edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Catchpole Brent: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Catchpole Brent: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4765] 
BRENT CATCHPOLE (NZ First) 
: 
 New Zealand First has supported the title of this bill but that is as far as we will go because this bill will not work. The comment made by the Minister Paul Swain when he asked Peter Brown whether this bill would work indicates that he has no confidence in this bill whatsoever. I draw the Committee’s attention to clause 146 in the Supplementary Order Paper which states that the Government wants to review the legislation in 2 years. Clause 146 indicates that the Minister has no confidence whatsoever in the bill because he has suddenly realised that it will not work. 
There is a simple description in the bill for interpreting “actual distance”. I cannot believe that it means “the distance that would otherwise have been recorded on an odometer had it not been tampered with”. 
Hon David Carter 
: That’s going to be a curly one but the Minister will be able to answer it—she is getting advice from Parekura Horomia. 
BRENT CATCHPOLE 
: Parekura Horomia is giving her his advice right at this very moment. 
Hon David Carter 
: Seek leave for Parekura Horomia to answer it now! 
BRENT CATCHPOLE 
: I seek leave for Parekura Horomia to give us the answer right now—he is obviously giving advice to the Minister. 
It is impossible to detect when somebody has tampered with an odometer disconnected it or even put undersized or oversized wheels or tyres on to a vehicle which throws the odometer completely out. So how on earth can one decide whether an odometer has been tampered with? 
Clause 8 “Who is treated as a motor vehicle trader” states: “(1) A person is treated as carrying on the business of motor vehicle trading for the purposes of this Act if—... (b) in any specified period the person sells more than 6 motor vehicles”. They could be two-wheelers too. Backyard operators operating with or without a licence—usually without a licence—or under somebody else’s licence; in other words harbouring are not going to report the number of sales they have had. How will the Minister police that part of the bill? Whether or not he is harbouring a backyard operator will not report the number of sales he has had. He will not report that he has bought and sold more than 6 vehicles. This bill will not work; it has no possibility of working. [ 
Interruption 
] I have heard a lot of noise from the other side and it just indicates to me that Government members do not have confidence in this bill. They have realised that it will not work. Government members cannot give an interpretation of “tampering”. They cannot give a genuine interpretation of how they will police whether this bill can pick up backyard operators. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: It’s not intended to. 
BRENT CATCHPOLE 
: It is not intended to I have heard. Perhaps that is the answer: the Government is putting in a bill just to tamper with the system.
Hartley Ann: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Hartley Ann: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17559] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The amendments to clauses 19 and 20 the amendment to the heading of clause 21 and the amendments to subclauses (1) and (4) of clause 21 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 314 in the name of Richard Worth have been ruled out of order as they are inconsistent with previous decisions of the Committee.
Turner Judy: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Turner Judy: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20197] 
JUDY TURNER (Deputy Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I will take just a brief call on Part 1 of the Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill because it relates to the apology. In a way I want to counter the speech made by Mr Franks who was concerned that the Crown was apologising merely for the erosion over time of traditional structures that may have changed anyway as traditional structures do when societies progress and move on. 
However the nature of this apology is that it is based on a specific moment in history when a group of people were traumatised through land confiscation and an accusation of collective guilt. At that point in time a process of the erosion of traditional structures began which can be dated from a traumatic event for which the Crown now chooses to apologise—and rightly so. I think it is wrong somehow to water down the very essence of this apology by saying that that erosion was some sort of natural process that could have occurred over time anyhow because traditional structures in society do change. That is not what we are dealing with here; the apology is about a traumatic event that happened to those people from which we can now date a process of erosion. 
That process could have happened in a different way and in a different manner. Societies do change cultures do change but that is not what is being apologised for here. The apology is for the fact that the people in that group were required to make changes and to have their traditional structures eroded through a traumatic event imposed on them by other people. I think we need to remain supportive of this aspect of the legislation.
Simich Clem: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Simich Clem: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:615;Page:10857] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I thank the member I was about to address the matter myself. Could the member please withdraw that remark. 
David Benson-Pope 
: I withdraw and apologise. 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON 
: Let us just look at the Employment Relations Bill. The question is whether there is one business organisation in New Zealand that supports it. The answer is a loud clear no. I was told by one of my friends in Auckland— 
David Benson-Pope 
: That was Simon Carlaw telling lies. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The senior Government whip is saying that people are telling lies. He just made mention— 
Hon Chris Carter 
: No just the National Party! 
