edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Mitchell Mark: Financial Markets Conduct Bill — First Reading 
Mitchell Mark: Financial Markets Conduct Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:885] 
MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney) 
: 
 It is a great honour for me too to be able to take a call on the Financial Markets Conduct Bill as—I cannot say the youngest—probably the most junior member of the Commerce Committee. 
I would just like to finish by maybe taking a bit of a human approach on this. In my electorate—actually prior to it becoming my electorate—when I was out doorknocking I knocked on a door and an elderly lady answered. We began talking and she told me the story that her husband who had been diagnosed with dementia had recently had to go into a special care retirement facility. She had the house on the market because they had lost basically all of their life-savings to a dodgy finance company. We spoke for probably half an hour and at the end of it she looked me in the eye and she said: “At the end of the day there’s actually nothing you politicians can do for me and my husband anyway.” The great thing about this bill is that I think it is going to go a long way to addressing what happened to her and her husband and to instilling some confidence back in the people of New Zealand and us in this Parliament in being able to make sure that we do the best that we can to stop that from happening again. Thank you.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Financial Markets Conduct Bill — First Reading 
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Financial Markets Conduct Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:881] 
KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) 
: 
 I stand to speak on the Financial Markets Conduct Bill on its first reading. The main purpose of the bill is to promote the confident and informed participation of businesses investors and consumers in the financial market and to facilitate the development of fair efficient and transparent financial markets. When National became the Government the country was reeling under the collapse of financial companies. National intends to restore investors’ confidence by rewriting our security laws. A strong capital market provides a vital source of finance to help our businesses to grow and create jobs. This bill provides a vital role by providing better information and most important protection for mum and dad investors. National will repair the confidence that was shaken by the collapse. This will be done by setting clearer guidance for the companies looking forward to raise capital. The Financial Markets Conduct Bill will provide information to encourage people to manage their investment and capitalise towards creating jobs and building a stronger economy. I congratulate the Minister the Hon Craig Foss on bringing forward this legislation and I commend this bill to the House.
Dean Jacqui: Defence Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Dean Jacqui: Defence Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:869] 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) 
: 
 It is a shame that the Opposition—although it is wonderful that it is supporting the Defence Amendment Bill—seems to be bogged down in the minutiae of the bill about you know the officers yet— 
Iain Lees-Galloway 
: Just ignore the detail! 
JACQUI DEAN 
: Gosh they are very excitable tonight are they not. What is it? The Opposition is terribly excitable tonight. I think it is because those members have been caught out. I think that they have been caught out focusing on the tiny little itty-bitty details that indeed will be very important in the select committee consideration of this bill but actually what is important in a first reading speech is what does the bill mean for the Defence Force in New Zealand? I mean that is what we should be talking about in the first reading speech. What is it that we want our Defence Force to be doing for us on behalf of New Zealand? What are our responsibilities that our Defence Force should be looking at and how is it that the New Zealand Parliament through the most excellent Minister of Defence Jonathan Coleman can support it in doing that? Those are the questions that we should be asking in this first reading speech. 
I think the questions laid out in this bill indeed are worth asking. There is the fact that it has taken 3 years for the consultation on this white paper which was initiated by the Hon Wayne Mapp; there has been a white paper consideration of what does our Defence Force need to deliver. Do we need to refocus our efforts into the South Pacific? What are our responsibilities? In a budget-constrained environment how best do we deliver those services? 
So you see this bill looks outwards. This bill looks at how our New Zealand Defence Force can be focused not only on delivering on behalf of the Defence Force itself but also on delivering to us as New Zealanders and out into the wider Pacific and further on out in the world on behalf of us. The moment we start focusing on that then we will start having a good debate. Thank you. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The next call is a split call between Labour and the Greens.
Upston Louise: Defence Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Upston Louise: Defence Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:872] 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
: 
 There has been a significant contribution from this side of the House so I am not going to say anything further but to commend the Minister of Defence Dr Jonathan Coleman for this fantastic piece of legislation the Defence Amendment Bill. I support it in its first reading.
