edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Parker David: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
Parker David: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9512] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I will begin by putting on record a mistake that I made when this debate was last called. It was during urgency—I think it was the third day in urgency. I had been delayed at a select committee meeting that had overlapped with the start of the day and I had not briefed my colleague Charles Chauvel on the agreement that I had made on behalf of the Labour Party to support leave being granted for including this matter in the Judicial Matters Bill by way of Supplementary Order Paper 108. I think that I caused some understandable consternation on the part of the Attorney-General. I would like to put on record that that was my responsibility and no reflection should be made upon other members of the Opposition including Mr Chauvel. 
The Labour Party will be supporting Supplementary Order Paper 108. We support the increase in the number of judges. On reflection having agreed to it—and we are honouring our agreement—Charles Chauvel made a good point as to whether I should have made that agreement and whether we should have sent this sort of proposal to the select committee to have it discussed. My judgment at the time was that it did not need to go to the select committee. We stand by that decision but perhaps if I was asked again I would think again about that. 
I agree with the reasons that the Attorney-General has outlined; there is a need to increase the number of District Court judges. In reality I know that if the number of District Court judges was not increased then the Attorney-General would be increasingly reliant on retired judges—I do not know whether we call them retired—or semi-retired judges to come back under temporary warrants and act as judges. It is undesirable to be reliant on too many temporary warranted judges. It is better to have a greater number of permanent judges. Apart from anything else I think that the public looks somewhat askance at having too many judges drawing superannuation and also being paid as current judges. For those reasons I am happy on behalf of the Labour Party to express our support for the changes.
Finlayson Christopher: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
Finlayson Christopher: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9513] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 I will make two comments in response. The first point is to thank the honourable member David Parker for his very generous remarks. I had not intended to deal with that matter; I though it was water under the bridge but I am very grateful for his comments. 
The second point is I think he hit the nail on the head when he talked about the undesirability of too many retired judges having temporary warrants. In fact at one stage the number was up to about 45 to 50. I became very concerned about that. An important concomitant of the changes that we are talking about tonight is that they will mean that judges holding temporary warrants will not receive any further warrants once they reach the age of 72. That will enable this potentially unconstitutional and troubling practice to slowly diminish.
Finlayson Christopher: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
Finlayson Christopher: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9516] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 I want to address a couple of matters raised—and I know that Dr Kennedy Graham wants to say something about them—in relation to clauses 16A and 16B as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 108. These clauses set out the determination of the additional remuneration of High Court judges when they serve in the Court of Appeal. High Court judges either can join the permanent judges of the Court of Appeal in the full court of the Court of Appeal or can sit with Court of Appeal judges in either the civil or criminal division of that court. 
Apparently there was always broad agreement about the remuneration that High Court judges would receive when they were sitting as judges of the Court of Appeal. It results from an arrangement that was entered into by the then Chief Justice and the then Secretary for Justice. It was resolved that High Court judges should receive the same salary as Court of Appeal judges as determined by the Remuneration Authority for their service in the Court of Appeal. That might be for 2 or 3 weeks or it might even be for a couple of months. But that was the arrangement that was reached. 
Some years ago a case came before Justice MacKenzie in the High Court at Wellington called  
Wikio v Attorney-General.  
I refer the member to the judgment dated 11 July. It was a broad-ranging attack on behalf of those applicants on the way in which certain judges were sitting on particular cases be they retired judges with a temporary warrant or judges of the High Court sitting in the Court of Appeal. Questions were raised and Justice MacKenzie looked at this issue. He said that “given the constitutional importance of judicial salaries I consider that the payment of an allowance to a High Court judge sitting on the Court of Appeal should rest on a more secure constitutional foundation than is apparent on the evidence before me.” He did not express a final view but he made that comment. So it was thought that the sooner this matter could be cleared up the better. The judgment was given on 11 July 2008 and this Judicature Matters Bill was simply seen as a good opportunity given the relative infrequency of legislation affecting the Judicature Act coming before the House for us to try to sort out the matter. 
The question that I believe that the member Dr Kennedy Graham may raise is of retrospectivity and admittedly clause 16B adopts a belt and braces approach. I suggest to the honourable member that it is not like cases of retrospectivity that validate for example an unlawful taking but it is a declaration in a belt and braces way. It is dealt with in this way simply because the issue was raised but was not finally determined before that learned High Court judge.
