edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Urgent Debates Declined — GCSB Review of Compliance—Investigation into Leak and Release of DataText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeUrgent Debates Declined — GCSB Review of Compliance—Investigation into Leak and Release of Data[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12327. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Where more than one application is received that meets this test the Speaker considers the importance of the matters raised and decides which in his opinion is more important. The matter raised by Dr Norman and Mr Robertson touches on issues that may well be considered during the Privileges Committee inquiry into the use of intrusive powers within the parliamentary precinct. The report will be debated by the House in due course. There are now the avenues for which to pursue this matter and these applications are therefore declined.
Carter David: Urgent Debates Declined — GCSB Review of Compliance—Investigation into Leak and Release of DataText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgent Debates Declined — GCSB Review of Compliance—Investigation into Leak and Release of Data[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12326. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I have received letters from Dr Russel Norman and Grant Robertson seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the receipt by the Department of the PrimeMinister and Cabinet of emails between the Hon Peter Dunne and Andrea Vance and the withholding of knowledge of their receipt from the Prime Minister for weeks. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. However I have also received a letter from David Shearer seeking to debate the Government’s response toFonterra’s announcement that bacteria that could cause botulism has been found in some of its products. This too is a particular case of recent occurrence involving the administrative responsibility of the Government.
Prosser Richard: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeProsser Richard: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12326. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]20.RICHARD PROSSER (NZ First)to theMember in charge of the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill: Why is the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill needed now?TRACEY MARTIN (Member in charge of the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill):I thank the member for his question. The Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill is needed now as more and more children are finding themselves in the unenviable position of being declared an orphan or an unsupported child by the State. Kin carers are being targeted by social services to step up and support these children which they do only to find the children deliberately disadvantaged through lower support due to a kin relationship. These children are being discriminated against by the State due to circumstances beyond their control.Richard Prosser: How will orphans and unsupported children be better off under the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill?TRACEY MARTIN: Should the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill pass into law all orphans and unsupported children will be recognised equally by Government services as should always have been the case. This will bring the focus of the service provision back to a child-focus provision which was I believe the original intent of previous Parliaments.
Prosser Richard: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeProsser Richard: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12326. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]19.RICHARD PROSSER (NZ First)to theMember in charge of the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill: What is the intention of the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill?TRACEY MARTIN (Member in charge of the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill):Kia ora. The intention of the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill is recognition in statute that an orphan is an orphan whether placed with foster parents or kin carers and that any State support should be based upon the circumstances of the child not the circumstances of the adult.Richard Prosser: What feedback if any has the member received from the community on the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill?TRACEY MARTIN: Kia ora. I have been pleased to receive not only substantial support from the Grandparents Raising Grandchildren Trust but also positive recognition from the New Zealand Family and Foster Care Federation Inc. I have also had conversations with iwi-based social service providers who have an intimate knowledge of how this inequity affects many of these children in the families they serve.
Stewart Barbara: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeStewart Barbara: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12325. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]18.BARBARA STEWART (NZ First)to theMember in charge of the Sentencing (Protection of Children from Criminal Offending) Amendment Bill: Why is the Sentencing (Protection of Children from Criminal Offending) Amendment Bill needed now?Mr SPEAKER: I callLe’aufa’amulia Asenati Lole-Taylor.Le’aufa’amulia ASENATI LOLE-TAYLOR (Member in charge of the Sentencing (Protection of Children from Criminal Offending) Amendment Bill):Just to help you Mr Speaker. My name isLe’aufa’amulia—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Would the member just address the question.Le’aufa’amuliaASENATI LOLE-TAYLOR: It is a fair comment. It is my name.Mr SPEAKER: Order!Le’aufa’amuliaASENATI LOLE-TAYLOR: I am glad to hear that the member’s interest in this bill shows the importance of why the bill should receive strong support across the House. Only last month another child died at the hands of the child’s carer—one of so many children whom this country has witnessed to be a statistic and to form the unacceptable level of minors being unfairly affected by the ignorant behaviour of those who subject our young children to their criminal activities. Criminal offending by adults often exposes minors to serious harm and I can advise the member that this bill aims to enable the legal system in New Zealand to view such criminal activities and give appropriate sentences that are reflective of this harm.Barbara Stewart: What research backs up the Sentencing (Protection of Children from Criminal Offending) Amendment Bill?Le’aufa’amulia ASENATI LOLE-TAYLOR: An excellent question and I can say this. There have been numerous media reports of children being placed in danger and also children who were found in P labs are likely to be inhaling and absorbing the same levels of methamphetamine as adult drug users. I can inform the member that senior lecturer in psychological medicine at the University of Auckland DrTreciaWouldes said that in their research on the long-term effects of methamphetamine on children what was known about the effects of passive smoking could be indicative and the effects range from allergies or irritations from the drugs with the worst coming from breathing the fumes daily and physical trauma or burns that could occur if the labs exploded. Thank you.