Dean Jacqui: Crown Pastoral Land (Rent for Pastoral Leases) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Dean Jacqui: Crown Pastoral Land (Rent for Pastoral Leases) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:852] 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) 
: 
 It is nothing but pure eco-arrogance to assume and to put forward the notion that high country farmers do not and are not able to farm sustainably. I find those comments ignorant and offensive and they will certainly be offensive to those 300 high country farming families who for a number of generations have not only sustainably farmed their high country pastoral leases but also in the meantime have improved them to the extent where—well not now—the previous Labour Government turned its beady eye on to them and decided that “Yes we want them back now thanks very much.” So I completely condemn the comments of the previous Green Party speaker Steffan Browning. If that reflects the attitude of the Green Party in general then heaven help us because I just find that absolutely abhorrent. 
In fact it was the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment Dr Jan Wright in her report on the sustainable management of the high country of the South Island who acknowledged that management is not an either/or thing. Management is not either protection of the environment or exploitation for productive management; in fact the future of the high country in New Zealand is a combination of those plus many other things. 
I think that perhaps members of the Green Party should also cast their eye over what is happening now in the Mackenzie Basin which involves land that is not only in pastoral lease but also in freehold and the efforts that those farming communities and all stakeholders are coming to in order to find a sustainable vision for the Mackenzie high country. We will hear more of that in the months and years to come. 
So I think it is probably quite useful to remember what in fact the history is of Crown pastoral leases. Many many generations ago the high country was in dire danger of well literally blowing down off the alpine tops because weed was taking over. We were losing the value of that country so it was decided to offer that land to high country farmers by way of a perpetual lease. Thank you.
Browning Steffan: Crown Pastoral Land (Rent for Pastoral Leases) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Browning Steffan: Crown Pastoral Land (Rent for Pastoral Leases) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:852] 
STEFFAN BROWNING (Green) 
: 
 This bill the Crown Pastoral Land (Rent for Pastoral Leases) Amendment Bill not only limits the Crown’s earning potential but currently misses the potential of ensuring environmental gains. The need to ensure best-practice farming management that may actually stock significantly less intensively than the stock-carrying capacities that are currently accepted is not actually enshrined in this rental-focused bill. It allows for it but does not enshrine best practice. Whatever mechanism is used to determine rentals it should necessitate the requirement that farming practices must be genuinely sustainable and that biodiversity protection targets are set and met. There are brilliant examples of good management within leaseholders and those best-practice—including certified organic—examples need replicating at every opportunity. 
This bill could allow a little bit more certainty about ensuring some of those aims. I know there are other provisions that should be treated a little more holistically than focusing on some carrying capacity methodology. The Commissioner of Crown Lands must take into account certain matters including ecosystems and values of indigenous plants and animals and landscapes and the like but the Greens think that this bill could actually enshrine some of those benefits that we actually look for. 
With 1.6 million hectares potentially being able to be truly sustainable while ensuring good biodiversity outcomes if the mechanism was correctly applied this could happen with a good formula. The Greens support farming families. We want to see more families on the land but not farming families that are not using genuinely environmentally sustainable practices. What is considered an efficient farmer as in some of the preliminary discussion on this bill has no certainty of genuine environmentally sustainable outcomes. 
I heard partnership mentioned before. I think partnership is fantastic. Partnership between leaseholders and the Crown can ensure very good outcomes but values around carrying capacity need to ensure the best environmental outcomes—not just adequate but the very best. The Greens oppose this bill but would support a mechanism that ensures the Crown a fair return on all values of this land while allowing genuine farming families an affordable rental while preserving biodiversity values and being committed to improving the land for future generations.
Vote: Crown Pastoral Land (Rent for Pastoral Leases) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Crown Pastoral Land (Rent for Pastoral Leases) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:853] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Crown Pastoral Land (Rent for Pastoral Leases) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 63 
New Zealand National 59; Maori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1. 
Noes 58 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Mana 1; United Future 1. 
