edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Mapp Wayne: Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill — In Committee 
Mapp Wayne: Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:672;Page:18304] 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP (Minister of Defence) 
: 
 In relation to some of these issues it is perhaps a pity that Mr Nash was not on the Commerce Committee. Some of his questions might have been appropriately answered by his colleagues. But for the information of listeners it is worth knowing that the register itself will be an online document as we would expect given that the bill itself states that it will be in electronic form. 
I have to say that some of the issues that have been raised by the previous speaker are rather tendentious and people will make their own interpretations as to the amount of time that has been spent in the Committee on this matter. 
Stuart Nash 
: Mr Chair— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: No the member has exhausted his calls. 
Stuart Nash 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. The Minister said that the register must be kept online. The bill actually states that the register may be kept online. There is no “must” there. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: That is a debating point and you have exhausted your calls. Maybe a colleague would like to pick up that issue.
Mapp Wayne: Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill — In Committee 
Mapp Wayne: Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:672;Page:18299] 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP (Minister of Defence) 
: 
 I will put on the record the notes of the Minister of Commerce on Part 2 of the Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill. Part 2 outlines the requirements that applicants must meet in order to be eligible to receive a licence from an accredited body including as has been noted the requirement that every applicant be fit and proper. The licence must be issued for a maximum of 5 years. Conditions may be imposed upon the licence to specify the kinds of issuer audit in respect of which the auditor is licensed to act. 
It is worth noting that a person issued with a licence is required to complete programmes in order to maintain their ongoing competence and where an auditor has failed to satisfy the minimum standards the bill enables the professional accounting accredited body to suspend or cancel that auditor’s licence. 
The Financial Markets Authority may grant accreditation to any person provided that the person meets minimum prescribed standards including that they be fit and proper and the accreditation may be subject to conditions. Once every 4 years the Financial Markets Authority must also review the quality of the systems policies and procedures of every audit firm that includes at least one licensed auditor. The Commerce Committee recommended that the Financial Markets Authority publish an annual report of quality reviews conducted and be allowed to publish further reports on particular quality reviews. 
Accredited bodies are responsible for investigations and disciplinary actions against their members who are licensed auditors. Supplementary Order Paper 239 provides that an accredited body must give the Financial Markets Authority reasonable assistance and it adds an offence provision where a body fails to provide assistance. The Supplementary Order Paper further provides for the cancellation of registration of an audit firm found to have obtained registration through false or misleading actions. Finally the Supplementary Order Paper provides for protection from liability for accredited bodies in the execution of their statutory auditory and regulatory functions unless it has been shown that the body has acted in bad faith or without reasonable care. 
These provisions are needed to protect regulators from legal threats by parties whom they are investigating and to provide them with the incentive to act firmly when it is in the public interest to do so.
Mapp Wayne: Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill — In Committee 
Mapp Wayne: Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:672;Page:18295] 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP (Minister of Defence) 
: 
 I will summarise what the two very good previous speeches have in part covered. As was noted Part 1 of the Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill establishes the purpose of Parts 1 to 3 which is to regulate auditors who carry out audits. That regulation was primarily done by licence and process and I note that the bill originally provided only for the licensing of auditors. The Commerce Committee recommended that the provision be broadened to allow for the registration of audit firms that include at least one licensed auditor. 
The proposed change recognises that the quality of auditing depends both on the adequacy and the effectiveness of firms’ policies and procedures and on the expertise of individual practitioners. I also note that this issue has been widely recognised across the House and that all parties are supporting the change for the reasons that have been well stated by the two previous speakers. Thank you.
Mapp Wayne: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 5 to Minister 
Mapp Wayne: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 5 to Minister 
[Volume:672;Page:18292] 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP (Minister of Defence) 
: 
 I seek leave to make a minor correction to an answer that I gave earlier in the House today. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: In the House today I made this statement: “The New Zealand Defence Force has investigated the allegations by Mr Stephenson—particularly those relating to 2002.” I meant to say “2010”. I seek leave to correct my answer from 2002 to 2010. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The member has made a personal explanation. That is all that is required. Thank you.
