edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Gallagher Martin: Children Young Persons and Their Families Amendment Bill (No 4) — First Reading 
Gallagher Martin: Children Young Persons and Their Families Amendment Bill (No 4) — First Reading 
[Volume:618;Page:14456] 
MARTIN GALLAGHER (Labour—Hamilton West) 
: 
 I will not be long and I thank the Chair. I commend this bill. I look forward to it going to a select committee. I have heard quite a bit of the contribution tonight. I take the opportunity to pay tribute to the wonderful people in Hamilton who are working with youth offenders the fantastic leadership of our police and certainly the police officers working in the whole youth-offending area whom I have spoken to. They are doing a wonderful job. Recently I attended a major meeting of all the people involved with our various youth-offending teams in the city. What a wonderful job they are doing and I take this opportunity to place on record my profound respect for those people who really walk the talk. This bill is a positive step forward. I look forward to it going to a select committee. I look forward to the probing and analysis that the select committee will do which Judy Turner and others have alluded to. I look forward to this bill being returned to the House in due course.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:608;Page:5983] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I can tell those bodies that they can proceed. There is no reason to believe the canards put about by some that the Government will grab the money. There is no intention to move such an amendment.
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17566] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 46 
Adams(P) 
English(P) 
Peters J (P) 
Tisch  
Alexander(P) 
Franks(P) 
Peters W (P) 
Turner(P) 
Baldock (P) 
Gudgeon(P) 
Power(P) 
Wang(P) 
Brash(P) 
Heatley(P) 
Prebble(P) 
Williamson(P) 
Brown(P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Roy (P) 
Woolerton(P) 
Carter D (P) 
Jones  
Ryall(P) 
Worth(P) 
Carter J (P) 
Key(P) 
Scott(P) 
Catchpole(P) 
Mapp(P) 
Shirley(P) 
Coddington 
McNair(P) 
Smith L (P) 
Collins(P) 
Newman(P) 
Smith M (P) 
Connell 
Ogilvy(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Dunne(P) 
Paraone(P) 
Stewart (P) 
Teller: 
Eckhoff(P) 
Perry(P) 
te Heuheu(P) 
Copeland  
Noes 74 
Anderton(P) 
Duynhoven(P) 
Laban(P) 
Simich(P) 
Ardern(P) 
Dyson (P) 
Locke(P) 
Sowry(P) 
Barker(P) 
Ewen-Street(P) 
Mackey J (P) 
Sutton(P) 
Barnett(P) 
Fairbrother(P) 
Mackey M (P) 
Swain(P) 
Benson-Pope  
Field(P) 
Maharey(P) 
Tamihere(P) 
Beyer(P) 
Fitzsimons(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Tanczos(P) 
Bradford(P) 
Gallagher(P) 
Mallard(P) 
Tizard(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mark(P) 
Turei(P) 
Burton(P) 
Gosche(P) 
McCully(P) 
Turia(P) 
Carter C (P) 
Goudie(P) 
O'Connor(P) 
Ward(P) 
Chadwick(P) 
Hartley(P) 
Okeroa(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Choudhary(P) 
Hawkins(P) 
Parker(P) 
Wong(P) 
Clark(P) 
Hereora (P) 
Peck(P) 
Yates (P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Hide(P) 
Pettis  
Cullen(P) 
Hobbs(P) 
Pillay(P) 
Cunliffe(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Rich(P) 
Dalziel(P) 
Horomia  
Ririnui(P) 
Donald(P) 
Hunt(P) 
Robertson (P) 
Donnelly(P) 
Kedgley(P) 
Robson(P) 
Teller: 
Duncan(P) 
King(P) 
Samuels(P) 
Hughes  
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 314 in the name of Richard Worth to omit clause 30 be agreed to.
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:613;Page:9934] 
11.  
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour—Waitakere) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What steps is he taking to ensure that international students studying at New Zealand secondary and composite schools receive a high standard of pastoral care? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Under the Code of Practice for the Pastoral Care of International Students schools must provide a range of support services for foreign fee-paying students including advice on accommodation courses welfare facilities and health services. From next year the Education Review Office will start assessing in-depth the extent to which the code has been implemented including through inspecting a random sample of home-stay placements. 