Bill read a second time.
Clendon David: Financial Markets Conduct Bill — First Reading 
Clendon David: Financial Markets Conduct Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:886] 
DAVID CLENDON (Green) 
: 
 I am glad to take a very brief call on the Financial Markets Conduct Bill. I think Mr Cunliffe called it right when he pointed out that the Greens have come down on the side of opposing this bill despite accepting the need for some changes—some quite fundamental changes—and regulation around finance markets. 
We clearly need finance markets in the current economic context. One does not need to speak to many business people before discovering that there is a need for capital out there. Our businesses need capital in order to trade in order to grow and in order to innovate and create new opportunities for employment and for export. We need reliable finance markets that we know are going to work. 
People are looking for places to put their capital. We want to pull money out of the property market and put it into areas of a more productive nature than simply tying it up in homes and rental properties and the like. We have seen too much of that. We have seen the negative effect of that. It is not particularly helpful for that to continue. 
We need a return of confidence. Twenty-odd years ago we saw a complete collapse of the sharemarket. 
Debate interrupted.
Vote: Building Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Vote: Building Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:678;Page:838] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 59; Maori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Mana 1. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Schedule as amended agreed to.
Vote: Building Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Vote: Building Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:678;Page:837] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 59; Maori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Mana 1. 
Amendments agreed to.
Vote: Building Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Vote: Building Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:678;Page:837] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 59; Maori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Mana 1. 
Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Building Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Vote: Building Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:678;Page:838] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 59; Maori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Mana 1. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Robertson H V Ross: Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:678;Page:813] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The House is in Committee. Kia ora tatou no reira e te Whare e nga iwi e nga reo e nga hau e wha tena koutou tena koutou tena koutou katoa. Good afternoon honourable members. The House is in Committee for further consideration of the Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill and consideration of the Building Amendment Bill (No 3). Members we move first to the Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill and when we last considered this bill the Minister of Customs had moved Supplementary Order Paper 194 dividing the bill. For the sake of clarification I call on the Minister to move that motion again now.
Lotu-Iiga Sam: Financial Markets Conduct Bill — First Reading 
Lotu-Iiga Sam: Financial Markets Conduct Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:883] 
Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 It is an honour to talk to this the Financial Markets Conduct Bill. I support many of the comments that have been made here tonight in that this is an overdue reform. Thirty-three years ago the Securities Act was enacted and certainly this bill is part of a package of reforms that this National Government has undertaken in its second term. It really is about our priorities of building a more competitive and a productive economy one that will create jobs and one that will create opportunities not only for our businesses to grow but also for people to work and provide for their families. It really is about encouraging confidence and trust in our financial sector. When we came into power in 2008 we were really rocked by a number of collapses. To this day we are seeing it in the news the effect of these collapses and not only the effect of what has been quite immoral behaviour but also the lack of regulation. We acknowledge that and that is why this bill is on the Order Paper today. 
I also believe that the process with which this bill was presented to the House is a good process. We have had an exposure draft that was released to stakeholders in our sector and in the industry. We have had a number of discussion documents and now 500-odd pages later we have a bill before us that our Commerce Committee will run. It is part of the regulatory reform. In the last term of Government we enacted the Financial Markets Authority. We introduced regulations around auditors and the licensing of trustees and statutory supervisors. This bill adds to what has already been done by this Government. 
There is just one part of the bill that I want to talk about quickly. It is about breaches liabilities and regulations around enforcing liabilities on those who commit breaches. Penalties will be up to 10 years’ imprisonment. That is welcomed certainly by the National Government. I support this bill and look forward to it in the select committee. Thank you.
Tisch Lindsay: Crown Pastoral Land (Rent for Pastoral Leases) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Tisch Lindsay: Crown Pastoral Land (Rent for Pastoral Leases) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:838] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Members when we were last debating the Crown Pastoral Land (Rent for Pastoral Leases) Amendment Bill Raymond Huo was speaking. He has 6 minutes and 30 seconds remaining should he wish to speak
Hutchison Paul: Defence Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Hutchison Paul: Defence Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:866] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) 
: 
 Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this Defence Amendment Bill. Like the Hon Jonathan Coleman and the Hon Phil Goff I too pay tribute to the members of the Defence Force both past and present who have served New Zealand so extraordinarily well to the extent of being prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice. 