Lindsay Tisch 
: This is a point of order and the member interrupts. Is he going to be dealt with?
Burton Mark: Christchurch City Council (Robert McDougall Gallery) Land Vesting Bill — Procedure Second Reading 
Burton Mark: Christchurch City Council (Robert McDougall Gallery) Land Vesting Bill — Procedure Second Reading 
[Volume:611;Page:8803] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House that at the conclusion of the second reading—
Vote: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15719] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 47 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 12; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Noes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Roger Sowry to clause 19 be agreed to: 
to amend clause 19 by adding the following new subclause: 
(5)The Minister must consult with all other generators before determining the terms of the Whirinaki contract.
Hereora Dave: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
Hereora Dave: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8720] 
DAVE HEREORA (NZ Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Benson-Pope David: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
Benson-Pope David: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8703] 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (Senior Whip—NZ Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8486] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 11 
Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 108 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 130 in the name of Sue Bradford to clause 92(5) to (7) be agreed to.
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates — Tranz Rail 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates — Tranz Rail 
[Sitting date: 10 June 2003. Volume:609;Page:6063. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received from the Leader of the Opposition the Hon Bill English from the Rt Hon Winston Peters from Rodney Hide and from Jeanette Fitzsimons applications under Standing Order 376 to debate the Government’s decision to acquire an interest in Tranz Rail Holdings. I omit the letter from Mr Peters from consideration because he did not include any authenticating material and I would urge that his whips read the Standing Orders. I have also received a letter from the Hon Richard Prebble seeking to debate the decision of the Government to commit troops to Iraq and further troops to Afghanistan. 
Those are particular cases of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility and both meet the criterion of justifying the immediate attention of the House. Standing Order 378 provides that if more than one application received on the same day justifies a debate the Speaker gives priority to the matter that in the Speaker’s opinion is the more urgent and important in the case of there being two applications. In considering this issue I have taken into account the fact that a ministerial statement was made early today on the deployment of personnel to Iraq and Afghanistan and the fact that in regard to Afghanistan anyway the House in 2001 debated and endorsed participation in the mission to that country. I have also taken note of the fact that I did receive four letters about one particular issue. 
For those reasons I accept the applications relating to Tranz Rail Holdings. As the first application that I received was from the Leader of the Opposition I call on him to move the motion.
Hunt Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hunt Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:423;Page:18529] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: As long as I have been in this House the Government has been able to decide who answers a particular question. If Mr Alexander does not wish to ask his question he does not have to. It can automatically be withdrawn and resubmitted another day. At this point I ask Mr Alexander to ask his question.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:606;Page:3421] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 No. I hope of course that those boy racers will not be grown up by the time we do get the bill through.
English Bill: Motions — America's Cup—Support for Team New Zealand 
English Bill: Motions — America's Cup—Support for Team New Zealand 
[Volume:606;Page:3339] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 I move  
That this House expresses its support for Team New Zealand and sends its best wishes for a successful defence of the America’s Cup 
. 
Motion agreed to.
Jones Dail: Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Jones Dail: Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11250] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 I speak on behalf of New Zealand First and once again I cannot help but say that this is another clear example of why we should reduce the number of members in the House to 99. It was very clear in the Minister’s letter to I expect all political parties that during Commissioner Patten’s visit to New Zealand in 2003 he formally proposed that a delegation office of the European Commission be established in Wellington. That was subsequently endorsed by President Prodi and New Zealand is going ahead with that proposal. With the expansion of the European Union on 1 May 2004 by the addition of 10 new members New Zealand is today in a very vulnerable position. The more we do and the quicker we act to get the European Union into New Zealand and be able to have dialogue with it the better. 
The attitude of the National Party and ACT which want to delay something that is formal practice between civilised countries is quite extraordinary. For example just a little while ago the Deputy Prime Minister of the Czech Republic Cyril Svoboda was here. I am sorry that the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee was unable to meet him on the Monday as arranged but it is vital to New Zealand that we act promptly and that we do something to have the European Union here. 
We have discovered that sometimes the European Union sets out the terms and that we have to adopt reasonable civilised terms. Passing legislation that applies to all types of missions of this kind is a reasonably civilised way of behaving. The Government agreed earlier on that this was essentially an obvious and suitable occasion to amend the legislation to include the European Union in it. 