Stewart Barbara: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeStewart Barbara: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12324. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]17.BARBARA STEWART (NZ First)to theMember in charge of the Sentencing (Protection of Children from Criminal Offending) Amendment Bill: What is the intention of the Sentencing (Protection of Children from Criminal Offending) Amendment Bill?Le’aufa’amulia ASENATI LOLE-TAYLOR (Member in charge of the Sentencing (Protection of Children from Criminal Offending) Amendment Bill):How wonderful it is to hear the member’s question. I must thank the member for seeking better understanding of what this bill is all about.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Now would the member just address the question.Le’aufa’amuliaASENATI LOLE-TAYLOR: I am pleased to inform the member that the Sentencing (Protection of Children from Criminal Offending) Amendment Bill aims to ensure that New Zealand deals with criminals who take no notice of the rights of young generations particularly minors or children under the age of 17 years. The bill seeks to make criminal offending in the presence of a minor an aggravating factor at sentencing in response to the increased number of children who suffer emotional physical and psychological effects as a result.Barbara Stewart: What feedback if any have you received from the community on the Sentencing (Protection of Children from Criminal Offending) Amendment Bill?Le’aufa’amulia ASENATI LOLE-TAYLOR: Kia orana Mr Speaker. That is one valid very important question. I am pleased to elaborate.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Would the member just answer the question.Le’aufa’amuliaASENATI LOLE-TAYLOR: I am trying to Mr Speaker. In recent years communities have witnessed the ongoing and unfair treatment of our children yet criminal activities involving children have not deterred criminals from committing serious crimes in their presence. I can advise the member that I have received a huge amount of feedback from various community organisations local groups individuals and key Government organisations. Some of these communities includePapatoetoe Methodist congregations;Sandringham congregations; the combined Woolston and Christchurch communities whom I met at a public forum; anti-violence groups; councils; schools; sports clubs; and more. These communities are waiting with interest to see this bill being introduced to the House and getting its first reading which I am hopeful will be this week.
Williams Andrew: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilliams Andrew: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12324. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]16.ANDREW WILLIAMS (NZ First)to theMember in charge of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (Amending Primary Function of Bank) Amendment Bill (No 2): Why is the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (Amending Primary Function of Bank) Amendment Bill (No 2) needed now?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Member in charge of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (Amending Primary Function of Bank) Amendment Bill (No 2)):Despite a recent drop the fact is that there has been an unerring rise in the New Zealand dollar heading towards parity with the US dollar. Our current account deficit is forecast to reach almost 7 percent as I said in the next 2 years. As we know an average of 100 manufacturing jobs are being lost each week and the high dollar is estimated to be costing exporters well over $2 billion a year. We need to have a serious public debate about the future of monetary policy—in particular the historically high dollar—and this time we hope that the National Party which has so many provincial seats—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Just complete the answer without referring to the National Party. It is to do with the member’s responsibility for the bill.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: —will by some process of osmosis understand common sense and economics.Andrew Williams: What is the international context of the bill?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: That is the best question of all because this House has heard that we cannot take measures except that around the world Governments and central banks are placing greater emphasis on their exchange rate. Right now the United States for example is getting the benefits of its third round of quantitative easing so is the United Kingdom and the European Central Bank has cut interest rates. Singapore Japan and Switzerland are actively trading against their respective currencies. Other countries such as Brazil and Canada are operating capital controls whilst we resemble Spain with the tired old recipe that has not worked for 28 years now.
