be repeated. It is his complaint that the compliance cost of an annual return on biofuel blends is a compliance cost on small business. There are approximately five oil companies in New Zealand. Those companies have a combined turnover that is measured in billions of dollars—[ 
Interruption 
] An annual return for companies that have a turnover of many hundreds of millions of dollars is not an onerous compliance cost. If that is the sort of hurdle that can never be overcome by a National Government as we move towards sustainability measures it is no wonder National members never do anything to advance sustainability issues. 
The reality is that oil companies will not introduce biofuels without there being a mandatory obligation for them to do so except for the occasional exception like Gull Petroleum. Probably even that company is introducing them only because it knew that a biofuels obligation was coming. When they do introduce biofuels because of this obligation they will be helping New Zealand to take a small step towards sustainability—not a large step. But that small step towards sustainability has to be taken before the subsequent larger steps can be taken. 
We have to update our infrastructure. In terms of the cost of that the advice from the officials to the select committee—on which the National Party was represented and its members did not accuse the officials of misrepresenting the facts—was clear that the infrastructural cost will be between 0.2c and 0.4c per litre of fuel if that cost is recovered over 4 years. It will probably be recovered over a longer period because as sure as anything it will last more than 4 years. The cost is minimal. In terms of the fuel itself it is not yet clear what the impact on price will be. Some of the tallow producers say that at current oil prices—at prices under US$100 a barrel—bio-diesel from tallow could be cost competitive with or indeed slightly cheaper than petrol. 
There is nothing wrong with this bill. The sustainability standards are world leading. That is not good enough for the National Party but of course it is not willing to lead on anything.
Robertson H V Ross: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Robertson H V Ross: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18272. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Part 1 includes clauses 3 to 17. The debate on Part 1 includes debate on schedules 1 and 1A.
Henare Tau: Points of Order — Maori Affairs Committee—Attendance 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Henare Tau: Points of Order — Maori Affairs Committee—Attendance 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18272. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I bring to the attention of the House that the chairman of the Maori Affairs Committee has called an urgent meeting of the Maori Affairs Committee tomorrow. Unfortunately not a lot of people on this side of the House can be at that meeting because it does not fall on the usual day that we meet and members of the select committee have other select committee business and other issues to attend to. I am wondering what the Speaker’s view of that would be. It would have been all right if we had had notice of the meeting but we did not have any notice; it has come out of the blue. Mr Deputy Speaker I would appreciate your view. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: My view is that I will digest the matter for the moment and give you an answer very soon.
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18300. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 47; ACT New Zealand 2; Independent: Copeland. 
Clause 2 agreed to.
Stewart Barbara: Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill Human Rights Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Stewart Barbara: Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill Human Rights Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18341. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) 
: 
 On behalf of New Zealand First I rise to support the third readings of the Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill and the Human Rights Amendment Bill (No 2). This legislation has been an absolute pleasure to be involved with. It is a really great occasion to see it passed tonight. We have to say thank you to the officials who have done the job very well and we appreciate that. 
We in New Zealand First believe that this legislation is a very positive move forward for the disability sector and is very worthy of support. Of course it has that support from all parties in this House. That universal support I must say is very rare and when attained it can actually be celebrated. It can be seen as the result of some very successful and useful discussions with all parties involved. I counted up the number of Acts that are affected by this legislation and it is 23 so it is quite a significant number. 
I also thank the Minister Ruth Dyson. Her advocacy and dedication has ensured that all parties now have a disability policy and are aware of disability issues. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: No. National doesn’t have a policy yet. 
BARBARA STEWART 
: It should have. I also thank the disability sector for following up this issue with politicians and for the work that it has done. It has not been easy and I can assure the sector that we have all learned much from it. So I thank the sector for continuing to work with us. 
We in New Zealand First believe that we have made a lot of progress with the recognition of equal rights for all people but we are aware that there is still quite some way to go. We are happy now that the legislation and the strategies are all in place. Now we need to move forward and we will be looking forward to monitoring progress in this area. 
