edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Pettis Jill: Coroners Bill — First Reading 
Pettis Jill: Coroners Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:622;Page:18091] 
JILL PETTIS (Labour—Whanganui) 
: 
 A lot of bills have been dealt with under this urgency motion and in the main the debate has been polite and constructive so I apologise for the contribution that has just come from Tony Ryall of the National Party. This is an important bill. It is about a very sensitive matter. It is about something that most of us do not like to consider which is the death of family and loved ones. 
My mother passed away just last month and because her general practitioner was not in town other services had to be involved at the time of her passing. The officers with whom I was required to communicate following my mother’s sudden passing were nothing but professional kind courteous and considerate. Coroners play a huge role in assisting family members at a time that is most difficult for them. 
This bill includes a provision for establishing the office of Chief Coroner. We will also move to having a smaller number of mostly full-time legally qualified coroners and special steps will be taken to ensure that families are notified of the significant stages that occur during the coronial process. 
One of the other provisions will be that full-time coroners will have more time to undertake public education. I know from attending various courses in my own area long before I came into Parliament that coroners involve themselves in talking to groups involved in the community about their role and about how they might best assist families and other people in the community at a difficult time such as the death of a family member. 
This bill has been long awaited and I am confident it will go a long way to enhancing the inquiry and inquest processes. I look forward to it passing through the select committee and being reported back to the House as it is a means of assisting the coronial officers themselves and the community at large.
Hughes Darren: Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Hughes Darren: Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:613;Page:10197] 
DARREN HUGHES (Labour—Otaki) 
: 
I rise to speak in support of this bill that is being introduced by the Hon Phil Goff. I support the bill despite that irrational and very unhelpful contribution from a former Minister of Justice who actually had an opportunity when he had a warrant in that portfolio area to try to do something about the issues he raised in Parliament tonight. Mr Goff has introduced legislation that will bring about an active management regime for child sex offenders in the community which will be aimed at managing the long-term risks posed by those offenders. It is a proactive and practical way of doing something about that rather than sitting on the Opposition benches and crying crocodile tears over these very important issues.
Choudhary Ashraf: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Choudhary Ashraf: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:613;Page:9799] 
10.  
Dr ASHRAF CHOUDHARY (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Conservation 
: What progress is being made on the protection of marine mammals? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 Last night I announced three initiatives to improve the protection of marine mammals: an awareness campaign focusing on avoidable threats such as marine debris; the development of a threat minimisation plan; and finally a cooperative working relationship between my department and the fishing industry to reduce marine mammal deaths. 
Dr Ashraf Choudhary 
: What has been the response of the fishing industry to the Minister’s initiatives? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: Very positive. The Seafood Industry Council has welcomed the development of a plan for whale dolphin and seal recovery. Owen Symmans the council’s chief executive said yesterday that the seafood industry is keen to work with the Department of Conservation to develop practical solutions to marine mammal issues. I commend the industry for its responsiveness to conservation concerns.
Cullen Michael: Urgency 
Cullen Michael: Urgency 
[Volume:608;Page:5358] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That extraordinary urgency be accorded the introduction and passing of the Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill 
. This bill changes the excise duty rate on alcohol between 14 and 23 percent by alcohol content to deal with a youth drinking problem and comes into force tonight so requires to be passed this evening.
Hunt Jonathan: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Hunt Jonathan: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:8996] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have no difficulty in ruling about this at all and I do not need any further assistance. I refer members to Speaker’s ruling 6/1 (Supplement) which states: “Members may not be addressed by nicknames first names and so on. They should be addressed by their proper name or by the position or portfolio they hold.” There are no exceptions. I was present during the whole of the general debate today. It was a vigorous debate and so it should be. That is the whole point of a general debate. But members are not to be referred to in terms such as gnomes or dwarfs. They are members or honourable members and that is the end of the matter.
Robertson H V Ross: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15914] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the honourable member for drawing that to my attention. He will note that the senior whip has not put any more closure motions. In reality the position is that it is in the hands of the chair of the Committee as to when a closure motion is accepted. He will also know that last time the speakers were given a good hearing and I think it went very well.
