edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Martin Tracey: Patents Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMartin Tracey: Patents Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12984. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TRACEY MARTIN (NZ First): I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to take a very short call on what is a very very good bill the Patents Bill to come through this Parliament. As has already been mentioned the Patents Act of 1953 needed to move forward with the times. I would like to acknowledge the work throughout the House on creating a workable bill particularly for the development of patents in the IT area. This is going to be a continually moving feast. This is probably the one area where New Zealand First would agree with all other parties that this is where global legislation—the borders of this industry—is almost non-existent. This is going to be a continual movement around how we protect our intellectual property the intellectual property of New Zealanders in this country and the intellectual property of those in other nations who also create the apps and the other computer programmes and technology that we will use in everyday life and have begun to use today.I would like particularly to also support the Minister of Commerce’s acknowledgment of the gentleman who spent 10 years of his life looking at this particular piece of legislation and trying to modernise it so that it is workable and so that New Zealand can as my colleagues have already said lead the way in this particular area. I know that the situation has been of major concern to the IT industry here and I know that it will be pleased to hear this debate. I do however want to acknowledge some of the concerns around genetic modification that my Green Party colleague Steffan Browning raised.New Zealand First agrees in part that the branding of New Zealand which is a niche-market country—we are small and we can never compete on the amount that we produce but we can compete on the quality of what we produce—is an area that we should give severe consideration to. We should have a wide conversation in this country with politics taken out of the game about what is best for us as a nation and the future employment and agricultural outcomes for our country. Again New Zealand First supports this bill and applauds the across-House work that has been done to bring this legislation up to date.
Joyce Steven: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 4 to MinisterText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeJoyce Steven: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 4 to Minister[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12983. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment): I seek leave to correct an answer I gave to question No. 4 in the House this afternoon.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? It appears not. Leave is granted.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: This afternoon in the House I said in answer to a supplementary question that an increase in credit achievement from 24.8 credits in 2011 to 37.3 credits a year later was an increase of 66 percent. The correct percentage increase is of course in fact 50 percent.
Young Jonathan: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYoung Jonathan: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12979. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth): I am very pleased to stand in support of the Patents Bill at its third reading. In New Zealand a patent may be granted for an invention that is a manner of manufacture. What it does is it gives the patent owner the right to exclude others from making using or signing a patent invention during the 20-year term of the patent. When it comes to patents competition innovation and all of these issues it is very complex. Although we want goods to be available for the common good we also want to protect the interests of people who are inventors and innovators so that they can get a just and deserved reward for their efforts and so inspire people to continue to innovate.We know that our patent law here in New Zealand had become quite outdated. It was based on laws in the United Kingdom. Our Patents Act was established in 1953 and it was based on the United Kingdom’s Patents Act of 1949 so it is well over 60 years of age and no doubt has had amendments all along the way. A complete rethink and a reworking are important as we live in this modern age where we have not only weightless products but also weighed products that need to be protected and recognised through patents.During this time I have no doubt that other members of the Commerce Committee received emails from many people. I thank them very much for their contributions. I thank the submitters who came and spoke to us during the previous Parliament. Their views have been considered. I believe that the Minister of Commerce was right inaddressing some of those areas. We need to understand that we live in a complex world where so much information and sharing of ideas occurs. How to do that in an appropriate way that not only protects the originality and the inventors’ interests but at the same time enables innovation to occur is important.One of the things that we need to understand here in New Zealand is that we rely on the rest of the world incredibly so. Eighty-five percent of what we make we export and so it is very important for us to have understanding around international treaties. A lot of people emailed and said we were bowing to Big Brother whoever that might have been but we understand that these international treaties enable us to reach out into the world with our products. They protect our interests and very much so.A lot of good debate has taken place this afternoon around the issues of the Patents Bill which is before us. It is good to see that we are making progress and today we shall complete this third reading and enact this law. I want to thank all the members of the Commerce Committee. I am now the chair and I want to just acknowledge Lianne Dalziel a former chair and the work she did as well. I acknowledge the Hon Simon Power and I acknowledge the Hon Craig Foss for the great work he has done in bringing this bill to the House. I think we have got it right. Thank you very much.
Vote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12976. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendment as amended be agreed to.Ayes103New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7; ACT New Zealand 1; Independent: Horan; United Future 1.Noes18Green Party 14;Māori Party 3; Mana 1.Amendment as amended agreed to.Clause 2 as amended agreed to.Bill reported with amendment.Report adopted.