Vote: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Vote: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9512] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clauses 1 to 11 and schedules 1 to 4 be agreed to. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Clauses 1 to 11 and schedules 1 to 4 agreed to. 
Bill reported without amendment. 
Report adopted.
Finlayson Christopher: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
Finlayson Christopher: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9512] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 We come now to a new Part 1A. As required by Standing Order 299 I seek leave of the Committee to move the amendment to the District Courts Act 1947 which is set out on Supplementary Order Paper 108. Leave is required because the amendment is a substantive one to an Act not amended by the bill as introduced. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Leave is sought for this course of action. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: I thank honourable members for their cooperation on this matter. This is a relatively short amendment to the District Courts Act to increase the number of District Court judges from 140 which is the current statutory cap to 156. It will be the first increase since 2004 and it will apply to judges of the District Court holding jury warrants as well as to those acting in their criminal and civil jurisdictions. It will also include the specialist divisions: the Family Court the Youth Court and the Environment Court. 
In a couple of months the Immigration Act 2009 will come into force and the chairperson of the Immigration and Protection Tribunal will be a District Court judge. Furthermore at the present time two judges of the Employment Court also hold warrants as part-time judges of the District Court. The chief coroner and the outgoing Principal Disputes Referee also hold warrants as District Court judges. Given the increase in the workload particularly in Auckland and Manukau City and the desirability of appointing further judges in those courts and in other courts in the north of the North Island it is necessary to increase the cap.
Bennett David: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Bennett David: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9509] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I want to follow on from the speech made by Carol Beaumont who is an effective member of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. I am disappointed that the Labour Party gave her the job of trying to say nothing for 5 minutes. The Labour Party is a party that has been based on labour relations. That is its core support—the unions are its support base. There was nothing in that previous speech and National has done nothing to compromise workers’ rights in New Zealand over the last year and a half. In fact National has stood up for workers and delivered for them when Labour did not. 
Tim Macindoe 
: 75c. 
DAVID BENNETT 
: As Mr Macindoe that great member from Hamilton West said 75c was added by the National Government during a recession to the minimum wage. Labour was nowhere to be seen in terms of looking after workers during the 9 years it was in Government. That is sad. It is sad when the Labour Party goes for its core constituency and cannot even make any arguments that would be of consequence to the punters and the voters out there. 
The Labour Party knows that the Government has delivered as much as can be given in these economic times. The Labour Party says that according to National workers are costs that need to be reduced—that is its perception of National’s view but it is simply not the case. New Zealanders and the National Government value the work that all New Zealanders do. We want to see a stronger country where workers across the board get a fair return for their day’s work and we will deliver that to them through measures like tax cuts through measures in relation to the working environment and by keeping their jobs. We will not have a situation where we will compromise workers’ employment for political expediency. 
National wants to see New Zealanders keep their jobs and we want to see New Zealand develop so that we can pay workers what they deserve and give them the opportunities they seek in life. It is a shame that Labour members cannot find anything to argue in terms of labour relations from their point of view. They know that we have delivered for the workers better than the previous Labour Government did in 9 years. 
Report noted.
Sharples Pita: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Sharples Pita: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9510] 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES (Minister of Maori Affairs) 
: 
 I would like to— 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Tena koe Mr Chairperson. Can I just confirm that the Labour Party has no further calls? I thought I heard you say that but I ask whether you could confirm it. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: The member is correct. I will just make the point to the member that if in the event that no other party takes a call and there is time available members can take a call. 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: I am happy to take a call on the financial review of Te Puni Kokiri for the last financial year. I acknowledge the work of the Hon Tau Henare and the Maori Affairs Committee in its examination of the performance of Te Puni Kokiri. It is pleasing to read that in its judgment the ministry has increased its focus on working with other agencies in the State sector to benefit Maori. The committee’s report particularly acknowledges the complexity of the environment that Te Puni Kokiri provides its advice in and the work of the ministry to improve its performance across a range of areas. 