Peck Mark: Holidays Bill — Third Reading 
Peck Mark: Holidays Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10746] 
MARK PECK (Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 Sometimes one listens to the most amazing things in this House. I find it absolutely galling that that member—who is probably the only member of Parliament in the Chamber who still has not paid her grievance settlement to the worker whom she ripped off and who has never had less than 4 weeks’ leave in her life and takes holidays when she feels like it—stands up and says it is patronising for workers to get 4 weeks’ leave. There is a word for that. We cannot use that particular word in the House but I say to that member that she should pay her bills and treat her staff with some decency. Then there would not be a need for Parliament to pass legislation like this. I tell members that if it were not for the fact that there have been Labour Governments over the years workers would still be on 2 weeks’ holiday. That is what that member would deem to be about right. 
I have been going around and talking to the workers in my electorate. When I talk to them about some of the Opposition’s arguments they say: “Let them work 49 weeks a year and have 3 weeks’ leave. Let them do that and then let them come and talk to us about how patronising it is for us to get 4 weeks’ annual leave.” I have negotiated wages and conditions in a former life and I know the workers never got a jot more than what they were entitled to under the legislation. Employers are not quite as benevolent as some would make out. Sure they value service and time—I will give Mr Adams that particular point—but members must not think for a moment that employers are benevolent to the point of giving people all the time off that they require. We should be clear on one thing: leave is essential to the good mental health of workers in performing their work. 
I make one final point in conclusion. If all those alleged fears about this legislation driving the economy down are true why is it that at this particular point in our history when we have gone through a point of considerable reform in the labour market we have the lowest unemployment rates that we have had for 15 years? I say to those members opposite that they will live to regret the speeches they have made in this particular debate. They have been totally irresponsible in the way they have promoted this legislation. It is a good bill workers will welcome it and if those members want to oppose it at the next election be it on their heads.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:620;Page:15735] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 Is it still the intention of the Government to pass the seabed and foreshore legislation prior to Christmas?
Personal Explanations — Replies to Questions for Written Answer 
Personal Explanations — Replies to Questions for Written Answer 
[Volume:609;Page:6121] 
Personal Explanations 
Replies to Questions for Written Answer 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Minister of Maori Affairs) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to make a personal explanation under Standing Order 343. 
Hon ROGER SOWRY (Deputy Leader—NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That sounds very much like a ministerial statement. I can well remember when the Rt Hon Jenny Shipley tried to make a personal explanation in this House and the Labour Party stopped that from occurring on the basis that it should be a ministerial statement because it related to answers given in the House. I think that exactly the same rules should apply now. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The same member raised that precise point in the last session of the House and you ruled then that the standard procedure throughout the time that you and I have been MPs is for a Minister to make a personal explanation to correct an answer. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The answer is quite clear: it is in the hands of members. A member has asked for leave to make a personal explanation; if there is any objection then the member cannot make a personal explanation. Is there any objection? 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Can you advise us as to what the situation is? You have just told us that it is the choice of the House as to whether a member can make a personal explanation but it is a requirement of the Standing Orders for the mistake to be corrected. If a mistake is made by a Minister surely the Minister is obliged to make a ministerial statement to correct his or her previous answers. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the Minister has made a mistake in a written reply he can record the mistake by a written reply. I asked for the leave of the House. Is there any objection to the Minister making a personal explanation? There is. 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Minister of Maori Affairs) 
: 
 Yesterday in the House I said that I— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There is objection. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I now want to raise a quite serious matter which is a matter for future reference and is not in relation to this case. In relation to the ruling you have just given where a Minister discovers that a mistake has occurred in an answer seeks to make a personal explanation to correct that answer and the House denies that leave I see that as being the end of the matter. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No. All that the Minister now has to do is to supply the Clerk with an answer in writing and that will be sufficient.
Simich Clem: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Simich Clem: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:17081] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: We now come to the amendments to the Minister’s amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 302.
Visitors — Speaker of Legislative Assembly Victoria 
Visitors — Speaker of Legislative Assembly Victoria 
[Volume:607;Page:4669] 
Visitors 
Speaker of Legislative Assembly Victoria 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that the Hon Judy Maddigan the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly Victoria Australia accompanied by Mr Ray Purdy the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly are present in the gallery. I am sure that members would wish that they be welcomed.