Lynne Pillay 
: How will the Education Review Office go about monitoring the implementation of the code? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The Education Review Office will monitor the implementation of the code through its regular education reviews and will include information from the new in-depth investigation in its regular reports on individual schools. By mid next year the review office will also produce an education evaluation report on the pastoral care of foreign fee-paying students based on information and recommendations from those individual reports. 
Bernie Ogilvy 
: In the light of the focus of the primary question on pastoral care for school students will he give serious consideration to United Future’s proposal to extend the Social Workers in Schools programme to all decile 1 and 2 schools? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: It is not a matter I have immediate responsibility for. If the member’s social services spokesperson took it up with my colleague the Minister for Social Development and Employment that would be useful. I might say that if the economy continues to be damaged by the sabotage work of Pansy Wong in China the ability to do that will not exist. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member knows he is out of order in saying what he said and commenting in that way on a member of Parliament. I want him to withdraw and apologise. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I withdraw and apologise. I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I know it is very unusual to ask for an explanation or reason in this area but when a member of Parliament is deliberately undermining the New Zealand education industry in China that is in my opinion sabotage. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order and the member knows that.
Hunt Jonathan: Offices of Parliament—Presentation of Address to Governor-General 
Hunt Jonathan: Offices of Parliament—Presentation of Address to Governor-General 
[Volume:617;Page:12539] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I wish to advise the House that the Address agreed to by the House relating to the alterations to the appropriations for the 2003-04 financial year for Vote Audit Vote Ombudsmen and Vote Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment and the appropriations for the 2004-05 financial year for those votes was transmitted to Her Excellency the Governor-General on Thursday 8 April 2004.
Mackey Janet: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mackey Janet: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:616;Page:11998] 
7.  
JANET MACKEY (Labour—East Coast) 
 to the  
Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment (CYF) 
: What is she doing to ensure multiple-agency care placements are managed effectively? 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment (CYF)) 
: 
 Last week I had the pleasure of launching a memorandum of understanding between the Department of Child Youth and Family Services and five social service agencies that will ensure that no multiple placement to the same caregiver occurs without the consent of all the agencies involved with that caregiver. 
Janet Mackey 
: How does the memorandum of understanding affect those who are placed in care? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: The memorandum of understanding sets down clear procedures to safeguard the interests of the person being placed in care and preserves the integrity of an existing placement. It also ensures that information is shared between agencies and improves the support offered to caregivers which in turn will have a positive impact on the quality of care. 
Katherine Rich 
: How will this initiative if at all reduce the over 5300 children on the unallocated case list waiting to see a Department of Child Youth and Family Services social worker and can she assure the House that as a result of the present review of that department no child will be deleted from the unallocated case list without personal contact being made with the child or the family first? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: That supplementary question gives me the opportunity to correct an incorrect figure that was given to the select committee this morning. The figure of around 5300 was not correct; it is around 4700. In answer to the second question that member received a categorical assurance this morning from the acting chief executive from the acting general manager social worker operations and from me as Minister that there is no intention no directive and no action to delete inappropriately from the unallocated cases. It is irresponsible of that member to continue to allege something that she received an assurance this morning is not correct. To repeat something that is not true does not make it any more true. 
Judy Turner 
: Does the Minister agree that this multi-agency accord is a good start but it simply does not go far enough to address the more imminent concerns of Department of Child Youth and Family Services staff and other agencies that there is a dire shortage of caregivers available in the first place such as those required for 17 children in Southland as at 6 March this year; if not why not? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: Yes I do agree that this memorandum of understanding will not directly address that. But it will certainly offer more support for caregivers and reduce the confusion and overlap that there is currently between multiple placements.
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:17055] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 10 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 109 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment to the amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 302 and Supplementary Order Paper 304 in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen to Part 2 be agreed to.
Vote: Social Security (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Social Security (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:15820] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Social Security (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 101 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 18 
Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; Maori Party 1. 
Bill read a first time and referred to the Social Services Committee.
Vote: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:16357] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 4 
New Zealand National 4. 
Noes 112 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 20; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 267 in the name of the Hon David Benson-Pope to insert new clause 80A be agreed to.