Mapp Wayne: Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill — In Committee 
Mapp Wayne: Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:672;Page:18302] 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP (Minister of Defence) 
: 
 I will give a brief answer to the issues raised by Ms Clare Curran which she has raised in respect of both parts to date about financial literacy. I can advise that the Minister of Commerce has asked officials to develop a financial literacy work stream. The work is in the early stages of development. It is worth noting that the Government has recently transferred responsibility for the Retirement Commission to Vote Commerce and this recognises the important linkages between the financial literacy functions of the commissioner and financial markets’ regulation. Thus this should promote increased investor confidence. Thank you.
Goodhew Jo: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Goodhew Jo: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:672;Page:18270] 
JO GOODHEW (National—Rangitata) 
: 
 I rise to speak very briefly on the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill. It is important that this bill travels through the House at this time given that we need to have these provisions in place before the conditions are met that would otherwise trigger the expiry of the sunset provisions of the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act. 
Dairying is a particularly important industry to New Zealand to New Zealand’s future and to New Zealand’s economic growth in the rural community and it is certainly one that this National-led Government supports wholeheartedly. We are making sure that our markets operate efficiently with competition and we are also encouraging innovation and enabling faster growth. In my electorate of Rangitata one-third of the primary production area is used for dairying. I know it is very important that we get the settings right for dairying in this nation. I commend this bill to the House.
Goudie Sandra: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Goudie Sandra: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:672;Page:18268] 
SANDRA GOUDIE (National—Coromandel) 
: 
 I am delighted to get up and speak to the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill. I cannot add much more than my excellent colleagues Shane Ardern and Colin King so I want just to respond to “Mrs Rip Van Winkle”. I refer to an article in  
The 
Cattleman 
 an annual magazine put out by the Angus Association and the comments that were made by Massey University Professor of Pastoral Agriculture Jacqueline Rowarth. She points out that food is cheaper than it seems. She has statistics on her side because she has done her homework. Sue Moroney Labour and the Green Party have not done their homework. When adjusted for inflation 2 litres of milk in 1999 would in today’s money cost $3.87. In 2009 2 litres cost $3.48 and today in Woolworths supermarkets house-branded milk is at $3.60. It is actually cheaper. So get that—it is actually cheaper. Do the homework I say to Labour and the Greens. 
Professor Rowarth added an interesting fact: on average New Zealanders aged over 18 spend $16 million a day—that is $5 each—on impulse buys. She has pointed out that she has the facts to back up that income has risen faster than prices. So if the Opposition and all those other members did their homework they would be able to pick up on the same facts that Professor Rowarth has. They should do some homework and stop making spurious statements about prices. Those facts are all available to us all on the Statistics New Zealand website. Maybe they would like to do their homework and use it.
King Colin: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
King Colin: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:672;Page:18265] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to stand and speak during the second reading of the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill. The bill itself deals with interim procedures to ensure that we retain the structure and the basis of the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act as it stands. That makes sense because when we look back to the year 2001 which does not seem very long ago we see that 10 years have gone by. It is very important from the point of view of cohesion to ensure that until we get everything within the dairy industry into a structured format we have consistency. Hence we have this bill. 
The bill deals principally with sections 147 148 and 149 of the existing Act and it readjusts the very volume at which the trigger is set for us to start to curtail the purpose of the Act as it was set up. When we look at the original section 148 we see that it talks about independent processors collecting 65 million kilograms of milk solids in the South Island and one processor collecting 25 million kilograms. When we turn to this bill we see that in fact it repeals sections 147 through to 149 of the Act. New section 147(1) in clause 4(1) of the bill states: “(a) 20% or more of milksolids on or from dairy farms in the North Island of New Zealand … or (b) 20% or more of milksolids on or from dairy farms in the South Island of New Zealand …”. That is an indication of the principal change from the Act as it stands at the moment. 
The bill also ensures that there is some consistent process in the event of that happening. It is unlikely to happen because as a country we produce 1.44 million tonnes of milk solids. When we look at that and do our maths we see that effectively we are asking a processor to pick up somewhere in the region of 280000 tonnes of milk solids. 
However it was interesting that during the select committee process in the Primary Production Committee we heard from Westland Cooperative Dairy. The 400 suppliers to Westland Cooperative Dairy have been very very successful but as we speak I believe the company is making moves to have a collection point just out of Rolleston so that it can pull back milk from Canterbury take it through the tunnel and process it over in Westland. That certainly is a change of thought and understanding of what was the case back when this particular Act was put together. 