Since I became the Minister of Maori Affairs in 2008 Te Puni Kokiri has supported me well in delivering on this Government’s priorities. Three things stand out for me in the 2008-09 year. Firstly the Maori economic summit that I convened on 28 January 2009 stands out. This summit brought together Maori leaders and thinkers to devise responses from Maori to the recession. On 18 March I announced the appointment of the Maori Economic Taskforce to progress responses to the economic downturn. That task force is nearing a year in existence and we will have a full report on those activities next time. That task force has had a busy year and it has commenced a number of initiatives that will enhance the Maori economy. 
Secondly I was able to announce my whanau social assistance programmes during the year. We now have Kaitoko Whanau a network of whanau advocates in communities to liaise with whanau and community groups working with our families experiencing hardship in order to empower those families out there. This is a forerunner of course to Whanau Ora. Following on from that is our Maara Kai programme our gardens programme; $1 million has gone out for our gardens all over New Zealand—to marae and to Maori organisations. And there is the Oranga Whanau programme—our elders working among the community. 
Thirdly 2008-2009 was a milestone year for the Maori Trustee. It was the last year that that office was part of the core Public Service. From 1 July 2010 the Maori Trustee will be a fully independent sustainable entity with ongoing funding for enhanced services for Maori beneficial owners. [ 
Interruption 
] I agree with the member Te Ururoa Flavell that it has been a really good year for Te Puni Kokiri. Once again I thank the Hon Tau Henare and the select committee for their performance review. All in all it is not too bad for 7 months in office and this year is even busier. Thank you.
Young Jonathan: Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Young Jonathan: Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:669;Page:15977] 
JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) 
: 
 One could say that the Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill exists to highlight the existence of the social contract or the obligation that undergirds a safe and civil society. It is fundamental that the social contract that undergirds our society is that individual freedoms are enjoyed in accordance with the commitment of its citizens to engage in their social responsibilities. 
The vote is seen as that which enables citizens’ participation in choosing the Government that rules over them but also the vote ultimately brings the highest level of accountability of that Government to the public as we see election by election. So we agree that the vote ought to be enshrined in measures of protection that enable our system of government to remain free from the encumbrances of incompetence incoherence and failure. The vote is a safeguard of the institution of democracy which offers the best opportunity of political freedom for all those people who live under its protection. 
No person is truly free; we all live in regard to others. The law exists to arbitrate between the interests of individuals so that we can coexist for the best benefit of all. The social contract is critical for a safe and civil society. The notion of the social contract implies that people give up something to gain something. They give up some sovereignty to a Government or authority in order to receive the benefits of social order that comes through the rule of law. The social contract can also be thought of as an agreement by the governed on the set of rules by which they are governed. It could be said that lawbreakers give up nothing so something is taken from them. In simple terms this bill is essentially saying that for a person to participate in the election of lawmakers that person cannot be a lawbreaker. That is the social contract the obligation. 
Just as I close— 
Chris Hipkins 
: Is that it? 
JONATHAN YOUNG 
: No no I have more—I can do more than that. One must have a respect for and a willing compliance to that which people seek to participate in—that is the establishing of and living under the law. 
We take our electoral law seriously. In fact we say that a person has to be of a certain age before they can participate in elections. Why? We have drawn a line to say that we judge that at 18 someone is of an age where their understanding and maturity enables them to participate in the election of lawmakers. This is not just a matter of exercising a rite of passage; it is a matter of embracing responsibilities. So as a society we have set limits. We are now shifting the line to recognise the obligation of responsible participation not just the exercising of the right to participation. Thank you.
Mallard Trevor: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Mallard Trevor: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9494] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Rather than starting with half a minute to go might we take leave to take the dinner adjournment now? I have seen 5.59 p.m. on the clock for about half a minute now.
Tisch Lindsay: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9494] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I understand that the next financial review that members wish to debate is the financial review of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. Will members please turn to the Primary Production Committee’s report—
By-Election — Mana 
By-Election — Mana 
[Volume:669;Page:15905] 
Wednesday 8 December 2010 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
By-Election 
Mana 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have been advised by the Electoral Commissioner that pursuant to section 185 of the Electoral Act 1993 the name of the member elected to the House of Representatives for the Mana electoral district is Kristopher John Faafoi.
Tisch Lindsay: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9494] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The time has come for me to leave the Chair. I shall resume the Chair at 7.30 p.m. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.
