edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Hughes Darren: Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Hughes Darren: Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7373] 
DARREN HUGHES (NZ Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 This is a very short bill but it is also a very important one because it reaffirms this Parliament’s commitment to the International Criminal Court. The bill will allow New Zealand to ratify the Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the International Criminal Court which will mean that if there is ever a time when the International Criminal Court has to sit in New Zealand we will be able to provide those protections to the judges who sit on and the staff who service that very important international panel. It is another example of the Government’s and Parliament’s response to international cooperation. I support the passage of this bill to the select committee.
Power Simon: Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill — First Reading 
Power Simon: Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:613;Page:9771] 
SIMON POWER (National—Rangitikei) 
: 
 National intends to support this bill to the select committee but we will be watching its passage through that committee with some interest. My understanding is that there are some reasonably significant Western nations that are not party to this convention and it will be an interesting process to compare those countries’ views on the applicability of a piece of legislation such as this with the bill that will probably now proceed to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee. 
Whilst the bill will implement the International Convention against the Recruitment Use Financing and Training of Mercenaries—the Mercenaries Convention—there are questions to be asked about extraterritorial jurisdiction. In particular questions need to be asked about the way that this convention would impact on the domestic law of New Zealand and how that compares with other countries such as the US Australia the UK and Canada which I understand are not implementing this particular convention. So whilst the National Party will be supporting this bill to the select committee it will at the same time reserve the right to look closely during its passage at the matters I have just raised.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:612;Page:9249] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week in the House priority will be given to the second reading of the Land Transport Management Bill after which the Government will be moving an urgency motion. The following bills will be included in the urgency motion for their respective remaining stages: the Copyright (Parallel Importation of Film and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill the Retirement Villages Bill the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill the Counter-Terrorism Bill the New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill (No 2) the Wine Bill the Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) and the Intellectual Disability (Compulsory Care) Bill.
Hodgson Pete: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
Hodgson Pete: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15853] 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Energy) 
: 
 The speaker who has just resumed his seat may not be as fully aware of the detail of the proposed legislation in this regard as he might be. It is very similar to a transmission pipeline which he spoke of when he said that I should be pleased about the progress of open access to the Maui Gas pipeline. 
All members in this Parliament would find it repugnant if for some reason or other a person who owned a pipeline—if that pipeline had spare capacity—could somehow stop someone else from using it in order to gain some competitive advantage at the other end. We would all find that to be anti-competitive and the inappropriate use of a monopoly power. 
A similar analysis can be applied to gas processing facilities. Gas processing facilities are often big but gasfields in this country may in the future—we do not know—be often or usually small. So it is well within the bounds of possibility that one two or three gasfields with different owners may want to use the same gas processing facility and that that gas processing facility might have spare capacity. 
In the ordinary course of events people would use it through a commercial contract; that is what people do. In the normal course of events that is how the Maui pipeline would work too. The company would ring up just like a trucking company and ask: “Have you got spare capacity? Well we want to use you.” But because there could be monopolistic behaviour there backstop regulation is proposed. 
Let me tell members the conditions. The regulation-making power is permissive. It can be used only if a need is demonstrated. The fact that the regulation-making power exists of course is an incentive for people to behave reasonably—the member who resumed his seat acknowledged that—but really interestingly the regulation can be made by me only if it is recommended to me by the industry. It can be made by me only if the industry as a whole says: “This ain’t working.” Those are the only circumstances under which I may make the regulation and then I have to use reasonable terms and conditions and also be personally satisfied that spare capacity is available and non-competitive practices are afoot. That surely is reasonable.
Vote: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21573] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put 
. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand Labour 51; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 25; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 7; ACT New Zealand 5. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Rod Donald to clause 10 be agreed to: 
to insert in paragraph (b) of subclause (1) after the words “business assets” the words “including aquaculture”.
Burton Mark: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — In Committee 
Burton Mark: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:624;Page:19085] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Mark Ron: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Mark Ron: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:21685] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to table a report of a Mr Craig James Taylor who had $42259 wiped from his slate by Judge Moran. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that report. Is there any objection? There is.
Vote: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:619;Page:14868] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 4 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 37 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Schedule 4 as amended agreed to.