Hide Rodney: Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill — First Reading 
Hide Rodney: Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:613;Page:9772] 
RODNEY HIDE (ACT) 
: 
 It is good to hear Mr Peters speaking up. The ACT party too will not be supporting this bill. It is a bit rich that the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Mr Phil Goff is sponsoring this bill and talking about all the damage that mercenaries do around the world when he is a man who was quite happy to go to the bunker with Yasser Arafat cuddle up to him hold his hand and present a smiling face to the world then have the—well one cannot say it can one? 
Simon Power 
: The temerity. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: He has the temerity to come back to New Zealand climb on his little soapbox and say: “Here is what New Zealand is going to do to sign up to an international convention.” Are the leading First World nations signing up to this I ask Mr Power? I do not think so. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: What about Italy and Belgium for instance? 
RODNEY HIDE 
: What about the United States and the UK? They always run off to their mates. So we say “No” and we say “Shame on Mr Phil Goff.” who is quite happy to be photographed with international terrorists then come down here and climb on his high horse. The ACT party is against this bill.
Tisch Lindsay: Budget Debate 
Tisch Lindsay: Budget Debate 
[Volume:626;Page:21113] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Maori Party did not take a call so there should be another spot left which I am claiming. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I thank the member for raising that. Jill Pettis took up the slack as it were. 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: On the number of speaking spots that were presented to us by the Labour whips’ office this morning I point out that there is still one spot available.
Vote: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7729] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 69 
Labour 50; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Abstentions 1 
Hunt. 
Bill read a first time.
Vote: Third Readings 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Third Readings 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17791. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 4) be now read a third time 
. 
Ayes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 36 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Maori Party 1. 
Bill read a third time.
Personal Explanations — Question No. 5 
Personal Explanations — Question No. 5 
[Volume:612;Page:9034] 
Personal Explanations 
Question No. 5 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Associate Minister of Health) 
: 
 In response to question No. 5 today my wording was that the Accident Compensation Corporation has a contract with Federated Farmers and that may have implied that there is direct payment to them. In fact the situation is that there is a strategic partnership between the Accident Compensation Corporation and Federated Farmers. No direct payment goes to them.
King Annette: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading 
King Annette: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:621;Page:16464] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Health) 
: 
 I move  
That the NgatiTuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill be referred to the Maori Affairs Committee for consideration that the committee have the authority to meet at any time during a sitting of the House except during questions for oral answer during an evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Order 194(1)(b) and (c) and that the committee report finally to the House on or before 1 March 2005.
Shirley Ken: Points of Order — Assistant Speaker Simich—Ruling Questioned by Member Ahmed Zaoui—Birthday 
Shirley Ken: Points of Order — Assistant Speaker Simich—Ruling Questioned by Member Ahmed Zaoui—Birthday 
[Volume:622;Page:17422] 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Whip—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You asked that the balloon be removed. I take it you meant removed from the Chamber— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Removed from my sight. 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY 
:—because could it not burst and cause some alarm? It is still here in the Chamber.
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:20281] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 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. 
Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Hodgson Pete: Legislation (Incorporation by Reference) Bill — Instruction to Committee Second Reading Instruction to Committee Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Hodgson Pete: Legislation (Incorporation by Reference) Bill — Instruction to Committee Second Reading Instruction to Committee Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:19792] 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Commerce) 
: 
 I move  
That the Legislation (Incorporation by Reference) Bill be now read a second time 
. I would like to express my thanks to the Government Administration Committee for its swift consideration of the bill. 
At the appropriate time I intend to table a Supplementary Order Paper to clarify the bill’s amendments to the Copyright Act. The Supplementary Order Paper will clarify that if the Crown owns the copyright in a work and that work is incorporated by reference in another work listed in section 27(1) of the Copyright Act then the copyright in the first mentioned work is removed. Where however the copyright in a work is owned by a person other than the Crown and that work is incorporated as just described the copyright remains unaffected. 
As members will know the bill amends the Building Act the Commerce Act and the Health Act to remove the requirement that where material is incorporated by reference under those Acts those with delegated or statutory responsibility must make that material such as building standards in the case of the Building Act available free of charge on the Internet. “Incorporation by reference” is a term used to describe a mechanism that gives legal effect to provisions contained in a document without repeating those provisions in the text of the legislation that incorporates that document. 