Boscawen John: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Boscawen John: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9473] 
JOHN BOSCAWEN (ACT) 
: 
 I seek leave to lodge with the Committee a copy of my letter to the Minister of Justice dated 14 December 2009 requesting that Strategic Finance be put into statutory management. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is anyone opposed to that course of action? It appears not. Leave is granted. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
JOHN BOSCAWEN 
: I seek leave to lodge with the Committee a copy of the Minister of Justice’s reply to my letter dated 21 January 2010. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is anyone opposed to that course of action? It appears not. Leave is granted. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9482] 
KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) 
: 
 The financial review of the State Services Commission was undertaken by the Government Administration Committee. One of the main aims of the National-led Government is to provide services to the public. In February 2009 the Government released its  
Expectations for Pay and Employment Conditions in the State Sector 
. These new expectations reflect the Government’s priority in economic and fiscal situations. 
The key points were that any changes to pay must not lead to private sector movements and must take into account the total cost and value of employment conditions. State sector agencies that were required to consult the State Services Commission regarding changes to the conditions of employment are expected to demonstrate that the outcomes are fiscally sustainable within the baseline responsible and demonstrate value for money. This was not a wage freeze. It was about moderating wage expectations in the public sector which has continued through the financial year. 
The National-led Government is not about growing the Public Service but about growing services to the public. This means more front-line service delivery and more efficient back-office services. 
The National-led Government has halted the growth in Public Service bureaucracy. The human resource capability strategy of 2009 shows that the Public Service is heeding the Government’s call for wages restraint and small core Government administration. The summary reports a decline in the number of public servants since December 2008 and labour force index data show that growth in Public Service wages has slowed. It is not the numbers; it is the service that this Government has committed to the public and we are providing that. Thank you. 
Report noted.
Calvert Hilary Jane: Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Calvert Hilary Jane: Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:669;Page:15969] 
HILARY CALVERT (ACT) 
: 
 I rise to take a call on the third reading of the Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill. I cannot pretend this bill is my favourite thing. Trevor Mallard leaving the House earlier and not being able to vote while he was away could count as a favourite thing. Perhaps popping a ping-pong ball in the mouth of the honourable member over there who all day keeps turning his head from side to side with his mouth open could count as my favourite thing. This bill is not my favourite thing. However Act is supporting National on this bill.
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9458] 
11. 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
 to the  
Minister of Agriculture 
: What steps has the Government recently made to progress domestic agriculture greenhouse gas research? 
Hon DAVID CARTER (Minister of Agriculture) 
: 
 Earlier this month the Prime Minister officially opened the Government’s Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre based in Palmerston North. The opening of the centre marks a new era for agricultural emissions research and it will be a key part of New Zealand’s efforts to find practical ways to curb emissions from agriculture. It is a clear demonstration of this Government’s commitment to responding sensibly to climate change. 
Colin King 
: Why has the Government committed $50 million to funding the research centre? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: Reducing agricultural emissions while improving the productivity and profitability of our farmers and growers is one of the biggest challenges New Zealand faces. The centre will support New Zealand in taking a significant step forward in meeting this challenge. Another major aspect of New Zealand’s efforts in this area is of course the Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases which is going from strength to strength; 26 countries have now signed up. My colleague Tim Groser and I will host the first full meeting of the alliance here in Wellington next month. The alliance is something for which New Zealand is now receiving considerable praise internationally. The Global Research Alliance is an initiative that all New Zealanders should be proud of. 
Hon Jim Anderton 
: Apart from the $5 million paid to the national centre for agricultural greenhouse gas research—which of course is a continuation of the previous Government’s policy—how much of the $25 million available to the Primary Growth Partnership for primary production research projects has been invested since the last election in November 2008 nearly 18 months ago? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: A total of $50 million has been dedicated to the domestic centre. For the Primary Growth Partnership we now have some hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of applications before us and they are being processed as we speak. 
Hon Jim Anderton 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I kept that question very simple. The Minister was asked to say how much had been invested in the Primary Growth Partnership which has had $25 million available in the 18 months since the last election. He did not answer that question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Forgive me; I thought I heard the Minister give an answer in which he cited an amount of money. I invite the Minister to clarify the situation. 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: I cannot give the actual amount here today— 
Hon Members 
: Zero! 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: —no it is not zero at all—because as we speak the investment advisory panel is continually reviewing projects. So as to how much exactly has been spent as of this moment I would have to come back with an accurate figure for the member.