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8145] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 47 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Amendments agreed to.
Prebble Richard: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Prebble Richard: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13041] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I was indicating to you that I think the way out of this is to seek leave to allow Mr Marc Alexander to be able to have a call. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The Committee is the master of its own destiny. 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: In that case I seek leave for Mr Marc Alexander to be able to make one speech and for the vote to be then taken. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The Committee is the master of its own destiny. Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 204 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 194 be agreed to.
Brown Peter: Maritime Security Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Brown Peter: Maritime Security Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12209] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I seek leave to do exactly as you have suggested.
Personal Explanations — Maori Language—Interpretation 
Personal Explanations — Maori Language—Interpretation 
[Volume:615;Page:11408] 
Personal Explanations 
Maori Language—Interpretation 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Minister of Maori Affairs) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to make a personal explanation. This afternoon following a point of order I stated that I had not used the term “you” in Maori in answer to a question. I have now listened to a tape and realised that I was mistaken. I had used the Maori term for “you”. I apologise unreservedly to the House for my error.
Gallagher Martin: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Gallagher Martin: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16036] 
MARTIN GALLAGHER (Labour—Hamilton West) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17938] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9. 
Amendments agreed to.
Pettis Jill: Climate Change Response Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Pettis Jill: Climate Change Response Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20409] 
JILL PETTIS (Labour—Whanganui) 
: 
 That was Mr John Key. He used to be good but he is not any more and it is a sad misfortune that has befallen such a young and promising man. He talked about George Bush at 11.30 at night. George Bush is not awake at 11.30 at night and we have that on authority from his wife Laura Bush who described herself as a “desperate housewife” because George retired at 9 p.m. at night. So I think Mr Key is a bit mistaken. 
His views while almost Neanderthal in their approach are sad coming from a young man who showed such promise when he first came into this House. I am proud to say that this Government’s position is based on environmental integrity whereas the Opposition’s position is opportunistic and inconsistent with its earlier stance. We have flip-flops all over the place. The jandal award is being dusted off yet again because Nick Smith—that “blue-green” spokesperson—said at one stage that National would opt out of the Kyoto agreement at the first chance if countries like the US and Australia did not sign up. Well we know that our good friends in Australia mine uranium in a national park which is something that we would never do in New Zealand. 
Nick Smith went on to say that eventually climate change and issues associated with it would—in his words not mine—“…stuff life on earth. New Zealand can’t ignore the problem. New Zealanders must do their bit.” That is representative of National’s position on this issue or rather its total lack of position because those members change their views. They do not give leadership. They do not send a very clear and unequivocal message to the public of New Zealand who are incredibly interested in this issue. 
Guy Salmon has spoken positively about this Government’s environmental policy in this particular regard. So I am pleased to say that this bill actually extends the regulation-making powers of the Forests Act to enable the establishment of a mechanism to allow landowners to access the value of carbon sequestration that is created under the Kyoto Protocol. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: Absolute rubbish! 
JILL PETTIS 
: That is absolutely a fact and this Government is sending a very clear and unequivocal message to the people of New Zealand. We are a country that has a proud record on the environment. New Zealanders from all walks of life want to look out for the environment and this Government is very happy to be a partner in doing that.