As I understand it members of the proposed staff are in Canberra at the present time and in terms of the Minister’s advice to all members of Parliament they are seeking the usual immunities and privileges that apply to them. New Zealand First supports this bill and looks forward to meeting with the European Union delegation as soon as possible. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 190 in the name of Hon Phil Goff to clause 2 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to and clause 2 as amended agreed to.
Gosche Mark: Transport Legislation Bill — First Reading 
Gosche Mark: Transport Legislation Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:619;Page:14900] 
Hon MARK GOSCHE (Labour—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 The debate is in danger of becoming congested by Ministers and former Ministers of Transport so I will take a very brief call. I will not get into the sharing of my inner feelings in such a manner as Mr Williamson even though I could tell some stories myself because the health of our whips might not be enhanced by that process. 
As the chair of the select committee I look forward to this bill coming before it and to perusing it to make sure we get good legislation. I am pleased that we will have a structure that will put into place Government agencies that are able to keep pace with the rapid progress this Government is making in transport—in improving infrastructure and public transport throughout the country. It is a good bill and I commend it to the House.
Goudie Sandra: Wellington City Empowering and Amendment Bill — Second Reading Procedure Third Reading 
Goudie Sandra: Wellington City Empowering and Amendment Bill — Second Reading Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:615;Page:11114] 
SANDRA GOUDIE (National—Coromandel) 
: 
 I support the comments made by my colleague the Hon Dr Nick Smith with regard to this bill. If things were simplified this process which is at a considerable cost to taxpayers would not have been necessary. I would like to mention a comment made by the Hon Marian Hobbs in a speech she made in the House on this bill at an earlier time. On 4 December 2002 she said: “I support the council being able to make local decisions about its portfolio property free from the arbitrary restrictions of old and outdated laws.” Well I think it is a shame that councils are not free to make those sorts of decisions and make decisions for themselves even with the new law that has now been passed by this current Government. We support the passage of this bill but thousands and thousands of dollars have been spent on this process which should have been absolutely unnecessary. 
I was overcome before by the grovelling of the highest order with regard to the Wellington City Council. While it is to be commended for all its efforts with regard to the community service groups that it housed in the buildings concerned I put it to the House that local authorities generally do look after their community groups do consult with their groups and do the best that they can for their communities as a whole. I would not want to single out any particular council for doing that. It is only right and proper that the Wellington City Council in this instance has done that also. It is to be commended for doing the best that it can for these groups but this is by no means concluded. I am sure that the sale of the properties will assist in that regard as already mentioned. 
I think it is a shame indeed that the new Local Government Act has not supported councils and has not lessened to any degree their compliance costs—nor has a number of other measures that have been implemented by this current Government. On that note I will leave it at that and say that National supports the passage of this very very minor bill although we are very disappointed that this process has cost so much and taken the time it has. Was it really necessary? That question was raised at the select committee but of course an answer was not forthcoming.
Pettis Jill: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Pettis Jill: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6990] 
JILL PETTIS (Junior Whip—NZ Labour) 
: I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The question is that the question be now put.
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Ireland—Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food 
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Ireland—Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food 
[Volume:616;Page:11627] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that Mr Liam Aylward TD Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food Ireland with responsibility for Animal Health and Customer Services is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed and accorded a seat on the left of the Chair. 
Mr Liam Aylward accompanied by the Hon David Carter entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
Burton Mark: Business Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
Burton Mark: Business Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:616;Page:12416] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 Following discussions with parties I seek leave that following the part we are about to conclude the remaining parts of the Committee stage of the bill be taken as a single wide-ranging debate following which we move on to the third reading as the House has already agreed; and that following that we take Government notice of motion No. 2 and at that point if it is before 10 p.m the House rise.
Donnelly Brian: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
Donnelly Brian: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8857] 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. We cannot hear what you are saying. We heard no call for a vote here on the Opposition benches at all. How are we supposed to respond when we are not able to hear you call a vote or call that the question has been put? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: I thank Mr Donnelly. I will call for order next time.
Simich Clem: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
Simich Clem: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:8927] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: There are no reassurances but I understand fully what the member and Mr Donnelly are talking about and we do not have a problem.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:620;Page:15735] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Yes.
Vote: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9415] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 82 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 35 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Bill read a third time.
