edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Urgent Debates Declined — Syria Internal Conflict—Government ResponseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeUrgent Debates Declined — Syria Internal Conflict—Government Response[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13243. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Urgent Debates DeclinedSyria Internal Conflict—Government ResponseMr SPEAKER: Honourable members I have received a letter from Dr Kennedy Graham seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the question of New Zealand Government policy in response to a request by the United States to lend moral support for a US military strike against Syria. For there to be an urgent debate there must be a particular case of recent occurrence that involves the administrative or ministerial responsibility of the Government. The Government has not yet made a decision on the request by the United States Secretary of State and there is no ministerial responsibility for the global perception that chemical weapons were used in Syria or for the response of the United States Secretary of State or the United Nations Secretary-General. An urgent debate is a way of holding the Government accountable for an action that has occurred and for which it is responsible. There must be a distinct governmental responsibility for the particular case that is sought for debate. The application is therefore declined.
Visitors — Sweden—Dr Anders WJonssonRiksdagText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVisitors — Sweden—Dr Anders WJonssonRiksdag[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13229. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Wednesday 4 September 2013Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.VisitorsSweden—Dr Anders WJonssonRiksdagMr SPEAKER: Honourable members I have much pleasure in informing the House that a parliamentarian from theRiksdag of Sweden Dr Anders WJonsson MP is present in the gallery. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed.
Henare Tau: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHenare Tau: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13363. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TAU HENARE (National): If I can I will start my speech by paying my condolences to big Denis Hansen. For the last 30 years or so of my life out in west Auckland he was a father figure to most maleMāoris my age out in the west. E te rangatiratakoto mairātakoto mairā. Haere ki teokioki haere haere haere.[Lie there the elder lie there indeed. Go forth to rest depart journey on farewell.]I suppose that when we are talking about heritage Denis Hansen is part of the heritage of west Auckland and part of the heritage of Auckland itself in so many ways. I think we have to protect the memories and we have to protect what our heritage is in this country and that comes in all shapes and sizes. I do commend the Heritage New ZealandPouhere Taonga Bill to the House. I think it is important that we make legislation that works and works very easily and well for the country rather than long-winded and drawn-out legislation that does not serve any purpose.Debate interrupted.
Vote: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13358. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes63New Zealand National 59;Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes54New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 12; New Zealand First 6; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Bill read a third time.
O'Connor Simon: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Simon: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13356. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SIMON O’CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): I am pleased to take a call on the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill in its third and obviously final reading. Although I did not sit on the Government Administration Committee I have followed this bill with interest particularly as I have had to prepare to speak on it but also because various constituents have come to my office to raise questions around why this is happening. We have heard from a number of people particularly from this side around the structure or why this had come about. We have heard I think legitimate thoughts and concerns from the other side too but a lot of it keeps away from the real issue which is that the Government must act. The Government has to act. I am very conscious that the likes of the Ombudsman and others can provide opinions and so forth—very valid. That is their job. But it is Parliament’s duty prerogative and abilityof course to act and to make this amendment occur go through Parliament so that we can provide the safety the security—the health and safety—that is required.As we have heard this comes through basically an error in drafting in the original bill. When you look back throughHansard and the debates at the time it is very clear—very clear—that the intention was for the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board to be able to prosecute those who were not registered to levy its members and to do disciplinary action but also to prosecute those people who are not appropriately registered but are undertaking plumbing gasfitting and so forth. It was very appropriate. However it was found not to be legal. It was found not to be legal. It has left the board in a difficult position. In many ways it has left the country therefore in a difficult position.This bill is basically aligning the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board with what many other boards and similar structures do. We heard from Minister Williamson around how it operates. I acknowledge what the previous speaker Ruth Dyson was saying before she resumed her seat. There are different models but ultimately the boards review through regulation their industry. They work with the industry. They maintain their standards. They act where they can. This bill is really a simple opportunity—a simple opportunity—to make legal and bring about the original intention of the bill: that levies can be collected to ensure that the high quality and standard that we expect and have come to experience from our plumbers gasfitters and drainlayers around New Zealand can be maintained; that this board will be able to set its levies and take disciplinary action of its members where required; and most important as this amendment bill seeks to do that we allow the board to take action against those people who are not licensed and not registered. I support this bill and commend it to the House.