Vote: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
Vote: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
[Volume:624;Page:19206] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the Real Estate Agents Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 76 
Anderton(P) 
Duynhoven (P) 
Locke  (P) 
Samuels(P) 
Barker(P) 
Dyson(P) 
Mackey J (P) 
Shirley(P) 
Barnett  (P) 
Ewen-Street   
Mackey M(P) 
Simich(P) 
Benson-Pope(P) 
Fairbrother(P) 
Maharey(P) 
Sowry(P) 
Beyer  (P) 
Fitzsimons(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Sutton(P) 
Bradford(P) 
Gallagher(P) 
Mallard(P) 
Swain(P) 
Burton(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mapp(P) 
Tamihere(P) 
Carter C (P) 
Gosche(P) 
Mark(P) 
Tanczos(P) 
Chadwick(P) 
Hartley(P) 
McCully(P) 
Tizard(P)  
Choudhary(P) 
Hawkins(P) 
O'Connor(P) 
Turei(P) 
Clark(P) 
Hereora(P) 
Okeroa(P) 
Ward(P) 
Coddington(P) 
Hide(P) 
Parker(P) 
Williamson(P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Hobbs   
Peck(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Cullen(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Pettis (P) 
Wong(P) 
Cunliffe(P) 
Horomia(P) 
Pillay(P) 
Yates   
Dalziel(P) 
Hunt(P) 
Rich(P) 
Donald(P) 
Kedgley(P) 
Ririnui(P) 
Donnelly   
Key(P) 
Robertson(P) 
Duncan(P) 
King(P) 
Robson(P) 
Teller: 
Dunne(P) 
Laban(P) 
Roy(P) 
Hughes   
Noes 44 
Adams(P)  
Copeland(P) 
Ogilvy(P) 
te Heuheu(P) 
Alexander(P) 
Eckhoff(P) 
Paraone(P) 
Tisch(P) 
Ardern(P) 
English(P) 
Perry(P) 
Turia(P) 
Baldock(P) 
Field   
Peters J (P) 
Turner   
Brash(P) 
Franks   
Peters W (P) 
Wang(P) 
Brown (P) 
Goudie(P) 
Power 
Woolerton(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Gudgeon(P) 
Prebble(P) 
Worth 
Carter D (P) 
Heatley(P) 
Ryall(P) 
Carter J (P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Smith L (P) 
Catchpole(P) 
Jones(P)  
Smith M (P) 
Collins(P) 
McNair(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Teller: 
Connell(P) 
Newman(P) 
Stewart(P) 
Scott   
Bill read a third time.
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13048] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Noes 61 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 213 in the name of the Hon Paul Swain to Part 3 be agreed to.
Prebble Richard: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question No. 5 to Minister Questions to Members 
Prebble Richard: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question No. 5 to Minister Questions to Members 
[Volume:607;Page:4974] 
2. 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT NZ) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee 
: Has a committee meeting been set to consider the petition of Kenneth Wang and others requesting a review of the new English language immigration tests; if not why not? 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Chairperson of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee): 
 The committee currently has some 46 petitions before it. It will be meeting in the very near future to consider its course of action in respect of all of them. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Can the chairman assure the House that the committee when looking at this petition will firstly take notice of the fact that it is an urgent issue and secondly take into account that I understand more than 25 percent of the total Chinese population of New Zealand has signed the petition which would be the equivalent of a general petition turning up here of 750000 names; or does it not care about Chinese opinion? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: In considering each and all of the 46 petitions before us all relevant facts will be taken into account. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: Why does the committee not consider the petition on an urgent basis since there is another petition by Jackie Orr and others in front of the committee relating to the new English language immigration test? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: There are a number of petitions before the committee all of which would plead urgency with regard to their particular case. As I indicated in my original answer in the very near future we will be meeting to consider each of those.
Horomia Parekura: Te Whanau-a-Taupara Trust Empowering Bill — Second Reading Third Reading 
Horomia Parekura: Te Whanau-a-Taupara Trust Empowering Bill — Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5727] 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA (NZ Labour—Ikaroa Rawhiti) 
: 
 I move  
That the Te Whanau-a-Taupara Trust Empowering Bill be now read a second time 
. I am pleased to sponsor this bill on behalf of the Te Whanau-a-Taupara Trust and its beneficiaries. The bill proposes to dissolve the Waerenga-a-hika Trust and constitute the Te Whanau-a-Taupara Trust in order to modernise the administration of the trust and remove existing impediments to its effective operation. 
The Waerenga-a-hika Trust Act 1947 provided for the incorporation of the new board to hold property then held by the Waerenga-a-hika Trust Board. The Act has not been amended since 1947. The present trustees consider that it is now timely that new arrangements be made to provide for the future needs and objectives of the trust. 