I also want to pay tribute to the work of the Hon Wayne Mapp who has ushered through the white paper that is very much behind the genesis of this bill and an incredibly thorough process of consultation. It concerns one when you hear New Zealand First speaking in such an absolutely uninformed way about the future of our armed forces when this white paper was put out for consultation right throughout New Zealand. Some of the finest minds in this area contributed to it resulting in this comprehensive statement of the Government’s defence objectives priorities strategies capability and funding for the next 20 years. 
 It was a little rich to hear the Hon Phil Goff saying that this bill was all about cuts. This was the leader of the Labour Party who campaigned about spending more borrowing more and taxing more and what actually happened? He cut his own party from 49 seats to 34 seats—an absolutely incredible result. It was totally rich to hear this former Leader of the Opposition suggesting that that was the element of this bill. Not for one moment did he deny that he was supporting it. I think almost certainly he will be supporting the bill. 
This bill is indeed about the National-led Government committing itself to making sure that New Zealand has a strong and effective Defence Force and strengthening the one-force approach of the modern Defence Force. The one-force approach is a key to ensuring that the three services work more effectively together as is required by the increasing sophistication of military operations. Far from it being a bill about cutting it is a bill that has been very carefully considered. I look forward to it being debated rigorously in the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee and I commend it to the House.
Robertson H V Ross: Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:678;Page:814] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The question is that the motion be agreed to. I will report this bill without amendment and so divided presently. Members we now move to the Building Amendment Bill— 
Chris Hipkins 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I think you might have neglected to put the vote on that matter. The custom is that you ask whether members are in favour of or opposed to a question before you put it. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I did move that the motion be agreed to. [ 
Interruption 
] I am sorry; I will move it then. All those in favour please say Aye. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: Hold on you can’t have bad process. They either know the rules or they don’t. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order! I am on my feet. I am going from the transcript here. I accept that I made a misjudgment an error because I just said that the question is that the motion be agreed to. I should have also said “All those in favour please say Aye to the contrary No.” and I did not. All those in favour please say Aye to the contrary No. The Ayes have it. I will report this bill without amendment and so divided presently. 
Motion agreed to. 
Bill to be reported without amendment presently.
Williamson Maurice: Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Williamson Maurice: Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:678;Page:814] 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister of Customs) 
: 
 I move  
That the Committee divide the bill into the Customs and Excise Amendment Bill and the Biosecurity Amendment Bill  
 pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper 194 
.
Walker Holly: Building Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Walker Holly: Building Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:678;Page:827] 
HOLLY WALKER (Green) 
: 
 I will not take up much more of the Committee’s time. I just want to thank the Minister for Building and Construction for his clarification earlier and the history lesson about the deregulation of the building industry. We in the Green Party know that there was not much difference between National and Labour in those days but we would still echo the point I made earlier that it is important for this House to learn from the lesson of the leaky homes example and the experience of the former deregulation of the building industry no matter whose legislation it was. 
To finally conclude the remarks I was making earlier I was remarking that we recognise that there is another building amendment bill on the Order Paper—the Building Amendment Bill (No 4)—and acknowledge that that bill seeks to strengthen the consumer protections. We are tentatively encouraged by that and will be supporting that bill going to a select committee because we believe that consumer protections are very important in this industry. But I would like to comment that while it is important to protect consumers when things go wrong and to ensure that their rights are recognised if their builder does take off to Queensland and they are left with a faulty home it is even better to make sure that the regulations are sufficient to begin with and that safe long-lasting houses are built. For that reason after hearing the submissions in the select committee the Green Party found that we were unable to support this Building Amendment Bill (No 3)—Part 1 or any part. Thank you.