Yates Dianne: New Zealand Council of Law Reporting Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Yates Dianne: New Zealand Council of Law Reporting Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20627] 
DIANNE YATES (Labour—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I wish to speak on this bill and reiterate as the Minister has done that the existing Act for law reporting in New Zealand to be carried out by the New Zealand Council of Law Reporting is limited. The council currently reports the key judgments of the High Court and the Court of Appeal which are recognised as New Zealand’s only official law reports. This bill will simply provide for the inclusion of the Supreme Court into the existing regime. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: No it doesn’t. Read the bill. 
DIANNE YATES 
: Mr Mapp has had his turn at speaking Mr Assistant Speaker. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Indeed. 
DIANNE YATES 
: Publishing has been provided for under the Act since 1938. 
To ensure the continued value and validity of New Zealand law reports it is essential that they include the key judgments of New Zealand’s final appellate court. The decisions of the Supreme Court will provide invaluable guidance to the lower courts as to the application and interpretation of legal principles. Without reliable publication of the judgments the validity of case law and precedent is jeopardised and as has been mentioned before by a previous speaker there is the matter of access. This bill will enable the Council of Law Reporting to continue producing an authoritative and reliable set of key judgments of New Zealand’s higher courts.
Hughes Darren: Electoral Amendment Bill Broadcasting Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
Hughes Darren: Electoral Amendment Bill Broadcasting Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
[Volume:622;Page:17344] 
DARREN HUGHES (Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 I rise to take a very short call in respect of the third readings of the two bills that are before the House at this time. Most of the matters addressed by members have referred to the Electoral Amendment Bill but I want to make a very brief comment on the Broadcasting Amendment Bill (No 2) because I think it assists political parties in their planning for general elections and streamlines the process by which this matter is treated particularly the part of the bill that repeals the requirement on the Electoral Commission to invite broadcasters to provide free or discounted time for electoral broadcasting. What will happen now will be a far quicker process for political parties to register the fact that a general election is about to occur and for broadcasters to respond in a way that is favourable to both parties so that political broadcasts can begin. 
The other important change made by the Broadcasting Amendment Bill (No 2) will be that only registered political parties will be eligible for the allocation of time and money. I think that is important because with the move to MMP under which registered parties with 500 members or more are the formal parties in our political system this just means that the legislation is catching up with that fact in that regard. 
There are two bills before us at the present time. I of course support both. I wanted to make a few brief remarks about the Broadcasting Amendment Bill (No 2). I am sure that the Hon Tony Ryall will be able to expand far more on these important points given his 14½ years of experience in the New Zealand Parliament.
Carter John: Amended answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 9 to Minister 11 May 
Carter John: Amended answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 9 to Minister 11 May 
[Volume:617;Page:12957] 
JOHN CARTER (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I seek leave for Parliament to set half an hour a week aside on a permanent basis to allow Ministers to come down to correct the answers to questions that they have given inaccurately. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to do that. Is there any objection? There is.
Visitors — Environmental Protection and Resources Conservation Committee People's Republic of China 
Visitors — Environmental Protection and Resources Conservation Committee People's Republic of China 
[Volume:613;Page:10013] 
Thursday 13 November 2003 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Environmental Protection and Resources Conservation Committee People's Republic of China 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that members of the Environmental Protection and Resources Conservation Committee of the National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China led by the vice-chairman of the committee Mr Ye Rutang is present in the gallery. I am sure that members would wish that the delegation be welcomed.
Vote: Legislation (Incorporation by Reference) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Legislation (Incorporation by Reference) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:19827] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 47 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; Maori Party 1. 
Amendments as amended agreed to and Part 1 as amended agreed to. 
Part 2Amendments to Commerce Act 1986
Appropriation (2002/03 Financial Review) Bill — First Reading 
Appropriation (2002/03 Financial Review) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10507] 
Appropriation (2002/03 Financial Review) Bill 
First Reading 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Appropriation (2002/03 Financial Review) Bill be now read a first time. 
Bill read a first time.
Vote: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Vote: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:15193] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 46 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 1. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 246 in the name of the Hon David Benson-Pope to Part 2 be agreed to.
Vote: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Transitional Provisions and Controls) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee  
Vote: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Transitional Provisions and Controls) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee  
[Volume:616;Page:11760] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 112 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 8 
ACT New Zealand 8. 
Part 1 agreed to.