Tisch Lindsay: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9460] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The House is in Committee on the Appropriation (2008/09 Financial Review) Bill. The financial review debate is the Committee stage of the Appropriation (2008/09 Financial Review) Bill. The time allocated for this debate is 4 hours and comprises two distinct elements. The first is the debate on the annual financial statements of the Government as reported on by the Finance and Expenditure Committee. Once this has concluded the Committee debates individual financial reviews of departments Offices of Parliament and non-departmental appropriations as reported on by select committees. The debate on the Government’s financial position may be a fairly wide-ranging one but the debates on the individual financial reviews of departments Offices of Parliament and non-departmental appropriations should be relevant to their performance in the 2008-09 financial year and their current operations. 
The compendium of financial reviews and non-departmental appropriations available for debate are on the Table. A member may have no more than two calls on each financial review. At the conclusion of the debate a single question is put on the provisions of the bill. There is no amendment to or debate on this question. The Chairperson then reports the bill to the House and it is set down for third reading forthwith. There is no debate on the third reading.
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9457] 
10. 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Conservation 
: Does she support the Department of Conservation’s first stated strategic approach “to promote the benefits and value of conservation in New Zealand”? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 Yes. 
Hon David Parker 
: Did she recently tell the Christchurch  
Press 
 that she was reviewing whether the Department of Conservation should even have an advocacy role before resiling from that extraordinary position a week later; and does her first statement to the Christchurch  
Press  
not indicate her Government’s true intention? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: The member is making mischief about the advocacy role. There is no suggestion at all that the department’s advocacy role will be eliminated. I am simply looking at whether to improve it. Some out there will say there is not enough advocacy on the part of the department; some say there is too much. I am looking at it. 
Hon David Parker 
: Does the Minister agree with the statements about the schedule 4 prohibition on mining that it “at long last puts some pegs in the sand in some very significant areas of New Zealand and says to the mining industries of New Zealand: ‘These are no-go areas.’ ” and that “national parks are not appropriate areas for mining” as stated in a proclamation to this very House by her colleague the current Minister for the Environment Nick Smith. 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: I say to that member again that that is a mischievous attempt. I quote from our Prime Minister and say that we do need to balance economic benefits we stand to gain from some increased mining activity and the obvious environmental responsibilities that we have. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: What recent examples are there of mining companies making a positive contribution to conservation? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: Just last week I accepted a gift on behalf of the people of New Zealand of 80 hectares of land on the West Coast from Rio Tinto. It has also entered into a partnership agreement with conservation volunteers including a 5-year funding commitment to restore that land from the sea to the mountain to help protect the Westland petrel. As another example Pike River Coal which is mining in or under the Paparoa National Park has sponsored a programme to support the recovery of the blue duck in addition to paying for a full-time Department of Conservation liaison officer. It also pays a couple to map the kiwi population and it has a comprehensive pest and predator programme. 
Hon David Parker 
: Will the Minister release the changed terms of reference for possible mining in national parks and other conservation areas which the Prime Minister said yesterday were widened 3 weeks ago; or are there no extended terms of reference and was that just an excuse to save face? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: As the member is well aware there is a discussion document pending. When that discussion document is finalised it will be available for the member to read.
Calder Cam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Calder Cam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9456] 
9. 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Police 
: Has she received any progress reports on the roll-out of Tasers to New Zealand police officers? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Police) 
: 
 Yes. I am very pleased to report excellent progress since the Government’s decision in the last Budget to fund this $10 million project. The police now have 733 Tasers which have been distributed to police districts throughout the country. Training is under way and by June 3500 of our officers will know how to use Tasers. Trials carried out by the police over the past year are already proving the worth of Tasers. In most cases just the prospect of receiving a 50000 volt electric shock has been enough to bring volatile situations quickly under control therefore saving lives. 
Dr Cam Calder 
: What steps will be taken to ensure that Tasers are used appropriately? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Since the trial began last year the police have introduced and maintained a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation programme. This involves the reporting of all use of force regular audit processes the conducting of a medical examination of any person who has been Tasered and an independent review of those medical reports. I am very pleased that the police have another non-lethal option in their tool kit. My Government is serious about making sure that the police have the right tools to do their job safely and effectively.
Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9444] 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 I acknowledge the Speaker’s success at the Helensville show on the weekend. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: What the gold medal? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: The member Gerry Brownlee would have done well there speaking of bull. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: Always happy to take a blue ribbon Phil. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think that is about equal; it is 50-50.
Turei Metiria: Points of Order — Whaling—Arrest of Peter Bethune by Japanese Authorities 
Turei Metiria: Points of Order — Whaling—Arrest of Peter Bethune by Japanese Authorities 
[Volume:661;Page:9444] 
METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move a motion without notice about the arrest of the New Zealand anti-whaling activist Peter Bethune by the Japanese authorities. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Dunne Peter: Motions — Earthquake—Chile 
Dunne Peter: Motions — Earthquake—Chile 
[Volume:661;Page:9443] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 On behalf of United Future I join with others who have expressed sympathy to the Government and people of Chile for the sad loss of life and destruction of infrastructure that occurred in the wake of the Concepción earthquake on 27 February. It was a timely reminder to all of us in this earthquake-prone country of the devastation that natural forces can wreak and of the consequences of those events for affected populations. The way in which the world responded to those situations reinforced not only our commitment to be a good international citizen and play our part but also the reality that when the time comes and this country is on the receiving end of the disaster—should we ever be so afflicted—we will be similarly grateful for the level of international aid to help our country recover that has been provided in the case of Chile. 
I acknowledge too the work of the New Zealand civil defence authorities in the wake of the tsunami warning. I acknowledge the work of Radio New Zealand which demonstrated the value and worth of having a quality public broadcaster through the work it did in keeping New Zealanders informed of the threat and risks of the tsunami and the steps that needed to be taken to make sure we were well prepared. Although Chile is 11 hours’ flight and many thousands of kilometres of ocean away from New Zealand the fact that the tsunami spread so quickly even though it was not of a great height when it got here reinforced our vulnerability and our link to those people. 
I join with others in expressing condolence and sympathy to those who have lost loved ones in this tragedy but also I acknowledge the work of our emergency services in helping make sure that this country would be able to respond in the event that disaster struck here as well. 
Motion agreed to.
Finlayson Christopher: Appropriation (2008/09 Financial Review) Bill — Third Reading 
Finlayson Christopher: Appropriation (2008/09 Financial Review) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9512] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Finance 
: I move  
That the Appropriation (2008/09 Financial Review) Bill be now read a third time 
. 
Bill read a third time.
Norman Russel William: Motions — Earthquake—Chile 
Norman Russel William: Motions — Earthquake—Chile 
[Volume:661;Page:9442] 
Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 The Green Party joins with others in expressing condolences to the people of Chile in their time of tragedy. Our thoughts and heartfelt sympathy are with all those families who have lost loved ones in the earthquake and its aftermath. For those of us in New Zealand it is difficult to understand the damage and the human tragedy that Chile has been through. We too have had our disasters but we have had nothing on that scale for a long time. Our geologically young country is also prone to earthquakes and we share in the very human feeling of a common vulnerability to a disaster that is beyond our control. So we extend our deepest sympathy to those in Chile who have suffered loss and are struggling to return to their normal lives. We commend the support that the Government and New Zealanders have given to Chile in its time of need and we wish the Chilean people all the best in recovering from this disaster.
Hide Rodney: Motions — Earthquake—Chile 
Hide Rodney: Motions — Earthquake—Chile 
[Volume:661;Page:9442] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 On behalf of the ACT Party I join with the rest of Parliament in this time of sorrow for the Chilean people. We remind ourselves of what a wonderful wonderful people the people of Chile are across the water from New Zealand of what great friends they are to the people of New Zealand and of how close we feel as a country particularly in this time of trouble for Chile. Like other parties ACT too supports the Prime Minister and the Government in the efforts they have made to provide assistance.
Foss Craig: Westpac New Zealand Bill — First Reading 
Foss Craig: Westpac New Zealand Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:669;Page:15950] 
CRAIG FOSS (National—Tukituki) 
: 
 I move  
That the Finance and Expenditure Committee 
 consider the Westpac New Zealand Bill and that the committee report finally to the House on or before 8 April 2011 
. 