Williams Andrew: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilliams Andrew: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12322. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]14.ANDREW WILLIAMS (NZ First)to theMember in charge of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (Amending Primary Function of Bank) Amendment Bill (No 2): What is the intention of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (Amending Primary Function of Bank) Amendment Bill (No 2)?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Member in charge of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (Amending Primary Function of Bank) Amendment Bill (No 2)):The intention of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (Amending Primary Function of Bank) Amendment Bill (No 2) is to amend section 8 of the principal Act to give the Reserve Bank a broader ambit when implementing monetary policy. This is an approach that provincial and export New Zealand has been desperately waiting for for decades now. The bill would mean that the Reserve Bank would have to consider a much wider range of counter-inflationary measures which about 50 other economies are doing I might add as well as supplementing tools for managing the exchange rate—in short no longer following the crude prescription for the right-wing monetarists that have so beset this economy.Andrew Williams: What additional tools could the Reserve Bank use?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: That also is an excellent question. Such tools would include lightening capital controls which would reduce the inflow of so-called “hot” money which so many commentators have talked about and lead to a depreciation of the exchange rate which all the commentators—including the IMF—say is seriously overvalued except they do not want to do anything about it. Another option is the introduction of a cap on the New Zealand dollar and a floor above which or below which it must not rise or fall. This would require the Reserve Bank to sell New Zealand dollars and purchase foreign assets when the dollar reaches a certain threshold which is now well past. The dollar has been damaged in the New Zealand export sector for a long long time hence we are finding so many people in the countryside despite there being basic primary products like logs having no employment at all.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12322. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Question No. 13 is held over.
Moroney Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMoroney Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12321. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]12.SUE MORONEY (Labour)to theMember in charge of the Electronic Data Safety Bill: Is it her intention to proceed with the first reading of the Electronic Data Safety Bill; if so why?CLARE CURRAN (Member in charge of the Electronic Data Safety Bill):It is my intention to proceed with the first reading of the Electronic Data Safety Bill which would establish a commission of inquiry into the various privacy breaches that haveoccurred within the last few years within various Government agencies. The commission would also examine the agencies’ capacity to respond to breaches in the future and how best to prevent future unauthorised access to private information. There is a long line of privacy breaches at Government agencies which include the ACC the Ministry of Social Development the Earthquake Commission Housing New Zealand the Medical Council of New Zealand Immigration New Zealand and recently the Ministry—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That answer goes well past the original question.Sue Moroney: Has the member seen recent reports of breaches that have provided unauthorised access to private information or instances where the Government’s handling of a vulnerability issue has been questioned—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member in charge of the bill has no responsibility for that whatsoever.Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The question was “Has the member seen …”. She actually does have responsibility for what she sees. It is the same as the Minister—Mr SPEAKER: No I do not accept that on this occasion. The question is ruled out of order.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12321. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Question No. 10 and Question No. 11 are held over to the next sitting day.
Moroney Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMoroney Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12320. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.SUE MORONEY (Labour)to theMember in charge of the Care of Children Law Reform Bill: Is it her intention to proceed with the first reading of the Care of Children Law Reform Bill; if so why?JACINDA ARDERN (Member in charge of the Care of Children Law Reform Bill):Yes it is my intention that the Care of Children Law Reform Bill will receive its first reading as soon as members’ day allows. This bill seeks to update the antiquated adoption laws in New Zealand and put children at the heart of all decision making around their future guardianship. Given that this is such an overdue piece of work I would encourage the Government to pick it up as soon as possible.Sue Moroney: Why is it necessary for the Care of Children Law Reform Bill to be advanced at this time?JACINDA ARDERN: Our current law in this area dates back to the early 1950s and simply put is no longer fit for purpose. More than 10 years ago the Law Commission put out a report titledAdoption and its Alternatives  a more than 300-page report of ideas and recommendations to modernise our law and put children at the heart of any decision making about their future. Labour progressed work on guardianship and now it is time for adoption law reform to begin and to finally give legal weight to things like for instancewhāngai adoption which for too long has not been given legal weight in this country. My bill will begin that process and I look forward to the support of this House for that bill.