Peck Mark: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — First Reading 
Peck Mark: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:4036] 
MARK PECK (NZ Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In my speech I forgot to mention that on first reading I want to refer the bill to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:618;Page:14459] 
Thursday 29 July 2004 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business Statement 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week in the House priority will be given to the completion of the Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) and making progress on the Building Bill and the Education (Export Education Levy) Amendment Bill. Wednesday is a members’ day. 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 Can the Leader of the House indicate whether we are likely to have further periods of urgency during this 3-week sitting? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I can set the member’s mind at rest—no.
Swain Paul: Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Swain Paul: Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:16213] 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. On extremely rare occasions the odd little minor mistake is made. I would like to be able to move that the Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill be referred to the Education and Science Committee for consideration and that the committee report the bill by Thursday 16 December 2004. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: The member needs leave to do that. Is leave granted for that? Leave is not granted.
Duynhoven Harry: Maritime Security Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Duynhoven Harry: Maritime Security Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12201] 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Associate Minister of Transport) 
: 
 I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Maritime Security Bill that it take the bill part by part.
Mackey Janet: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading 
Mackey Janet: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading 
[Volume:615;Page:11613] 
JANET MACKEY (Labour—East Coast) 
: 
 I am pleased to support this legislation. I will comment on a couple of points that my colleague on the committee Phil Heatley raised. It is true that the industry was over-levied; it is true that some of those people are no longer fishing and it is true that some of those people are still paying off a debt to the Ministry of Fisheries. However I would point out that there were other people who paid the debt immediately by taking out loans by borrowing and by mortgaging their houses. 
There is one other point I would make though and that is that most of the people who were paying the levies were fishing off individual catch entitlements. They paid that levy only on the fish they caught. But obviously there was another group that was fishing off a quota species. Those in that group paid the levy on their quota as opposed to the number of fish they caught so if they did not go fishing that year and they held quota they still paid that levy. The easy answer would be to say that we will wipe that debt but we cannot do that because it would be manifestly unfair to all of those fishers in the industry who paid the debt in the past. The other point I would make is that would be consistent with the levying regime in fisheries generally. 
It would be improper I believe for the select committee to have recommended any other alternative. We understand the position that some of those people find themselves in but that is the way that quota has been allocated in the past. It would only create confusion if the committee had sought any other remedy. 
I thank my colleagues on the committee. The bill was dealt with expeditiously and I look forward to its passing.
Jones Dail: Sittings of the House 
Jones Dail: Sittings of the House 
[Volume:618;Page:14157] 
DAIL JONES (Junior Whip—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I can see no reason why this matter cannot be dealt with now and I would be happy to seek leave myself for that to happen. As I understand the motion the House would rise at midnight tonight and—[ 
Interruption 
] I ask for leave for the Deputy Leader of the House to explain the matter to me more clearly. I would be very happy to come back at the ringing of the bells tomorrow.
Business of Select Committees — Meetings 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Business of Select Committees — Meetings 
[Sitting date: 16 June 2004. Volume:618;Page:13625. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Business of Select Committees 
Meetings 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the Government Administration Committee to meet in Australia from 21 to 25 June 2004 and to adopt such procedures and practices as are considered suitable for the conduct of its business. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the Finance and Expenditure Committee to meet in Australia from 21 to 24 June 2004 and to adopt such procedures and practices as are suitable for the conduct of its business. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that leave being granted? There appears to be none.
Brownlee Gerry: Business of the House 
Brownlee Gerry: Business of the House 
[Volume:614;Page:10336] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I note that the House is making very good progress tonight. I also note that on the Order Paper are a number of bills that have been lanquishing for some time. Most particularly I draw the attention of the House to items 16 and 18. Item 18 is the Taonga Maori Protection Bill which has been on the Order Paper for the entire time the Labour Party has been in Government—almost 5 years now—with no progress whatsoever being made. I seek leave that the House move to the Committee stage of that bill right now. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Deed of Settlement—Ngati Awa Defence Cooperation 
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Deed of Settlement—Ngati Awa Defence Cooperation 
[Volume:607;Page:4421] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13042] 
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 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:608;Page:5688] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This question came down for the Prime Minister and left the Clerk’s Office for the Prime Minister whereupon it was promptly referred by her to the Minister of Energy except that anyone who has been involved in Cabinet would know that if the answer is that there has been no prime ministerial involvement that is an answer that the Minister of Energy cannot be certain about. Anyone above that Minister would know that from past and present practice. That is why I referred this question specifically to the Prime Minister. Dr Cullen can look curious but it is a fact that a number of issues to do with a Minister may have been considered away from his or her office and portfolio by a Prime Minister a Treasurer or a Minister of Finance. That is my point and that is the reason that I wanted my question to be answered by the Prime Minister. I now seek leave for the Prime Minister to answer this question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is. I will now rule on the point of order. There is no reason that one Minister with responsibility for an issue which the Minister of Energy has here should not answer for the involvement of another Minister even the Prime Minister in that issue. That has been the ruling for as long as I have been in this House.