Vote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12976. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendment to the amendment be agreed to.Ayes117New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Noes4Māori Party 3; Mana 1.Amendment to the amendment agreed to.The question was put that the amendment as amended set out on Supplementary Order Paper 120 in the name of the Hon Craig Foss to clause 2 be agreed to.
Vote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12975. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments as amended be agreed to.Ayes103New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Noes18Green Party 14;Māori Party 3; Mana 1.Amendments as amended agreed to.Schedule 2 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12975. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendment to the amendment be agreed to.Ayes117New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Noes4Māori Party 3; Mana 1.Amendment to the amendment agreed to.The question was put that the amendments as amended set out on Supplementary Order Paper 120 in the name of the Hon Craig Foss to schedule 2 be agreed to.
Vote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12975. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes15Green Party 14; Mana 1.Noes106New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Amendments not agreed to.Part 6 as amended agreed to.
Robertson H V Ross: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12974. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): The amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 336 in the name of Steffan Browning to Part 6 is out of order because it is contingent on agreement to Supplementary Order Paper 124.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 348 in the name of Metiria Turei to Part 6 be agreed to.
Vote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12974. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendment be agreed to.Ayes117New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Noes4Māori Party 3; Mana 1.Amendment agreed to.
Vote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12974. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments as amended be agreed to.Ayes103New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7; ACT New Zealand 1; Independent: Horan; United Future 1.Noes18Green Party 14;Māori Party 3; Mana 1.Amendments as amended agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 126 in the name of the Hon Craig Foss to Part 6 be agreed to.
Vote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12974. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments as amended be agreed to.Ayes103New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Noes18Green Party 14;Māori Party 3; Mana 1.Amendments as amended agreed to.Part 4 as amended agreed to.
Robertson H V Ross: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12973. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): The amendments set on Supplementary Order Paper 336 in the name of Steffan Browning to Part 3 are out of order because they were contingent on agreement to the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 124 in his name.Part 3 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12973. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendment be agreed to.Ayes26Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 3; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Noes95New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment not agreed to.Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12973. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes15Green Party 14; Mana 1.Noes106New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Amendments not agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 124 in the name of Steffan Browning to Part 2 be agreed to.
Vote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12972. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes103New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Noes18Green Party 14;Māori Party 3; Mana 1.Amendments agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 348 in the name of Metiria Turei to Part 2 be agreed to.
Robertson H V Ross: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12965. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): I call the honourable member Denis O’Rourke.
Robertson H V Ross: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12961. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is none. The vote shall be amended. Thank you. Kei te pai.
Turei Metiria: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTurei Metiria: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12961. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green): I raise a point of order Mr Chair.The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): Ah point of order. The honourable member Metiria Turei.Tēnā koe Ms Turei.METIRIA TUREI: Thank you Mr Chair.Tēnā koe. I am glad you are so relieved. I seek the leave of the Committee to amend a Green Party vote on Part 1. We mistakenly opposed Supplementary Order Paper 237 when we should have voted in favour.
Tisch Lindsay: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12959. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): I am going to call—I will just explain. You have had two calls in a row and we do not normally give a third one when someone else is calling so I am giving the call to Dr Megan Woods.
Tisch Lindsay: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12956. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): That is correct.
Turei Metiria: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTurei Metiria: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12956. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Does that mean that the amendments to clauses two hundred and something—I cannot recall the exact numbers now—will be put during the vote on Part 6?
Tisch Lindsay: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12956. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): I will just have to seek some clarification. The answer is that it has amendments to clauses 4 and 6 which form part of Part 1.
Turei Metiria: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTurei Metiria: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12956. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I would just seek your advice as to why my amendment to Part 6 of the bill was put during the vote on Part 1.
Vote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12956. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes15Green Party 14; Mana 1.Noes106New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Amendments not agreed to.Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12955. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes103New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Noes18Green Party 14;Māori Party 3; Mana 1.Amendments as amended agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 348 in the name of Metiria Turei to Part 1 be agreed to.
Vote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12955. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments to the amendments be agreed to.Ayes117New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan.Noes4Māori Party 3; Mana 1.Amendments to the amendments agreed to.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 103 Noes 18.The question was put that the amendments as amended set out on Supplementary Order Paper 120 in the name of the Hon Craig Foss to Part 1 be agreed to.
