edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Chadwick Steve: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Chadwick Steve: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7966] 
STEVE CHADWICK 
: 
 I can clarify for that member that ships in New Zealand include those that are within the 12-mile limit. If they are within the 12-mile limit they are in the New Zealand zone. The Health Committee asked Ministry of Health officials to work with the shipping industry and come back with something that works. The result of that consultation with the industry is in the bill. I am very pleased we undertook that system. 
I want to show members some examples of the cleverness we tried to get around in terms of visual displays and I advise members in the Chamber to look at them. They are very very creative. We may get our heads around one visual display and find that acceptable but once we start getting the tilting of packages suddenly we find the impact of promotion of cigarette packets increases enormously. I thank the industry for working with us to come up with a definition that works so that the visual impact at point of sale is minimised. It is absolutely wonderful that the industry worked with us and that we found a compromise solution together. That is covered in my definition. 
With regard to cigar bars I am sure that the honourable member has wonderful intentions with his promotion on behalf of people who have gone to him about cigar bars. Cigar bars that have a liquor licence and have paid employees are included. We have taken the consistency of argument right across the board to include places that have liquor licences and workers. That is to protect the 10500 hospitality workers in this country from the effects of second-hand smoke.
Cunliffe David: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Cunliffe David: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4302] 
DAVID CUNLIFFE (NZ Labour—New Lynn) 
: 
 The member alleged that I drew the select committee report into the debate. I did not. I referred to the select committee process but not to the report. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: That is a debatable matter. The member has sought leave and it is up to the House to decide whether it is granted. Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.
Catchpole Brent: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Catchpole Brent: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8516] 
BRENT CATCHPOLE (NZ First) 
: 
 I am looking at schedule 1 “Conditions that may attach to casino licence” and as Judith Collins asked what on earth do salary arrangements and personal practices have to do with the casino licence? It is nothing more than putting in the demands of the unions and others who have obviously influenced this Labour Government so heavily. Those things have no place in the licence. Similarly when one goes on to look at schedule 1A one sees that the job description once again has no place in that particular schedule. The job description should be handled purely by the authorities that are running the casinos; it should not be put into the bill. 
If we then turn to schedule 3 clause 4 we see that the Minister has a huge influence. He is able to remove the presiding member from the board just by supplying a written notice to that person and then sending a copy to the board. In other words he can just snap his finger and that board member is gone. 
R Doug Woolerton 
: What does that letter say? 
BRENT CATCHPOLE 
: I think the letter would probably start with the words “Dear John”. The schedule does not state that the Minister has to give any clear reasons for removing the member. If he does not agree with the board member’s political thoughts then he can get rid of him or her—just like that. 
Lindsay Tisch touched on schedule 5 with regard to the Racing Act and mentioned the support in that schedule for the racing clubs. It assists racing clubs by giving them a bit more of a level playing field and New Zealand First supports that part of the schedule for that reason. That is one area that New Zealand First is strongly supportive of because it is a huge industry for New Zealand. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: You have to be a punter to be a New Zealand First member. 
BRENT CATCHPOLE 
: One does not have to be a punter to enjoy racing and to enjoy watching the racing industry. One can enjoy that just by watching the races on television or by going to the track and having a wonderful time there—as many people do. New Zealand First is very supportive of the racing industry we support any measures that will help the racing industry and we particularly support any measures in this bill that will help the racing industry. We will support that section of the bill. 
I will wind up by thanking the Minister for his assistance earlier on when he allowed us to come and chat with him about this bill. We thank him very much but we found that there were issues in the bill that meant that we just could not give our overall support to it.
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:620;Page:15965] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 During this question the Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations stated that the 1992 transfer between the Minister of Conservation and the TuwharetoaMaori Trust Board of the Lake Taupo lake bed also included the airspace above the lake. I did not pursue that matter because I thought it was worth looking at the deed before doing that. We have now been able to locate a copy of the deed and the question I would have asked the Minister was where in this deed such a transfer of airspace was made. I seek the leave of the House to ask that question of the Minister now. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is.
Burton Mark: Urgent Debates — Solomon Islands—Deployment of Police and Military Forces  
Burton Mark: Urgent Debates — Solomon Islands—Deployment of Police and Military Forces  
[Volume:609;Page:6711] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Minister of Defence) 
: 
 I rise in anticipation of the fact that the member is going to table a document that I was genuinely led to believe does not exist—if it does in advance I apologise. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: There is no objection. 