Just in closing I would like to say that New Zealand First congratulates the disability sector on the work it has done to ensure that its voices have been heard. It is a big step forward and we are looking forward to further progress. New Zealand First supports this legislation.
Vote: Public Transport Management Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Public Transport Management Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18256. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Public Transport Management Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 47; ACT New Zealand 2; Independent: Copeland. 
Bill read a second time.
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18284. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 66 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 47; ACT New Zealand 2; Independent: Copeland. 
Part 1 agreed to.
Dyson Ruth: Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill Human Rights Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dyson Ruth: Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill Human Rights Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18340. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for Disability Issues) 
: 
 I move  
That the Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill and the Human Rights Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a third time 
. Passing these bills will enable New Zealand to proceed to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This action will reinforce our leadership role with other States in the promotion of human rights for all people and continue our leading role with regard to the convention in particular. Passing these bills will result in New Zealand being confident that our legislation our policy and our practice are not inconsistent with the convention and that its ratification can proceed. I appreciate the support of other parties in the House which has made this possible. The commitment of the whole House sends a clear signal about the value that must be placed on the inclusion of disabled people in our society.  
I commend these bills to the House.
Vote: Commerce Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Commerce Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18326. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Commerce Amendment Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 112 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand National 47; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independents: Copeland Field. 
Noes 4 
Maori Party 4. 
Bill read a second time.
Woolerton R Doug: Reserve Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Woolerton R Doug: Reserve Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18229. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
R DOUG WOOLERTON (NZ First) 
: 
 New Zealand First wholeheartedly supports the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill (No 3) and its intentions. To follow on from Mr Groser I say that we absolutely support the free market even though we sometimes criticise aspects of it. We recognise that regulation is needed to give confidence because this bill apart from anything else is about confidence. If we have a situation where those with the money are reluctant to lend it on to those who need it then that will stifle business and stifle the growth of this country. This bill will ensure that that does not happen by putting in place some light regulations around that area. 
Speaking personally I am one of those who are criticised in this country. My family coming from farming stock like to be able to see touch and walk over their assets rather than have somebody look after them. We have a stockbroker in the family by marriage and he is far wealthier than the rest of us so maybe that proves something. 
I think that credit ratings for the non-banking sector which this bill brings into play are important. I am in agreement with Mr Groser that it would be wrong for that sector to give the general public the idea that there was no risk and that they could rely absolutely on those ratings. However it is another step forward in terms of supplying more information to the public. We applaud that and think it is long overdue. If we have a situation where confidence goes down the tubes we will have a country that forever has a stop-start economy. We would not like to see that happen. One of the previous speakers spoke about this aspect of the financial sector being mainly New Zealand - owned. I just want to say that we should not take anything from that apart from the fact that there has been less regulation in this area than in others. 
New Zealand First looks forward to the day when more banks as opposed to the second tier of financial institutions are owned by New Zealanders. We would like to see our first tier of banking institutions owned by New Zealanders and we believe they could run them with aplomb dignity and absolute surety just as they do with Kiwibank and the Taranaki savings bank. The banks can make sure their depositors do not lose out. 
New Zealand First is keen to see the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill (No 3) progress so I will not take up any more time of the House. I say again that New Zealand First enthusiastically supports the passage of this bill.
Jones Shane: Reserve Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Jones Shane: Reserve Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18227. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon SHANE JONES (Minister for Building and Construction) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Finance 
: I move  
That the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill (No 3) be now read a third time 
. Tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker tena tatou katoa. E te matamua e Winitana kia ora. 
[ 
Greetings to you Mr Assistant Speaker and to all of us. Greetings to you Winston the elder statesman 
.]  
This bill establishes a framework for the regulation of non-bank deposit takers with the aim of promoting a sound and an efficient financial system. The bill will do this by establishing prudential standards and providing depositors with a clearer basis for distinguishing between lower risk and higher risk entities. The House has already spent quite some time on this bill this morning so I do not plan to go back over ground that has been well traversed. However I think it is important to note that this legislation is a significant step forward and should provide more confidence in a sector that has faced a number of challenges over the last year or so. It complements some important work that is being undertaken by the Minister of Commerce the Hon Lianne Dalziel. This is important legislation which has broad support from the House.  