Burton Mark: Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Burton Mark: Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:627;Page:21878] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 I just wanted to listen to get the scope of what members were actually asking but I think I could refer them back to 1987 when the lands case in the Court of Appeal elaborated the principles of the treaty at that time as required by section 9 of the State-Owned Enterprises Act 1986 as the member previously referred to. In that judgment the President of the Court of Appeal Sir Robin Cooke wrote of the principles of partnership active protection and redress. In 1989 the fourth Labour Government drawing on the principles that had been developed to date including past judgments from the courts published a set of five principles. That is why I am mystified that members refer to their lack of knowledge of these principles as though they had never been spoken of and had never been recorded in this House. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Well you keep changing them. 
Hon MARK BURTON 
: Well on 30 April 2002 the then Attorney-General the Hon Margaret Wilson advised Parliament that these principles are what the Government considers to be relevant. I refer the member to  
Hansard 
 Volume 600 at pages 15813 to 15814 where the Attorney-General stated: “Those principles were published by the fourth Labour Government in 1989 to assist the Government when making decisions about matters related to the treaty. In summary they are as follows. First there is the principle of government: the Government has the right to govern and to make laws. Second there is the principle of self-management: iwi have the right to organise as iwi and under the law to control their resources as their own. Third there is the principle of equality: all New Zealanders are equal before the law. Fourth there is the principle of reasonable cooperation: both the Government and iwi are obliged to accord each other reasonable cooperation on major issues of common concern. Fifth there is the principle of redress: the Government is responsible for providing effective processes for the resolution of grievances in the expectation that reconciliation can occur.” I think that clearly articulates the position.
Peck Mark: Counter-Terrorism Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Peck Mark: Counter-Terrorism Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9348] 
MARK PECK (Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Gallagher Martin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Gallagher Martin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:607;Page:4131] 
5.  
MARTIN GALLAGHER (NZ Labour—Hamilton West) 
 to the  
Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade 
: What actions have been taken to safeguard New Zealanders in the Middle East against the possible consequences of conflict in the region? 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade) 
: 
 Over the last few weeks New Zealand has intensified its consular activities in the region encouraging registration of all New Zealanders and ensuring where possible a communication channel with them through a warden network. We are also working closely with our consular partners on contingency planning. Yesterday New Zealanders living in Iraq Kuwait Syria Jordan Israel and the Palestinian Authority were advised to leave immediately and New Zealanders elsewhere in the Middle East were advised to consider departing. New Zealanders have been advised to defer most travel to the Middle East. 
Martin Gallagher 
: How many New Zealanders are in Iraq and what action has been taken to ensure their evacuation? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: We are aware of 15 New Zealanders who as of yesterday were in Iraq: 12 with the United Nations Monitoring Verification and Inspection Commission UNMOVIC one with another UN agency one with a non-government organisation and another apparently there as a human shield. Kofi Annan has now ordered the evacuation of all UN personnel and that is proceeding today. The non-government organisation worker is also due to depart today. We have no contact with the person acting as a human shield though we are aware that two other New Zealanders who went there for that purpose have now departed. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: Will New Zealand be working with our friends and allies to ensure that New Zealanders who do remain in the region are taken under their protection during the course of any impending conflict; if not why not? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: New Zealand in consular matters deals most closely with its four consular partners. We are indeed working very closely with them and in the instance where for example we do not have a diplomatic post in Kuwait but the United Kingdom does the United Kingdom helps us assume responsibilities for those people in that region.
Jones Dail: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Jones Dail: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:624;Page:19531] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 Madam Speaker on behalf of the Rt Hon Winston Peters.