Vote: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — Third Reading 
Vote: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4803] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Motor Vehicle Sales Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 96 
Noes 20 
Motion agreed to. 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7.
Points of Order — Tabling of Document—Question No. 8 to Minister; Tuesday 24 August 
Points of Order — Tabling of Document—Question No. 8 to Minister; Tuesday 24 August 
[Volume:619;Page:15013] 
Wednesday 25 August 2004 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Points of Order 
Tabling of Document—Question No. 8 to Minister; Tuesday 24 August 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Health) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Yesterday Judith Collins sought leave to table a document at the conclusion of question No. 8. I have been advised by the Clerk’s Office that the member has not tabled the document. I am keen to see the report that she mentioned because she said there had been an increase of 20 percent in the primary health organisation charges from Feilding. As there is no primary health organisation there someone is being misled. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Let me say that when leave is given to table a document the document can be delivered to the House before the House rises. I refer to Speakers’ ruling 128/1. In Speakers’ ruling 128/2 leave to table a document is permission to table it. There is no legal obligation—perhaps there is a moral obligation but there is no legal obligation—on the member to use the permission given. It is entirely over to the member concerned. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This raises an interesting question. Frequently when members seek leave to table a document they make certain claims about its content. They say: “This document shows that X Y and Z …”. If the member then fails to table the document it becomes rather difficult to check whether “X Y and Z” was true; whether in fact the member either intentionally or unintentionally was misleading the House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It might become difficult but that is just too bad. As I said it might be a moral obligation but it is not a legal obligation according to the Standing Orders.
Brownlee Gerry: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
Brownlee Gerry: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6876] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. With all due respect to the Chair it is the National Party that has taken offence. If members take offence members’ words must be accepted and I believe it is incumbent upon you as the Chairperson of the Committee to require the Minister to stand withdraw and apologise. Otherwise where does decorum go? 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: If the member has taken personal offence I ask the member to withdraw.
Chadwick Steve: Education (Disestablishment of Early Childhood Development Board) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Chadwick Steve: Education (Disestablishment of Early Childhood Development Board) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12141] 
STEVE CHADWICK (Labour—Rotorua) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Pettis Jill: Animal Welfare (Restriction on Docking of Dogs' Tails) Bill — Procedure First Reading 
Pettis Jill: Animal Welfare (Restriction on Docking of Dogs' Tails) Bill — Procedure First Reading 
[Volume:621;Page:16366] 
JILL PETTIS (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave for parties to cast votes on the Animal Welfare (Restriction on Docking of Dogs’ Tails) Bill for the Ayes and the Noes to record abstentions notwithstanding Standing Order 144(1)(b). 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member has sought leave. Is there any objection?
Vote: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16151] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 63 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 275 in the name of the Hon Paul Swain to the amendments to sections 69O and 69P in clause 30 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 263 in his name be agreed to.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:619;Page:15105] 
8.  
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: Does he have any concerns regarding foreign ownership of New Zealand’s electricity distribution and provision? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 My primary concern is any lack of investment in electricity distribution and provision rather than the ownership thereof being outside the Government sector. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: How can the sale of key New Zealand electricity infrastructure possibly be in the national interest when we have State-owned Meridian Energy calling for urgency in the upgrade of transmission and distribution lines at the same time as line companies are being sold off to foreigners—whose concern as we all well know from experience is profit and not New Zealand’s long-term energy needs? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The aim of any company in the New Zealand electricity business is to make a profit. Indeed I think that would be a requirement of it under the Companies Act. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Is it the Minister’s view that it is sound economics for a company like Powerco which has gone from a profit of $2 million a year to almost $20 million a year to be taken from the ownership of the people of Taranaki and put in the hands of Australians; and what possible benefit can that have for the people of New Zealand particularly the people of Tauranga who have just had two power cuts while Powerco was very busy trying to sell itself rather than running a proper business? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: As I said before the matter of any change in ownership of Powerco is likely to come before me for approval under the Overseas Investment Act. Therefore I am not prepared to comment further at this point.
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16964] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Foreshore and Seabed Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 65 
New Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 13; Progressive 2. 
Noes 55 
New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata; Other: Mahuta. 
Bill read a second time.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:623;Page:18863] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Given the events that will happen tomorrow it might be advisable if I give the business statement today. Next week in the House priority will be given to the remaining stages of the Animal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill the second reading of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill and any first readings that are on the Order Paper.