Street Maryan: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeStreet Maryan: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13348. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour): Thank you very much Mr Assistant Speaker for recognising me for the call. I have to confess that I am struggling to remember the first 8 minutes of my speech and just quite where I left off in my speech at the end of the 8 minutes because it has been such a long time since this interrupted third reading of the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill commenced. We continue despite interruptions to oppose this bill. In the end although we were open to finding a solution to the continuing problems that have plagued the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board over the collection of the disciplinary levy in particular and since 2010 the offences fee for the prosecution of unlicensed practitioners we have not managed to arrive at that conclusion.We are going to be left with the validation of an illegal fee that was collected an illegal charge upon tradespeople which is continuing to aid the complete exodus of our tradespeople—our plumbers gasfitters and drainlayers—from New Zealand to Australia. This bill is not going to assist the plumbers gasfitters and drainlayers in any measure and we cannot—cannot—support it. Thank you.
Vote: Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13348. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Bill be now read a third time.Ayes63New Zealand National 59;Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes56New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 6; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Bill read a third time.
Sabin Mike: Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSabin Mike: Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13347. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MIKE SABIN (National—Northland): If we were living on Fantasy Island that contribution from Eugenie Sage would have been absolutely appropriate. But—Hon Simon Bridges: “The plane! The plane!”MIKE SABIN: “The plane!”—that is right “The plane!”. But actually we are not. We are living in the real world not in the Green vacuum. As for this legislation and this Minister of Housing if we are to accept criticism—and we do accept some criticism from across the floor. But if the criticism of this Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Bill is that this is moving too fast and this will have things happening too fast then I say that we welcome that criticism.There are hundreds if not thousands of New Zealanders who are queuing up wanting land and who are wanting to build or buy a home and cannot. This bill is about Economics 101. It is about freeing up land. It is about providing enough supply to meet the demand. This bill is not about solving all of the problems; if nothing else it is one aspect of solving the nexus between the supply and demand situation in particular in the city of Auckland. If it is good enough for the pseudo-leader of the Labour Party the de facto leader of the Labour Party Len Brown to support this legislation and if it is good enough for Len Brown to work on pragmatic solutions for his city with the Minister then why is it not good enough for the Labour Party to support this bill?The Labour Party’s solutions to this are firstly to oppose because that is what it will do to any pragmatic solution; secondly to criticise because that is just what it does and it does it so well; thirdly to ban Asians and get all xenophobic about it; and fourthly to impose a capital gains tax. I could throw in a few other things if I had the time. One of the special ones is to promise 100000 homes in 10 years for an average of $300000. Of course these are homes that must levitate—must hover above the ground—because when the average section is $325000 in Auckland how can one build a house for $300000? It is lunacy. It is Labour Party politics. That is why members are scrambling around trying to find someone who might be crazy enough to stand up and lead that party—because it is leading itself into oblivion. This is good legislation. I commend the Minister and I have been pleased to work on the bill. I commend it to the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13345. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I understand that the next call is a split call.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13328. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table the entire set of such letters. Is there any objection to that course of action happening? There is none. The member can table those letters.Documents by leave laid on the Table of the House.