Vote: Animal Welfare (Restriction on Docking of Dogs' Tails) Bill — Procedure First Reading 
Vote: Animal Welfare (Restriction on Docking of Dogs' Tails) Bill — Procedure First Reading 
[Volume:621;Page:16379] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 76 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 40 
New Zealand National 24; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Motion agreed to.
Vote: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:12890] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 1AA be agreed to. 
Ayes 63 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 55 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Schedule 1AA agreed to.
Prebble Richard: Points of Order — Question No. 4 to Minister 
Prebble Richard: Points of Order — Question No. 4 to Minister 
[Volume:609;Page:6677] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think it is better to raise my point of order now rather than later as it might give you a chance to think about the issue. I raise a point of order about Speakers’ rulings 115/2 to 115/6 and 116/1 and 116/2. Those rulings are about the transfer of questions to Ministers. The relevant ruling says that really it is not a matter for the Speaker and the Minister can transfer responsibility. 
I raise this issue in respect of question No. 4 in my name. The transfer has resulted in the question no longer being the question I wanted to ask. That has occurred because my question was whether the Minister of Police had had discussions with the Commissioner of Police and what that meant for New Zealand front-line policing. It has now been transferred to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade so it now asks whether the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade has had discussions and what that means for front-line policing in New Zealand. If I had wanted to ask the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade that question I would have addressed my question to him. I want to know what the Minister of Police thinks. 
I put this point to you. The reason I put “he” in the question is that if one writes “Minister of Police” the Clerk’s Office always crosses it out and writes “he” above it. If the Government wants the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade to be the Minister of Police in New Zealand as well that is its prerogative. But just as the Clerk’s Office is able to cross out “Minister of Police” and put in “he” in this case it should now cross out “he” and put in “Minister of Police”. If the Government really does want the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade to answer the question it should now read: “Has the Minister of Police discussed with the Commissioner of Police ...”. That is the point I would like to put to you for you to think about before the House gets to my question.
Okeroa Mahara: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Okeroa Mahara: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:4104] 
MAHARA OKEROA (NZ Labour—Te Tai Tonga) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Vote: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5513] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 2 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 60 
Noes 45 
Abstentions 8 
Clause 2 as amended agreed to. 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5. 
Green Party 8.
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — President of the Bundestag Federal Republic of Germany 
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — President of the Bundestag Federal Republic of Germany 
[Volume:614;Page:10271] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that His Excellency Mr Wolfgang Thierse President of the Bundestag Federal Republic of Germany accompanied by the Deputy Speaker is within the precincts of the Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed and accorded a seat on the left of the Chair. 
His Excellency Mr Wolfgang Thierse accompanied by the Deputy Speaker entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
Duynhoven Harry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Duynhoven Harry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:621;Page:16395] 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Associate Minister of Energy) 
: 
 I apologise I should have sought leave at the time to table a sheet with data from the activity and expenditure reports of the Crown Minerals website from 2001-02. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that. Is there any objection? There is.
Copeland Gordon: Appointments — Ombudsman—Beverley Wakem 
Copeland Gordon: Appointments — Ombudsman—Beverley Wakem 
[Volume:622;Page:17664] 
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
: 
 On behalf of United Future I am also delighted to support the appointment of Beverley Wakem as an Ombudsman for our nation. Beverley has had a most distinguished career and that fact of course says a lot about her as an individual. The career has flowed from the qualities of the individual and I have no doubt at all that she will continue to serve our nation in this new capacity to a very high standard.
Tisch Lindsay: Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4) — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4) — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20386] 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 I want to talk in general terms about the process with regard to Statutes Amendment bills although I know that Part 1 of this bill is about the Alcohol Advisory Council Act. I do not intend to take a call on each part. When we debated the second reading of this bill it became very evident at that time that the Government was introducing Supplementary Order Papers at the eleventh hour that we did not have a chance to debate. We had read the bill talked to our various spokespeople on the issue and gone to the Government Administration Committee but subsequent to that a number of Supplementary Order Papers were tabled. I made the point very strongly during the debate on 5 April that that was unsatisfactory and that the process needed to be streamlined. I have had an assurance from the Minister that that will be the case in the future and we are happy to support Supplementary Order Papers 342 and 349 as we go through the process on this bill. 