Lee Melissa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Lee Melissa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:678;Page:812] 
11. 
MELISSA LEE (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development 
: How is Government working with the Auckland Council and the Auckland Chamber of Commerce to support young Aucklanders into employment opportunities? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development) 
: 
 I am pleased to announce a joint initiative between the Auckland Council the Auckland chamber of commerce and the Ministry of Social Development which are working together to place Work and Income Limited Service Volunteer graduates in positions within Auckland Council departments council-controlled organisations and local businesses. This initiative is one that I think just makes perfect sense. So you are combining those graduates from the Limited Service Volunteer programme a pre-employment programme where they have gained the motivation and some of the skills then sealing that really by putting them into work experience. 
Melissa Lee 
: How many young Limited Service Volunteer graduates benefited from this joint initiative? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: There will be 230 available places this year with the goal of working towards all Auckland-based Limited Service Volunteer graduates from Hobsonville over the next few years. I understand that the Auckland Council already has plans for a dozen young people to start this month with 50 placements over the first 3 months and up to 230 work experience places over the next 12 months. I certainly want to thank the work of the Auckland Council the Auckland chamber of commerce and of course my own ministry.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:678;Page:811] 
10. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Local Government 
: Does he have confidence in the financial management of the Auckland Council? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister of Local Government) 
: 
 As I advised the member last Thursday financial management of the Auckland Council is the responsibility of its elected mayor and council. I would again invite the member if he has concerns to directly raise them with the council or if he is dissatisfied with that response then to lay a complaint with the Auditor-General. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Has he received any reports in respect of section 32A of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act of 2009 which enables the Minister to exercise the power in section 254 of the Local Government Act 2002 and in particular sections 254(2)(b) and (c) which relate to identifiable mismanagement of resources and a significant and identifiable deficiency in the management or decision-making processes of that local authority? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: There are in the Auckland Council reform transitional provisions but they are there as a last resort. For instance the Government is giving consideration to a transitional provision around the rating transition that Auckland is working its way through. Those transitional provisions were never intended to be about the day-to-day running of the Auckland Council which rightly rests with the mayor and council. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Has the Minister in respect of the last question received any reports that Deloitte acting as both supplier of services and auditor of them is in breach of section 254 of the 2002 Local Government Act? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: No. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Has the Minister received had communicated to him or requested any reports that Deloitte a supplier of services to the Auckland Council and its auditor contrary to section 254 of the 2002 Act has provided free overseas travel and gifts to the council’s chief financial officer commonly called Deloitte McKenzie? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The employment of both the chief executive of the Auckland Council and its chief financial officer is the responsibility of the Auckland mayor and council and if the member has got concerns that there has been any financial impropriety— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. As you so delicately pointed out last week he is being asked whether he has got any reports and last week he received that report and he has to bring himself up to date. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The Rt Hon Winston Peters is correct. The Minister was asked whether he has received any reports on a certain issue and it would be helpful if the answer were to address that point in the question. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: To my knowledge no I have not had any reports drawn to my attention in regard to the issues the member raises.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:678;Page:809] 
8. 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: Have Iwi Maori raised any issues with him about the proposals in the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill; if so what? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 The bill is currently before the Local Government and Environment Committee. Approximately 18 iwi have made submissions on the bill and I have seen those submissions. They are strongly supportive of the Government putting in place a proper regime for protecting the exclusive economic zone but they also set out improvements that they would like to see made to the bill in regard to things like Treaty provisions. The Government also has a relationship agreement with iwi specifically on this issue an initiative that has been taken in response to representations by the Maori Party. The iwi involved are discussing issues on both the bill and the regulations that will flow from it. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: How will customary interests for Maori in the exclusive economic zone be recognised and protected when the only considerations for the Environmental Protection Authority are economic and environmental factors? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: There are two quite specific provisions of the bill. The first of those is clause 26 which again is a provision that comes from the advocacy of the Maori Party. It provides for a Maori advisory committee and it requires the Environmental Protection Authority to be informed from a Maori perspective of any applications in the exclusive economic zone. There is also a provision in clause 46 of the bill that states that the Environmental Protection Authority is required to notify iwi authorities customary marine title groups and protected customary rights groups directly of any applications within the exclusive economic zone.  