Motion agreed to.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Immigration—New Immigration Retirement Package Whaling—Arrest of Peter Bethune by Japanese Authorities 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Immigration—New Immigration Retirement Package Whaling—Arrest of Peter Bethune by Japanese Authorities 
[Volume:661;Page:9460] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Hon Pete Hodgson seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the Government’s new immigration retirement package announced by the Minister of Immigration on 10 March 2010. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. However as Speaker’s ruling 175/6 makes clear not every ministerial announcement even an important one will give grounds for an urgent debate. There must be such an element of urgency that the matter must take precedence over other business. This application for urgent debate is declined. 
I have also received a letter from Metiria Turei seeking an urgent debate on the “Government’s decision” of 12 March 2010 not to denounce the arrest in Japan of Pete Bethune of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. This is a particular case of recent occurrence. The Government though has no responsibility for the actions of a private citizen or for the actions of the Japanese authorities and there is a legal process being followed in Japan. An oral question on this matter was lodged and answered today. I am not persuaded that this matter requires the immediate attention of the House to take precedence over other business. This application is also declined.
Goff Phil: Motions — Earthquake—Chile 
Goff Phil: Motions — Earthquake—Chile 
[Volume:661;Page:9441] 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 On behalf of the New Zealand Labour Party can I add our concern our support our sympathy and our condolences to the people and to the Government of Chile following the massive 8.8 on the Richter scale earthquake on 27 February. That earthquake left an estimated 700 people dead over half a million homes destroyed and 2 million people affected as well as doing enormous damage to infrastructure like roads bridges and hospitals. In cities like Concepción and Constitución the devastation was overwhelming and the overall cost of the damage is something approaching US$30 billion. To put that in context it is about 15 percent of the annual GDP of Chile. 
Chile of course is our nearest neighbour to the east albeit 11 hours’ flight from New Zealand. Over recent years our friendship and our links our working together on the trade front and our people-to-people arrangements like working holidays schemes—all of those things—have increased and strengthened our relationship with Chile. I welcome the assistance that New Zealand has been able to give—half a million dollars to the international efforts to help Chile—but I wonder whether we might have been able to extend other assistance to Chile given the strong relationship that we have with the people of that country. 
After Haiti and the Samoan tsunami there is again a question of whether we might develop a ready-reaction force utilising the skills of our defence force our police and our civil defence personnel to help with search rescue and recovery. New Zealand’s own vulnerability to earthquakes is well known and the practical experience that our people would get on the ground by assisting in that way as well as the actual assistance that we gave to the country that we were helping would I believe be invaluable. 
Once again to the people of Chile affected by that disaster I add Labour’s voice to the expressions of concern and support from our Parliament today.
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Ireland Republic—Minister for Health and Children Colombia—Minister of Foreign Affairs 
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Ireland Republic—Minister for Health and Children Colombia—Minister of Foreign Affairs 
[Volume:661;Page:9441] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that Ms Mary Harney Minister for Health and Children of the Republic of Ireland is present in the gallery. I am sure that members would wish that she be welcomed.
Barker Rick: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Barker Rick: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9510] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Members we are getting close to the end of the time for this debate. The situation as I understand it is that the Labour Party has exhausted its calls. My advice from the Government whip is that members now wish to debate the report on the Ministry of Maori Development.
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Ireland Republic—Minister for Health and Children Colombia—Minister of Foreign Affairs 
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Ireland Republic—Minister for Health and Children Colombia—Minister of Foreign Affairs 
[Volume:661;Page:9441] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I also have pleasure in informing members that Mr Jaime Bermúdez Merizalde Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Colombia is present in the gallery. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed.
Graham Kennedy: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — First Reading 
Graham Kennedy: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9525] 
Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party simply endorses what has been said tonight with regard to the Courts (Remote Participation) Bill. Technology has allowed us to consider this now. It “is an idea whose time has come.” to quote a colleague. There are clearly some implications to the bill that we will need to explore further in the select committee. We look forward to doing so constructively with the Government. Thank you.
Borrows Chester: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — First Reading 
Borrows Chester: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9523] 
CHESTER BORROWS (National—Whanganui) 
: 
 I relish the opportunity to speak on the Courts (Remote Participation) Bill. To translate what the previous speaker Lianne Dalziel said this measure is a really good idea because it is cheap and it fits the criteria for safety. People like Liam Ashley will not be beaten up and killed when being transported to court. If the prisoner who killed Liam Ashley had been able to stay at the prison if evidence had been able to be given by way of an audiovisual link then lives would not have been put at risk; the safety of prison officers and other prisoners would not have been put at risk. 