However—and I bring it up now because I think it is important—we were notified last week that there will be once again a Supplementary Order Paper comprising pages on the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 5) which is currently before the Government Administration Committee and on which I spoke during the first reading debate. Given the point I made during the second reading debate on the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4) about late Supplementary Order Papers being unsatisfactory when the support and the agreement of the whole House is necessary and given the fact that the Government has flagged that there will be substantial changes to the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 5) that will add other significant requirements one has to ask whether there needs to be a Statutes Amendment Bill (No 6) to cover those points. So I say to the Minister in the chair Rick Barker that the points I made when we debated the second reading of the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4) are still relevant to the progress of the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 5) which is currently before the select committee. 
As I said National members will not be taking calls on all parts of this bill. We have thoroughly vetted them. I will make a couple of points as we go through the bill. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: In relation to Supplementary Order Paper 349 in the name of the Hon Rick Barker I signal the Government’s objection to Part 1 standing part. 
Part 1 objected to and struck out of the bill.
Vote: Immigration Amendment Bill — Instructions to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Immigration Amendment Bill — Instructions to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8299] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the schedule be agreed to. 
Ayes 60 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; Green Party 9. 
Schedule agreed to. 
Bill reported with amendment.
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3809] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
Noes 60 
Ayes 57 
Noes 60 
Amendment to the amendment not agreed to.Amendment to the amendment not agreed to. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Green Party 9. 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Katherine Rich to the amendment to clause 26(2) set out on Supplementary Order Paper 57 in the name of the Hon Steve Maharey be agreed to: 
to amend subclause (2) by omitting the words “1 July 2003” and substituting the words “1 July 2007”. 
A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Green Party 9. 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 57 in the name of the Hon Steve Maharey to Part 3 be agreed to.
Dunne Peter: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Discharge In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Dunne Peter: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Discharge In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8815] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I take the point raised by the member. I feel strongly as I am sure he does about people who think they know best about the way in which other people should behave in this situation. As a subject of Her Majesty I know that the member will be familiar with the cartoons of Carl Giles the famous British cartoonist. Giles was well known for caricaturing people in that guise yet he was also known for his virulent anti-fascist views. If the member has taken offence I take his point and will not make that reference again. However I think it was more in the context of what is common parlance anyway in describing that particular group of beady-eyed zealots who think they know best.
Vote: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4777] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 69 
Noes 48 
Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 30 in the name of the Hon Judith Tizard to Part 2 be agreed to. 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Amendments agreed to.
Brash Don: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brash Don: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:624;Page:19625] 
1. Dr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Has she had any meetings or discussions with Ministers maligned by John Tamihere in his  
Investigate 
 magazine interview? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 I meet and have discussions with my Ministers all the time. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Is it not the case that John Tamihere is right when he says that the issues that motivate most of her Government members—union gay and Maori rights—are not the concerns of the majority of New Zealanders? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: The issues that motivate this Government and that motivate most New Zealanders are getting unemployment down which we have been particularly successful in doing; making sure there is fair labour law which that member has never stood for; lifting minimum wages; increasing the statutory annual holidays to 4 weeks; and implementing paid parental leave so parents can spend some time with their new babies; and also Working for Families which only this week is paying most families with family support another $25 a week for the first child and $15 for each other child. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Is not the real reason that the Government is so upset at John Tamihere stating that her Government “champions values mainstream New Zealanders do not relate to” the fact that the truth hurts? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: The member knows that the truth hurts every time he sees an opinion poll in the papers. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Has her Government gone too far in pushing minority interests to the detriment of more pressing concerns of mainstream New Zealanders? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: The Government wants to go even further in lowering unemployment improving incomes for families making sure that the health system works even better that children get an even better education—all things that would go down the drain because Mr Key has promised to cut public spending teachers and nurses.
Smith Murray: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Murray: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:620;Page:15466] 
12.  
MURRAY SMITH (United Future) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What specific proposals does he intend to implement to ensure that the broader economic contribution of the voluntary sector is both valued and encouraged in light of the report by PricewaterhouseCoopers which estimates that the voluntary sector may be contributing more than a billion dollars to the economy a year? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 As the member is aware a summary of this report has been released in the last few hours and I am yet to see a final copy of the report. I will be interested to read the full report and see whether it makes any specific proposals. If so they will of course be considered carefully by the Government. 