We look forward to the comprehensive review that the Minister has made clear is to occur. We realise that this legislation is an interim change. It is appropriate and on that basis we can support the bill with confidence. Thank you.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — SAS Afghanistan—Prisoners 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — SAS Afghanistan—Prisoners 
[Volume:672;Page:18253] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from Keith Locke seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the handing over by the New Zealand Special Air Service of prisoners to the United States and Afghan authorities. This is an ongoing matter. New media allegations have emerged since the House last met. However the making of such allegations can never constitute a particular case of recent occurrence for which there is ministerial responsibility. An urgent debate cannot be granted on the basis of media speculation neither is the absence of action on the part of the Government a particular case of recent occurrence. A case occurs at the time when a decision or some action is publicly announced. The application is therefore declined.
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:672;Page:18253] 
12. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he have confidence in all his Ministers? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Will he rule out appointing Don Brash as Minister of Finance at any time in the future? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I can absolutely rule him out for this term.
Shearer David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Shearer David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:672;Page:18252] 
10. 
DAVID SHEARER (Labour—Mt Albert) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he have confidence in his Minister of Foreign Affairs? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes. 
David Shearer 
: Is he aware that the Minister of Foreign Affairs spent at least $75000 travelling to Vanuatu by the Royal New Zealand Air Force in February this year to attend a meeting lasting just a few hours? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I am not sure of the exact cost; I would have to go back and refer to the paper the Minister would have sent. But I am sure the Minister would have done that only if it was believed to be in the best interests and the best use of taxpayers’ dollars to do so. 
David Shearer 
: Can he confirm that he personally approved the trip as Prime Minister because he approves all ministerial trips overseas; if so why did he not question the expense? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I do but I hasten to add that the actual cost of a trip often varies from that in the letter sent by the Minister because that is only indicative. Often the trips come in under budget. If we want to talk about using defence assets and about whether they represent value for money I can assure the member that no member of my Cabinet has used taxpayers’ dollars to get an RNZAF plane to jump— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! 
David Shearer 
: Mr Speaker—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have called David Shearer. 
David Shearer 
: Will he now undertake to ask the Minister of Foreign Affairs why he did not use commercial airline services which would have cost about $4000 and not at least $75000? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: No because I accept the logic that was put forward by the Minister of Foreign Affairs at the time.
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:672;Page:18251] 
9. 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN (Deputy Leader—ACT) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: By how much has Government expenditure increased as a percentage of GDP since he became Minister of Finance? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 Core Crown expenditure in 2008-09 the year in which we were elected was 34.7 percent of GDP. I have to say that it had risen pretty rapidly from about 29 percent of GDP in 2005. Last year’s half-year update projected expenditure in the current year at 34.9 percent almost unchanged from 2 years ago. That figure did not include the cost of the February earthquake which will be largely accounted for in the end-of-year accounts for this year. 
Hon John Boscawen 
: Can he explain why when measuring total Government spending as a percentage of GDP New Zealand’s tax freedom day falls 2 months after it does in Korea and more than a month after Australia; and does he believe that the Korean national party and the Australian Labor Party “follow an extreme right-wing doctrine”? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: We could have an argument over what measures to use. In the Crown accounts total Crown expenses include for instance all the expenditure by State-owned enterprises. We do not think that is a very useful definition. We use the core Crown expenses definition and according to that it has not gone up in the last 2 years. I might say that historically this argument has been had before. I know that the member will not mind me pointing out that for instance last time New Zealand had a significant recession—well one of the previous recessions—a member of his party Sir Roger Douglas was the Minister of Finance. Expenditure as a percentage of GDP went up every single year that he was the Minister of Finance. 
Hon John Boscawen 
: Does he stand by his Government’s concrete goal of catching Australia by 2025; if so will he at least cut expenditure as a percentage of GDP to the same level as Australia’s? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The answer to the first question is yes; for the answer to the second question the member will have to wait for the Budget but it is likely that Government expenditure as a proportion of GDP will peak this year and begin dropping. I am sure with the support of parties that believe in smaller government that will continue to drop.
Wagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Wagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:672;Page:18250] 
7. 