The bill was introduced on 21 December 2001 and was referred to the Maori Affairs Committee for consideration. The committee received and considered only two submissions on the bill. The submissions identified the challenges for the trust the key one being the need to modernise its administration. After thorough examination of the bill the select committee has unanimously proposed a number of amendments that clarify certain matters contained in the bill and modify to some extent the provisions in the trust deed. I wish to acknowledge and thank the members of the Maori Affairs Committee for their thorough examination of the bill. 
In conclusion I urge that this bill proceed without delay.
Cullen Michael: Shop Trading Hours Act Repeal Act (Abolition of Restrictions) Amendment Bill — Procedure 
Cullen Michael: Shop Trading Hours Act Repeal Act (Abolition of Restrictions) Amendment Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:609;Page:6761] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the time by which the Commerce Committee must finally report the Shop Trading Hours Act Repeal Act (Abolition of Restrictions) Amendment Bill to be extended to 18 December 2003. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.
[Volume:620;Page:15717] 
The Electricity Commission can have a systems operation levy a market operation levy a supply security levy if it wishes—and I am sure it will—an electricity efficiency levy and if that is not enough it can have a consumer protection levy. One has to ask how a levy protects the consumer. I would have thought it should have a levy protection levy with all those coming down. The sixth type of levy is an electricity transmission levy. There are six different levies that this Electricity Commission can put in place in order to tax consumers because ultimately they will pay. But last of all the commission can levy what is known as “other activities” and that can be as broad as the imagination will allow. 
I have an amendment put forward by Roger Sowry in relation to the Whirinaki issue which I would like to raise with members. The amendment adds to clause 19 new subclause (5) which states: “The Minister must consult with all other generators before determining the terms of the Whirinaki contract.” Here we have the absurdity. Clause 19 informs us that the Minister may direct the commission to enter a contract relating to the Whirinaki power station. Here is a power station—a diesel generator by the way—in the Hawke’s Bay commissioned last year operating on diesel and not as a State-owned enterprise but in all senses basically subject to the Electricity Commission which is supposed to provide security of supply. 
What is happening is that the Electricity Commission is purchasing reserve power. Whirinaki will be sitting there on a retainer which will cost the consumer and it will kick in when there is a high electricity demand where supply does not meet demand. The Minister is prepared to legislate a reserve generator to meet the demand when supply is low yet he is not prepared to legislate for or on any policy platform support for those in the private sector or even for State-owned enterprises to go into the construction of generation plants themselves. 
The Minister will not promote in any way coal generators because he is against coal. He will not promote in any way geothermal generators. We saw this in recent times when the extension of the geothermal generation at Ngawha in the far north was literally put on the back-burner by this Government. The Minister will not promote in any way other generators around the country. In fact as the Hon Richard Prebble mentioned the E3P project in Huntly was not going to get off the ground at all unless it was underwritten because that generator had no confidence whatsoever that it would be a runner with current Government policy and legislation.
Hughes Darren: Education (Export Education Levy) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Hughes Darren: Education (Export Education Levy) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:14754] 
DARREN HUGHES (Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Care of Children Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Care of Children Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:16694] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 3 be agreed to. 
Ayes 60 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9. 
Noes 54 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 8; Maori Party 1. 
Schedule 3 agreed to.
Parker David: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Parker David: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5431] 
DAVID PARKER (NZ Labour—Otago) 
: 
 This legislation does not “trifle” with sherry. It is legislation that is “fortified” with common sense and no amount of “whining” from the Opposition will provide any “proof” to the contrary. I submit that in terms of this legislation those late-night listeners be they “Ethyl” or “Methyl” will not be able to bear much more of this debate. So I suggest that we “nip” this debate in the bud and in the “spirit” of cooperation pass this legislation unanimously.
Hunt Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hunt Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:616;Page:11643] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is debatable material but if the Minister has anything to say later on in the day he can of course make a correction at that time.
Hughes Darren: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Hughes Darren: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16063] 
DARREN HUGHES (Junior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
A party vote was called for on the question That the question be now put.