Document not tabled.
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3820] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 48 
Noes 67 
Amendment not agreed to. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Labour 52; Green Party 7; United Future 8. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Katherine Rich to clause 31 be agreed to: 
to amend subclause (1) by adding the following paragraph: 
(c)inform the board how the Government intends to give effect to Labour’s 1999 broadcasting policy to work towards TVNZ retaining a greater proportion of its dividend so that it might fund a greater amount of local content.
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8099] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 3 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Part 3 as amended agreed to.
Hunt Jonathan: Speaker’s Rulings — Responses to Oral Questions 
Hunt Jonathan: Speaker’s Rulings — Responses to Oral Questions 
[Volume:609;Page:6544] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before I call questions for oral answer I undertook on Thursday to give consideration to the situation where a Minister promises to get back to a member with information in response to an oral question. In these circumstances the Minister has made a promise that should be honoured as soon as possible. This is the same as following up on a written reply—see Speaker’s ruling 130/2. I am not going to try to define what is a reasonable time in terms of providing the following information as each case will vary. 
 Members who do not get a follow-up reply should approach the Minister first. They can raise the matter with me if they feel the Minister has not responded within a reasonable time but I want to warn members that I will not entertain complaints about whether the answer is satisfactory. Whether members are happy with a reply or unhappy with it is not a matter of concern to me. I will regard as a very serious waste of my time and the time of the House any attempt to raise the adequacy of a follow-up reply.
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17880. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
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.
Visitors — United Kingdom—Leader of the House of Commons 
Visitors — United Kingdom—Leader of the House of Commons 
[Volume:621;Page:16781] 
Wednesday 10 November 2004 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
United Kingdom—Leader of the House of Commons 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that the Rt Hon Peter Hain Leader of the House of Commons United Kingdom is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed and accorded a seat on the left of the Chair. 
The Rt Hon Peter Hain accompanied by the Hon Dr Michael Cullen entered the chamber and took a seat on the left of the chair.
Prebble Richard: Animal Welfare (Restriction on Docking of Dogs' Tails) Bill — Procedure First Reading 
Prebble Richard: Animal Welfare (Restriction on Docking of Dogs' Tails) Bill — Procedure First Reading 
[Volume:621;Page:16369] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (ACT) 
: 
 It has been drawn to my attention that there is a possibility that somebody may wish to abstain from voting. I therefore wish to amend the leave I sought so that in the event of a member wishing to abstain the abstention be recorded and also the name of the member. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member has sought leave. Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There appears to be none.
Brash Don: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brash Don: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:627;Page:22172] 
Dr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I asked the Prime Minister whether she was aware of the $1.7 billion write-off required to the Crown’s balance sheet on account of loans already made to students as a consequence of her Government’s announced policy of wiping out interest on those loans. She has not answered that question.
Vote: Families Commission Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Families Commission Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:614;Page:10310] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 60 
New Zealand Labour 52; United Future 8. 
Noes 58 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Resource Management (Energy and Climate Change) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Resource Management (Energy and Climate Change) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11334] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand Labour 52; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 54 
New Zealand National 25; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 8; ACT New Zealand 7; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Part 2 agreed to.
Copeland Gordon: Income Tax Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Copeland Gordon: Income Tax Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12097] 
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
: 
 I was somewhat surprised suddenly to find Muriel Newman talking about correspondence with Michael Cullen and subsequent Treasury advice in the context of the Income Tax Bill. However I think I probably should take a right of reply just to cover some of the misinformation that is contained in the remarks she made. 
First of all let me say I think it would be a very sad day if people came to this Parliament with completely predetermined positions on tax issues. If we are endeavouring as I am to create a situation in New Zealand where we do not have investment distortions where we do not have tax-driven investment coming into the economy in the wrong places—into places that are not productive—versus places where according to market signals that money should be going then it is quite right and proper and responsible for a member of Parliament to raise those issues with the Minister of Finance. 
I might say to put the record straight that United Future has no policy in relation to bringing in a capital gains tax on residential rental properties. I do think though that capital gains tax on share schemes on share investments on various trust funds and on various insurance policies should be revisited if we are to get some kind of level playing field and to avoid investment distortions in terms of where people put their money. 