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: How does the Minister plan to prevent the further erosion of Maori rights over our moana throughout the process of granting mostly large multinational companies consents in the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The first point I would make is that currently anybody doing an activity in the exclusive economic zone or extended continental shelf does not require any sort of consent so to argue that there is some erosion I think is incorrect. What this bill is going to do is to require a proper process for those. In respect of the point about the companies that may be involved in using resources this is a country that needs more jobs and more exports. Maori have a strong interest in the growing economy and in ensuring that New Zealand takes up these opportunities—albeit in a way that is respectful of Maori and of the quite legitimate environmental interests.
Vote: Defence Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Defence Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:872] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Defence Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 98 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Maori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 23 
Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Mana 1. 
Bill read a first time. 
Bill referred to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee.
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:678;Page:808] 
6. 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
 to the  
Minister for Communications and Information Technology 
: What progress has been made to improve access to broadband in New Zealand schools? 
Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister for Communications and Information Technology) 
: 
 Yesterday the Prime Minister the Minister of Education and I announced the roll-out of ultra-fast broadband to a further 693 schools throughout the country. This means that by July next year 410000 students at 1500 schools across New Zealand will have access to fibre under the $1.35 billion Ultra-fast Broadband Initiative or the $300 million Rural Broadband Initiative. This progress in schools alongside that being made in hospitals businesses and homes will see New Zealand becoming one of the most connected countries in the world. 
Colin King 
: What further progress can be expected for students and schools in their access to better broadband? 
Hon AMY ADAMS 
: In just a few years by the end of 2015 97.7 percent of schools and 99.9 percent of students will receive ultra-fast broadband enabling speeds of 100 megabits per second. The remaining schools in the most remote locations of New Zealand will receive a high-speed wireless or satellite connection. This is a game-changer for New Zealand schools and will fundamentally improve the way our children learn.
Dean Jacqui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Dean Jacqui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:678;Page:805] 
3. 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: How much funding has the Government committed to the Fresh Start for Fresh Water clean-up fund for the projects announced at the Bluegreens Forum at the weekend for the Manawatu River and the Wairarapa Wainono and Waituna Lagoons? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 The Prime Minister announced funding on Saturday totalling nearly $8 million made up of $5.2 million for the Manawatu River $1 million for the Wairarapa lakes $800000 for the Wainono Lagoon in the member’s electorate and $785000 for the Waituna Lagoon clean-up in Southland. This brings clean-up funding for our first 4 years in Government to a total of $101 million as compared with $17 million for the preceding 4 years under the previous Government. That is a six-fold increase and it shows the level of commitment this Government has to clean water in New Zealand. 
Ian McKelvie 
: What reports has the Minister received on actual impacts on water quality arising from the Government’s clean-up programme? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The most dramatic improvements we have seen have been in the Rotorua electorate with the Lake Rotoiti scheme. Its measured eutrophic levels have reduced— 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Whose decision was that? Labour’s decision. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Who provided the funding? That is what speaks I would say to the member who is interjecting and this Government has committed more money to freshwater clean-ups than in the history of New Zealand. We have seen stunning results with Lake Rotoiti being the cleanest it has been in decades and that is the sort of result we want to extend to the other seven programmes we have under way.
Young Jonathan: Financial Markets Conduct Bill — First Reading 
Young Jonathan: Financial Markets Conduct Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:885] 
JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) 
: 
 It is a sad thing but it is known by many people that the best most mature and most developed legislation comes out of how things have gone wrong. We know that through the last 5 or 6 years we have seen hundreds and thousands of New Zealanders suffer tremendous loss and through the ashes of that we see legislation emerging that is bringing great solidarity certainty strength and stability out of times that have devastated and disappointed many New Zealanders. The Financial Markets Conduct Bill with a tremendous amount of detail in it is to bring back that surety and that strength which as was said across the House are important not just for New Zealanders but also for overseas investors. I talk to people in my neck of the woods who invest hundreds of millions of dollars into New Zealand and having certainty is one of the key factors why they feel confident to invest here because of the regulation and the stability of Government. 