NICKY WAGNER (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery 
: What process will the Government use to rebuild and restore damaged infrastructure in Canterbury? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery) 
: 
 Today I was pleased to announce the formation of a contracting alliance that will rebuild Christchurch’s badly damaged ground level and below ground level infrastructure including roads water waste water and stormwater. This is an important step towards rebuilding and restoring Canterbury. Alliancing is an approach for developing complex large-scale projects where clients consultants and contractors from several organisations work together to meet quality cost and timeliness in their targets. The Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority has worked with the Christchurch City Council the New Zealand Transport Agency and contractors to establish the alliance. I acknowledge the hard work of those involved. I look forward to the success of this project. 
Nicky Wagner 
: Why was the alliance model chosen to rebuild Christchurch infrastructure? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: An alliance was considered the most appropriate and proven way of dealing with the problem when one does not know the full extent of the damage. It is the fastest way of completing the job it offers flexibility in a fluid situation it includes local companies—there will be lots and lots of work for local contractors as well as the five lead contractors—and it will get the job done in as timely a fashion as possible. The method has been used repeatedly by the New Zealand Transport Agency with great success. We expect that same success for the infrastructure rebuild in Christchurch.
King Annette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
King Annette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:672;Page:18246] 
4. 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he stand by his statement that “we’ve done as good a job as we can in the conditions we’ve got to try and help low-income New Zealanders”? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes. 
Hon Annette King 
: If he is satisfied that his Government has done all that it can to help low-income families will he accept the challenge from Melissa Voice in Timaru to walk a week in her shoes in order to experience how the rising cost of living is affecting people because despite her being debt-free and budgeting carefully the cost of basic items continues to rise and she has found that she is worse off than she used to be; if not why not? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: No. 
Hon Annette King 
: No I am sure he would not. Is he satisfied that his Government has done a good job to help low-income New Zealanders when city missions in Wellington and Wanganui have run out of food in their food banks for the first time since the 1990s with many families being unable to make ends meet due to the rising costs they are facing which are critically influenced by his Government’s decision to raise GST and to not properly compensate those people with tax cuts? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Yes. 
Hon Annette King 
: Has he had time to read the latest report out of Northland which states that children there are more likely to end up in hospital with serious conditions than children in the rest of New Zealand because people are struggling to pay their heating and food bills; if not will he undertake to meet with the health professionals in Northland so that they can tell him directly about the impact that his policies are having on struggling families? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: No. 
Hon Annette King 
: Does he give a damn about people in New Zealand who are struggling because every answer he has given today dismisses the true cases that are coming out all around New Zealand based on the changes that his policies have made to families in New Zealand; if he does care will he get out of his car and meet a few people and talk to them? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I do. 
Rahui Katene 
: Does he believe that the 2000 Maori homes that are to be insulated as part of the $323 million negotiated in the emissions trading scheme agreement between the Maori Party and the National Government will help low-income New Zealanders; if so how? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Yes.
Ardern Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Ardern Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:672;Page:18246] 
3. 
SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki - King Country) 
 to the  
Minister of Customs 
: What recent reports has he received regarding interceptions of methamphetamine by customs officers at the border? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister of Customs) 
: 
 Great work by customs officers resulted in $10 million worth of methamphetamine being seized at Auckland Airport last week. Customs officers searched the bags of one of the group and referred the group for a personal search. P was detected in their shoes. Three further members of the group of interest to the Immigration Service were then referred to the Customs Service and the final six members of the group were also rounded up in both the customs hall and the airport’s domestic terminal. P was found inside the shoes of all 10 people. With the current street value of P being approximately $1 million per kilo it means that the intercept was to the value of $10 million. 
Shane Ardern 
: What is the significance of this bust in the New Zealand Customs Service’s fight against drug smuggling at our borders? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: The 10 drug courier arrests were the most made at any one time in any such event. To put the seizure in context the Malaysians were found to be stowing away around 8 kilograms of methamphetamine between them. That is almost half of the 18.6 kilograms that the Customs Service intercepted at the border for the whole of last year.
