edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Horomia Parekura: Obituaries — Raiha Lady Mahuta 
Horomia Parekura: Obituaries — Raiha Lady Mahuta 
[Volume:661;Page:9667] 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Labour—Ikaroa-Rawhiti) 
:  
E te Kaiwhakawa o te Whare ki a tatau katoa e mahi atu i konei e tautoko te Ropu Reipa nga korero o te Kaiwhakahaere o te Kawana. Na te mea i roto i etahi o tatau Ngai Maori e mohio atu kei te makuku haere te whenua o te motu mo tenei hinga mo tenei wahine rangatira i whai kaha atu a muri a nga take e pa ana ki te pai o tatau. Na te mea ahakoa he wahine no te taitokerau e tu atu hei kaikorero mo te Kuini Maori i era tau a muri. I tae atu i te tu a te Kingi Tuheitia i reira ke a Te Raiha e manaaki atu nga take. Na te mea e mohio atu tatau mai i ra ano he wahine pukumahi ki te whakatikatika i nga ahua mo te rawakore. He wahine e kaha ana mo te whakatikatika te paru i roto i te wai o te awa o Tainui. He tino wahine hoki e poipoi atu ona mokopuna. 
Kei te tangi hoki te ngakau mo ona tamariki a Tukaroto raua ko Nanaia me Tipa. Na te mea hoki e mohio atu tatau he wahine pukumahi. Ahakoa i reira ke tona hoa rangatira a Kotahi a Bob e mahi ana i nga mahi e tu atu a Raiha i runga i tona tu anake mo tona kaha ki te manaaki atu i ona whanau whanui. Na te mea hoki e tuku aroha atu tatau o tenei ropu nga kanohi Maori i konei mo te rere haere o tenei kuia wahine. Me ki penei tonu ahakoa te karangatanga o Waikato taniwha rau mo to ratau nama mo te he piko he taniwha kia pai hoki to haere e Rai kia tae kaha atu koe ki to hau kainga i te wahi tata nei ki Te Oneroa-a-Tohe. No reira tena tatau tena tatau katoa. 
[ 
Mr Speaker and all those who work here the Labour Party supports the statement made by the Prime Minister. That is because Maori know that this country will be drenched with tears for the passing of this noble woman who worked diligently behind the scenes in matters pertaining to our wellbeing. Although Lady Raiha was from the far north she spoke on behalf of both the Maori Queen and King Tuheitia on various matters. We also know that for a long time she strove to improve the lives of the poor and made great efforts to clean up the Waikato River. She also cared a lot for her grandchildren.  
I express my sympathies to her children Tukaroto Nanaia and Tipa. We all know that she was a hard-working woman. Despite the presence of her husband Sir Robert Lady Raiha stood for various causes and cared for her extended families. Therefore we of the Labour Party and its Maori members offer our condolences for the passing of this matriarch. Despite the saying of Waikato which states that at every corner of the river there is a leader we say farewell to you Lady Raiha may you reach your home near Ninety Mile Beach. So greetings and thank you all 
.]
Cosgrove Clayton: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer and Questions for Written Answer—Consistency of Responses 
Cosgrove Clayton: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer and Questions for Written Answer—Consistency of Responses 
[Volume:661;Page:9670] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Last week I raised a point of order that was taken up on your behalf by the acting Speaker Mr Tisch in respect of the consistency of written answers with oral answers given in the House. My simple inquiry is whether you are in a position to report progress. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I regret to inform the honourable member that I am still investigating the background to the issue. I am taking the member’s point of order seriously and I expect to report back.
Urgent Debates Declined — Mining in Conservation Areas—Joint Ministerial Approval for Access 
Urgent Debates Declined — Mining in Conservation Areas—Joint Ministerial Approval for Access 
[Volume:661;Page:9688] 
Urgent Debates Declined 
Mining in Conservation Areas—Joint Ministerial Approval for Access 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the honourable Leader of the Opposition seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the introduction of joint ministerial approval for access to Crown land. Standing Order 380 requires that the matter for debate be a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. For there to be a particular case of recent occurrence an event upon which an urgent debate is sought must have occurred. The purpose of the urgent debate procedure is to provide an opportunity for the House to hold the Government accountable for its decisions. 