It is good to see the Financial Markets Conduct Bill come to the House. I look forward to seeing it in the Commerce Committee and I believe that it will bring some great confidence and strength into our markets. Thank you.
McKelvie Ian: Crown Pastoral Land (Rent for Pastoral Leases) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
McKelvie Ian: Crown Pastoral Land (Rent for Pastoral Leases) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:851] 
IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitikei) 
: 
 I am pleased to take this opportunity to speak briefly to this enlightened piece of legislation the Crown Pastoral Land (Rent for Pastoral Leases) Amendment Bill and I intend to bring it back to a practical basis. The legislation is designed to ensure that high country rents—and I refer to pastoral leases of course—are fair workable understandable easily interpreted and do not result in unnecessary disputes in the negotiation process and a large bit of the discussion in the last few minutes has been around that. There are a number of other matters for consideration that will possibly spin out of this legislation and further justify the changes proposed by it. Farmers throughout New Zealand have a huge interest in their environment and it is essential they are able to farm profitably as this enables them to make the contribution to environmental matters that is so necessary in this type of country. This bill will assist them by setting a rental that is based on their leased land’s productive potential allowing them to plan and better understand their future cash flows. 
Another consideration in this rental-setting process could well be the fact that we may set rentals at a level that does not drive production beyond the sustainable capacity of the land concerned. We have seen this happen all too often in New Zealand farming history and some of the subsidy schemes of 30-odd years ago certainly distorted the use of land and put pressure on the sustainability of that land in a manner that is still being paid for today. 
Including amenity value in the valuation process will inevitably put renewed pressure on the sustainable capacity of the land as livestock farming would have to subsidise. The so-called amenity value as returned from this source is not an option in the current or foreseeable future on many of these farms. 
My own electorate in the Rangitikei of course has a fair bit of what might be termed high country land. It is however highly productive and for the main part privately owned. Therefore the bill does not apply to us North Islanders and I guess to some extent we would regret that. This country is of course the home of the mighty merino one of our most valuable high-end luxurious and totally sustainable fashion products—and fashion icons really. I think that this Government must encourage the production of merino and its products through sound policy and this in my view is sound policy. There is no doubt that high country leases are the best way to both manage and protect this wonderful piece of New Zealand for future generations of our children. Thank you.
Robertson H V Ross: Voting — Correction—Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill 
Robertson H V Ross: Voting — Correction—Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill 
[Volume:678;Page:827] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The last time the Committee considered the Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill the vote on the question on the provisions standing part was incorrectly announced as Ayes 119 and Noes 1. The correct result is Ayes 115 and Noes 1. The record will be corrected.
Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:678;Page:813] 
Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill 
In Committee 
Debate resumed from 15 February. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The House is in Committee. Kia ora tatou no reira e te Whare e nga iwi e nga reo e nga hau e wha tena koutou tena koutou tena koutou katoa. Good afternoon honourable members. The House is in Committee for further consideration of the Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill and consideration of the Building Amendment Bill (No 3). Members we move first to the Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill and when we last considered this bill the Minister of Customs had moved Supplementary Order Paper 194 dividing the bill. For the sake of clarification I call on the Minister to move that motion again now. 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister of Customs) 
: 
 I move  
That the Committee divide the bill into the Customs and Excise Amendment Bill and the Biosecurity Amendment Bill  
 pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper 194 
. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The question is that the motion be agreed to. I will report this bill without amendment and so divided presently. Members we now move to the Building Amendment Bill— 
Chris Hipkins 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I think you might have neglected to put the vote on that matter. The custom is that you ask whether members are in favour of or opposed to a question before you put it. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I did move that the motion be agreed to. [ 
Interruption 
] I am sorry; I will move it then. All those in favour please say Aye. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: Hold on you can’t have bad process. They either know the rules or they don’t. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order! I am on my feet. I am going from the transcript here. I accept that I made a misjudgment an error because I just said that the question is that the motion be agreed to. I should have also said “All those in favour please say Aye to the contrary No.” and I did not. All those in favour please say Aye to the contrary No. The Ayes have it. I will report this bill without amendment and so divided presently. 