The amendments proposed in this bill endeavour to strike a balance between facilitating access to material incorporated by reference and the legitimate commercial interests of the owners of copyright and standards and of other material that may be incorporated by reference. The amendments in the bill will ensure that the Government is not expropriating or infringing the copyright of other parties both in New Zealand and overseas that the standards development process in New Zealand is up to date with international best practice and that the development of joint standards by Australia and New Zealand can continue. 
As all parties know following consultation over the last week it is the Government’s intention to make further amendments to the Building Act by way of a further Supplementary Order Paper to this bill. Those amendments are technical in nature and relate to omissions inconsistencies or clarifications. Substantive amendments are however proposed in section 363 to address practical issues that have arisen during the implementation of the Act. At the appropriate time I will move a motion that the Committee of the whole House have the power to consider and if it thinks fit adopt the amendments set out on that Supplementary Order Paper 361. 
I commend this bill to the House.
Points of Order — Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3)—Referral of Supplementary Order Paper 246 
Points of Order — Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3)—Referral of Supplementary Order Paper 246 
[Volume:619;Page:15093] 
Points of Order 
Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3)—Referral of Supplementary Order Paper 246 
Hon DAVID CARTER (National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move member’s notice of motion No. 3 in my name without debate. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is.
Robson Matt: Ministerial Statements — Iraq—Military Action 
Robson Matt: Ministerial Statements — Iraq—Military Action 
[Volume:607;Page:4292] 
Hon MATT ROBSON (Deputy Leader—Progressive) 
: 
 The Progressive party deplores the fact that a military juggernaut is descending upon the people of Iraq. In March 2002 I had the honour to be the New Zealand Minister at the development and financing conference in Mexico. The powers that are now descending on Iraq could not find the money to meet the needs of the people of Iraq and all the other millions of people around the world who need action on underdevelopment. Now they have money in abundance to take a military juggernaut against the very people who symbolise the suffering of people throughout the world. At that very conference were the assembled dictators who receive money arms and financing for the oppression of their people. Also at that conference were the representatives of Israel which at this very moment is continuing to remove the Palestinians from their lands and which has been armed with weapons of mass destruction and is carrying out terrible crimes against the people of Palestine. 
History has a way of bringing down harsh judgments. As I have said many times in this House a judgment upon those responsible for putting Saddam Hussein in power and for giving him the weapons to oppress his own people and to launch war against Iran is now coming home to haunt those who have launched this war against Iraq. 
I can only say that we must redouble our efforts in Government to put New Zealand at the forefront of genuine disarmament and genuine development. Firstly I ask this House to consider giving support to the Government to get in behind the Government of South Africa which has asked that the world urgently consider linking disarmament with development. Secondly I ask that this House get behind the genuine effort to make sure that out of this conflict the people of Iraq will have a genuine Government that will be independent and able to use its national resources for its people and not for the interests that have their military forces now invading Iraq.
Chadwick Steve: Immigration Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Chadwick Steve: Immigration Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:611;Page:8214] 
STEVE CHADWICK (NZ Labour—Rotorua) 
: 
 Obviously the previous speaker was also keen to add his support to this bill and he is anxious to speak. This has been a long-awaited piece of legislation. The country is waiting for it our electorate is waiting for it and I am pleased to support it.
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates — Department of Child Youth and Family Services—Report  
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates — Department of Child Youth and Family Services—Report  
[Volume:613;Page:9939] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received applications from Katherine Rich Judy Turner and Dr Muriel Newman under Standing Order 376 to debate the report of the chief social worker of the Department of Child Youth and Family Services into the deaths of Olympia Jetson and Saliel Aplin. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility and notwithstanding that the House held an urgent debate on 4 November on a baseline review of the department I am prepared to accept the applications. The first application was lodged by Katherine Rich and I therefore call on her to move that the House take note of a matter of urgent public importance.
Cullen Michael: Income Tax Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Cullen Michael: Income Tax Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12096] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Revenue) 
: 
 On the member’s last point—yes I can assure him about that. On the other point he raises I will look into that and come back to him on the question of the subsidiary because I do not have that information to hand. I thank the member and indeed all colleagues for their cooperation on this bill. It would otherwise have been impossible to get this bill through and the huge amount of work that has been done by successive Ministers the department the Parliamentary Counsel Office and others would really have been for nothing.