Tisch Lindsay: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12949. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): I call Clare—no I am sorry that member has had her four calls. I call Chris Hipkins.
Lees-Galloway Iain: Patents Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: Patents Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12948. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North): Before the lunch break I was talking about the new clause that the Commerce Committee added to the “Purposes” clause of the Patents Bill which is around getting the balance right between the rights of the patent holder and the person who invented a particular item to which a patent applies and the interests of the well-being of the wider society.I think there are two aspects to this. One is the fact that if we clamp down too tightly with patent law that is too restrictive that stifles innovation. A very important aspect of innovation is building on previous ideas—taking an idea that someone else has had and adding something new to it. If patent law is too restrictive then it is not possible for that type of innovation to be carried out.But there is also the societal good side and I think that Pharmac is a particular example of this. Pharmac makes use of the fact that medicines come off patent after 20 years and can therefore provide cheaper access to medicines than is otherwise possible whilst medicines remain on patent. It is important that drug companies are able to patent medicines and reap the rewards from the research and development that they have carried out and the invention of that new medicine or the discovery of the ability that a particular product has as a medicinal property. But after a period of time when they have justifiably held a monopoly on the rights to such a product it is important that they are opened up.There is a debate going on internationally about how long medicines should stay on patent and I know that New Zealand is under pressure from a number of different organisations and from people located in a number of different countries to change our patent law in a way that would keep medicines on patent for a lot longer. The purpose of this bill speaks to that. It speaks about the balance that has to be struck between the rights of the patent holder and wider society and I think that we have a good balance in New Zealand between the rights of the holder of patents of pharmaceuticals and thewell-being of wider society. I think New Zealand should be firm on its stance in holding to that 20-year period because as this bill says that is a fine balance that must be struck carefully.
Sabin Mike: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSabin Mike: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12945. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.MIKE SABIN (National—Northland) to theMinister for Social Development: How will the Children’s Action Plan better protect children through greater screening and vetting standards for those working with children?Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development): Outstanding—outstanding question. Legislation will be introduced in the next month to implement minimum screening and vetting standards for those people who are working with children. This process will be more comprehensive than the current police check that some do and others do not. It will include specific interview techniques thorough referencing police record checks as well as looking into the history and behaviour of every one of those individuals. It will also mean checking with former employers and wider community members about any concerns relating to the children that may have been raised during that process.Mike Sabin: Whom will these new mandatory standards apply to?Hon PAULA BENNETT: This will be mandatory for all Government agencies and Government-funded organisations working with children but voluntary for community organisations. There are hundreds of thousands of people in that children’s workforce. We estimate all up that it is more than 370000 people. In the core workforce we are talking about paediatricians Child Youth and Family social workers and teachers. The wider workforce would mean non-teaching staff such as library reading-group leaders for example or Work and Income case managers.Mike Sabin: How will these new restrictions keep dangerous violent and abusive people away from children?Hon PAULA BENNETT: Alongside the new screening and vetting there will also be new restrictions on whom they are allowed to employ. For example there will be restrictions meaning that they cannot employ people who have serious convictions such as murder manslaughter sexual violation assault on a child and sexual conduct with young people. We simply have to protect our vulnerable children. For those who choose to ignore that restriction there will be heavy fines.Jacinda Ardern: Will charter schools be compelled or will they just be expected to vet staff under her new vetting and screening requirements?Hon PAULA BENNETT: They will be included in the law and they will be expected to and compelled if that is the word the member chooses to use.Jacinda Ardern: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If I could have the Minister perhaps clarify. I asked whether or not it was mandatory compelled—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The question was very clearly addressed for the member.Jacinda Ardern: Will it be mandatory for charter schools to vet and screen their staff?Hon PAULA BENNETT: I would say that actually if the member had answered my letter of 2 months ago where I offered to her to have a briefing on this then shewould have the answer. But since she chose not to get involved yes it will be mandatory.