Ardern Jacinda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeArdern Jacinda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12320. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.JACINDA ARDERN (Labour)to theMember in charge of the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill: Is it her intention to proceed with the first reading of the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill if so why?TRACEY MARTIN (Member in charge of the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill):Kia ora Mr Speaker. Yes. It most certainly is my intention to proceed with the first reading of the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill because the issue of fairness that it addresses for a large percentage of New Zealand orphans and unsupported children is real and urgent.Jacinda Ardern: Will the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill assist groups like the Grandparents Raising Grandchildren Trust; if so how?TRACEY MARTIN: Indirectly yes. The majority of kin carers who are looking after the day-to-day needs of these orphans and unsupported children on behalf of us in New Zealand do tend to be grandparents who are now raising their grandchildren.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12319. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have just been advised that Jacqui Dean is not in the House and therefore—[Interruption ]—Order! I have just been advised that Jacqui Dean is not in the House and that question will be held over to the next sitting day.KRIS FAAFOI: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am just wondering whether I can seek leave to table this question to the chair of the Law and Order Committee.Mr SPEAKER: No. That is just wasting the time of the House.
Faafoi Kris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFaafoi Kris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12319. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana):My question is the Chairperson of the Law and Order Committee. When will she—
Little Andrew: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLittle Andrew: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12319. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.ANDREW LITTLE (Labour)to theMember in charge of the Sentencing (Protection of Children from Criminal Offending) Amendment Bill: Is it her intention to proceed with the first reading of the Sentencing (Protection of Children from Criminal Offending) Amendment Bill; if so why?Le’aufa’amulia ASENATI LOLE-TAYLOR (Member in charge of the Sentencing (Protection of Children from Criminal Offending) Amendment Bill):What an excellent question and I thank the member for his keen interest in this very important bill. I can advise the member that I am looking forward to the opportunity to introduce this bill the Sentencing (Protection of Children from Criminal Offending) Amendment Bill to the House. New Zealand society has raised numerous and major concerns around the increased number of young children being subjected to severe abuse through criminal offending. New Zealand parliamentarians can no longer afford to turn a blind eye to the seriousness of this particular issue especially with more children dying at the hands of irresponsible criminals. Furthermore some of the incidents and cases involve family relatives of children and those who are meant to be their guardians for life. These irresponsible criminals will be made to face the reality of their offending and my bill will ensure that they are given the sentence that reflects the seriousness of their offending.Andrew Little: What impact will the bill have on the numbers of families and the numbers of children whom the bill seeks to protect?Le’aufa’amulia ASENATI LOLE-TAYLOR: I must apologise I did not quite the hear the question from—Mr SPEAKER: The question was what impact will the bill have on the numbers of families and numbers of children affected.Le’aufa’amuliaASENATI LOLE-TAYLOR: The bill would definitely provide the opportunity for a safety net. It will also give judges the power to ensure that the sentences being handed out to criminals reflect the crime that has been committed. In other words we are looking at making sure that the punishment fits the crime.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12319. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: That is a matter for interpretation at the time. I do point out again that the member is wrong. I quoted Speaker’s ruling 169/4 which of course is from 1984. That was probably still before the member was with us but be that as it may.
Hipkins Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12318. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You referred me earlier to the Speakers’ rulings. I have now had a chance to look at them and I just want some clarification from you with regard to Speakers’ ruling 169/6 on the same page. In this case it is to do with questions to Ministers but it equally presumably applies to questions to members. Speakers’ ruling 169/6 states: “(1) Ministers need address only one of the questions contained in supplementary questions.(2) If members ask multiple questions they run the risk of Ministers answering the parts that they regard as less important.” That of course is a more recent ruling than the one that you quoted which is from 1963. The one that I have just quoted basically variously dates from the 2000s. I just want to get your ruling on which of those applies: the more recent one or the historical one.