Vote: Crown Minerals Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Crown Minerals Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7622] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Motion agreed to.
Chadwick Steve: Wine Bill — Second Reading Procedure In Committee Third Reading 
Chadwick Steve: Wine Bill — Second Reading Procedure In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9501] 
STEVE CHADWICK (Labour—Rotorua) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Maori Purposes Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Maori Purposes Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4831] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 16 
Noes 101 
Amendments not agreed to. 
ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Stephen Franks to clause 5 be agreed to: 
to amend new clause 5AC by inserting in subclause (2) before the word “if” the words “if the presiding officer or member holding office under clause 5(1) consents and”.
Connell Brian: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
Connell Brian: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16181] 
BRIAN CONNELL (National—Rakaia) 
: 
 By popular demand I am back to finish the story I was telling last night. The woman in question who had been through a targeted selection interview process did not get the job. She took an action against the company which failed in the Employment Court. So she went to the Human Rights Commission and said: “I’m a woman I didn’t get the job and I’ve been discriminated against on the basis of my sex.” The commission like a rabid dog grabbed the case and charged. To cut a long story short she took an action which went something like this: she had no justification she admitted privately that she had no justification and the commission said that it did not think she had any justification but by the way it did not think that that big company would like that sort of adverse publicity so why did it not sit down and write out a little cheque. We ended up writing out a small cheque for $220000. 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: How much? 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: It was $220000. So the moral of the story is that people should grab one of the Minister’s forms and go out and make themselves a fortune. That is why we do not like Part 4. We do not like either point that the Minister in the chair Paul Swain is suggesting. [ 
Interruption 
] I do not know what that Minister is doing in calling out; he has no idea what is in this part. I suggest he keeps very quiet. I cannot give the Minister a better example than that as to why he should rethink that component. The company paid $220000. That is what took place. She admitted as did the commission that she had no justification whatsoever. She had been treated fairly and her grievance was a complete and utter fabrication. That will be replicated by others who will simply say they do not like the boss. They will be given a choice whether to take step (a) or step (b) and they will be able to make themselves a small fortune. Surely the Minister cannot believe that is right. It is a huge injustice. I ask the Minister to take a call and explain that away.
Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH 
Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH 
[Volume:607;Page:4360] 
Government Communications Security Bureau Bill 
Instruction to CommitteeCWH 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Social Services and Employment) 
 on behalf of the 
 Prime Minister 
: I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Government Communications Security Bureau Bill that it take the bill part by part and consider any schedules as one question. 
A party vote was called for on the question that the motion be agreed to. 
HEATHER ROY (ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Can I withdraw ACT’s vote? We are voting in favour of the motion. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: That is out of order. 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The member might want to seek leave to have the vote put again. That would be the tidiest way of proceeding. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Does the member seek leave for the vote to be put again? 
HEATHER ROY (ACT NZ) 
: 
 Yes I would like to seek leave to do that. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member is seeking leave. Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There appears to be none. 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I do not think there is any necessity to have a party vote. Just an oral vote would tidy the situation up. 
Motion agreed to.
Tisch Lindsay: General Debates 
Tisch Lindsay: General Debates 
[Volume:611;Page:8551] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The member quoted from a list that he said he had here. I ask that he table that document concerning Dr Smith.
Mallard Trevor: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
Mallard Trevor: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17949] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Associate Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Committee divide the bill into the Public Finance Amendment Bill the State Sector Amendment Bill (No 4) the Crown Entities Bill and the State-Owned Enterprises Amendment Bill 
 divided into Public Finance Amendment Bill State Sector Amendment Bill (No 4) Crown Entities Bill State-Owned Enterprises Amendment Bill  
pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper 316 
. 
A party vote was called for on the question that the motion be agreed to.
Hide Rodney: Speaker’s Rulings — Questions for Oral Answer—Ministers' Replies 
Hide Rodney: Speaker’s Rulings — Questions for Oral Answer—Ministers' Replies 
[Volume:620;Page:15445] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 If Ministers felt that consistent with the public interest they could not give an answer it would be helpful if they could actually say that rather than give half an answer. If they said they could not answer a question because under Standing Order 370(1) that would be inconsistent with the public interest then we would know where we stood. That is the first point. 