Wilkinson Kate: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilkinson Kate: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12943. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.Hon KATE WILKINSON (National—Waimakariri) to theMinister of Justice: What changes is the Government making to election laws following the inquiry into the 2011 election?Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice): Yesterday I introduced the Electoral Amendment Bill that will implement improvements to our electoral system. The key changes include allowing greater use of theEasyVote cards to simplify and speed up voting processes and improve the accuracy and efficiency of scrutinising the rolls; providing for greater use of technology including full online enrolment; using the Government’sRealMe electronic identity verification; and clarifying the law around list seats. The bill also provides that loans exceeding $15000 will be subject to the same disclosure rules as donations. These are sensible improvements that ensure our electoral system maintains its high level of integrity.Hon Kate Wilkinson: What other changes are being made as a result of the inquiry?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: There are a number of recommendations from the Justice and Electoral Committee that do not require legislative change. The Government is obtaining further advice from the Electoral Commission on a long-term strategy for voting technology incorporating civics education into the New Zealand school curriculum and expanding public civics education. The Electoral Commission will be ensuring that future public information campaigns about electoral matters provide sufficient information and are accessible to all voters including disabled voters. The commission is looking at ways to expand phone voting for vision-impaired voters. I aimfor the bill to be enacted by early next year. This will ensure that the Electoral Commission has enough time before the 2014 general election to implement changes. It will also allow time for candidates and parties to be made aware of new requirements.
Upston Louise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeUpston Louise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12941. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō) to theMinister of Energy and Resources: What recent announcements has he made about mineral exploration in the central North Island?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Energy and Resources): Yesterday I announced the opening of the Epithermal Gold 2013 tender. The tender covers more than 8000 square kilometres of the central volcanic zone across the Bay of Plenty and Waikato regions. Companies interested in exploring for minerals have until the end of January to submit bids for exploration—not mining Mr Norman. Following the success of the first minerals tender in Northland the Government is keen to promote further opportunities for exploration that could offer down the track far-reaching benefits to local communities and regional development.Louise Upston: What reports has he seen on the development of mining opportunities in New Zealand?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: In the course of my duties I have seen reports that called exploration and mining “an essential feature of domestic and export growth”. I have also seen anti-exploration development leaflets distributed in Wellington and I have seen a muddled interview onThe Nation in which the interviewee seemed intent on not holding a firm view on mining development. While the contestants on that side of the House are all over the show on this side of the House we believe mining has been and will continue to be a strong contributor to building a more productive economy for all New Zealanders.
O'Connor Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12938. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]4.SIMON O’CONNOR (National—Tāmaki) to theMinister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment: What reports has he received on the performance of the Youth Guarantee scheme?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment): This morning I released the latest figures from the Tertiary Education Commission on the Youth Guarantee scheme. The Government established Youth Guarantee fees-free tertiary places in 2008 for students who find the traditional classroom environment challenging and were at risk of dropping out of school. The 2012 results for Youth Guarantee show course completions at tertiary institutions that provide Youth Guarantee improved to 70 percent in 2012—up from 63 percent in 2010. Qualification rates have also increased from 48 percent in 2010 to a very impressive 64 percent in 2012.Simon O’Connor: How many students were enrolled in Youth Guarantee in 2012?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: There were 8900 students enrolled in Youth Guarantee fees-free tertiary education in 2012 and by 2015 the Government will be funding up to approximately 15500 full-time equivalent student places. A large number of students involved in Youth Guarantee have had little previous achievement at secondary level. In 2012 39 percent of them arrived at Youth Guarantee with little or no qualifications. In 2011 the Youth Training programme was merged into the Youth Guarantee scheme and it is great to see that students of former youth training providers are producing significantly better results under Youth Guarantee. Credit achievement for that group has risen from an average of 24.8 credits in 2011 to 37.3 credits 1 year later—a 66 percent increase in just 1 year.Simon O’Connor: What other steps is the Government doing to help young people succeed in education or work?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: When we came into office 4½ years ago too many young people were falling between the cracks between education and work. A couple of the initiatives we have taken include taking the pruning shears to the thousands of qualifications below degree level. In 2008 there were 6000. We are on track to be down to 1800 by the end of next year. At the end of it a hairdresser a plumber and a joiner will be able to complete the same qualification that is trusted by employers whether they do it at a polytech at a private training establishment or as an apprentice. We have set up vocational pathways in National Certificate of Educational Achievement in schools and in Youth Guarantee providers. They list good subjects for young people to take at secondary school to set them up for a career in industry sectors. And we are rebooting industry training—creating New Zealand Apprenticeships boosting overall funding increasing the educational content and untangling the spaghetti of industry training organisations that we inherited.