Dunne Peter: Motions — Breakers—Australian National Basketball League Championship Victory 
Dunne Peter: Motions — Breakers—Australian National Basketball League Championship Victory 
[Volume:672;Page:18241] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I join with others who have congratulated the Breakers on a superb achievement last Friday night. Successes of this type are rare and wondrous; they deserve to be celebrated. I simply say to the House that when the House takes time out of its normal business to move a motion to congratulate a team on its achievement or an individual or group on their successes it should do so with a measure of decorum. It is a matter of disrespect to the Breakers that the debate this afternoon has proceeded in the way it has where other political events have been dragged into the debate. The motion is about congratulating the Breakers on its achievement. We should be united as a Parliament in doing so. I for one unreservedly am. 
Motion agreed to.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Motions — Breakers—Australian National Basketball League Championship Victory 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Motions — Breakers—Australian National Basketball League Championship Victory 
[Volume:672;Page:18240] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Speaker. Kia ora tatou katoa. Kei te whaiwhai haere i nga korero kua puta i te ahiahi nei ki te whakanui i te ahuatanga o te ropu Breakers me mihi ra ka tika. 
[ 
Thank you Mr Speaker and greetings to us all. Following up on the congratulatory messages to the Breakers team this afternoon it is most appropriate that this is done 
.] 
Unfortunately I was tied up at a wananga from about 5 p.m. on Friday evening until Sunday so I did not actually see the game I missed the wedding and I missed the launch of a political party. Be that as it may I was focused on learning whakapapa karakia and whaikorero and we dived into the depths of Maori knowledge on this particular wananga. But fortunately as we were getting to the real depth of this matauranga texts came flying through every 5 minutes about the state of the nation in terms of the Breakers so we were able to keep up with progress in amongst learning the traditional knowledge of Te Ao Maori. 
I follow up other speakers by saying the Maori Party also acknowledges the work that has been done by the coach Mr Lemanis and also by the captain Paul Henare and acknowledges the team for a magnificent effort of course. It goes on the back of a lot of history for New Zealand basketball across the board in terms of attacking our Australian colleagues over there at an international level. We have had our role models at a national level with the likes of Pero Cameron and so on who was the New Zealand Sportsperson of the Year a few years ago. We hope that the success over the weekend will produce more successes in the future. This is not about me but my daughter is in the New Zealand basketball team for her age group and they look at the Breakers every week. They look at those role models in basketball and hope to aspire to the same levels as they do—[ 
Interruption 
]—unlike Shane Jones’ whanau who are not quite there yet. 
Be that as it may the Maori Party is absolutely supportive of the efforts of the basketball team. But more important we hope that we build on it from here that we do not just say we have won and leave it at that but that we go after a second title in a year’s time. The Maori Party hopes that we look to the future and build on the success of the weekend. Thank you.
Boscawen John: Motions — Breakers—Australian National Basketball League Championship Victory 
Boscawen John: Motions — Breakers—Australian National Basketball League Championship Victory 
[Volume:672;Page:18240] 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to stand on behalf of the ACT Party— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is a question of the correction of the method you used to address Mr Boscawen. My understanding is that he has resigned from the executive and is therefore no longer— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Speaker can only act on advice that the Speaker has received. I am not aware of having received any such advice yet so I have to act as I am advised. 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN 
: Thank you Mr Speaker. I say to Mr Mallard that no I have not resigned but I will be doing so shortly. 
The ACT Party extends its best wishes to the Breakers. It is interesting that this was a trans-Tasman competition because the Breakers was the first New Zealand sports team to actually win an Australian competition. Is it not about time that the members of this Parliament start to address how we address the changes in the income and prosperity of this country with that of Australia? It is interesting to hear the heckles because we are celebrating success. The Breakers represent success. They won an Australian competition— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I apologise to the honourable member. I say to members of the House that I cannot hear. The member is speaking loudly yet I cannot hear him. I accept that my ears are far from perfect but the noise is too loud and totally unreasonable. 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN 
: Thank you Mr Speaker. I will conclude by simply saying the ACT Party congratulates the Breakers. We look forward to further victories in New Zealand - Australian competition. Thank you.