The second point is that it does seem to me Mr Speaker that you are required to judge the answers given at least in one respect. Standing Order 370(1) requires that Ministers must answer the question subject to being—Michael Cullen can shake his head but that Standing Orders states: “An answer that seeks to address the question asked must be given …”. Mr Speaker you are at least required to rule that when a Minister gives an answer he or she has sought to answer the question. The concern that members on the Opposition side of the House have is that Ministers are not seeking to answer questions; in fact they are seeking every device known to mankind not to answer them. I accept that to give an answer could be as in the example given by Dr Cullen inconsistent with the public interest. A Minister should be upfront and say he or she cannot answer that question because of the public interest. However if that test does not apply then the requirement under the Standing Orders is that each and every Minister should seek to answer the question. That is the rule and that is what we expect the Speaker to uphold.
Vote: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Vote: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9017] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 43 
New Zealand National 25; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5. 
Noes 71 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 3 be agreed to: 
to insert the following new subclause: 
(1AA) to allow for a politically appointed highest court in this country.
Stewart Barbara: War Pensions Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
Stewart Barbara: War Pensions Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4527] 
BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) 
: 
 Like my colleague I note that this bill has been considerably delayed. It has taken a very long time to come through this House and New Zealand First believes that this bill should commence as soon as possible. 
Clause 2 agreed to.
Hughes Darren: Budget Debate 
Hughes Darren: Budget Debate 
[Volume:617;Page:13424] 
DARREN HUGHES (Junior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That this debate be now adjourned. 
Motion agreed to.
Peck Mark: Electoral Matters Bill — Second Reading 
Peck Mark: Electoral Matters Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:621;Page:16751] 
MARK PECK (Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 Unfortunately that speech in support of the bill was somewhat churlish I thought and it did not deal with the issue of explaining why the National Party has opposed the Supplementary Order Paper without even knowing the full details. I would have thought that any mainstream political party would at least take the opportunity to learn what was in the Supplementary Order Paper before making a caucus decision about it. It certainly flies in the face of logic and tends to leave absolutely open the issue of what National would do in the unlikely event that it ever became the Government of this country again because the Supplementary Order Paper is a significant improvement on the very hodgepodge arrangements that exist amongst local authorities at this particular point in time. We deserve to hear quite a bit more about the National Party position in respect of this. It simply defies logic and I think that those members will find themselves somewhat exposed in this debate on the matter. 
If the Minister is forced to pull the Supplementary Order Paper because of lack of support at the end of the day it will be on their heads. We will then go back to the hodgepodge whereby some local authorities say signs can be up for 3 weeks and some local authorities say they can be put up 3 months in advance and they regulate size. 
I think that given Lindsay Tisch’s position as campaign organiser for the National Party on one occasion he knows the stupidity that situation causes for those who have to organise the campaign for the party vote. It is a sensible Supplementary Order Paper and frankly I find the National Party’s position absolutely scurrilous.
Brown Peter: Motions — Floods—Eastern Bay of Plenty 
Brown Peter: Motions — Floods—Eastern Bay of Plenty 
[Volume:618;Page:14294] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 On behalf of my colleagues in New Zealand First I endorse the sentiments expressed in the Hon Tony Ryall’s motion and echoed by Janet Mackey. It is a dreadful disaster and it is absolutely beyond belief in many respects. It says much for the people of that area that they are showing such effort and determination to right things. On behalf of New Zealand First Party members and our members of Parliament I wish them all the very best in their endeavours.
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4249] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 4 be agreed to. 
Ayes 71 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 47 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 12; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Part 4 agreed to. 
The Committee divided the bill into the Taxation (Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill the Taxation (Annual Rates of Income Tax 2002-03) Bill the Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill and the Child Support Amendment Bill pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper 60.
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 2) Questions for Written Answer 
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 2) Questions for Written Answer 
[Volume:606;Page:3339] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There is.
Visitors — Australia—Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs House of Representatives 
Visitors — Australia—Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs House of Representatives 
[Volume:617;Page:12539] 
Tuesday 4 May 2004 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Australia—Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs House of Representatives 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that members of the Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs from the House of Representatives of Australia led by the chairperson the Hon Bronwyn Bishop MP are present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish the committee be welcomed.