Tamihere John: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Tamihere John: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18731] 
JOHN TAMIHERE (Labour—Tamaki Makaurau) 
: 
 Supplementary Order Paper 327 has been read in large part by Mr Gerry Brownlee. The interpretation is as follows and can be followed by all members in recital (12) of the preamble to the bill: “The Crown and Te Runanga o Ngati Awa initialled a deed on 8 July 2002. Ngati Awa ratified the Crown’s settlement offer and entered into a deed of settlement on 27 March 2003 recording matters to give effect to a full and final settlement of all Ngati Awa’s historical claims.”
Hunt Jonathan: Responses — Mr Frank Alefounder—Statements Made By Larry Baldock MP 
Hunt Jonathan: Responses — Mr Frank Alefounder—Statements Made By Larry Baldock MP 
[Volume:620;Page:15785] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I hereby present a response under Standing Orders 160 to 163 on the application of Mr Frank Alefounder relating to statements made by Larry Baldock MP on 5 May 2004.
McNair Craig: Government Superannuation Fund Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee Procedure 
McNair Craig: Government Superannuation Fund Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:606;Page:3888] 
CRAIG McNAIR (NZ First) 
: 
 Dr Lockwood Smith had a very good point last night when talking about how only 800 adults and 19 children were affected by this bill. But even though it affects such a small number of people it is still very important legislation which is why New Zealand First will support the bill in its entirety. We support the aim of the bill which is to repeal the provisions of the Government Superannuation Fund Act that suspend the payment of benefits to widows or widowers in the event of remarriage and provide for the restoration of suspended benefits under those provisions. We also want to put on the record that we support the replacement of the prescribed fixed allowance paid to children of deceased members under the old scheme with the inflation-adjusted allowance provided for in the new scheme.  
Once again we feel this is a very important bill. It does not really matter how many people it affects; it is still very important legislation and I am very proud on behalf of my New Zealand First colleagues to support the bill.
Burton Mark: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Discharge In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Burton Mark: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Discharge In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8807] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:616;Page:11989] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 Given that the Leader of the House has published the urgency motion which has a reasonable amount of business in it and noting that much of that business is hardly of the urgent nature that urgency would portend can we expect that provision will be made for question time on Wednesday and Thursday of next week—noting of course that the Government at this time would have no fears about being placed under scrutiny by the Opposition?
Baldock Larry: Meat Board Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Baldock Larry: Meat Board Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:618;Page:14090] 
LARRY BALDOCK (United Future) 
: 
 I rise to take a very short call on behalf of United Future as this bill passes through its third reading. The member who spoke before me said in his speech on the second reading that he was a very proud farmer and in that speech he certainly portrayed himself as a very proud ACT party member as well. He wondered why I laughed. Well when we hear some things that are really ridiculous we cannot help ourselves. It is spontaneous. We just had to laugh as he took credit for the fact that there is unity in the House today saying it is entirely dependent upon ACT party policy. The real reason why there is unity on the passage of this bill today is that ACT for the first time in a long time has decided to vote for something instead of simply opposing everything that is ever brought into this House. We are happy that there has been unity on this legislation because it is important legislation. It is good for the country. It will be good for the meat industry for our primary industries and United Future is very happy to see it pass through its third reading today to benefit the country.
Vote: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:623;Page:18827] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 98 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 20 
New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Brownlee Gerry: General Debates 
Brownlee Gerry: General Debates 
[Volume:607;Page:4426] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am not sure what you mean by that. If a member feels that there is a point to be made he or she has an absolute right to take a point of order and you as the Assistant Speaker have an obligation to rule as to whether it is right. As someone who considers that his speech today was unnecessarily disrupted by an unruly Minister I am particularly aggrieved that you choose to give that information out as we are about to hear from another four Labour speakers. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the honourable member for raising that issue. I will consider what he said and take it into account.
Hodgson Pete: Rail Network Bill — First Reading 
Hodgson Pete: Rail Network Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19772] 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Transport) 
: 
 I rise to support the bill; to thank the National Party for its support of this bill and to say I look forward to its contribution when this bill reaches a select committee; to thank my colleague the Minister for Transport Safety for his erudite opening remarks; and to say that this bill marks the end of an era that began when the then National Government sought to privatise the railways which was arguably the worst act of privatisation in New Zealand’s privatisation era. I have a great deal of pleasure in seeing the rail track—indeed a monopoly provision—not only returned to State control but also under this legislation having statutory identity.