Ministers released a discussion paper yesterday containing a number of proposals and seeking input from the community before making decisions about the policy initiatives set out in the paper including the introduction of joint ministerial approval. No decision has yet been made. In these circumstances there can be no particular case of recent occurrence. This does not mean that the matter is not of sufficient importance to require the attention of the House; it simply does not meet the requirement of the urgent debate procedure at this time. The application is therefore declined.
Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer and Questions for Written Answer—Consistency of Responses 
Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer and Questions for Written Answer—Consistency of Responses 
[Volume:661;Page:9670] 
Points of Order 
Questions for Oral Answer and Questions for Written Answer—Consistency of Responses 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Last week I raised a point of order that was taken up on your behalf by the acting Speaker Mr Tisch in respect of the consistency of written answers with oral answers given in the House. My simple inquiry is whether you are in a position to report progress. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I regret to inform the honourable member that I am still investigating the background to the issue. I am taking the member’s point of order seriously and I expect to report back.
Goodhew Jo: Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement (Regional Agreements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Goodhew Jo: Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement (Regional Agreements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9700] 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
Motion agreed to. 
Clause 4 agreed to.
Turei Metiria: Obituaries — Raiha Lady Mahuta 
Turei Metiria: Obituaries — Raiha Lady Mahuta 
[Volume:661;Page:9668] 
METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I stand here to support the motion. First I acknowledge the passing of Bevan Tipene-Matua: father friend environmentalist and rangatira. We join with others today kia ora to mourn the passing of Lady Raiha. Ka maharatia e au te wahine rongonui ko Raiha. E kui tautoko katoa mai te ringa a Whina Kupa ka pakari ana ta korua wairua moe mai ra. 
[ 
I will remember this famous woman Raiha. Dear lady your total support and that of Whina Cooper has been spiritually uplifting. Rest well 
.]  
Lady Mahuta was a woman who was passionate about her whenua and her awa her whanau and her iwi. She played a leading role in negotiating with the Crown which is always difficult on behalf of Waikato-Tainui in signing the settlement deal which provided for a significant fund for the cleaning up of the polluted Waikato River and for a river co-management arrangement. Her commitment to the environment was an inspiration to us and her ability to weave together kaitiakitanga and rangatiratanga and to make it understandable to the Crown and to others was an exceptional skill one that will be sorely missed. 
She was a courageous negotiator and a courageous woman and I know she will be deeply missed. The Green Party sends our heartfelt prayers and love to our colleague Nanaia to her whanau to her hapu and to her iwi. Kia ora koutou.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — First Reading 
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9663] 
KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) 
: 
 I was about to conclude when my previous call on the first reading of the Courts (Remote Participation) Bill was interrupted by the adjournment of the House. This bill will greatly reduce costs and moreover significantly increase the number of cases to be brought before the courts. It will make the system function more efficiently and competently. The bill will also greatly reduce the stress on victims and witnesses who usually have to wait for a long time before their cases are heard. 
The introduction of an audiovisual link will improve court efficiency and increase safety and security. It will also enhance the quality of evidence and access to justice. I fully support the bill and believe that it will bring about a vast improvement and will be an excellent step forward for our justice system. I commend this bill to the House.
Vote: Education Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Education Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9663] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Education Amendment Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 112 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 8 
Green Party 8. 
Bill read a second time.
Goodhew Jo: Education Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Goodhew Jo: Education Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9663] 
JO GOODHEW (National—Rangitata) 
: 
 I am very pleased to rise in the second reading of the Education Amendment Bill to take a very brief call. I was happy to be on the Education and Science Committee that progressed this bill. 
It disappoints me this afternoon that we have not been able to celebrate the fact that we are all on the same page in terms of how we are voting on this bill. The select committee process was quite straightforward and we came to an agreement on the best way to progress the bill. I am disappointed at the way the debate has gone this afternoon in terms of members picking up on petty nit-picky extraordinary little bits that have nothing to do with the bill. For members to talk about failure of the committee to achieve what we set out to do or certainly what the National members set out to do is quite wrong. The committee members worked quite well together. We had robust discussion. We closed submissions back in June last year. We considered 10 submissions and heard only seven. 