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12318. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]4.Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South)to theMember in charge of the Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill: Is it his intention to proceed with the committee stage of the Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill; if so why?TE URUROA FLAVELL (Member in charge of the Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill):Heiwhakautui tepātaiāe. Kaangawhakamuatēnei ongāpire kitā tewā o tePāti Māori epīranginei. Kamutu he ahaai? Narungai temea kongā huarahi katoa engaukinoneii tehungarawakore kawhaia e tePāti Māori kitōnamutunga.Mēnā hepaingaanōrā o rotoitēneipire kitāmātauāe hepaingaanōrā kawhaia kitōnamutunga.[To answer the question yes. This bill will move forward to a point in time desired by the Māori Party. And furthermore why? Based on the fact that all avenues that affect those who are underprivileged will be pursued by the Māori Party to their conclusion. If there is any benefit at all in this bill and we say yes there is we will follow it through to its conclusion. ]Hon Trevor Mallard: Is it his intention to strengthen the harm reduction aspect of his bill by accepting an amendment to have a “pokie pause” for 4 or 5 hours each morning similar to the one that the House supported in relation to alcohol because the House saw that this was a useful way to overcome addiction and abuse; if not why not?TE URUROA FLAVELL: Itēneiwākāo.Kāoreanōtērāmomokōrero kiawhakatakotohia kimuai tearoaro o te WharePāremata.Mēnā hetāpiritangakōrerotērā pea kaātatirohiaēngarii temeakāore aui kiteirungai tetēpu kamutukāoreanō au kiarongomōtērā ongāmomo huarahi kamutu o koremātou e tautoko.[At this point in time no. That kind of statement has not come before the House of Parliament. If it was a supplementary one it might be examined but because I have not seen it on the table and furthermore heard about those kinds of avenues we will not support it eventually. ]
Street Maryan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeStreet Maryan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12316. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]2.Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour)to theMember in charge of the Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill: Is it her intention to proceed with the first reading of the Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill; if so why?MOANA MACKEY (Member in charge of the Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill):Yes it absolutely is my intention to proceed with the first reading of the Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill and the reason that I want to proceed is that this bill is an important first step to meeting the current Government’s two targets: firstly that 90 percent of our electricity generation be from renewable resources by 2025; and secondly the National Government’s target of a 50 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. This bill is an important first step in introducing a range of measures that will help us to meet those targets. Currently we are not on track to meet those targets. The Hon Gerry Brownlee has indicated the importance of this bill when he said on the repeal of this measure which the previous Labour Government put in place that in fact what we needed was—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption ] Order! I invite the member before she prepares for her next question if there is one to look at Standing Order 383.Hon Maryan Street: What would the impact of the bill be on the renewable energy sector?MOANA MACKEY: The impact is very very important indeed. The best thing we could do for the renewable energy sector would be to have an adequate price on carbon. As of this morning that price on carbon was 50c. The Hon Gerry Brownlee highlighted the importance of this bill when he said: “Reducing carbon emissions in the electricity sector remains a goal and renewable technology will be encouraged through the Emissions Trading Scheme” and “National believes that investment decisions in the electricity sector should be made on the basis of sound economics with environmental effects taken into account through a price on carbon.” Labour agrees with that. We do not currently have an adequate price on carbon. That is why this member’s bill is entirely appropriate and necessary.
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12315. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]1.Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South)to theMember in charge of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (Amending Primary Function of Bank) Amendment Bill (No 2): Is it his intention to proceed with the first reading of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (Amending Primary Function of Bank) Amendment Bill (No 2); if so why?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Member in charge of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (Amending Primary Function of Bank) Amendment Bill (No 2)):Undoubtedly yes because the Reserve Bank needs a much wider range of counter-inflationary measures rather than the crude blunt tool favoured by the incumbent Government. It needs tools—Hon Gerry Brownlee: Brought in when that member was Treasurer.Mr SPEAKER: Order!Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: —to combat the inflow of hot money much wider than the last policy targets agreement which was changed by the National Party - New Zealand First Government in 1996 and then promptly ignored by the next National Party leader Don Brash and it needs tools to create a stable competitive exchange rate paying regard to the fact that we are an export-dependent economy. All of those will be fresh news for Gerry Brownlee.Hon Trevor Mallard: Has he seen any reports from economists on this question; if so what did they say?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The reality is that all those economists who are concerned about this country’s future and who understand this country’s history—like for example Business and Economic Research Ltd—have been very supportive of this measure. Then of course you have got the other lot who are dependent upon the insurance companies and banks in overseas ownership for their future livelihood. They tend to favour a currency run for the few—and very few—against the dynamic majority interest of provincial New Zealand and exporters and workers for exporters.