King Annette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKing Annette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13328. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon ANNETTE KING (Labour—Rongotai): Mr Speaker—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! This is a point of order.Hon ANNETTE KING: Poor old Billy!Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The member can raise her point of order and it will be heard in silence—it will be heard in silence.Hon ANNETTE KING: I seek leave to table every letter I wrote to every district health board asking how many patients were refused first specialist assessment for the years 2010-11 2011-12 and 2012-13—the entire set of letters.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13328. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that particular document. Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Ryall Tony: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRyall Tony: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13328. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health): I seek leave to table a copy of an Official Information Act request asking how many patients were waiting more than 6 months for first specialist assessment and surgery for the years 2005 through to 2012—
Hauiti Claudette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHauiti Claudette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13324. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]10.CLAUDETTE HAUITI (National) to theMinister of Local Government: What is the Government doing to make it easier to vote in local body elections?Hon CHRIS TREMAIN (Minister of Local Government): Yesterday I announced that we will trial online voting at the 2016 local body elections. I am confident that online voting will boost turnout as it is more convenient and will particularly appeal to young voters. Postal voting creates a barrier for some people and voter turnout at the 2010 elections was below 50 percent. Online voting will encourage participation which is good for democracy.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The public of this country are soon to engage in a local body election. There is a great chance of confusion happening now because the assumption of this question was that it was for the election that is coming this year. He is talking about the year 2016. Frankly it is not relevant and it is likely to mislead the public when there is a low enough vote already—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not a point of order. The question is in order and the Minister was answering it in an orderly fashion. Does the Minister who was interrupted want to add any further to the answer?Hon CHRIS TREMAIN: No.Claudette Hauiti: How will theRealMe service be used to enable online voting?Hon CHRIS TREMAIN: New Zealanders will be able to use the newRealMe service to prove their identity so they can vote online in 2016. This is safer and more reliable than postal voting. The Government is also making changes to electoral law to enable full online enrolment usingRealMe.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Stop wasting taxpayers’ money.Hon CHRIS TREMAIN: I understand the member has significant difficulties with information and communications technology and online voting would be beyond him so do not worry about that in 2016.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13323. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) to theMinister of Revenue: What recent initiative has the Government put in place to improve compliance with child support and student loan repayment obligations?Hon TODDMcCLAY (Minister of Revenue): Yesterday Minister Tremain and I announced a new information-sharing agreement where the Department of Internal Affairs will provide the Inland Revenue Department with contact details for adult passport renewals and applications. The Inland Revenue Department will use the information to contact New Zealanders living overseas who owe money to the taxpayer on their child support or student loans. The agreement is limited to contact information about overseas-based student loan borrowers who are in default on repayments and liable parents living overseas who are in default on their child support obligations and whose contact details are out of date.Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: How will this information sharing encourage those in default to meet their repayment obligations?Hon TODDMcCLAY: The vast majority of people pay their child support payments or student loan repayments on time. However it has become apparent that the principal reason why many New Zealanders living overseas fail to comply with these obligations is that they have in many cases simply lost contact with the Inland Revenue Department. Accurate contact details are crucial for ensuring overseas-based liable parents and student loan borrowers are able to meet their obligations and the department’s experience is that 70 percent of borrowers in default begin to comply once they have been contacted. This common-sense measure will allow the department to contact these people and help them to meet their obligations to taxpayers and to their children.
Carter David: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Imputations in Respect of Persons Outside HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Imputations in Respect of Persons Outside House[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13311. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: That is certainly true and that is available to Mr Maxwell if he so thinks.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Imputations in Respect of Persons Outside HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Imputations in Respect of Persons Outside House[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13311. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think the normal avenue for misleading has now passed but I think that if Mr Maxwell feels that there have been any inaccuracies he has the ability to seek a correction.
Carter David: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Imputations in Respect of Persons Outside HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Imputations in Respect of Persons Outside House[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13311. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I do not believe there is anything that I can do as Speaker in that that question was raised yesterday. It was in fact a question to the Minister of Finance as a shareholding Minister. The questions were in order; the answers were in order. The ramifications of those questions and answers are now something that must be dealt with byMāori Television perhaps but I do not believe that there is anything that this House can do to assist. If the member believes that there was any deliberate misleading there is certainly an avenue available to him and if he is unsure of that remedy he is welcome to talk to me after question time.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Imputations in Respect of Persons Outside HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFlavell Te Ururoa: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Imputations in Respect of Persons Outside House[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13311. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TE URUROA FLAVELL (Co-Leader—Māori Party): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. Kia oratātou. I just wanted to check with you about a matter that actually happened yesterday and I accept that it should have been raised at the time. However additional knowledge has come to pass since then. Yesterday in question time Clare Curran raised a number of questions in respect of the appointment of the chief executive officer of theMāori Television board. The question was to the Prime Minister I think and it talked about the confidence of the Prime Minister in the board in respect of the appointment of a chief executive officer.During question time she put into the public arena by way of Parliament a number of pieces of information about MrPaora Maxwell and his former employment so at the time I assumed that an appointment had been made but I have since found that that is not the case and that there has been no appointment to the position. The statements that she has now put into the public arena may well influence the appointment of a chief executive officer to theMāori Television Service so in this point of order I ask what guidance there might be bearing in mind that the ramifications of that information being in the public arena may well influence the outcome of an appointment of a chief executive officer and whether there are any consequences—such as an apology perhaps—from Ms Curran for putting it into the public arena bearing in mind that that may well jeopardise future employment for that particular person.