I would like to make something else clear. The claim has been made not only in this Chamber but also to the media and to property investors in this country that somehow my letter to the Minister of Finance resulted in the Inland Revenue Department deciding to undertake a review of depreciation rates. The release given under the Official Information Act to the ACT party made it very clear that that was already on the Inland Revenue Department’s work list prior to my correspondence coming in and I do not think the two are directly connected in any way. 
It is important to clear up that little matter and to say that the problem however still remains—that in my view we do have great investment distortion in this country. New Zealand’s economy and its companies could benefit if the existing anomalies around capital gains tax on investments on the stock exchange could be removed so that we could see a greater proportion of the nation’s savings going into that area. That is just a brief comment but I thought it would be good to clarify those issues. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 195 in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to.
Hartley Ann: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Hartley Ann: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:627;Page:21971] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The House is in Committee on the Appropriation (2005/06 Estimates) Bill. The Standing Orders provide for 8 hours of debate on the estimates. Each member may have no more than two speeches of 5 minutes on each vote. The estimates debate should be relevant to the Government’s current spending plans as contained in the Estimates of Appropriations. 
As each vote is reached a question will be put that that vote be agreed to. If it is the wish of the Committee I will put the question on groups of votes by a Minister until a vote is reached that members seek to debate. A separate question on that vote will then be proposed from the Chair. Should it be the wish of the Committee a question may be proposed on two or more related votes for the purpose of debating them together. At the conclusion of the 8 hours of debate any remaining votes and the remaining provisions of the bill will be put as one question. 
The Government indicates which votes are available for debate. I understand that all votes are available in order of seniority of Ministers commencing with the Speaker’s votes. Copies of the order of votes to be considered are available on the Table.
Peters Winston: Motions — Speaker—No Confidence 
Peters Winston: Motions — Speaker—No Confidence 
[Volume:620;Page:15736] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. As a matter of clarification that is my very point. If the motion has not been debated within a certain time it goes off the Order Paper. Given that I believe this is a matter of urgency I want to know how it can be debated in this democracy in which we live.
Hartley Ann: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Hartley Ann: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:8996] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Members have concern about a ruling that I have given on how members should be addressed. This has been referred to three times in recent speeches. Members are concerned that my ruling is too rigid and that it does not allow for robust debate and humour.
Vote: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17776. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 36 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 9. 
Motion agreed to.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:609;Page:6197] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 No I think that if the member goes through it again he will find that all of those are time-limited debates except the Committee stage of the New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill. 
Hon Roger Sowry 
: That did not answer the question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there urgency? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I said “No” right at the start.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:610;Page:7137] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I really have gone quite a long time on this matter and I have made my ruling. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: I seek leave to withdraw this question and ask it tomorrow rephrased. I will be asking the Prime Minister whether she made those statements does she have confidence in her judgment in making them or was she unconscious at the time? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No the member knows full well that there is no need to seek leave; he just does not ask the question. If he does not ask the question we will move to question No. 4.
Peters Winston: Points of Order — Question No. 4 to Minister 13 May 
Peters Winston: Points of Order — Question No. 4 to Minister 13 May 
[Volume:608;Page:5679] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That last comment you made which I am sure you meant to be some sort of assurance to us is totally illusory. If we came to you and said that the Prime Minister was not telling the truth you would have said: “But she has already explained that in the House at 7.30 and therefore your breach of privilege charge has to be denied.” That is what you would say so the comment that we could come to you is simply not one of any substance whatsoever. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No. It would have had to be raised with me before 2 o’clock today.
Ogilvy Bernie: Education (Trustee Ineligibility) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Ogilvy Bernie: Education (Trustee Ineligibility) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:623;Page:18520] 
BERNIE OGILVY (United Future) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of United Future to support the referral of the Education (Trustee Ineligibility) Amendment Bill to the Education and Science Committee. We have some very good reasons why we want to do that. United Future believes that every mum dad or parent in the country would probably want to see this bill looked at and I would hope that every teacher would also want to see it go to the select committee to be examined. So we are not alone in that proposal. We do think that this is a good bill in the sense that it is technical very specific and one that I would call a good amendment bill. Some amendment bills are so convoluted that one wonders what their point is. This bill is very very good very specific and to the point. 