Lees-Galloway Iain: Patents Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: Patents Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12933. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North): It is not long to go until the lunch break so I intend to take only a brief call on Part 1 of the Patents Bill. I was very interested to see that the very first subclause in clause 3 “Purposes” was actually added by the Commerce Committee and it says that the Act is to “provide an efficient and effective patent system that—(i) promotes innovation and economic growth while providing an appropriate balance between the interests of inventors and patent owners and the interests of society as a whole;”.I think there is an increasing awareness in our communities of how important that balance is. If we weigh that balance too heavily towards the patent owners and inventors then that can entrench inequalities particularly between large multinational corporations and small businesses entrepreneurs and innovators trying to commercialise their ideas and to grow new businesses. And of course if we do not recognise the efforts of inventors and patent owners then that itself stifles innovation. Striking that balance is of enormous importance.When thinking about the interests of society I think in particular of the way Pharmac works andPharmac’s ability to purchase off-patent medicines. At the moment in New Zealand medicines come off patent after 20 years. I know that there is some international pressure for us to change that approach but I think that 20 years is a good balance. It allows inventors of new medicines to reap the rewards of their research and development but it also means that society can benefit from those lower-cost generic medicines once they come off patent. I think that is a very very good example of the balance that paragraphs (aa)(i) and (aa)(ii) in clause 3 are trying to achieve. I know that in the near future we will be debating more and more—Debate interrupted.Sitting suspended from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.
Browning Steffan: Patents Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrowning Steffan: Patents Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12931. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]STEFFAN BROWNING (Green): Just in speaking on Part 1 of the Patents Bill in clause 3 “Purposes” it is very clear that there is to be an understanding between the interests of inventors and patent owners and the interests of society as a whole and I will go into this a little bit more in Part 2. But there are some elements of course that are inappropriate. Again the bill seeks to address some of those.I would like to congratulate the Minister of Commerce on the elements that have been included as exclusions from this but it does need to go that little bit further. It will be interesting when we look at the purposes and overview of the bill when some of these issues in the areas of life and organisms come up in the courts where it will be considered whether something is absolutely new or whether it is new only because different components have been pulled together. It could be clearer. It certainly allows for genetic engineering and that is one of the real risks of this bill.We were just hearing about the Plant Variety Rights Act. That is very very strong. It does look out for people breeding plants in New Zealand and it is good to see that plants have been excluded. But in terms of the purposes clause I think it could have been stronger and the Supplementary Order Paper following will address that in part. It is great that there was this cross-party effort to deal with issues around software and the like and it is fantastic to see a national approach in the truest sense of the word. A countrywide approach is something that we can all be proud of.The inventiveness is really a concerning part when it comes to life and then also the interpretation. Moving to clause 5 “Interpretation” with regards to the Budapest Treaty and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights as well I am concerned that unfortunately those sorts of treaties that we enter into outside Parliament when our negotiators and others go over there could actually be pulled into New Zealand regulation and whatever through this bill. So things may happen that we do not intend because of the inclusion of the Budapest Treaty and some of theramifications of that. I am not quite sure that other members actually understand the lengths that that can go to.The Greens will be supporting this bill because of those positive parts but we will address some of the others in the Supplementary Order Papers and will seek support on those. Thank you.
O'Rourke Denis: Patents Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Rourke Denis: Patents Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12924. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First): I wish to take only a very brief call on behalf of New Zealand First as far as Part 1 of the Patents Bill is concerned. The Minister’s amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 120 will be supported by New Zealand First. Those amendments are with the support of the amendments to Supplementary Order Paper 120 on Supplementary Order Paper 237 consistent with the bill as a whole and we think they add value—mainly in respect of technical aspects but also they clarify some important sections in the bill.Concerning new clause 10A(1) and (2) New Zealand First supports Supplementary Order Paper 237 to add a new clause 10A(3). Clause 10A(2) is unclear without new subclause (3) which says: “A claim in a patent or an application relates to a computer program as such if the actual contribution made by the alleged invention lies solely in it being a computer program.” We think that this now makes sense of the words “as such” as they were used in subclause (2). The clause we feel had been a cause of considerable complaint as the bill had been introduced because of the uncertainty around what it had meant. But we now feel that the amendment to add new clause 10A(3) solves the problems with the clause. Accordingly we will support the bill on the basis that it is amended in that way and New Zealand First will not accordingly be supporting Clare Curran’s Supplementary Order Paper 123.