Hide Rodney: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Hide Rodney: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18638] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I want to draw your attention to this issue. We know that the Government is under pressure to get a lot of legislation through but I want you to reflect on the fact that the ACT party has three MPs here. Deborah Coddington has moved an amendment that the Government has incorporated into the bill. I have come down to the Chamber to speak as party leader but I have not had the call and so have not had that opportunity. Stephen Franks has made one contribution to the debate on Part 1. He has moved substantial amendments. The Minister chose to speak after him. He totally misrepresented Mr Franks’ amendments which Mr Worth kindly spoke in support of as having merit. The Minister then launched into a personal attack on Mr Franks. He took two calls to do so. Then you chose to close down the debate on Part 1. New Zealand First did not have an opportunity to speak and that is absolutely appalling. I saw Peter Brown requesting the call when you took the closure motion. The ACT party’s three MPs all made a contribution to the final legislation. Mr Franks had his reputation shredded and his amendments misrepresented by the Minister in the chair for political purpose and you chose to close down the debate. I accept that that is your right but I ask you to reflect on that behaviour because it does not allow Parliament to function. One party has been completely excluded and a party that has made a major contribution to this legislation has had only one opportunity to speak. I suggest to you that a way forward is for you to invite Mr Franks back to the Chamber—because I think he was provoked beyond measure—so that he can contribute to the further parts of this legislation. I think that would be fair. I suggest that you also allow some latitude so that New Zealand First and ACT can contribute to the debate on the subsequent parts of this legislation. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the member for his considered opinion and I appreciate the way he has put it. I say that I had looked at the proportionality of the debate and it was bang on apart from New Zealand First which did not seek a call at all during the 15 speeches. I may have missed that and I apologise if I have made a mistake. I have considered what Mr Hide has said about Mr Franks. If he speaks to the Clerk afterwards I will reconsider my position. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: What does he speak to the Clerk about? 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: About the time that he has been sent out. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: How can he speak to the Clerk if he is not allowed in the Chamber? 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: You Mr Hide may like to come to the Table later.
Robertson H V Ross: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
Robertson H V Ross: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:613;Page:10004] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I have already ruled on the issue. 
PETER BROWN 
: This is a new point of order.
Duynhoven Harry: Civil Aviation Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Duynhoven Harry: Civil Aviation Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11360] 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Associate Minister of Transport) 
: 
 I will take just a very quick call to sort out one or two things that are obviously puzzling people. First I say to Ms Coddington that I am amazed at her suggestion and that is all I will say about it. 
Regarding section 65J in the bill—in new Part 5A inserted by clause 24— in terms of crew members having the say over whether a person is unruly and whom the order comes from it has rightly been identified that the pilot in command of the aircraft is exactly that: the person in command. He or she will have to be satisfied that there is indeed an offence. So the person in charge the pilot will make the decision as to whether the passenger’s behaviour or language is insulting etc. Normally a crew member—usually a member of the cabin crew—would report to the pilot that the crew was having trouble with a passenger in say seat 65J or whatever it was say what was happening and ask what should be done. Major aircraft these days do contain means of restraining passengers usually by the use of the plastic cable tie type of arrangement. The crew can strap people into their seats by strapping their arms to the armrests. Those sorts of restraining devices are quite common because obviously some people react very badly when they are under the effects of alcohol or whatever. So the pilot in command can request that that action is taken. 
The pilot in command has to be satisfied that there actually is an offence. In the event that the offence is serious enough the pilot in command would notify the Aviation Security Service or the police of the offence before the aircraft comes into land. The aircraft concerned does not have to be a New Zealand aircraft; it can be any international aircraft or domestic aircraft that is landing at a New Zealand airport. The pilot in command of the aircraft wherever it has come from and whatever its nationality can request New Zealand’s Aviation Security Service or the police to meet the aircraft and the aircraft is regarded as still in flight even after it has landed and the door is opened until the pilot of the aircraft—the captain in charge—has determined that the incident is over and that the Aviation Security Service or the police has taken whatever action is required. I hope that clarifies the situation for members.