New Zealanders are welcoming this bill. There are important changes that improve the safety of our students in the classroom and also of those who are learning out in the community. I think New Zealanders will welcome this Education Amendment Bill. It is such a shame that sometimes politics gets in the way of our just getting on with it. I commend this bill to the House in its second reading. I think it is certainly time to move it forward.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Public Service—Update on Cap and Job Cuts 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Public Service—Update on Cap and Job Cuts 
[Volume:661;Page:9630] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter which may be of interest to members from the Hon Ruth Dyson seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the release by the Minister of State Services the Hon Tony Ryall of the second 6-monthly update on the Government’s cap of core Government administration and the associated announcement of the cut of 135 jobs at the Ministry of Health. 
As has been ruled on many occasions a continuing issue cannot give rise to a debate under Standing Order 380. The Government’s cap on core Government administration has been in place since 2009 and the Minister’s announcement is his second 6-monthly update. To be a particular case of recent occurrence there must be either a new situation of importance or a new development in an existing situation of sufficient importance in itself to warrant a debate being held. That is Speaker’s ruling 174/4. As there is no new development that is of sufficient importance in itself to warrant immediately putting aside the business of the House this application for urgent debate is declined.
Henare Tau: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Henare Tau: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:661;Page:9624] 
8. 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations 
: What recent progress has the Government made towards its goal of settling all historic Treaty claims by 2014? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 Yesterday the Crown signed terms of negotiation with Te Atiawa at Owae Marae at Waitara and terms of negotiation with Taranaki tuturu at Puniho Marae. These milestones mark an important step in the process of settling the remaining historic claims in Taranaki. I acknowledge all those who were present yesterday including parliamentary colleagues from both sides of the House. I especially mention the local MPs Tariana Turia and Jonathan Young who have played an important role in helping to progress these negotiations. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: What is the significance of settling the remaining historical claims in Taranaki? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: Yesterday also marked the 150th anniversary of the start of the Land Wars. Taranaki was the scene of some of the gravest Treaty breaches in New Zealand’s history including the destruction of Parihaka in 1881. If New Zealand is to move forward it is important that we address the wrongs of the past and that is why this Government is so keen to settle the remaining historical claims in Taranaki. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: With regard to claims is the Minister concerned about the actions of the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust trustees in blocking duck shooters from accessing the Pencarrow lakes during the eight weekends a year of the duck shooting season; if so what steps can be taken to resolve this without setting a precedent for similar exclusions of public access in future settlements? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: Yes I was concerned by initial reports that the trust may have purported to act outside the terms of the Treaty settlement with Taranaki Whanui. The iwi as landowner has the right to exclude recreational activities only if there is “a risk of a significant adverse effect to the environment”. The iwi believes for a number of reasons that such a risk is posed by didymo and also by the irresponsible actions of some hunters. I can assure the member I am looking very closely at the situation.
Garrett David: Voting — Correction—Resource Management (Requiring Authorities) Amendment Bill 
Garrett David: Voting — Correction—Resource Management (Requiring Authorities) Amendment Bill 
[Volume:661;Page:9613] 
DAVID GARRETT (ACT) 
: 
 I seek leave to correct the ACT Party vote last night on the first reading of the Resource Management (Requiring Authorities) Amendment Bill. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
DAVID GARRETT 
: The vote from the ACT Party should have been four opposed. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The vote is amended accordingly.
Boscawen John: Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel (Deputy Commissioner and Disposal of Complaints) Amendment Bill District Courts (District Court Judges) Amendment Bill Judicature (Judicial Matters) Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Boscawen John: Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel (Deputy Commissioner and Disposal of Complaints) Amendment Bill District Courts (District Court Judges) Amendment Bill Judicature (Judicial Matters) Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:661;Page:9645] 
JOHN BOSCAWEN (ACT) 
: 
 The ACT Party will be supporting this legislation. 
Bills read a third time.
Quinn Paul: Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel (Deputy Commissioner and Disposal of Complaints) Amendment Bill District Courts (District Court Judges) Amendment Bill Judicature (Judicial Matters) Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Quinn Paul: Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel (Deputy Commissioner and Disposal of Complaints) Amendment Bill District Courts (District Court Judges) Amendment Bill Judicature (Judicial Matters) Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:661;Page:9641] 
PAUL QUINN (National) 
: 
 I took the liberty of checking  
Speakers’ Rulings 
 and I can perhaps remind the House that third reading debates by their nature are ones of summarising the discussion and conversation that have gone on during the course of the debate on the particular bill. I do not know why Trevor Mallard contributed to the debate at the time but perhaps it was because the Hon David Parker was yet again late to get to his speaking spot as I think he might have been this afternoon. But it so happened that young Trevor Mallard somehow contributed to the debate. 