Vote: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12922. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes85New Zealand National 59; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes36New Zealand Labour 34; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Bill read a third time.
Tisch Lindsay: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12919. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I understand the next call is a split call.
Wilkinson Kate: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilkinson Kate: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12915. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon KATE WILKINSON (National—Waimakariri): I rise to take a very brief call in support of the third reading of the Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill. This bill is a sensible responsible bill. It is about strengthening our fiscal responsibility. To say that strengthening our fiscal responsibility is irresponsible is just pure nonsense and political posturing. This bill is about more transparency. It is about ensuring that the Crown’s resources are managed effectively and efficiently. It proposes three new principles which previous speakers have already alluded to. This is a good bill. It is a sensible bill. It is a responsible bill. Any opposition to it is just pure nonsense and political posturing. I commend this bill to the House.
Vote: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12901. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat clause 3 be agreed to.Ayes85New Zealand National 59; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes36New Zealand Labour 34; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Clause 3 agreed to.Bill reported with amendment.Report adopted.
Vote: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12901. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat clause 2 be agreed to.Ayes85New Zealand National 59; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes36New Zealand Labour 34; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Clause 2 agreed to.
Vote: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12901. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat clause 1 be agreed to.Ayes85New Zealand National 59; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes36New Zealand Labour 34; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Clause 1 agreed to.
Vote: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12901. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat Part 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes71New Zealand National 59; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes50New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12901. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes71New Zealand National 59; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes50New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Amendments agreed to.
Vote: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12900. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat Part 1 be agreed to.Ayes85New Zealand National 59; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes36New Zealand Labour 34; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Part 1 agreed to.
Vote: Bail Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Bail Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12894. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Bail Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes102New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes19Green Party 14;Māori Party 3; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Bill read a third time.
Henare Tau: Bail Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHenare Tau: Bail Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12893. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TAU HENARE (National): I am pleased to take a quick call on the third reading of the Bail Amendment Bill and I want to congratulate the Law and Order Committee on all its work on what was a traumatic experience for all of the select committee members. I do not wish upon anyone the sort of evidence and hearings that they had to go through so my hat goes off to the select committee for doing a pretty good job of shepherding this bill through.I have never in my political career ever used the words “soft on crime”—never. I have tried to steer clear of accusing anybody of being soft on crime apart from today when I do so reservedly and I do so in the face of one of the Green members actually being a friend of mine until today. Unfortunately the talk that I heard from the Green member Jan Logie basically said to me that the Greens are soft on crime and that is a term that I do not use lightly.When we consider what has gone before we see that this bill and even the bills before it on the criminal justice system are about protecting the community. They are about protecting the victims from more tragedy and more trauma. This bill is specifically in front of us to deal with those two situations. It is about protecting the person in our community who has been visited by crime. Whether it is a punch a kick a murder or whatever we have to do all we can to protect that citizen from more trauma and more crime. Look I am not saying that if we had had this bill before ChristieMarceau’s tragic demise it would have stopped that happening. Who knows? But wemust always do our best to make sure that we protect those in our community who have been visited by such trauma and crime.I once again say and I do not make this point lightly that that is what you get if you vote for the Greens. I have a message for the Labour Party and yes that includes the “deputyDeputy Speaker”—Assistant Speaker Robertson. If Labour wants to hitch its wagon to the Green Party then it had better be very very careful where it does hitch that wagon.Again I say to everybody on the select committee that it was a job well done. I think that New Zealand will congratulate the committee and congratulate the House on the passage of this bill.
Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBusiness Statement[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13311. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Thursday 5 September 2013Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.Business StatementHon ANNE TOLLEY (Acting Leader of the House): Next week the House is in a 1-week adjournment. When the House resumes on Tuesday 17 September it is the Government’s intention to progress a number of first readings on the Order Paper including the Vulnerable Children Bill and the Electoral Amendment Bill as well as continuing the Committee stage of the Family Court Proceedings Reform Bill.Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): Could I just check with the Acting Leader of the House whether there are any plans to have extended sittings in either of the 2 weeks. I do not think we have had notice of that yet.Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Acting Leader of the House): Anything like that will be discussed in the Business Committee.