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17618] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 48 
Adams(P) 
Dunne(P) 
Ogilvy(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Alexander(P) 
Eckhoff(P) 
Paraone(P) 
Stewart(P) 
Baldock(P) 
English(P) 
Perry(P) 
te Heuheu(P) 
Brash(P) 
Franks  
Peters J 
Turner  
Brown  
Gudgeon(P) 
Peters W (P) 
Wang(P) 
Carter D (P) 
Heatley(P) 
Power  
Williamson(P) 
Carter J (P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Prebble  
Woolerton(P) 
Catchpole(P) 
Jones  
Roy(P) 
Worth(P) 
Coddington(P) 
Key(P) 
Ryall  
Collins(P) 
Mapp(P) 
Scott(P) 
Connell(P) 
Mark(P) 
Shirley(P) 
Copeland  
McNair  
Smith L (P) 
Teller: 
Donnelly  
Newman(P) 
Smith M (P) 
Tisch  
Noes 70 
Anderton(P) 
Dyson(P) 
King(P) 
Sowry(P) 
Ardern(P) 
Ewen-Street(P) 
Laban(P) 
Sutton  
Barnett  
Fairbrother  
Locke(P) 
Swain(P) 
Benson-Pope  
Field(P) 
Mackey M 
Tamihere(P) 
Beyer(P) 
Fitzsimons(P) 
Maharey(P) 
Tanczos  
Bradford(P) 
Gallagher(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Tizard(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mallard(P) 
Turei(P) 
Burton(P) 
Gosche(P) 
McCully(P) 
Turia(P) 
Carter C (P) 
Goudie(P) 
O'Connor  
Ward(P) 
Chadwick  
Hartley  
Okeroa(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Choudhary(P) 
Hawkins(P) 
Parker(P) 
Wong(P) 
Clark(P) 
Hereora(P) 
Peck(P) 
Yates (P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Hide(P) 
Pillay(P) 
Cullen  
Hobbs(P) 
Rich (P) 
Cunliffe(P) 
Hodgson  
Ririnui(P) 
Dalziel  
Horomia(P) 
Robertson  
Donald(P) 
Hughes  
Robson(P) 
Duncan(P) 
Hunt(P) 
Samuels(P) 
Teller: 
Duynhoven(P) 
Kedgley(P) 
Simich  
Pettis  
Amendment not agreed to.
Turia Tariana: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — First Reading 
Turia Tariana: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:12730] 
TARIANA TURIA (Labour—Te Tai Hauauru) 
: 
 I seek leave to take a call to speak in this debate. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member is seeking leave. Is there any objection?
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Privileges of the House and Speaker’s Actions 
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Privileges of the House and Speaker’s Actions 
[Volume:611;Page:8604] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I want to thank the members who have raised the point of order. I will give it consideration and I will rule accordingly when I am ready to do so. There have been two points made and I want to consider them.
Vote: Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:624;Page:19496] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to 
. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 47 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Motion agreed to.
Carter John: Meat Board Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Carter John: Meat Board Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:618;Page:14078] 
JOHN CARTER (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I have not had the chance to discuss this with any other of the parties but given that everybody supports this legislation I wonder whether the House would be inclined to grant leave for one wide-ranging debate over the Committee stage. I seek leave so to do. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is not.
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Land Access Report 
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Land Access Report 
[Volume:610;Page:7835] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Hon Ken Shirley seeking to debate under Standing Order 376 the report of the Land Access Ministerial Reference Group. The release of the report is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility but I cannot agree that a report that has been issued for consultation over the next few months requires attention by way of urgent debate. The application is declined.
Sowry Roger: General Debates 
Sowry Roger: General Debates 
[Volume:609;Page:6572] 
Hon ROGER SOWRY (Deputy Leader—NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Is this a new point of order? 
Hon ROGER SOWRY 
: Yes it is. I was listening to this debate on the radio in my office and I came down because this has to be the third or fourth week in a row when the Opposition has faced—and I faced it myself as I led off the debate last week—an absolute barrage right through the general debate. I am asking you and the other presiding officers when you next meet whether you can address the issue of the general debate and the fact that there is just a continual barrage. Today has been worse in the personal nature and nastiness of the comments from Mr Mallard but in other weeks we have had a continual barrage. I do not expect a ruling now but I ask if you and the Speaker at your meeting with the presiding officers can consider perhaps making sure that the Government members are not allowed to disrupt the debate in the way that they have become accustomed to doing. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I tell Mr Sowry that a certain amount of leniency as he knows is always allowed in the general debate. There has certainly been a barrage from all sides. The points of order have been dealt with now and they were dealt with when they arose.