I commend the bill to the House.
Vote: Third Readings — 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Third Readings — 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18313. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Energy (Fuels Levies and References) Amendment Bill the Customs and Excise Amendment Bill (No 5) the Tariff Amendment Bill (No 2) and the Local Government Act 1974 Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a third time. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independent: Field;. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 47; ACT New Zealand 2; Independent: Copeland. 
Bills read a third time.
Tremain Chris: Reserve Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tremain Chris: Reserve Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18226. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (National—Napier) 
: 
 I will take just a brief call given that we have covered most of the issues in the debate on Parts 1 and 2. I shall refer to the commencement date which is part of the three clauses we are debating. The commencement dates of many of the bills we are involved in are fairly superfluous but in this case the commencement date is very important. From the way that the bill was written these prudential changes would have been immediately imposed on a raft of non-bank deposit takers—depending on the definition. The Finance and Expenditure Committee in its wisdom sat back and saw that a heck of a lot of information would need to be churned through and provided to the Reserve Bank; a lot of detail is involved even in terms of the definition of which organisations fall under the auspices of the Act and which do not. So the commencement date was moved out by 18 months to make sure that the organisations that fall under this regime have time to find out exactly what they need to do to meet the requirements of the bill. This is a short call just to say that the select committee gave due consideration to making sure that the organisations captured by the bill have time to come to grips with what is required to provide the necessary information and to do so in a way that reduces their compliance costs. Thank you Mr Chair. 
Clause 1 agreed to. 
Clause 2 agreed to. 
Clause 3 agreed to. 
Bill reported with amendment. 
Report adopted.
Foss Craig: Reserve Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Foss Craig: Reserve Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18224. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CRAIG FOSS (National—Tukituki) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I wonder whether we could give the Minister in the chair the Hon Shane Jones a copy of the  
Hansard 
 for this debate so that he could address the questions we asked the previous Minister in the chair. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I call Craig Foss.
Fenton Darien: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Fenton Darien: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18292. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Turei Metiria: Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Turei Metiria: Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18332. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
METIRIA TUREI (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party is also very proud to be supporting the bill tonight in its second reading and through the rest of its stages. We are very pleased to have supported the Justice and Electoral Committee’s expediting the bill going through that process. It is very unusual for the Greens to do such a thing. There is no doubt that the community as a whole supported this legislation so there was simply no need to delay it any further. I think the Minister for Disability Issues has done a very good job in bringing this bill to the House in good time. Other members of the select committee and other members of political parties that support disabilities issues particularly the MMP parties of New Zealand First United Future and the Maori Party have done a great job in supporting the sector and this bill. I do not see any reason to make a meal out of it at this late hour. I am very pleased that people from the disability sector are in the gallery tonight to oversee our behaviour and hear our views on this bill but I know there are still more stages of the bill to proceed. I am very pleased that the bill is at this stage in the House. Kia ora.
Hobbs Marian: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hobbs Marian: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18190. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Marian Hobbs) 
: Let me take the member through it very slowly. The House is master of its own destiny. In this case a motion was put to the House while the Speaker was in the chair which said we should consider this Supplementary Order Paper 229 in conjunction with the bill. The House agreed to that. That is done. Otherwise it may not have been—but the House agreed to that. I will take no further points on that.
Vote: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18198. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 67 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 5; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 47; United Future 2; Independent: Copeland. 
Amendment agreed to. 
Clause 2 as amended agreed to. 
Bill reported with amendment. 
Report adopted.