Of course most of this debate has been centred on the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and only in the latter part of the Committee stage was the original bill split. But during the substantive discussions on the Judicial Conduct Commissioner part the Hon Trevor Mallard focused at the time on the role of the commissioner and the fact that his or her job was to hear complaints. For some reason he seemed to think that I might be an appropriate subject for a complaint because he alleged that I did not know my way to the Hutt Valley. I assured him during the debate that I did so perhaps the laying of a complaint would not be possible. 
What I found fascinating was that subsequently there was an article in the local community newspaper around WelTec parking in Petone. I had a meeting—this is a matter that I have been working on for many months— 
Moana Mackey 
: 5 minutes. 
PAUL QUINN 
: Many months actually I say to Moana Mackey. I ended up having a meeting on 15 February with a subcommittee of the Petone Community Board. In fact prior to the— 
Moana Mackey 
: What do you want? A gold star? That’s your job. 
PAUL QUINN 
: Because we are talking about complaints—we are talking about complaints. So I met with the community board and poor old Trevor Mallard in the following day’s  
Hutt News 
 did not even know that in fact the board had actually met. So I thought that it might be a useful— 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: The member is straying well outside the bounds. I am standing; the member will sit down. The member started off by quoting the Standing Orders about what third reading debates were and I ask the member to concentrate on a third reading speech. 
PAUL QUINN 
: Well with those concluding remarks I commend the third reading of this legislation to the House.
Hawkins George: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Hawkins George: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:661;Page:9629] 
1. 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Labour—Manurewa) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Auckland Governance Legislation Committee 
: How many submissions were heard on the Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill? 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Chairperson of the Auckland Governance Legislation Committee): 
 Three hundred and forty-one. 
Hon George Hawkins 
: Were the media present during the hearings and can he confirm that two of the newspapers  
The Aucklander 
 and  
Gulf News 
 not only reported on the Auckland Governance Legislation Committee but also made submissions to it? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I call the Hon John Carter in so far as the question is in order. 
Hon JOHN CARTER 
: I am afraid I cannot recall whether those media made submissions.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:661;Page:9613] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I do not anticipate that the House will go into urgency next week although the Government is of course behind the scenes going about its work urgently. As for select committee meetings that is a matter for the select committees themselves to determine. But where there is work to be done then I expect that the chairpersons of those committees will ensure that sufficient time is set aside for that work to be completed.
Hawkins George: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Hawkins George: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:661;Page:9629] 
2. 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Labour—Manurewa) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Auckland Governance Legislation Committee 
: Did the committee hear submissions on the Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill relating to Maori representation? 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Chairperson of the Auckland Governance Legislation Committee) 
: 
 Yes. 
Hon George Hawkins 
: Is the Maori Party represented on the Auckland Governance Legislation Committee; if so were Maori Party members present when those and other submissions were made? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The composition of select committees is a matter commonly known to the House. If the member is referring to whether a member attended a committee that is not in order. I will allow the member to repeat his question to make sure that I heard it correctly. 
Hon George Hawkins 
: Is the Maori Party represented on the Auckland Governance Legislation Committee; if so did they attend any of the submissions? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! 
Hon George Hawkins 
: The answers are— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No the Speaker is on his feet. We cannot allow a question like that.
Voting — Correction—Resource Management (Requiring Authorities) Amendment Bill 
Voting — Correction—Resource Management (Requiring Authorities) Amendment Bill 
[Volume:661;Page:9613] 
Voting 
Correction—Resource Management (Requiring Authorities) Amendment Bill 
DAVID GARRETT (ACT) 
: 
 I seek leave to correct the ACT Party vote last night on the first reading of the Resource Management (Requiring Authorities) Amendment Bill. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
DAVID GARRETT 
: The vote from the ACT Party should have been four opposed. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The vote is amended accordingly.
Urgent Debates Declined — Public Service—Update on Cap and Job Cuts 
Urgent Debates Declined — Public Service—Update on Cap and Job Cuts 
[Volume:661;Page:9630] 
Urgent Debates Declined 
Public Service—Update on Cap and Job Cuts 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter which may be of interest to members from the Hon Ruth Dyson seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the release by the Minister of State Services the Hon Tony Ryall of the second 6-monthly update on the Government’s cap of core Government administration and the associated announcement of the cut of 135 jobs at the Ministry of Health. 