Benson-Pope David: Gambling Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Benson-Pope David: Gambling Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:622;Page:18107] 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Minister of Fisheries) 
: 
 I am pleased to rise in support of the bill.
Chadwick Steve: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Chadwick Steve: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:616;Page:11836] 
6.  
STEVE CHADWICK (Labour—Rotorua) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: Has she received any reports on nutrition in New Zealand? 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Health) 
: 
 I have received a number of reports on nutrition the most significant being the child health nutrition survey released in November 2003 in which the growing obesity problem was identified. Yesterday the Hawke’s Bay report that was released backed up that survey. 
Steve Chadwick 
: What are some of the actions that are being taken to address this serious issue? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: I have already canvassed a number of the solutions in previous answers. There is no easy takeaway solution. We favour a multifaceted community-led approach similar to that that was shown at the weekend at Porirua’s Creekfest an event that over 10000 people attended. It was organised by health providers who showed the range of healthy foods people could eat and how they could have an active lifestyle. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Does the Minister agree with Sir John Krebs the Chair of the Food Standards Agency in England that unhealthy foods should not be sold or promoted in schools and will she therefore be calling on her ministry to develop healthy eating guidelines that all schools must follow; if not why not? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: The health-promoting schools do develop guidelines and as I said there is a major initiative between the education and health services in that respect. But I think we would do better to listen to some of the New Zealand community health workers who said that we would do far better to work with communities than to bring in a large hammer to hit people over the head with.
Cosgrove Clayton: Taxation (Annual Rates GST Trans-Tasman Imputation and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Cosgrove Clayton: Taxation (Annual Rates GST Trans-Tasman Imputation and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:613;Page:10112] 
CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 170 in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen to Part 2 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to.
Points of Order — Written Questions 
Points of Order — Written Questions 
[Volume:611;Page:8040] 
Points of Order 
Written Questions 
Hon TONY RYALL (NZ National—Bay of Plenty) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You will be aware that there is general concern that the Prime Minister is not here to answer questions in the House. I would like to draw your attention now to written questions that the Prime Minister is not answering. I have written to you about a question where I asked: “… what are the names titles and businesses of those people invited to attend the Tauranga Business-Government Forum?” to which the Prime Minister replied: “Invitations were extended to and accepted by a wide range of people in various businesses in the Tauranga region.”—even though she had sent out the invitations herself and the chamber of commerce has confirmed that the Prime Minister’s office organised the business-Government forum. I wrote to you about the matter. You required me to raise it with the Prime Minister. I wrote to her. She did not respond. I would now draw this matter to your attention. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Yes I ruled under Speaker’s ruling 130/4 that the member had to take the matter up with the Minister first which he said he has done. There is no response. I think he should come now to see me. I do not expect to deal with the details of written replies on the floor of the House but I am happy for him to come and see me. 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My point of order also involves the Prime Minister and it relates to Standing Order 375 “Delivery of replies to questions for written answer”. I put two questions down to the Prime Minister on 13 August: written questions Nos 8174 and 8215. My office has contacted the Prime Minister’s office repeatedly. Those answers were due on the 21st and we still have not had a reply. I think that when the Prime Minister does return it would be a good idea for you to speak to her and tell her that she is required to answer written questions. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will contact her office today.
Vote: Budget Debate 
Vote: Budget Debate 
[Volume:626;Page:20925] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That th 
is debate be now adjourned. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; United Future 8; Maori Party 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Duynhoven Harry: State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Duynhoven Harry: State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12176] 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Minister of State) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21014] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 1 be agreed to: 
to omit the words “Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Act 2005” and substitute the words “Prisoners’ Privileges Rights and Claims Act 2005”.
Vote: Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21654] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 100 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 24; New Zealand First 12; ACT New Zealand 4; United Future 7; Progressive 2. 
Noes 10 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 1. 
Clause 1 agreed to and clause 2 agreed to. 
Bill reported without amendment. 
Report adopted.