Tolley Anne: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTolley Anne: Business Statement[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13311. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Acting Leader of the House): Anything like that will be discussed in the Business Committee.
Mallard Trevor: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Business Statement[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13311. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): Could I just check with the Acting Leader of the House whether there are any plans to have extended sittings in either of the 2 weeks. I do not think we have had notice of that yet.
Tolley Anne: Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTolley Anne: Business Statement[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13311. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Acting Leader of the House): Next week the House is in a 1-week adjournment. When the House resumes on Tuesday 17 September it is the Government’s intention to progress a number of first readings on the Order Paper including the Vulnerable Children Bill and the Electoral Amendment Bill as well as continuing the Committee stage of the Family Court Proceedings Reform Bill.
Robertson H V Ross: Summary Offences (Possession of Hand-held Lasers) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Summary Offences (Possession of Hand-held Lasers) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13306. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I call on members’ order of the day No. 4. Just before doing so I want to advise the House that the honourable member Cam Calder will be using a visual aid and to advise the member that it must be removed at the conclusion of his speaking and also to tell him that it must not interfere with the view of the Speaker or other members.
Robertson H V Ross: Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13306. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Order! Can I just remind members that there are to be no interjections during the taking of a vote because it can actually be perceived as intimidation and may lead to a breach of privilege.
Vote: Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13306. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes59New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Māori Party 2; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Noes61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Motion not agreed to.
Yang Jian: Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYang Jian: Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13304. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr JIAN YANG (National): I rise to oppose the Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill. This member’s bill in the name of Labour MP Moana Mackey will create a preference for renewable electricity generation by a 10-year restriction on new baseload fossil-fuelled thermal electricity generation. The ban on thermal generation was initially enacted as part of the Labour Government’s emissions trading scheme in 2008 and subsequently repealed by the National Government in late 2008. This bill re-enacts that ban.A ban on thermal generation is unnecessary. A ban would also put security of supply at risk. New Zealanders need to be assured that during the harsh winters that can grip many regions we have a backup when hydro lakes and wind generation are low. During several winters between 2000 and 2008 gas and coal plants were at times supplying over 50 percent of New Zealand’s electricity needs because of low hydro lake levels.The bill defines “fossil fuel” in new section 62C inserted by clause 5 as natural gas coal petroleum any refined petroleum products or any other obligation fuel. Gas and coal plants in New Zealand generate between 20 percent and 30 percent of our electricity and they play a crucial role in keeping New Zealanders warm in winter and our lights on for households and businesses to function.The portion of energy generated from renewable sources has risen under a National Government. It is consistently above 70 percent which is far higher than it was under Labour. Just last month the Environment Court gave the go-ahead to Genesis Energy’s Castle Hill Wind Farm project which is north of Masterton and east ofEketāhuna to build 286 turbines which will power around 370000 homes. National remains committed to renewable energy and we remain on track to reach the aspirational goal of 90 percent renewable generation by 2025.Our reforms have controlled runaway increases in power prices. In fact price increases have halved yet we have still maintained investment in generation and transmission. New Zealanders are savvy and are increasingly taking advantage of greater competition and switching companies for a better deal as shown by the popularity of the What’s My Number website. The Government has already undertaken major electricity reforms to increase competition and improve security of supply. Labour and the Greens have already done their best to scaremonger and deter investors with their plans to nationalise the energy sector. Their power plan will kill competition and raise prices. This bill which seeks to ban thermal generation would cause further economic mayhem. I will not be supporting the bill. Thank you.