Hereora Dave: State Sector Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Hereora Dave: State Sector Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7324] 
DAVE HEREORA (NZ Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Mapp Wayne: Points of Order — Presentation of Report of Privileges Committee 
Mapp Wayne: Points of Order — Presentation of Report of Privileges Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7638] 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (NZ National—North Shore) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I want to move on now. We have been discussing this for 20 minutes and I think that is a reasonable go. It must be some new point of order. 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: It arises directly out of your statements. You said that Mr Duynhoven has not broken the law. The Privileges Committee has stated in a report which has been tabled today that based on the advice of the Solicitor-General there is a breach of section 55 of the Electoral Act. That is the breach of the law that engages you. The concern is this: your statement gives rise to the view that you do not think that there is a breach of the law—that is a breach of the Electoral Act by Mr Duynhoven—and we on this side of the House then think that you therefore must have prejudged the situation. I would suggest Mr Speaker you need to reassure this side of the House that that has not occurred given the clear finding of the Privileges Committee.
Carter John: Naming and Suspension of Member 
Carter John: Naming and Suspension of Member 
[Volume:608;Page:5288] 
JOHN CARTER (Senior Whip—NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. We now find ourselves in a peculiar situation. I know we are dealing with a procedural matter but it is past 6 o’clock which is the time to lift the House. My understanding of the Standing Orders is that even though we are dealing with a procedural issue when 6 o’clock comes we must lift the House and we cannot continue on. I think we will find ourselves in a bind if we try to deal with a matter now past the time that the Standing Orders say the House should lift. I know it is a peculiarity but I think we are in a conundrum.
Kedgley Sue: Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Kedgley Sue: Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11284] 
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
: 
 Originally this bill was called the Health (Screening Programmes) Amendment Bill. Thankfully that title has been changed to the Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill. The reason it was called the Health (Screening Programmes) Bill was that basically the provisions of the bill were to have applied to any screening programme that exists or would exist in the future. In other words under the original way the bill was worded we would have had the whole issue of informed consent undermined in all screening programmes. There would have been no informed consent for any person who was on any screening programme in New Zealand. 
As other members have mentioned we have managed to get that changed but the problem is that officials have stated that there is an intention to move a generic amendment—probably under the Public Health Bill which is due to be introduced to Parliament later this year—to extend the provisions of the bill that we are about to pass to any other screening bill. That will mean that any screening programme in the future will have the same provisions as this bill. It will mean that the whole issue of informed consent for health-care records will be undermined in any future screening programme. 
In other words any person who is on any screening programme be it the breast-screening programme a prostate-screening programme—if one is set up—or a vaccination-screening programme will have Hobson’s choice in having to surrender informed consent and having to allow any evaluator to access his or her very sensitive general practitioner records without that person’s consent. 
Although I am very very pleased that we managed to get the title changed and thereby not extend the provisions of this bill to other screening programmes at the moment let me assure members of this Committee that officials have stated that their intention is to extend the provisions to all other legislation. That ought to be a huge concern for the medical profession as well as for all New Zealanders because as I was saying doctors take the Hippocratic oath which dates back to the 4th century BC in which they swear to keep confidential all patient records and everything they learn about a patient. 
The New Zealand Medical Association states that doctors must preserve absolute confidentiality about everything they know about their patients and that is the basis of the general practitioner - patient relationship. Mark my words that confidential relationship will be eroded by the provisions of this bill and by the intention to extend those provisions to other screening programmes. 
Progress reported.