Murray Smith 
: Is the Government prepared to give consideration to United Future’s policy of substantially increasing the maximum personal tax rebate on donations to charitable organisations over the mere $630 given the fact that voluntary agencies are heavily reliant on such private funding and that private funding is increasingly more difficult to get but that voluntary agencies save the Government so much money; if not why not? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: We already have made one increase and I indicated at the time that we will undertake regular reviews of that limit now for each year and during the Budget process and obviously listen carefully to United Future on these matters. 
Sue Bradford 
: Has the Minister been briefed on the economic contribution of New Zealand’s largest philanthropic organisation the Tindall Foundation and will the Government act on the Tindall Foundation’s submission on the Charities Bill which stated: “We do not support the intent of this bill. It will only add to the burdens carried by the community and voluntary sector while not achieving what the Government and this sector want it to.”? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: No I have not been briefed on that but yes the Government will be undertaking a full review of the Charities Bill with a view to taking account of the submissions made and some major recasting. Clearly the bill is too heavy on the regulatory side and too heavy in terms of compliance costs. 
Murray Smith 
: Given the Minister’s friendly attitude to United Future proposals is the Government also prepared to give consideration to adopting United Future’s policy of a community volunteer rebate of $5 an hour up to a maximum of 100 hours a year which would strongly encourage the participation in the labour force of those aged over 55 who could otherwise be considered underemployed in economic terms; if not why not? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Perhaps I could invite the member to approach me formally on this matter in writing and we will get some reports on it. I must say as Minister of Revenue I always tend to be slightly cynical and wonder at the opportunities for tax avoidance that might occur as a result of this. I suspect there would be a massive flowering of volunteers if there were a special tax rebate for them.
Jones Dail: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — First Reading 
Jones Dail: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:4039] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 You heard my speech Mr Assistant Speaker and during my speech I indicated that I was pleased all three of the bills I mentioned—the Holidays Bill Matt Robson’s bill and this bill—were going before the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. That was a major premise of my speech; I wanted submissions to be made on all three bills together. That would give the ordinary working man the opportunity to make one submission on three bills to one committee rather than to have to split submissions between two committees. So I take the view that as he has indicated the bill was to go to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee—and that was a cornerstone of my speech—that is where it should go. If there were any question of leave New Zealand First would oppose the bill going to any committee other than the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Question No. 4 to Minister 13 May 
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Question No. 4 to Minister 13 May 
[Volume:608;Page:5678] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I point to Speaker’s ruling 106/4. It states: “The fact that a member makes a personal explanation with the leave of the House does not deny another member the right to discuss comments made by the first member or by any other member.” I just want to get a clarification that that ruling will be upheld today as you will see from the question sheet that there are questions there that will lead to supplementary questions that will inevitably will re-traverse some of this area. I just want to get a clarification that the existing Speaker’s ruling that allows that will be upheld.
Tisch Lindsay: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18639] 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Stephen Franks has a number of amendments to Part 1—in fact there are six amendments—and we will be voting on them in a moment. Although I respect the decision you have made and I am not relitigating it I think it is important that the member because he has made a contribution on earlier parts plus he has six amendments to Part 1 should be allowed back into the Chamber so that he can take part in the debate on Part 2 and then on the title. He has made a contribution in the past. I have been present right through the debate and I think that with the goodwill of the Committee it would be my recommendation— 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank you Mr Tisch and I will take that into consideration. I have invited Mr Hide to come to the Table. 
Peter Brown 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I have ruled on this matter. 
Peter Brown 
: I want to draw your attention to something new. It is a new point of order. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: It had better be a new point of order because I have ruled.
Brownlee Gerry: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — First Reading 
Brownlee Gerry: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:12737] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Could you tell the House what the arrangements are? Mr Tamihere has clearly got a split speech with Mrs Turia. Normally some indication is given to the House that a speech is to be split. Can I ask what the arrangement will be over the third speech that the National Party would ordinarily get given that this is the 95th bill being dealt with by this Parliament and therefore according to the one-in-three cycle the slot is appropriately ours? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will come to that at the end of this speech.
[Volume:619;Page:15144] 
I congratulate the team’s back-up crew as well. The fact that a number of our medals were won on New Zealand gear such as New Zealand cycles New Zealand kayaks and New Zealand canoes says to us that New Zealanders make great stuff and again that should inspire us to look for the good New Zealand stuff.