Bennett David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBennett David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12312. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East)to theMinister for Primary Industries: What response has he received from the primary sector on the potential whey protein contamination issue?Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister for Primary Industries):I have briefed a wide range of people from across the sector including industry bodies such as the Dairy Companies Association of New Zealand and Federated Farmers. The response has been consistent. Food safety is a top priority for New Zealand and we need to do what we can to assure New Zealanders and our export markets that we are taking this very seriously. The industry groups have expressed disappointment that this has happened but are committed to doing what they can to assure New Zealanders and overseas markets that as an exporting food nation we treat food safety issues very seriously.David Bennett: What messages has the Minister given to the sector?Hon NATHAN GUY: I have reiterated to industry groups that this issue is the top priority for the Government. Our first priority is of course the safety of New Zealanders and our international consumers. I have also updated the sector on the actions I my ministerial colleagues and officials have taken since learning of this issue. This includes the Ministry for Primary Industries sending staff intoFonterra’s data and distribution centres andNutricia’s warehouses with their permission to verify information and to obtain a complete picture of the products and locations affected by the potentially contaminated product. I have given the ministry a clear message that no resource is to be spared with this response to ensure the health and safety of New Zealanders and our international consumers. Primary industries are crucial to the New Zealand economy and it is vital that we have a strong reputation internationally as producers of safe food.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12312. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Would the Minister please—[Interruption ] Order!
Bennett David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBennett David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12312. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East):My question—[Interruption ]
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12305. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am sorry to interrupt the member. This question was transferred so it is not to the Minister of Police. It is to the Minister of Justice. Would the member like to start his question again. It is to the Minister of Justice.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFlavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12305. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TE URUROA FLAVELL (Co-Leader—Māori Party):My question is to the Minister of Police. Is the Government taking any action in response to the unprecedented recommendation from the Police Association—
Goldsmith Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoldsmith Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12301. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]3.PAUL GOLDSMITH (National)to theMinister of Finance: What are the expected economic consequences of the potential whey protein contamination issue?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance):The Government’s immediate priority is to protect families and consumers in all markets from the potentially affected products to share information and to work closely with our trading partners. In the year to June 2013 New Zealand exported $45 billion worth of product. Of this around a quarter was dairy and of that around a quarter was exported to China. In the year to June 2013 the export value of the two products potentially affected by contamination whey protein concentrate and dairy-based powder to our largest market in China totalled $125 million. That is around 1 percent of dairy exports or 0.25 percent of total exports. Only a fraction of that $125 million of value is currently subject to restrictions into the Chinese market. Products not affected include whole and skim-milk powders fresh and UHT milk butter cheese and yoghurt. There is some longer-term risk of course of effects to our reputation but if these circumstances are managed transparently and effectively we ought to be able to reduce those risks. The economic impact of the amount of product currently under restrictions is sufficiently small and would not have a discernible impact on our GDP.Paul Goldsmith: What preliminary assessments has he seen of the possible economic consequences of the issue?Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well there would not be a detailed assessment of economic consequences until or unless there was a likelihood of a significant impact. At this stage there is no indication that the issue has escalated to the point where it could have that significant impact. Treasury advises that macroeconomic effects will depend largely on the extent of response from our international trading partners and of course that is why we need to work so closely and transparently with our trading partners.Paul Goldsmith: What do financial market indicators suggest about the longer-term effects on the economy?Hon BILL ENGLISH: In the last few days I think we saw initially and understandably some reaction both in the price of Fonterra shares and the New Zealand dollar both of which declined. We will learn more tonight at the next global dairy trade auction. Prices for delivery later this year will provide an early indication of whether the market expects any longer-term effects. Important to avoiding any wider economic slow-down is of course to live up to our reputation as honest open transparent and trusted operators of food safety.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12298. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! On this occasion could the member please repeat the question as worded on the Order Paper.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I made the mistake of using the draft.Mr SPEAKER: Order! We all on occasion make mistakes. We do not often expect many from the right honourable member.