Hague Kevin: Motions — Breakers—Australian National Basketball League Championship Victory 
Hague Kevin: Motions — Breakers—Australian National Basketball League Championship Victory 
[Volume:672;Page:18240] 
KEVIN HAGUE (Green) 
: 
 I add the Green Party’s congratulations to the Breakers. These trans-Tasman sporting competitions are tough ones and we have struggled. But the New Zealand Breakers have been absolutely dominant in that competition from the very beginning of the season. They gave us a heart-stopping moment losing in the second game of the finals but it was fantastic to see them resurgent in that final game. Congratulations to Paul Henare and the team. We fully support the Prime Minister’s motion and let us hope that this will be the leading light for some of those other New Zealand teams in netball and for goodness’ sake can the Warriors please be next.
Key John: Motions — Breakers—Australian National Basketball League Championship Victory 
Key John: Motions — Breakers—Australian National Basketball League Championship Victory 
[Volume:672;Page:18239] 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 I seek leave to move a motion without notice on the success of the New Zealand Breakers basketball team. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none. 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I move  
That this House congratulate the New Zealand Breakers on their outstanding victory in the Australian National Basketball League.  
When the Breakers won their first National Basketball League—NBL—championship title on Friday evening they capped off a fantastic season and made New Zealand sporting history. They became the first New Zealand team to win an Australian-based A-grade professional sporting championship. This is a huge accomplishment. The Breakers’ hard work over the past 8 years is now reaping rewards. 
It is great to see a team with so much Kiwi talent in the ranks take out this title. From a 13-man squad 10 are genuine locals eligible to play with just three import players. There is a mix of seasoned New Zealand basketball players and some great younger talent combined with players from overseas. The club pulled together an excellent team to take out the title. 
I know that all members of this House will join with me in congratulating the coach Andrej Lemanis the retiring captain Paul Henare and the team on a thoroughly deserved victory. At times some people have regarded basketball as a minority sport in this country but this success proves otherwise. The Breakers can stand tall in New Zealand’s sporting history.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Media—Allegations Regarding ACT Leader Directing Executive 
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Media—Allegations Regarding ACT Leader Directing Executive 
[Volume:672;Page:18239] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I refer to you Speakers’ rulings 52/1-5 which go to the question of directions to a Government from a person outside Parliament. It has been widely reported in the media today that Dr Don Brash has been indicating to the Prime Minister the membership of the executive and that goes to two questions: who is in the executive and directly as a result of that who can ask questions in this House. It might be a matter you want to take under advisement. Clearly people can take advice but not instructions and directions. It has been indicated by way of the media that there has been a direction from Dr Brash to the Prime Minister as to who should be in his ministry and that is clearly a breach of privilege. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will consider the matter which the member has raised in good faith. If there is an issue to be considered I will come back on the matter.
Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 5 to Minister 
Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 5 to Minister 
[Volume:672;Page:18292] 
Amended Answers to Oral Questions 
Question No. 5 to Minister 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP (Minister of Defence) 
: 
 I seek leave to make a minor correction to an answer that I gave earlier in the House today. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: In the House today I made this statement: “The New Zealand Defence Force has investigated the allegations by Mr Stephenson—particularly those relating to 2002.” I meant to say “2010”. I seek leave to correct my answer from 2002 to 2010. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The member has made a personal explanation. That is all that is required. Thank you.
Urgent Debates Declined — SAS Afghanistan—Prisoners 
Urgent Debates Declined — SAS Afghanistan—Prisoners 
[Volume:672;Page:18253] 
Urgent Debates Declined 
SAS Afghanistan—Prisoners 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from Keith Locke seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the handing over by the New Zealand Special Air Service of prisoners to the United States and Afghan authorities. This is an ongoing matter. New media allegations have emerged since the House last met. However the making of such allegations can never constitute a particular case of recent occurrence for which there is ministerial responsibility. An urgent debate cannot be granted on the basis of media speculation neither is the absence of action on the part of the Government a particular case of recent occurrence. A case occurs at the time when a decision or some action is publicly announced. The application is therefore declined.
Ministerial Statements — Earthquake Christchurch—Expiry of State of National Emergency 
Ministerial Statements — Earthquake Christchurch—Expiry of State of National Emergency 
[Volume:672;Page:18241] 
Ministerial Statements 
Earthquake Christchurch—Expiry of State of National Emergency 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Minister of Civil Defence) 
: 
 I wish to make a ministerial statement under Standing Order 347 in relation to the final extension of the state of national emergency in Christchurch City. Under section 71 of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 on 18 and 24 April 2011 I further extended the duration of the state of national emergency in Christchurch city. I considered it necessary to keep the state of national emergency in place in order to provide the national controller with the necessary powers to respond to the aftershocks and further stabilise Christchurch City. 