As has been ruled on many occasions a continuing issue cannot give rise to a debate under Standing Order 380. The Government’s cap on core Government administration has been in place since 2009 and the Minister’s announcement is his second 6-monthly update. To be a particular case of recent occurrence there must be either a new situation of importance or a new development in an existing situation of sufficient importance in itself to warrant a debate being held. That is Speaker’s ruling 174/4. As there is no new development that is of sufficient importance in itself to warrant immediately putting aside the business of the House this application for urgent debate is declined.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:661;Page:9613] 
Thursday 18 March 2010 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business Statement 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 When the House resumes next week it is the Government’s intention to advance the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement (Regional Agreements) Amendment Bill and the Infrastructure Bill and to make progress on other bills on the Order Paper. The House will rise at 5 p.m. on Thursday 1 April for the Easter break. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I ask the Leader of the House whether he anticipates any urgency next week and also how many select committees he expects will be sitting during the Easter adjournment. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I do not anticipate that the House will go into urgency next week although the Government is of course behind the scenes going about its work urgently. As for select committee meetings that is a matter for the select committees themselves to determine. But where there is work to be done then I expect that the chairpersons of those committees will ensure that sufficient time is set aside for that work to be completed.
Mallard Trevor: Business Statement 
Mallard Trevor: Business Statement 
[Volume:661;Page:9613] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I ask the Leader of the House whether he anticipates any urgency next week and also how many select committees he expects will be sitting during the Easter adjournment.
Vote: Resource Management (Requiring Authorities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Resource Management (Requiring Authorities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9609] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Resource Management (Requiring Authorities) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 59 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 4. 
Motion not agreed to. 
The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 59 Noes 63.
Harawira Hone: Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Harawira Hone: Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9592] 
HONE HARAWIRA (Maori Party—Te Tai Tokerau) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker. Hoi no e mihi ana au ki te kaikorero katahi ano kua mutu mai i te Ropu Kakariki e korerohia i nga korero mo te tangata tona wairua tona hinengaro tona tinana me tona whanau. No reira tena koe e te rangatira e mutu nei i tena korero. 
[ 
Greetings to you Mr Assistant Speaker. I want to acknowledge the speaker from the Green Party who has just concluded for the references he made in his speech to a person’s spirituality mentality body and family. So I acknowledge him for that comment 
.] 
Last week at a hui on Maori mental health up in Whangarei  
Te Rau Hinengaro: The New Zealand Mental Health Survey 
 was released. It found that one in three Maori suffer from mental disorders during his or her lifetime with anxiety mood and substance disorders being the main ones. To nobody’s great surprise those mental disorders are more common for Maori and particularly for Maori on low incomes and living in poor neighbourhoods. Again to no one’s great surprise only half of those Maori with a serious disorder get the treatment that non-Maori get. 
We know from our own family histories that poor information and a lack of involvement from whanau lead to breakdowns in relationships and situations of distress and that can led to devastating results—for example our young Maori aged 15 to 24 are twice as likely to die by suicide than non-Maori. That is why the Maori Party will be supporting the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill. It will allow people to have access to information about the treatment that one of their whanau may be getting to be involved in the decision making about the treatment to be fully involved in the planning of care to be informed about the possible side effects of treatment and to be consulted about discharge plans. We know that whanau support during treatment leads to better outcomes for tangata whaiora and better outcomes for the whanau and we sincerely hope that this bill will properly recognise the importance and significance of whanau support to the person his or her family and the wider community. 
This bill is about best practice and it is about taking collective responsibility for the health and well-being of our own. This bill is about whanau ora and for that reason we are proud to stand alongside the Hon Luamanuvao Winnie Laban in supporting this bill. Kia ora tatou.
Dyson Ruth: Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Dyson Ruth: Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9593] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 This is a rare occasion and I do not know who will feel more uncomfortable Sir Roger or me because I agree with him but only on this specific issue of the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill. I genuinely acknowledge the ACT Party for taking this issue seriously to the point of splitting a party vote. I just wish that National had taken this bill seriously. This should be one of the issues that are above petty political point-scoring. In fact Jenny Shipley and Helen Clark were absolute leaders in this area in saying that mental health issues in general people with mental health challenges and their families should not be the subjects of point-scoring or media-baiting in Parliament or outside the House. They led a change of attitude in parliamentarians towards people with mental illness. I do not very often pay tribute to Jenny Shipley either but on this issue she certainly deserves it. I wish National members had done that tonight. 