Key John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKey John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12298. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):I think the member has got the question wrong.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12298. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First):This question is to the Prime Minister and asks: does he stand by all of the answers given on his behalf to Oral Question No. 5 on 29 May 2013?
Carter David: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Amended AnswersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Amended Answers[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12298. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: No the member can decide what action he wishes to take. If he wishes to write to me to allege a breach of privilege then I would certainly have a look at that and consider it as I do any application for a breach of privilege. But I am certainly not going to rule on that matter at this time in front of the House without a formal application from the member.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Amended AnswersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Amended Answers[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12297. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Is this a further point of order?Hon TREVOR MALLARD: Yes and it goes to what the alternative methods are. I understand—again taking the Prime Minister at his word that he was in error in thestatements he made last week—that that is not a breach of privilege. Can you inform the House whether in fact it is a matter of privilege not to do a correction in these circumstances? Is that the method you are recommending that I take up?
Carter David: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Amended AnswersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Amended Answers[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12297. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! In effect the member is now re-raising the same point of order a second time but reinforced with a Speaker’s ruling. My ruling still stands. It is a matter now for any Minister—or in this case the Prime Minister—to determine whether there is an answer to be corrected. If the member thinks the course of action charted by the Prime Minister or any Minister is unsatisfactory the member has alternative means to raise the matter.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Amended AnswersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Amended Answers[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12297. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I now want to refer you again to Speaker’s ruling 179/3. I want to make it absolutely clear that I am not making any allegation of breach of privilege here. I am going to take the Prime Minister at his public word last week that he was wrongly advised and that the errors he made in answering questions in the House were accidents rather than anything that was deliberate. Notwithstanding that the Standing Orders and Speakers’ rulings make it absolutely clear that when an error has been made in answer to an oral question there is an obligation on the Minister to correct his answer to the House. I know that you are in a somewhat uncomfortable position yourself because you are not subject to oral questions and assurances that you gave in the Committee stage are somewhat of a problem to be sorted. But the obligation of the Prime Minister is absolutely clear. He must come to the House and he must correct his answer.
Vote: Extended SittingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Extended Sittings[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12297. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the motion be agreed to.Ayes64New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; Independent: Dunne.Noes56New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1.Motion agreed to.
Carter David: Extended SittingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Extended Sittings[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12297. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: That is a matter for any Minister or in this case the Prime Minister who so wishes to correct any answers.
Mallard Trevor: Extended SittingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Extended Sittings[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12297. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In fact I have two points of order. The first is a question as to whether this is a debatable motion.Mr SPEAKER: This is a non-debatable motion.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My second point of order goes to the order of dealing with matters in the House. It is my understanding that under Speaker’s ruling 179/3 the Prime Minister’s correction to statements he made in relation to a Fairfax journalist and communications should have occurred before this motion. It is to be done at the first opportunity. I can understand it going after the Fonterra matter because that can take even further priority but my question is why that has not been dealt with before this motion.
Brownlee Gerry: Extended SittingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Extended Sittings[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12296. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):I moveThat the sitting of the House on Tuesday 6 August 2013 be extended from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. on Wednesday 7 August 2013 for consideration of the interrupted debate on the third reading of the Appropriation (2013/14 Estimates) Bill the second and third readings of the Imprest Supply (Second for 2013/14) Bill the first reading of the Raukawa Claims Settlement Bill and its referral to a select committee and the first reading of the SubordinateLegislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 2) and its referral to a select committee.
Carter David: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12296. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is none.
Brownlee Gerry: Sittings of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 06 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12296. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):In accordance with a decision of the Business Committee I seek leave for the House to suspend for the dinner break following the maiden statement of Meka Whaitiri today.