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13300. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National): Satsriakaal Mr Assistant Speaker and thanks for the opportunity to participate in the first reading of the Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill. The bill is in the name of Moana Mackey and National will be opposing this bill. This bill is one that is taking us in the reverse direction. The bill is giving the wrong indication to the business community that if you have the intention to expand your business then the Government is not prepared to guarantee you power supply. When I migrated to New Zealand I was very happy to see that there were no power cuts but some years later after arriving I started hearing that it was possible we might have power cuts. I was very disappointed. Those days are not far away if we adopt this bill which bans our thermal generation of electricity and will ensure that we will have power cuts in this country.The bill creates a preference of renewable electricity generation which we agree to but we do not agree to the 10-year restriction on new baseload fossil-fuelled thermal generation. The ban would put the security of power supply at risk. The ban on thermal generation was initially enacted as part of the Labour Government’s emissions trading scheme in 2008 and subsequently repealed by the National Government in late 2008.The National Government as part of its growth agenda has ensured the security of energy supply encouraged competition and boosted the level of renewable energy. We believe that it is the responsibility of the Government to provide infrastructure to the businesses so that they can grow their business and eventually help to grow the economy. Under National the proportion of energy generated from renewable resources has increased and is constantly above 70 percent—far higher than under Labour. We have remained on track to achieve the goal of 90 percent renewable generation by 2025. Labour had 9 years to make meaningful reforms to energy and to increase renewable energy. Instead it made an arbitrary and hasty ban at the end of its term.Gas and coal plants generate between 20 percent and 30 percent of our electricity. Without this the lights would not stay on. Thermal generation has been even moreimportant during the times of peak demand. During the several winters between 2000 and 2008 gas and coal plants were at times supplying 50 percent of New Zealand’s electricity needs because of low hydro lake levels. To suggest that New Zealand could do without thermal generation does not stand up to the facts. The ban on thermal energy was totally unnecessary and threatened the security of supply. It is vital that we keep the lights on and I oppose this bill.
Robertson H V Ross: Conservation (Natural Heritage Protection) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Conservation (Natural Heritage Protection) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13298. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I call the honourable member Eugenie Sage.Tēnā koe.Catherine Delahunty: No no you don’t.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Catherine Delahunty—Catherine Delahunty absolutely. I am sorry Catherine.
Robertson H V Ross: Conservation (Natural Heritage Protection) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Conservation (Natural Heritage Protection) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13296. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I understand that this is a split call so the member will get a bell at 4 minutes.
Vote: Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13279. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A personal vote was called for on the questionThat the Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes63Adams(P)Finlayson(P)LeeTisch(P)Ardern S (P)FlavellLotu-Iiga(P)Tolley(P)AuchinvoleFoss(P)McClay(P)TremainBakshi(P)Foster-Bell(P)McCully(P)Turia(P)Banks(P)Goldsmith(P)McKelvie(P)Upston(P)Barry(P)Goodhew(P)MitchellWagner(P)Bennett D (P)Groser(P)NgaroWilkinson(P)Bennett P (P)Guy(P)O’Connor S (P)Williamson(P)Borrows(P)Hauiti(P)Parata(P)Woodhouse(P)Bridges(P)Hayes(P)RossYangBrownlee(P)HeatleyRoy(P)YoungCalder(P)Henare(P)Ryall(P)Carter (P)Hutchison(P)Sabin(P)Coleman(P)Joyce(P)Shanks(P)Collins(P)KayeSharples(P)Dean(P)Key(P)Simpson(P)Teller:English(P)King C (P)Smith(P)MacindoeNoes55Ardern J (P)Goff(P)Mathers(P)StewartBeaumont(P)Graham(P)Moroney(P)StreetBrowning(P)HagueNorman(P)TirikateneClark(P)Harawira(P)O’Connor D(P)Turei(P)Clendon(P)Hipkins(P)O’RourkeTwyford(P)Cosgrove(P)Horan(P)Parker(P)WalkerCunliffe(P)Hughes(P)Peters(P)Wall(P)CurranHuo(P)PrasadWhaitiri(P)Dalziel(P)King A (P)Prosser(P)Williams(P)Delahunty(P)Lees-Galloway (P)Robertson G (P)Dunne(P)Logie(P)Robertson R (P)Dyson(P)Lole-TaylorRocheFaafoi(P)Mackey(P)Sage(P)FentonMallard(P)Shearer(P)Teller:Genter(P)Martin(P)Sio(P)LittleBill read a third time.