I must say that I found the absolutely patronising tribute from the chair of the Health Committee Dr Paul Hutchison totally inappropriate. For someone of Winnie Laban’s standing in this House and in the community to have that sort of absolutely patronising tribute addressed to her during the first reading of this bill was entirely inappropriate. I have been waiting for the Minister who is responsible for mental health issues Dr Jonathan Coleman to take a call. I was at a function last year not long after he was appointed to his ministerial position and he had heard from Supporting Families in Mental Illness that the existing legislation as written and intended was great but as delivered was not meeting the needs of families. He heard the plea that the Supporting Families in Mental Illness code of family rights should be put into law. Jonathan Coleman told that gathering that he would back it. Well here it is. That is what Winnie Laban’s bill is. It is the—[ 
Interruption 
] 
I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Jonathan Coleman just called me a liar and I ask you to ask him to withdraw and apologise. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: I certainly did not hear that. Did the member in fact say that? 
Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman 
: Yes I did and I will not withdraw and apologise. I have packed my stuff and I am off.
Vote: Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9597] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 60 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 1 (Douglas); Maori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 4 (Boscawen Garrett Hide  Roy H). 
Motion not agreed to.
Roy Eric: Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Roy Eric: Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9593] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: The member will leave the Chamber. 
Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman withdrew from the Chamber. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: At that function family members of Supporting Families in Mental Illness told Jonathan Coleman and the assembled supporters—and I was personally there—that the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act was great in theory but in reality it was not working. Family members were frustrated at the process of supporting their family member to get the best health outcome. That is what this Parliament should want most is it not? 
Regardless of whether it is a mental illness or a physical illness I ask why any member of this House would not want the best outcome. This bill does that. It puts in place a requirement for district health boards to deliver in the way the legislation as written in 1992 intended. That was National Party legislation and it was supported by both the major parties that are still in this House. This amendment strengthens it. It will mean that families who are distraught with frustration and want to do their best in supporting their family member will be supported by the law. 
This bill makes sense. It has been overwhelmingly and in fact unanimously supported throughout the very wide process of consultation that my colleague Winnie Laban has undertaken. Some members’ bills do not receive that level of attention. I have been in awe of the way that Winnie Laban has meticulously gone to consumers and their families to providers of mental health services to clinicians to advocates and to people across the whole spectrum in the mental health sector and explained to everyone the principle the point and the purpose of this bill. The bill will achieve better outcomes in our health sector as a result of its implementation. Why the Government would want to block that and not even let it go to a select committee beggars belief frankly. Government members should hang their heads in shame. If we were not in Parliament I would be able to say that those members’ making patronising prat-ish plonker-ish comments in this House about the admiration of Winnie Laban and supporting people with mental illness is hypocritical. This bill deserves support as do the families of people with mental illness.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:661;Page:9613] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 When the House resumes next week it is the Government’s intention to advance the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement (Regional Agreements) Amendment Bill and the Infrastructure Bill and to make progress on other bills on the Order Paper. The House will rise at 5 p.m. on Thursday 1 April for the Easter break.
Davis Kelvin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Davis Kelvin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:661;Page:9625] 
9. 
KELVIN DAVIS (Labour) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Education 
: Will the new national standards in respect of kura help raise Maori student achievement in those schools; if so how? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES (Associate Minister of Education) 
: 
 The standards will help those Maori students in kura because they are designed to complement the marautanga the curriculum of the kura. 
Kelvin Davis 
: Why when he was asked “What is the Ministry of Education’s official vision for students?” by student magazine  
Salient 
 in 2009 did he answer “That’s a hard question to answer because I’m not really happy with their vision myself” and are national standards a part of the Ministry’s vision he is unhappy about? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: My delegation is for kura and I am very happy in accordance with the member’s questions that those standards will suit kura and produce better results amongst the tauira. 
Kelvin Davis 
: Does he stand by his statement “Having bought into a relationship with the government this limits our capabilities …”; if so is an example of these limitations when he told Maori that national standards were dangerous only to have John Key come out and shut him down? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: I stand by what I said and I do all the time. The thing about Maori standards is that we have a consultation process going on and 47 kura are reporting back on the process. We have 18 regional networks and ultimately we will have them all feeding back to us so that we can if you like hone the final result. 