Cullen Michael: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Cullen Michael: Biofuel Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18277. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Deputy Prime Minister) 
: 
 Given that Mr John Carter for the first time in about 5 years deigned to speak in the Chamber in some detail about a bill although it was not clear that he knew which bill he was talking about—I can help him in that case; it is the Biofuel Bill—let me just respond to a couple of points he makes. The first point very clearly following upon the rational guidance from Dr Nick Smith is that Mr Carter has joined the brigade of those who believe that one can save the planet at no cost and that it is possible to actually deal with global warming with nobody changing his or her behaviour with no relative cost changes at all and with nobody doing anything differently; all anybody needs to do is—what? It was not clear.  
We heard from Dr Nick Smith that every party supports the emissions trading scheme. That is not true actually. The ACT party does not. The ACT party now supports having a carbon charge but of course when the Government proposed a carbon charge the ACT party opposed a carbon charge. The Business Roundtable is being followed faithfully by the ACT party in that respect. But ACT supports the emissions trading scheme as long as there is no cost to anybody and nothing has to change.  
So what is the cost in this bill? Well the best estimate we have been told is 0.2c to 0.4c per litre. Petrol prices go up and down 3c or 4c a litre a day at the present time. They went down US$10 a barrel overnight. Dr Norman was almost in tears this morning thinking about the price of oil coming down. That is not supposed to happen. It went down by US$10 a barrel! That is equivalent to something like 6c a litre at the pump in New Zealand. So this bill will make a tiny difference on costs but unless there is a requirement to start moving we will never build the infrastructure for alternative fuels because that is where the cost occurs.  
The larger the usage of alternative fuels then the lower the cost per litre to use those alternative fuels because the infrastructure is being better used in that respect. And yes there are some problems with some alternative fuels but this bill lays out the method by which we address those matters to ensure— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: After it’s compulsory. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Oh after a period of months or so we will lay out those rules! So what Dr Smith says is that for the sake of 9 months we should do nothing. I wish his parents had said the same thing at a certain key moment in the past. We would all have been saved this kind of irrationality on matters of this sort.  
I say: “Get with the programme National!”. There is a real need to address the issues before us. When National members promote themselves as young and vigorous and a brighter future but on everything they are timid unable to move and afraid of change then this is not the brighter future that National is pointing to.
Vote: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18197. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 67 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 5; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 47; United Future 2; Independent: Copeland. 
Amendment agreed to. 
Clause 1 as amended agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 229 in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to clause 2 be agreed to.
Dyson Ruth: Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dyson Ruth: Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18326. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for Disability Issues) 
: 
 I move  
That the Disability (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Bill be now read a second time 
. This bill forms part of the steps that will enable New Zealand to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The Justice and Electoral Committee has examined the convention and recommends ratification of it. I am pleased that the committee also supports the bill being passed without amendment. I acknowledge all the other parties that have participated in this process and also the officials who have worked hard over many months on the preparation of this legislation. 
The bill does not in itself provide for ratification but instead removes some obstacles in existing legislation. Historically New Zealand has set a very high standard for ratification of international human rights treaties. We ratify when the Government is satisfied that our laws policies and practices are not inconsistent with the treaty at issue. Passing the bill will reinforce the Government’s confidence that New Zealand meets this high standard. 
The bill seeks to achieve two outcomes. Firstly it removes outdated and discriminatory provisions in some legislation that automatically disqualify a person from certain public or fiduciary offices on the grounds of being mentally disordered within the meaning of the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 1992 or being subject to a compulsory treatment order under that Act. Instead the bill proposes amendments that will ensure that a person’s capacity to perform a role or a function is able to be individually assessed. Secondly the bill clarifies the provision of reasonable accommodation under the Human Rights Act in certain areas where it is uncertain. This is not a new obligation. 
New Zealand has made strong progress in removing barriers experienced by disabled people living their lives. However much more work remains to be done before we can say we are a fully inclusive society. The convention is a useful tool to help us in this work and to ensure that all New Zealanders enjoy their rights of citizenship and lead highly valued and productive lives. Passing the bill will enable us to proceed quickly with ratification of the convention. I look forward to our building on our strong reputation as a human rights champion by putting our commitment into action. I commend this bill to the House.
Vote: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18197. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 67 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 5; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 47; United Future 2; Independent: Copeland. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to.