Mitchell Mark: Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Mark: Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13278. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney): I want to acknowledge Te Ururoa Flavell as well like everyone else in the House has done because if he had not brought this Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill to the House then the conversation would never have got started. There is obviously a clear need for reform and he has highlighted that. I congratulate him on that and acknowledge him. The other thing that has happened of course is that he has started working with the Hon Chris Tremain. So this is just the beginning of more reforms that we will see rolled out in the next year. Congratulations to Te Ururoa—well done.It is only a short call but I would also like to mention the fact that Denise Roche raised the issue around funding and sports funding which is actually a really important upside of the revenue generated through class 4 pokies. I do not think that funding is gender based. I mean I look around the House and I see one of our top Black Ferns sitting in the House tonight. She played rugby. We have a lot of men who play netball. So to attribute that funding to being gender based I do not think is very true. You have also solved a bit of a mystery for me and that is the reason why Gareth Hughes has notturned out for the parliamentary rugby team this year. I see that Denise had his rugby boots. So it is good to see that that has been solved.It is a very good bill. Again I want to acknowledge and congratulate Te Ururoa Flavell and I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Members this debate has concluded. Just to explain the procedure I understand that there are members who wish to have a personal vote on this matter. I will be putting the question in the normal manner. Once I have determined the result any member can challenge the result that I have given and request a personal vote. That is the procedure that we are going to follow.
Tisch Lindsay: Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13276. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I understand the next call is a split call.
Tisch Lindsay: Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13270. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Sorry to interrupt the honourable member. Her time has expired.
Robertson H V Ross: Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13260. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): The question is that the motion be agreed to. I call the—hang on I have just got to make sure we go according to this. Where are we? I call the honourable member Jonathan Young.Hon Trevor Mallard: You’re going to have two in support of it straight off. That’s just outrageous.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Order! This is a conscience issue.
Robertson H V Ross: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: General Debate[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13258. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Order! The member is a very experienced member.The debate having concluded the motion lapsed.
Mallard Trevor: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: General Debate[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13258. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is very good of you to give that ruling. Why did you rule that my point of order which made exactly that point was frivolous earlier? The member because you let him get away with it did it 18 more times.
Carter David: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: General Debate[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13250. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Yes I accept the point. The member has now finished his speech but it is certainly not helpful and it does lead to disorder.
Mallard Trevor: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: General Debate[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13250. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think you heard the reference to the right honourable member who should be addressed in that way and not in the way that the member just did.
Carter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Syria Internal Conflict—Government ResponseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Syria Internal Conflict—Government Response[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13243. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members I have received a letter from Dr Kennedy Graham seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the question of New Zealand Government policy in response to a request by the United States to lend moral support for a US military strike against Syria. For there to be an urgent debate there must be a particular case of recent occurrence that involves the administrative or ministerial responsibility of the Government. The Government has not yet made a decision on the request by the United States Secretary of State and there is no ministerial responsibility for the global perception that chemical weapons were used in Syria or for the response of the United States Secretary of State or the United Nations Secretary-General. An urgent debate is a way of holding the Government accountable for an action that has occurred and for which it is responsible. There must be a distinct governmental responsibility for the particular case that is sought for debate. The application is therefore declined.
