Twyford Phil:  
Twyford Phil:  
[Volume:654;Page:88] 
PHIL TWYFORD (Labour) 
: 
 All evening I have been trying to think of one good thing I could say about the way in which the National Government has been handling the super-city debate and I have come up with something! The only way in which Councillor Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga will focus on his real job is if we disestablish the Auckland City Council. 
There are actually some good things to say about this bill. The establishment of the Auckland Council is the centrepiece of the governance arrangements proposed by the royal commission. The establishment of the council is the essence of the super-city idea; it is being debated in homes in workplaces in public meetings—meetings like the public meetings that Government members are going to have at taxpayers’ expense in the next 2 weeks—in protest marches across Auckland in every suburb of Auckland. This super-city offers the chance for Auckland to make a fresh start to pool our resources so that we can use them intelligently and sustainably to start to plan to use our infrastructure in a coordinated way and to develop our city in a holistic and integrated fashion. The Auckland Council—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I have two points of order—[ 
Interruption 
] Now there are three. The first one is that John Hayes just invited you to table your speech. Although this is a robust debate there have been rulings from previous people in the Chair that that is not an appropriate thing to say at this point of time. Do you want to rule on that one first? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: The member is making three points of order. I will listen to all three. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: The second point of order is that Mr Hayes has shifted from his bench and has been interjecting fairly consistently throughout the debate. [ 
Interruption 
] We now come to the third of my complaints and that is that the Leader of the House the Hon Gerry Brownlee and Mr Hayes have both interjected during this series of points of order. It is my opinion that that practice seems to be developing in the Committee in particular and as part of the minority I look for your protection so that points of order can be heard in silence. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: I am sorry. I am really really sorry to be dobbed in by Parliament’s new head prefect. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Mr Brownlee if you are truly sorry you would consign yourself to staying here until 1 a.m. as fit punishment rather than seeking to get let out early. I say to the Hon Trevor Mallard firstly I did not take it that the member who interjected “you” was meaning the Chair. It was an interjection; it was not part of the debate. I have been letting the debate flow. I prefer to let people give their speeches. I have been exhorting members all night to let the debate flow. We are not reading speeches; we are debating. I think it is a very good debate and very robust. 
As for the member shifting seats everybody has shifted seats tonight. Everybody has gravitated towards this part of the Chamber because this is where the action is and I do not see anything particularly wrong about that. I invite Mr Twyford to continue; he has 3 minutes and 17 seconds left. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. First of all you did not rule on the third leg of the stool in this particular case and that is the question of whether the Leader of the House and Mr Hayes should be interjecting during points of order. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: You are right; the members should not do that. But they are not the first to have done it tonight. I did not think the infraction was sufficient to tell them off. There have been other comments. Let us have the debate. I give Mr Twyford 3 minutes 17 seconds unless of course there is some reason why I should not. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. The last of this series of points of order is that I take offence at being called “head prefect”. Catherine Delahunty was at school with me. She would vouch that there was no chance whatsoever of my being any sort of prefect at school. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: I think I would concur with that. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I want to raise a serious issue in relation to my colleague’s speech—and I am sorry for breaking into his speech. I want to raise an issue about Councillor Sam Peseta Lotu-Iiga. I wonder whether his declaration of his pecuniary interests included his councillor’s remuneration. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: That is not a point of order. Order is about the order of the House in relation to a Standing Order. The member may feel that that matter is serious but it is not a point of order. For I think the sixth time I invite Mr Twyford to continue his speech. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I regret to dispute your ruling but it is clear that in this particular case a member has a direct pecuniary interest. Someone whose position is being abolished— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: The member will take his seat. That is not a point of order for the purpose of this debate. Pecuniary interest is not a matter of order for this debate. I invite Mr Twyford to continue his speech. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I am reluctant to disagree so strongly with the Chair especially when a particular person is in the Chair but whether someone is eligible to vote in a particular debate is a matter of order. It is very much a matter of order in this House which members are permitted to vote. It is my understanding that where a member has a special interest a particular interest above that of the public or above that of a particular class of individuals then that member’s vote cannot be cast. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: If the member wishes to raise that point he should do it at the time at which voting is about to be undertaken. I will ask the Clerk to investigate the matter and we will come back to it sometime later. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: Speaking to the point of order Mr Chairperson. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Excuse me; I am still on my feet. That is not a matter on which to interrupt a member’s speech when that member has 3 minutes and 17 seconds left. It is a matter that you should raise at the time that there is a vote. In the meantime I will have the Clerk check and I will come back on it. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: Excuse me how does that work? You should go from one side to the other. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Taking points of order is not about going from one side to the other. David Cunliffe had sought to make a point of order before the member did. I simply went in chronological order. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Thank you Mr Chairperson. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Before we get into that— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: I will hear the Hon David Cunliffe first. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: This point of order is in support of our junior whip’s point of order. It relates to Standing Order 401(f) which in particular asks the Clerk to take into consideration this matter of timing. The Standing Order gives as an example of a contempt or a breach of privilege “as a member failing to declare before participating in the consideration of any item of business any financial interest that the member has in that business:”. It is quite clear that Councillor Lotu-Iiga has a financial interest in the outcome of this legislation. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: I have just assured the House that I will go through all of these matters in a considered way and I will come back to the House on them. I do not want any more discussion on that at this point. The matter is closed. That is the end of it. I will come back on it at some later point. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I appreciate that you are asking the Clerk to give a ruling under Standing Order 401 and its various subsets so that the House can be clear on something. But I would be very disappointed if you were asking that in the particular case of a member in this House. Pecuniary interests are very very clear. A person has to have a particular pecuniary interest over and above the general interests of everyone else. Every farmer in this House every schoolteacher in this House every health worker in this House would be declaring pecuniary interests left right and centre if that did not prevail— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: I have just said that I did want to hear anything more on this matter. All the points the member has raised are well understood and will be well taken care of. I want the debate to continue. I do not want to have litigation backwards and forwards about this issue. I want to have some consideration of it and resolve the matter. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. It is a relatively simple point of order. Both at the end of your ruling before David Cunliffe’s point of order and again during your ruling on that point of order you were criticised by the Leader of the House—once from his bench and once from his feet. It is not a good example. 
Debate interrupted.