Lianne Dalziel also said that it is pretty important to check that no laws are broken when we do this sort of stuff. We need to check whether any regulations need to be changed to allow this much simpler really good idea to be implemented. I think everyone across the House will support the legislation because it is a good idea. It will save time and money and it will have benefits in terms of expediting justice. I commend the bill to the House.
Visitors — Ireland Republic—Minister for Health and Children Colombia—Minister of Foreign Affairs 
Visitors — Ireland Republic—Minister for Health and Children Colombia—Minister of Foreign Affairs 
[Volume:661;Page:9441] 
Tuesday 16 March 2010 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Ireland Republic—Minister for Health and Children 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that Ms Mary Harney Minister for Health and Children of the Republic of Ireland is present in the gallery. I am sure that members would wish that she be welcomed. 
Colombia—Minister of Foreign Affairs 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I also have pleasure in informing members that Mr Jaime Bermúdez Merizalde Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Colombia is present in the gallery. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed.
Foss Craig: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Foss Craig: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9447] 
2. 
CRAIG FOSS (National—Tukituki) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: Has he received any recent reports about the state of the New Zealand economy; if so what do they reveal? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 Yes; last Thursday the Reserve Bank delivered its Monetary Policy Statement. The statement highlights the longstanding structural imbalances in the economy. It highlights the need to move away from an economy based on big increases in Government spending and high levels of household borrowing to an economy based on savings exports business investment and new jobs. 
Craig Foss 
: What does the Monetary Policy Statement project for future growth and how does this compare with the recent past? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The Reserve Bank expects solid growth through the next few years. It projects over 10 percent cumulative real growth for the 3 years to March 2013. This compares with anaemic growth in recent years. In the 3 years to September 2008 before the global crisis began growth in New Zealand’s real GDP per capita was actually negative. That is average incomes for New Zealanders were falling at a time when the rest of the world was growing strongly. 
Craig Foss 
: How have reports about the New Zealand economy been received? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: There is a great deal of interest in these reports about the New Zealand economy particularly when they come from the Government. Just by way of contrast I note that the Prime Minister and I addressed a packed audience of over 200 people at the Invercargill Working Men’s Club. The other day I saw a photo on page 15 of the  
Southland Times 
 showing the Hon David Cunliffe addressing about six people at the same venue.
Appropriation (2008/09 Financial Review) Bill — Third Reading 
Appropriation (2008/09 Financial Review) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9512] 
Appropriation (2008/09 Financial Review) Bill 
Third Reading 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Finance 
: I move  
That the Appropriation (2008/09 Financial Review) Bill be now read a third time 
. 
Bill read a third time.
Chauvel Charles: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
Chauvel Charles: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9514] 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
: 
 This will be a very brief call to echo the comments that my colleague Lianne Dalziel has just made on the Judicial Matters Bill. As Lianne Dalziel said we stand by the arrangement that has been made between the Attorney-General and the Labour shadow Minister on this matter and we will support the incorporation of the Supplementary Order Paper108 at this point. Given that it would be good for members to hear from the Attorney-General just how the change to be made by this Supplementary Order Paper to new Part 1A will increase judicial throughput in the District Courts. 
We have heard that a number of acting warrants have been issued—the number was quoted—and that is somehow thought to be a bad thing. It would be good to hear why that is. One view is that at least it might be cheaper to have acting judges on a warrant backfilling in the District Courts rather than new warrants being made up and having all the costs associated with tenured judges sitting on an indefinite basis. The famous quotation about dukes and dreadnoughts comes to mind. 
If we are not to have a select committee process where we can get a properly ventilated argument about the changes proposed then 16 new judges being paid a significant salary each being paid significant amounts by way of a charge against the Crown for their support staff and for all the other accoutrements of office that will be required for them is a significant thing to commit to. As we are not to have committee scrutiny of whether that will result in better justice in the District Courts it would be good to hear why the Minister in the chair thinks that will be the case. The alternatives could be for example resorting to some variation of the current solution which is the warranting of acting judges or perhaps discussing with the judiciary via the appropriate authorities ways in which at least in the lower courts we might get more efficient outcomes.