McKelvie Ian: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMcKelvie Ian: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13242. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]12.IANMcKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei) to theAssociate Minister of Health: What recent announcements has she made regarding assistance for communities to improve their drinking water?Hon JO GOODHEW (Associate Minister of Health): Recently I announced that $7.9 million from the Drinking Water Subsidy Fund will be provided to small communities to help them establish or improve their drinking-water supplies. This funding will help council and community water suppliers provide safer drinking water to 21 communities totalling approximately 22000 people.Ian McKelvie: What types of project have been approved?Hon JO GOODHEW: Every project that was applied for in this year’s funding round and met the technical requirements has had a subsidy approved. Subsidies ranged from over $2 million for theWhakatāne District Council to upgrade the Rangitaiki Plains - Edgecumbe water supply serving 1730 people to $51000 being provided to thePirihimāWhānau Trust to treat and filter the TeKōhanga -Pirihimā water supply so that around 55 people will receive safer drinking water. In addition subsidies have been awarded to four West Coast of the South Island communities and to Foxton FeatherstonPahīatua Whirinaki TuakauKoriniti Taumarunui and other communities as well.Iain Lees-Galloway: With regard to the technical requirements the Associate Minister referred to in her previous answer what has been the impact of her Government’s decision to restrict access to the Drinking Water Subsidy Fund by changing the deprivation index limit from three to seven and reducing the Government contribution from 95 percent to 85 percent of total costs on communities like Tokomaru and others where the presence of giardia and cryptosporidium means water must be boiled to be safe?Hon JO GOODHEW: Back in 2005 the Budget allocated time-limited funding of $117.8 million over the years 2006-2007 to 2011-2012 for the drinking-water subsidies. But back in December 2010 the Government changed the timing of the expenditure so that it will now occur over a longer period of time to align better with the timetables of local authorities. Ten million dollars per annum is planned until the end of the programme and it was determined that we would target the funding much more at the communities that needed it the most. Therefore although I do not have the particular details I believe the member is asking for this was to target the poorer communities in New Zealand and make sure that we also allowed the funding rounds to continue for much longer allowing councils to make the best use of this money.
Hipkins Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13241. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) to theMinister of Education: Will Wanganui Collegiate be required to supervise a child if the child’s parents are unable to pay the $5200 “parent contribution” for meals house activities and supervision?Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education): Yes. The board of trustees must provide a safe environment for students which includes supervision. If students are boarders then the meals house activities and supervision are part of their boarding fees and as the member was advised in questions in the House last week the only compulsory fee that parents must pay is the attendance due.Chris Hipkins: How many parents elected not to pay the supposedly voluntary parental contributions in the last school year?Hon HEKIA PARATA: I do not have that level of detail but I am happy to get it for the member.Chris Hipkins: When she signed off the decision to integrate Wanganui Collegiate did she read the section on attendance dues and donations which stated that “While the remaining costs to day pupils are voluntary there would be considerable pressure on families to pay these. This is clearly a limiting factor for families in the local Whanganui network to access education at Wanganui Collegiate given the socio-economic profile of the area.”; if so does she still believe that her decision to integrate the school means that a Wanganui Collegiate education will be available to a wider number of students?Hon HEKIA PARATA: Yes and yes.Chris Hipkins: Is she aware that Wanganui Collegiate describes under the information about its fees that “The active involvement in house and on-campus activities for all students is unique and develops and maintains the collegial sense of community within our students.”; if so is she seriously arguing that there is a place within Wanganui Collegiate for students whose parents will not pay the $5200 parental contribution?Hon HEKIA PARATA: Yes; and yes.Chris Hipkins: When she signed off the decision to integrate Wanganui Collegiate did she read the ministry’s advice that “The Whanganui-Rangitīkei local network of State schools has significant surplus capacity as does the wider network of State integrated boarding schools.” that “The network of State secondary schools currently has surplus capacity of 1407 student places.” and that “There are a further 3107 surplus student places in primary schools in the area.”; if so will she rule out making any further changes to the schooling network in Whanganui?Hon HEKIA PARATA: Yes I did read understand and completely consider all of those details and I am comfortable with the decision. We will continue to monitor provision in the wider Whanganui-Rangitīkei region.Chris Hipkins: So that’s a no to the second part?Hon HEKIA PARATA: We will continue to monitor it.Mr SPEAKER: Question No. 12 Ian McKelvie. [Interruption] Order! [Interruption] Order! I have called Ian McKelvie.