I note that we are dealing with trustees and most of us are well aware that the role of a trustee is a very solemn duty. Therefore if that is true then we should at least make the criteria for selection as high a bar as we can set. The bar will always be inadequate because of whatever human nature produces in different people but if we can help in that process—and I believe that this bill is a step in the right direction—then we are helping trustees to be selected as well as to be the best trustees for their community which after all is what they are there for. 
We support this bill as well because of the wording in it that people have to be convicted of specified sex offences. If the offences were not specific or if the offenders were not convicted we would not be happy to see this measure go through as a bill. But the offences are also as everyone notes against the most vulnerable in our society—that is children or young persons. I just remind the last Green Party speaker that the clean slate legislation does not apply to that kind of activity. I think that she may well have been aware of that but she raised it and my mind was sort of taken off the subject by that. 
Also there are other reasons why this legislation should go to the good Education and Science Committee. There are some things that we could even add or insert in the bill because of the things that are coming into the House or that are in the House right now. For instance under the Films Videos and Publications Classification Amendment Bill we are dealing with child sexual abuse images. That may well be something we could dovetail in and I think that the chair who is nodding his head can see some point in that. The work being done on those issues by international organisations as well as New Zealand ones—like End Child Prostitution Child Pornography Child Sex Tourism and Trafficking in Children for Sexual Purposes New Zealand and others—has highlighted something in a current bill and we need to tie that into this legislation. So there are some areas where the select committee will have room to move. 
United Future will vote to send this bill for further examination to the select committee.
Peters Winston: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Peters Winston: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7711] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I know this matter relates to the declaration of the results of the election in August last year. If you have a careful look at the E9 for 2002 you will see it shows that New Zealand First came third. That means we are third in this House on a matter like this. This convenient arrangement whereby sometimes they let us speak and sometime they do not is simply wrong. I do not think any fair-minded New Zealander—or fair-minded parliamentarian for that matter—thinks that the priority you have just given is fair and right. We are the third-biggest party in this Parliament—we will soon be the second and not long after that the first—but in the meantime we are happy to go third but we are not happy to go fourth or fifth. It is just not right. I want a ruling on this. We have put up with it and frankly we have had enough of it because it is not fair and it is not right. We always understood from the day MMP began in this House in 1996 that that was the way the order of speakers would go. We cannot have Mr Dunne sometimes taking priority and sometimes not. If the Labour Party does not want to use its numbers it cannot do a deal and circumvent the electoral results of 2002.
Tizard Judith: Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Tizard Judith: Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14244] 
Hon JUDITH TIZARD (Minister of Consumer Affairs) 
: 
 Just for the sake of clarity I suggest that the Committee looks carefully at clauses 4 and 5 where the nature of mercenary activities and of mercenaries is defined. For a person to come within the bill and the convention he or she would need to take part in hostilities in an armed conflict. The focus is on those people actually taking part in hostilities in a combative role. Many of the examples given by Mr Mapp today seem very unlikely to fall within the definition of the bill. For example the security guards for the Prime Minister would clearly fall outside the definition of a mercenary. Clause 5(3)(d) specifically states that people participating in “domestic policing duties or other lawful activities of a similar kind involving the protection of individuals or property” are not mercenaries. 
In addition persons who are providing assistance with reconstruction and with the training of local armed forces provided they were not undertaking a combative role would not be covered. Of course a person who would be defined as a mercenary also has to be recruited within New Zealand or elsewhere in order to take part in hostilities and armed conflict has to be taking part in hostilities for private gain and has to be promised or paid by or on behalf of a party to the armed conflict material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar rank and functions. So to work with another armed force if that was in the normal course of for example working in Oman would be perfectly legal and would not be defined as being a mercenary. 
There is a lot of nonsense being talked by members of the Opposition. That is their job but I wish they would stick to the legislation.
Hunt Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hunt Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:612;Page:8966] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I want to say to members of Parliament this. The first act of a Speaker when appointed by the House is to go to the Governor-General and ask for the right of free speech. That is where this starts from. Mr Prebble is completely correct; there has to be free speech in this Parliament. That does not mean that everything said in this Parliament is wise or is accurate but we have free speech in this Parliament and it must never be denied. Whatever the privacy rule is outside the House it does not apply here. It is up to members to judge whether they observe privacy rules. There is no House rule that says that members cannot release private information. The House decides whether to admit documents by leave not the Speaker. If members think it is inappropriate they can object; sometimes they do sometimes they do not. Just to sum up this is a matter of political conduct by members. There is no procedural issue arising.