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17576] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 66 
Anderton(P) 
Dyson(P) 
Laban(P) 
Shirley(P) 
Barker(P) 
Ewen-Street  
Locke(P) 
Simich (P) 
Barnett 
Fairbrother(P) 
Mackey J(P) 
Sutton(P) 
Benson-Pope  
Fitzsimons(P) 
Mackey M 
Swain(P) 
Beyer(P) 
Gallagher(P) 
Maharey(P) 
Tanczos(P) 
Bradford(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Tizard(P) 
Burton  
Gosche (P) 
Mallard(P) 
Turei(P) 
Carter C (P) 
Hartley(P) 
Mark(P) 
Ward(P) 
Chadwick(P) 
Hawkins(P) 
Okeroa(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Choudhary(P) 
Hereora(P) 
Parker(P) 
Wong(P) 
Clark(P) 
Hide(P) 
Peck(P) 
Yates (P) 
Coddington  
Hobbs(P) 
Pillay(P) 
Cullen(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Prebble  
Cunliffe(P) 
Horomia(P) 
Rich(P) 
Dalziel(P) 
Hughes  
Ririnui  
Donald(P) 
Hunt(P) 
Robson(P) 
Donnelly(P) 
Kedgley(P) 
Roy(P) 
Teller: 
Duncan(P) 
King(P) 
Samuels(P) 
Pettis  
Noes 54 
Adams(P) 
Duynhoven(P) 
Ogilvy(P) 
te Heuheu(P) 
Alexander(P) 
Eckhoff(P) 
Paraone(P) 
Tisch(P) 
Ardern(P) 
English(P) 
Perry(P) 
Turia(P) 
Baldock(P) 
Field(P) 
Peters J (P) 
Turner(P) 
Brash(P) 
Franks  
Peters W (P) 
Wang(P) 
Brown(P) 
Goudie(P) 
Power  
Williamson(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Gudgeon(P) 
Robertson(P) 
Woolerton(P) 
Carter D (P) 
Heatley(P) 
Ryall(P) 
Worth(P) 
Carter J (P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Scott(P) 
Catchpole(P) 
Key(P) 
Smith L (P) 
Collins(P) 
Mapp(P) 
Smith M (P) 
Connell(P) 
McCully(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Copeland  
McNair  
Sowry(P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Newman(P) 
Stewart (P) 
Teller: 
Dunne(P) 
O'Connor  
Tamihere(P) 
Jones  
Schedule 1 agreed to.
Turei Metiria: Education (Export Education Levy) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Turei Metiria: Education (Export Education Levy) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:619;Page:14586] 
METIRIA TUREI (Green) 
: 
 Having heard the submissions and noting the changes to the bill made by the Education and Science Committee I feel reasonably satisfied that the Greens’ initial concerns about it have been dealt with. 
When the bill was introduced we thought it contained some disturbingly draconian measures. At the time in December it was all a bit of a surprise. However we have come to realise that disturbingly draconian measures in Government legislation have recently become a bit ho-hum. But I think it is very important to give some credit to the select committee which got rid of the worst of the measures in the bill particularly around the retrospective action of some of its provisions that would have required institutions in the industry to pay levies from 1 January this year rather than from when the bill comes into effect. 
When the export education levy was first proposed a number of years ago my colleague Nandor Tanczos expressed considerable concern that it would be used for purposes not related to the provision of export education and that concern remained with us during the progress of this bill. Increasingly schools are using the fees they gather from international students to pay for the education of their general population because the Government funding is so pathetic that it completely fails to cover the basic costs for schools. 
Government-forced dependence by schools on the fees from international students is a disgraceful legacy of this Government. But in the end the bill restricts the use of the levy to those issues relating to international students only and to their care and protection when the institutions to which they have paid their fees go bust. For that reason the Greens will support the second reading of the bill.
Cullen Michael: Taxation (Disaster Relief) Bill — Procedure First Reading Second Reading Third Reading 
Cullen Michael: Taxation (Disaster Relief) Bill — Procedure First Reading Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:11671] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Revenue) 
: 
 I seek leave for the Taxation (Disaster Relief) Bill to be taken through all its stages and for there to be a single debate taken at the second reading stage. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none.
Prebble Richard: Speaker’s Rulings — Privileges of the House and Speaker's Actions 
Prebble Richard: Speaker’s Rulings — Privileges of the House and Speaker's Actions 
[Volume:611;Page:8737] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think I may be able to help Mr Peters. I am not quite sure what his questions are but I think it is helpful for you to remind the House that under Standing Order 364(2) questions can be put to the Speaker but they have to be put in writing. If the member has some questions that is the procedure by which to raise them. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is absolutely right.
Hereora Dave: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
Hereora Dave: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15716] 
DAVE HEREORA (Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4777] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 96 
Noes 21 
Part 2 as amended agreed to. 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8.