Kelvin Davis 
: Why are national standards being trialled in kura but not in immersion units within mainstream schools? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: National standards are being trialled in kura because of the special nature of the marautanga the curriculum and its relationship to the kura movement. There are several types of kura which is why we have to look at how the standards fit kura with Aho Matua kura without Aho Matua and kura that are total immersion schools.
Douglas Roger: Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Douglas Roger: Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9592] 
Hon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS (ACT) 
: 
 I rise to support the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill being referred to a select committee. I do so not because I necessarily support all the detail of the bill; rather I support the right of the patient—or in this case the right of the close relative—to know except in the most exceptional circumstances. This I believe is a fundamental right and it needs to be widely debated. I think that it needs to be debated not just within the mental health area but within the total health system. 
The fact is that important information is persistently withheld and concealed in the New Zealand medical market place. Why is this? The answer is simple. In the medical market place people soon discover that it is in their own self-interest to withhold information. Why is this? It is because they do not view patients as the principal buyers of health care. Their principal customers are hospitals physicians Governments and third-party institutions such as insurance companies so they tend to serve them rather than serve the patients. 
There is another reason why patients frequently do not have access to information on the quality of providers. Medical associations physicians hospitals and Governments have made it difficult for patients to get information about quality. Avoiding quality comparisons has become almost a matter of professional ethics as we saw at Wanganui Hospital. Doctors are reluctant to openly criticise the judgment of their colleagues yet the price an individual pays for a wrong choice is much much higher in respect of medical services. That information including mental health information is the key to avoiding these circumstances. We have to look only at this article in the  
Listener 
 to understand the cost of these sorts of errors. 
The most important conclusion that flows from the fact that the medical market place is complex is the necessity to create an institutional environment in which experts find it in their own self-interest to give all of us accurate information and good advice. Information and how we provide it is vital. The hope that some of these issues—as they relate not only I would hope to mental health but also to the wider health area—can be debated is the reason that I support this bill’s referral to a select committee.
Vote: Debate on Budget Policy Statement 
Vote: Debate on Budget Policy Statement 
[Volume:661;Page:9569] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the House take note of the report of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the Budget Policy Statement 2010 and Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update 2009. 
Ayes 68 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 4; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Garrett David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Garrett David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:661;Page:9629] 
12. 
DAVID GARRETT (ACT) 
 to the  
Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations 
: How much has Tukoroirangi Morgan been paid by the Office of Treaty Settlements as a Crown Facilitator since 16 November 2008 and has he been paid on a hourly rate or as a fixed charge? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 Between 16 November 2008 and 1 March 2010 the Office of Treaty Settlements has paid Mr Morgan $171093.61 GST inclusive for facilitation work with a number of claimant groups. Mr Morgan was paid at an hourly rate with a cap limit. 
David Garrett 
: Can he assure the House that Tukoroirangi Morgan has not been charging for the same hours twice once to the Office of Treaty Settlements and again to the Tainui Maori Trust Board; if not will he release all invoices submitted by Mr Morgan to ensure there has been no double-dipping? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: In answer to the honourable member I say that have no ministerial responsibility for whatever charging arrangements Mr Morgan may have with Waikato-Tainui. I guarantee the honourable member that any payments made by the Crown to Mr Morgan for facilitation work have been for services with the iwi groups I mentioned in my answer to the member’s primary question. That work is quite different from the Crown’s engagement with Waikato-Tainui.
Parata Hekia: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Parata Hekia: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9541] 
11. 
HEKIA PARATA (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Economic Development 
: What support has this Government given to the development of a vibrant screen production industry in New Zealand? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Economic Development) 
: 
 The Government provides support to the screen production industry through the incentive of the Large Budget Screen Production Grant. The most notable film support this year was for the biggest-ever grossing movie  
Avatar 
. The production spent over $300 million in New Zealand. After a robust audit process it received a grant of around $45 million for the qualifying expenditure. This incentive keeps our industry competitive with other countries and maintains a highly skilled and a highly technologically capable industry on our shores. I congratulate Weta Digital in Wellington on winning the Oscar for best visual effects for the movie. That is another win for a leading high-technology firm in New Zealand. 