Vote: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:613;Page:9833] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Electricity and Gas Industries Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 81 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 8; United Future 8. 
Noes 27 
New Zealand National 21; ACT New Zealand 6. 
Bill read a first time.
Pettis Jill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Pettis Jill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:611;Page:8452] 
11.  
JILL PETTIS (NZ Labour—Whanganui) 
 to the  
Associate Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage 
: How is the Government assisting New Zealand’s professional regional Maori community and emerging arts organisations? 
Hon JUDITH TIZARD (Associate Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage) 
: 
 This year Creative New Zealand received an extra $11.6 million spread over 4 years to continue its support for well-established professional arts organisations emerging organisations regional arts initiatives Maori arts community arts and contestable project funding. The Government also increased the Royal New Zealand Ballet’s funding by $2 million over the next 4 years to continue the company’s artistic and audience growth. This support builds on the cultural recovery package which has seen a strong confident New Zealand voice emerging in the creative sector. 
Jill Pettis 
: What reports has the Minister received as to how that funding increase is benefiting New Zealand’s professional arts organisations? 
Hon JUDITH TIZARD 
: With the recent increase Creative New Zealand has been able to offer more funding to several of the 38 recurrently funded organisations it supports. This means more New Zealand works will be created more New Zealanders will see that work and more New Zealanders will have work in the creative industries. For example the National Business Review New Zealand Opera plans to stage another national tour following its extremely successful tour this year as well as to develop new New Zealand operas while Taki Rua Productions reports that next year it will be able to extend its tour of a New Zealand play in te reo Maori.
Vote: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Vote: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20287] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 2 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 110 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 9 
ACT New Zealand 9. 
Schedule 2 as amended agreed to.
Donald Rod: Points of Order — Visual Aids 
Donald Rod: Points of Order — Visual Aids 
[Volume:606;Page:3354] 
ROD DONALD (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have been reflecting on Gerry Eckhoff’s use of visual aids during question No. 8. While many members of this House found it humorous at the time I would ask you and other members of the House to consider whether it is acceptable for Mr Eckhoff to encourage and indeed incite people to shoot a member of Parliament. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The illustration used by the member could not be said to have inconvenienced members. That relates to physically obstructing members in their seats so it was not out of order under Standing Order 109. Whether it was appropriate to use the illustration is really a question of taste and not one that the Speaker can rule on.
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Government Transport Package Foreshore and Seabed Human Rights Review Tribunal Decision Points of Order 
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Government Transport Package Foreshore and Seabed Human Rights Review Tribunal Decision Points of Order 
[Volume:614;Page:10724] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I heard the Minister say quite clearly that decisions had not yet been made. I presume there must be another meeting of Cabinet before decisions are made. I heard that statement made very very specifically by the Prime Minister.
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:624;Page:19440] 
7.  
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour—Waitakere) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What steps is he taking if any to promote innovation within the export education industry? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Targeted innovation funding will provide leverage in developing New Zealand’s offshore education presence. Our projects include a joint project with a Chinese university development for teachers of English in China a foundation studies programme in Viet Nam and a virtual field trip to New Zealand for years 8 to 10 students in Asia. 
Lynne Pillay 
: Has the Minister received any advice on the value of the international education industry to the New Zealand economy? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Yes. The Education New Zealand Trust estimates that the direct revenue from international education amounts to approximately $2.2 billion annually. But of course it also exposes New Zealanders to a wide range of cultural and intellectual exchanges increases diversity and develops networks that will be a huge long-term boost to New Zealand.
Hide Rodney: Wine Bill — Second Reading Procedure In Committee Third Reading 
Hide Rodney: Wine Bill — Second Reading Procedure In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9481] 
RODNEY HIDE (ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I did not want to interrupt Mr Carter but while he was on his feet the Government whip Mr David Benson-Pope gave me an obscene gesture with his finger by sticking his finger up then pretending to push it up his nose. I took grave exception to that and I suggest that he be asked to withdraw and apologise.
Gallagher Martin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Gallagher Martin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:624;Page:19695] 
5.  