The situation in Christchurch has now improved significantly since the earthquake of 22 February 2011. Water has been restored to all areas outside the isolated red zone 97 percent of households now have sewer access or access to temporary sewerage systems power has been restored to all eastern suburbs and 60 percent of the central business district all telecommunication networks are stable and all roads outside the red zone cordon are passable. Good progress has been made in temporary housing and business recovery. The Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority has been established and there has been a smooth transition of responsibilities from the national controller to the new authority. I therefore consider that it is no longer necessary to have the state of national emergency over Christchurch city. The state of national emergency expired on 30 April 2011. 
I take this opportunity to acknowledge the national controllers John Hamilton and Steve Brazier for the dedication they have shown during the almost 10 weeks of the state of national emergency and for their many hours of work in response to this devastating earthquake. They have led teams of people who have shown similar dedication—firstly to rescue people and then to restore lifelines to the people of Christchurch City who have been affected by the national disaster which is the worst in New Zealand’s history. I have been proud to witness the civil defence response to the earthquake and to see the great community spirit shown by New Zealanders not only in Canterbury but around the country and around the world.
Points of Order — Media—Allegations Regarding ACT Leader Directing Executive 
Points of Order — Media—Allegations Regarding ACT Leader Directing Executive 
[Volume:672;Page:18239] 
Tuesday 3 May 2011 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Points of Order 
Media—Allegations Regarding ACT Leader Directing Executive 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I refer to you Speakers’ rulings 52/1-5 which go to the question of directions to a Government from a person outside Parliament. It has been widely reported in the media today that Dr Don Brash has been indicating to the Prime Minister the membership of the executive and that goes to two questions: who is in the executive and directly as a result of that who can ask questions in this House. It might be a matter you want to take under advisement. Clearly people can take advice but not instructions and directions. It has been indicated by way of the media that there has been a direction from Dr Brash to the Prime Minister as to who should be in his ministry and that is clearly a breach of privilege. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will consider the matter which the member has raised in good faith. If there is an issue to be considered I will come back on the matter.
Carter John: Ministerial Statements — Earthquake Christchurch—Expiry of State of National Emergency 
Carter John: Ministerial Statements — Earthquake Christchurch—Expiry of State of National Emergency 
[Volume:672;Page:18241] 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Minister of Civil Defence) 
: 
 I wish to make a ministerial statement under Standing Order 347 in relation to the final extension of the state of national emergency in Christchurch City. Under section 71 of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 on 18 and 24 April 2011 I further extended the duration of the state of national emergency in Christchurch city. I considered it necessary to keep the state of national emergency in place in order to provide the national controller with the necessary powers to respond to the aftershocks and further stabilise Christchurch City. 
The situation in Christchurch has now improved significantly since the earthquake of 22 February 2011. Water has been restored to all areas outside the isolated red zone 97 percent of households now have sewer access or access to temporary sewerage systems power has been restored to all eastern suburbs and 60 percent of the central business district all telecommunication networks are stable and all roads outside the red zone cordon are passable. Good progress has been made in temporary housing and business recovery. The Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority has been established and there has been a smooth transition of responsibilities from the national controller to the new authority. I therefore consider that it is no longer necessary to have the state of national emergency over Christchurch city. The state of national emergency expired on 30 April 2011. 
I take this opportunity to acknowledge the national controllers John Hamilton and Steve Brazier for the dedication they have shown during the almost 10 weeks of the state of national emergency and for their many hours of work in response to this devastating earthquake. They have led teams of people who have shown similar dedication—firstly to rescue people and then to restore lifelines to the people of Christchurch City who have been affected by the national disaster which is the worst in New Zealand’s history. I have been proud to witness the civil defence response to the earthquake and to see the great community spirit shown by New Zealanders not only in Canterbury but around the country and around the world.
Vote: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:672;Page:18270] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 107 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 15 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Bill read a second time.
Shanks Katrina: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Shanks Katrina: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:672;Page:18252] 
11. 