Hekia Parata 
: What are the benefits for the wider economy from screen productions? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: A recent PricewaterhouseCoopers study on the economic impact of the film and television industry in 2009 found that the film and television industry contributed $2.5 billion to the New Zealand economy and contributes additional financial benefits to the country by enhancing international awareness of the New Zealand brand. Major benefits also accrue to our wider service economy through associated activities like the provision of accommodation and hospitality. Screen production has continued to deliver strong economic support through the recession. I have come to know a lot more about this industry and I think we are doing very well with the support we are giving it.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:661;Page:9614] 
2. 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: He aha ta te minita mahi kia ata mohio pai ai a ia kei nga kaiako nga pukenga me te matauranga kia marama ai ratou ki te ako i te Tiriti ki te taumata teitei o te tirohanga whanui koronga matapono me nga uara hoki kua whakapuakina i roto i te marautanga o Aotearoa? 
[ 
What is the Minister doing to ensure teachers have the skills and knowledge to deliver an understanding of the Treaty to a high standard as expressed in the overview purpose principles and values of the New Zealand curriculum? 
] 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 All materials and professional development programmes designed to support the New Zealand curriculum guide schools to use Treaty principles to develop and implement their curriculum. Specific professional development programmes such as Te Kotahitanga and He Kakano also encourage schools to develop an iwi focus. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: He aha nga korero a nga kaiako e pa ana ki te whakapumautanga o te Tiriti o Waitangi hei “pou ara mo nga whakataunga marautanga”? 
[ 
What has been the teacher feedback to the initiative that introduces the Treaty of Waitangi as one of the “foundations of curriculum decision making”? 
 ] 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: Schools’ feedback on the draft curriculum I understand was that the Treaty needed to be more clearly represented in the document. That advice was taken into account in the development of the final document and I understand that recent research indicates that all the principles are being used in school curriculum development. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: E hia ke nei te rahi o te putea tautoko kua tukuna ki te whakatinana i te ahuatanga hou i roto i te marautanga mo te akoranga o te reo Maori me ona tikanga? 
[ 
What provision has been allocated to support the commitment in the new curriculum that all students will have the opportunity to acquire knowledge of Maori language and customs? 
] 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: Ka Hikitia—Managing for Success the Maori education strategy contains six strategic goals to strengthen Maori language provision. Those goals provide a framework for further development of Maori language policy. The Government is committed to working with the Maori Party to improve opportunities for all students to learn te reo.
Cosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Cosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9542] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 In light of the Minister of Corrections’ denial that Maori will be disproportionately affected by the “three strikes” policy I seek leave to table a Cabinet paper under the name and signature of the Minister of Police and Minister of Corrections that says the policy “is likely to have a disproportionate effect upon Maori.” 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Delahunty Catherine: Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel (Deputy Commissioner and Disposal of Complaints) Amendment Bill District Courts (District Court Judges) Amendment Bill Judicature (Judicial Matters) Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Delahunty Catherine: Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel (Deputy Commissioner and Disposal of Complaints) Amendment Bill District Courts (District Court Judges) Amendment Bill Judicature (Judicial Matters) Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:661;Page:9637] 
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green) 
: 
 I rise to take a very short call on the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel (Deputy Commissioner and Disposal of Complaints) Amendment Bill the District Courts (District Court Judges) Amendment Bill and the Judicature (Judicial Matters) Amendment Bill because the Green Party will be supporting all of them. I want to speak in support of comments made by my colleague Dr Kennedy Graham in the first reading the second reading and the Committee stage. He wanted me to assure the House that we had some concerns particularly around Supplementary Order Paper 108 but we were provided with background information by the Attorney-General that satisfied all of our concerns so we are comfortable now to vote with others in support of all stages of the legislation. Thank you.
Upston Louise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Upston Louise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9539] 
9. 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What were the findings of the survey  
Attendance in New Zealand Schools in 2009 
 and what is the Government’s response? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 The 2009 truancy survey results show that just over 30000 students are truant from State and State-integrated schools on any given day. This Government has doubled the funding available to support schools to reduce truancy. 
Louise Upston 
: How did the results of this survey differ from those of the last truancy survey? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: The last survey was taken in 2006 and it showed that up to 30000 children—that is 4.1 percent—of the 750000 primary and high school pupils nationwide skipped school in the survey week. The 2009 figures show almost identical figures. These figures show that Labour did absolutely nothing to address this very serious issue. It even tried to hide the extent of the problem from New Zealand by cancelling the 2008 truancy survey. This Government is committed to reducing truancy and keeping our students engaged at school.