Motion agreed to. 
Bill to be reported without amendment presently.
Voting — Correction—Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Voting — Correction—Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill 
[Volume:678;Page:827] 
Voting 
Correction—Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The last time the Committee considered the Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill the vote on the question on the provisions standing part was incorrectly announced as Ayes 119 and Noes 1. The correct result is Ayes 115 and Noes 1. The record will be corrected.
Draft transcript - Thursday 10 May 2012 
Published as advance copy. 
Draft transcript - Thursday 10 May 2012
Draft transcript - Wednesday 09 May 2012 
Published as advance copy. 
Draft transcript - Wednesday 09 May 2012
Draft transcript - Tuesday 08 May 2012 
Published as advance copy. 
Draft transcript - Tuesday 08 May 2012
Draft transcript - Thursday 03 May 2012 
Published as advance copy. 
Draft transcript - Thursday 03 May 2012
Draft transcript - Wednesday 02 May 2012 
Published as advance copy. 
Draft transcript - Wednesday 02 May 2012
Draft transcript - Tuesday 01 May 2012 
Published as advance copy. 
Draft transcript - Tuesday 01 May 2012
Tisch Lindsay: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Advance Copy - Subject to minor change before inclusion in Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: If the member keeps talking after I have rung the bell that constitutes another call. I did not dock you for one and I did not dock the previous Labour member as well. But just be mindful if you continue talking and I call you again that constitutes another call. It means that later on you will not have that call if you want to speak on something else. So I just remind all members of that.  
Report noted.
Bennett David: Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Bennett David: Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Advance Copy - Subject to minor change before inclusion in Bound Volume.] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to speak in regard to the Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill. As for the Labour Party there and its last member of the student loan scheme Chris Hipkins I ask whether he has repaid his student loan. 
Chris Hipkins 
: I have.  
DAVID BENNETT 
: You have. Good on you! 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order! 
DAVID BENNETT 
: When we look at this bill I think that the big part of it is that it brings in the requirement to have a New Zealand - based contact person. That is important because it gives a point of contact for the Inland Revenue Department. The contact person regime in itself does not mean that there will necessarily be a repayment but it is one of those things that once set in motion will lead to a situation where people actually follow the rules. 
Dr David Clark 
: Tinkering! 
DAVID BENNETT 
: Contrary to the view of the new member from Dunedin most citizens in New Zealand do their best to engage and be successful and deal with issues especially their obligations to the Inland Revenue Department. If they have a contact person who gives them a reminder of those obligations they are willing to comply with them and that will lead to greater enhancement of the system.  
I think it is a bit strange that the Labour Party and the Green Party have such a problem with this bill when really what it is doing is trying to make sure that those people who have used the system and have benefited from it actually repay that money so that somebody else can get that benefit and somebody else can use that Government funding for their education purposes. It seems a bit unfair that the Opposition is against people getting an education and is against people having that opportunity. Labour members would rather think it is just for them—that once they have done it that is it. They think it is all about them and not for the best interests of the community.  
This is a bill that will encourage repayment and encouraging repayment is good for education because it increases the opportunity for other people to get education and those opportunities. When we remember the student loan scheme we must recall how Labour put a cap on the number of students in our system. By bringing that interest-free student loan scheme in it effectively capped the number of New Zealanders who could get that education opportunity. That cap is a limitation yet in this House tonight we hear comments against this bill which actually will be a way that we can get more money coming into the system so that we can get more people going through rather than having the capping arrangement which the Labour Party is fond of in regard of students because Labour wants only some people to get an education not everybody. Thank you.