KATRINA SHANKS (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: Why has the Government announced a green paper on how we value nurture and protect children? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 We have announced the green paper because we believe we can do better by our children particularly our vulnerable children. For too long too many of them have not had the best start in life. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I apologise to the Minister but I cannot hear a word of her answer. The previous— 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: You’re not missing much. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Hon Ruth Dyson knows that is naughty. When I am on my feet she should stop interjecting. She is not alone in her interjecting today I hasten to add. 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: We have announced the green paper because we believe we can do better by our children particularly our vulnerable children. For too long too many of our children have had far from the best possible start. In fact many have been in danger and have been unsafe abused and neglected. This is the first time we have had a framework for a multidisciplinary debate where families community leaders teachers social workers academics grandparents parents policy makers doctors politicians neighbours and communities in general can get together and decide exactly where they want it to go. 
Katrina Shanks 
: What will the green paper focus on and address? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: The green paper is being written by a multidisciplinary team led by Dr Jo Cribb with input from a front-line forum headed by Murray Edridge and with Sir Peter Gluckman chairing a scientific and academic reference group. We are keen to consider such controversial issues in this age of sound bites. It is time we look at information sharing in order to protect children; tracking at-risk children and perhaps all children; greater use of schools after hours; and mandatory reporting of child abuse. We normally stay away from those issues but it is time this country debated them. 
Hon Annette King 
: Does she recall saying before the 2008 election that in Government she was going to start a national debate about children; if so why has she waited 2½ years to have a green paper written which will be followed by a white paper and will perhaps maybe turn into some policy well after—3 years after—she became the Minister? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: When I became Minister there was a lot of work to be done to better protect children. We introduced the Never Ever Shake a Baby campaign. We have supported the Auckland District Health Board with the Shaken Baby Prevention Programme pilot. We have put Child Youth and Family social workers in hospitals. We have done First Response we have put together an independent experts forum and we have looked at intensive case management of teen parents. The member should look at the Budget for more to be done for the safety of children. It has been a very busy 2½ years when it comes to work on these children.
Carter John: Nga Wai o Maniapoto (Waipa River) Bill Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill — Procedure 
Carter John: Nga Wai o Maniapoto (Waipa River) Bill Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:672;Page:18242] 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Minister of Civil Defence) 
 on behalf of the  
Acting 
Leader of the House 
: Following discussion in the Business Committee I seek leave for the Nga Wai o Maniapoto (Waipa River) Bill the Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill and the Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill to be taken as cognate bills for the first reading and for the debate to comprise 12 10-minute calls. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.
Vote: Television New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Television New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:672;Page:18289] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Television New Zealand Amendment Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 58 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Bill read a second time.
Mallard Trevor: Motions — Breakers—Australian National Basketball League Championship Victory 
Mallard Trevor: Motions — Breakers—Australian National Basketball League Championship Victory 
[Volume:672;Page:18239] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 The Labour Opposition joins with the Prime Minister in his congratulation of the Breakers. There is probably some dissent around the country but some of us thought that that game was the highlight of Friday night New Zealand time. 
I was lucky enough to be there. I thank my colleague Jacinda who won the lottery and managed to get through—one of the 500000 people who attempted to get through. She got through. I think it is fair to say that some of her background and her association with the Mormon faith and their basketballers came out. I did not think that a member of Parliament could scream as loud as she did during that match. It was absolutely clear that there was enthusiasm from Labour members of Parliament at the match during that time. 
I also pay tribute to my friend Tau’s cousin Paul Henare who for 8 years has been a leading New Zealand basketballer. He took the team through. If anything exemplified the attitude of that team it was his shot from the floor during the third quarter.
Nga Wai o Maniapoto (Waipa River) Bill Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill — Procedure 
Nga Wai o Maniapoto (Waipa River) Bill Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:672;Page:18242] 
Nga Wai o Maniapoto (Waipa River) Bill 
Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill 
Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill 
Procedure 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Minister of Civil Defence) 
 on behalf of the  
Acting 
Leader of the House 
: Following discussion in the Business Committee I seek leave for the Nga Wai o Maniapoto (Waipa River) Bill the Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill and the Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill to be taken as cognate bills for the first reading and for the debate to comprise 12 10-minute calls. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.