MARTIN GALLAGHER (Labour—Hamilton West) 
 to the  
Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade 
: What is the Government doing to secure the release of Hamish Sands’ body and to determine the cause of his death? 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade) 
: 
 I would like first to express my condolences to the family of Mr Sands for his death. The UN team sent to Bouake has positively identified his body and has arranged a visual examination by a surgeon from the French hospital. We are currently working through a number of different channels to encourage the New Forces group to release the body and that has been promised. We have made arrangements when it happens for the body to be transferred to Abidjan for a full autopsy to determine the cause of death. We then hope to repatriate the body in line with the wishes of the family. 
Martin Gallagher 
: What specific steps is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade taking to achieve that? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: To secure access to the body and its release the ministry has been working through the United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross as it has been from the start of this matter. Both organisations have had direct contact with the New Forces group and both have been very helpful. We have also made our representations through the United Kingdom Canadian and South African diplomatic channels as each of those countries has posts on the Ivory Coast. I put on record for the information of the House our thanks and the thanks of Mr Sands’ family for the ready cooperation of those countries and their assistance at every point that they have been asked for it.
Vote: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:619;Page:14829] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Noes 110 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 239 in the name of Sue Kedgley to add new subparagraph (iii) to clause 195(2)(b) be agreed to.
Tisch Lindsay: Social Security (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Social Security (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:624;Page:19578] 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. From where I was sitting it looked as though Muriel Newman was seeking the call. She was standing. You were not looking around. I am sure the member wished to take a call on this part and I ask that she be given the opportunity to do so. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I am happy to do that but I did not hear the member call. 
Dr Muriel Newman 
: I did call. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I am happy to do that.
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16964] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 66 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Progressive 2. 
Noes 54 
New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Motion agreed to.
Hereora Dave: Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) — In Committee 
Hereora Dave: Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9539] 
DAVE HEREORA (Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Cullen Michael: Points of Order — Foreshore and Seabed Bill—Availability of Supplementary Order Paper 
Cullen Michael: Points of Order — Foreshore and Seabed Bill—Availability of Supplementary Order Paper 
[Volume:621;Page:16875] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 This matter has been dealt with by the Business Committee which the member has been at over the last two meetings and he is well aware therefore of what I am talking about. I will be seeking leave to table a copy of the bill as originally introduced with the amendments as in the Supplementary Order Paper as if those amendments had been adopted by the select committee. The Committee of course will still consider the Supplementary Order Paper as the actual document in front of it but the purpose of that redline copy would be to enable members to see and to read the amendments more clearly in relation to the substantive provisions— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: What? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Dr Smith may find that disgraceful but I think most members would find it will actually help in understanding the bill.
Peck Mark: Medicines (Specified Biotechnical Procedures)  Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Peck Mark: Medicines (Specified Biotechnical Procedures)  Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20711] 
MARK PECK (Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 That speech came from a member who was going to join a campaign against dihydrogen monoxide—water. Because dihydrogen monoxide had killed lots of people she thought it was a dangerous substance and when she found out the substance was water she was a little mortified. At least she had the good grace to acknowledge the slip. Anybody who listened to that speech would have thought that some shock horror legislation was being put through the House designed to visit all sorts of unnaturals upon the populace at large. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is simple legislation which the member totally misrepresents. It actually extends the moratorium on xenotransplantation from 30 June 2005 to 31 December 2006. At the very least the member could have welcomed that. She could do that by way of interjection if she wished to. In fact what the extension allows to happen is what the co-leader of the Green Party—which Ms Kedgley belongs to—agrees with which is for an evidence-based approach to be set up for use with regard to xenotransplantation. The member forgets to tell us when she talks about diabetes that there are two types of diabetes one of which can be treated only by some form of treatment like this. I find it incredible that Ms Kedgley can go on in the way she has about this particular technology and science without the slightest bit of understanding of them. That explains why she was going to join a campaign to ban water. She just simply does not understand. 
Fortunately most of the Parliament does understand that this particular bill serves a purpose for now and that we will let the scientists get on with working out whether xenotransplantation is a safe procedure to use in humans over time.
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:622;Page:17297] 
3.  
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
 to the  
Minister of Labour 
: Is he satisfied that the Department of Labour sets a good example for New Zealand employers; if so why? 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Acting Minister of Labour) 
: 
 On behalf of the Minister of Labour who I note has recently been taking his labour and productivity responsibilities very seriously I consider that the department does perform well as an employer in a number of ways. But as a result of changes to its structure currently being implemented it will perform even better. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Has the Acting Minister seen the Department of Labour’s 2004 staff satisfaction survey which shows only 39 percent of the department’s staff were happy with their workplace; if so what does she think that says about the department’s ability to develop policies that promote its stated goal of helping New Zealanders to “achieve higher-quality working lives”? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: Yes I have seen the survey and I commend the department for providing an opportunity for its staff to comment honestly on issues that they are facing at work and to give their views about the department as a place to work. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Does she still have confidence in the Secretary of Labour Dr James Buwalda in light of the fact that during his watch the morale of the department’s staff has plummeted the Community Employment Group’s grants allocation regime has been so badly discredited that it has been disestablished and its whitewash of the “lying in unison” scandal has been roundly discredited by the Ombudsman; if so why? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: Yes I do have confidence in James Buwalda and I note that even in the area of the department with the highest turnover of staff it would only be comparable to the turnover of members of the National Party caucus if the  
New Zealand Herald  
poll were the election result.
Mackey Moana: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — Second Reading 
Mackey Moana: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:619;Page:14741] 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
: 
 I am very happy to rise to support the second reading of the Electricity and Gas Industries Bill. I think it is fair to say that like most members of Parliament electricity is probably the single issue I get the most correspondence about—in particular correspondence around the issues of consumer protection competition and security of supply. It is for that reason that I am proud to support this bill. In particular I indicate the work that has been done by the Commerce Committee. 
This bill puts in place the decisions made by the Government this year about electricity supply security and about the governance of the electricity and gas industries. The bill will provide certainty and stability in the electricity and gas markets. It contains measures to promote the security of supply to give consumer protection competition and to improve the governance of the electricity and gas industries. In particular I draw attention to the fact that this bill updates the Electricity Act to reflect the establishment of the Electricity Commission. The Electricity Commission has come under fire from opponents to this bill but I believe that through information provision and contracting it will be able to meet its primary objectives. I think the commission will have to resort to using its regulation-making powers very infrequently. This bill is a good step in the Government’s commitment towards greater energy efficiency and a sustainable energy future and I look forward to its passage through the House.
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:612;Page:9254] 
3.  
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What steps is he taking to encourage new teachers with student loans to stay in the teaching profession?
Tabling of Documents — Prostitution Reform Bill 
Tabling of Documents — Prostitution Reform Bill 
[Volume:609;Page:6543] 
Tabling of Documents 
Prostitution Reform Bill 
LARRY BALDOCK (United Future) 
:  
I seek leave of the House to table this petition which unfortunately cannot meet the requirements but does contain the signatures of 4624 individuals who are urging this Parliament to reject the Prostitution Reform Bill. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11242] 
Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill 
Instruction to Committee 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Health) 
: 
 I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill that it take the bill part by part. 
Motion agreed to.
Kedgley Sue: Points of Order — Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate Parliament Building—Media Access Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate 
Kedgley Sue: Points of Order — Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate Parliament Building—Media Access Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate 
[Volume:624;Page:19715] 
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I would like to speak in support of this particular point of order. It was my bill that members were almost able to complete— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: What is the point of order? 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Seek leave. 
SUE KEDGLEY 
: I seek leave basically to support Nick Smith’s seeking of leave that time be made available on Wednesday 11 May to make up time so that members can complete the business that was intended to be completed last night. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.
Prebble Richard: Points of Order — Access to Chamber—Media Obstruction  
Prebble Richard: Points of Order — Access to Chamber—Media Obstruction  
[Volume:616;Page:12432] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is a different point of order and I would like some guidance from you. As you are no doubt aware because everybody is the Government has announced that it is going to table foreshore and seabed legislation tomorrow. Under our Standing Orders as they are at the moment that means the vote will not be held until after the Easter adjournment. At the moment whether the Government has a majority is causing some concern to the market. I want to know whether it is open to me as a member at the moment the bill is tabled to seek leave for the matter to be debated and voted on immediately—as used to be the case when bills were introduced. Can I do that tomorrow? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member is entitled to seek leave at any time as he knows. 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: I give notice that tomorrow I am going to do that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is fair enough. The member knows he can do that. I am sure he is aware of the Standing Orders. There are only about four or five people in this Chamber who know a great deal about the Standing Orders and he is one of them.
Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — Instruction to Committee 
Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — Instruction to Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16017] 
Employment Relations Law Reform Bill 
Instruction to Committee 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Employment Relations Law Reform Bill that it take the bill part by part. 
Motion agreed to.