Tanczos Nandor: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Tanczos Nandor: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:627;Page:22219] 
NANDOR TANCZOS (Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. My apologies to the Committee but I think I may have inadvertently said “nine abstentions” in the previous votes after the dinner break rather than eight. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member has to seek leave to correct the vote. 
NANDOR TANCZOS 
: I seek leave to—[ 
Interruption 
] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I say to honourable members when there is a point of order on the floor there is to be absolute silence. The member is seeking leave to alter the vote. Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There appears to be none.
Visitors — President of the Bundestag Federal Republic of Germany 
Visitors — President of the Bundestag Federal Republic of Germany 
[Volume:614;Page:10271] 
Tuesday 2 December 2003 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
President of the Bundestag Federal Republic of Germany 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that His Excellency Mr Wolfgang Thierse President of the Bundestag Federal Republic of Germany accompanied by the Deputy Speaker is within the precincts of the Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed and accorded a seat on the left of the Chair. 
His Excellency Mr Wolfgang Thierse accompanied by the Deputy Speaker entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
Benson-Pope David: State Sector Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Benson-Pope David: State Sector Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7320] 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (Senior Whip—NZ Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
Vote: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:8945] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 84 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 31 
New Zealand National 26; ACT New Zealand 5. 
Amendment agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 149 in the name of Jeanette Fitzsimons to insert new clause 6B be agreed to.
[Volume:613;Page:9908] 
I believe we need to do some work on informed consent but I think that does not need altering in the construct of this bill. Just remember that New Zealand women were urging for us to improve the rate of cervical cancer in this country. It was a recommendation of Euphemia McGoogan supported by David Skegg one of the very best experts in the country. I think the committee did a wonderful piece of work on this bill—all women except Pita Paraone who took our guidance on this. I believe that Sue Kedgley even though she voted against it accepted the need for a robust cervical-screening programme. That is our endeavour. With this bill we fulfil the recommendation of Euphemia McGoogan.
Hunt Jonathan: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — Third Reading 
Hunt Jonathan: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4527] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It is perfectly in order for the member to vote with that number. That is perfectly in order and I so rule.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:624;Page:19105] 
Thursday 10 March 2005 
Madam Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business Statement 
Hon MARK BURTON (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week in the House priority will be given to the remaining stages of the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill and the Animal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill. Priority will also be given to the Committee stage of the Appropriation (2003/04 Financial Review) Bill which as members will know is a 4-hour debate. As previously indicated on Thursday the third reading of the Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill will be the first item of business on the Order Paper. And of course Wednesday is a members’ day.
Franks Stephen: Tabling of Documents — Minister of Police—Allegations made by New Zealand First Member's Bill—Prisoners' Human Rights 
Franks Stephen: Tabling of Documents — Minister of Police—Allegations made by New Zealand First Member's Bill—Prisoners' Human Rights 
[Volume:620;Page:15754] 
STEPHEN FRANKS (ACT) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a bill to achieve the end of the misuse of human rights law by criminals in prison. I realise that it is an unusual step to take. I have drafted this bill and I believe that it would get the approval of the National Party. I seek leave to dispense— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that bill. Is there any objection? There is.
Hobbs Marian: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — In Committee 
Hobbs Marian: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:624;Page:19132] 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Associate Minister of Justice) 
: 
 As I said last night during the Committee hearing time I do not want to indulge in arguments or in broad sweeping statements about morality or otherwise. I just want to clarify what is in the law. I did make the comment last night but knowing that there may be different people listening today I will repeat it. Stephen Franks has just made a comment about the different dates. There are different commencement dates in this bill. For instance the amendments to the Care of Children Act will come into effect on 1 July 2005 to coincide with the commencement of that Act. For the same reason the amendments to the Status of Children Act will come into effect on the same day. That is for clarity for the people who are working in the area. Amendments to the Local Authorities (Members’ Interests) Act will come into effect on 13 October 2007 to coincide with the next local body election. That is about clarity and ease of working. Amendments to the Rates Rebate Act will come into effect on 1 July 2006 because rates are set until that date. 
 An issue was raised by the New Zealand First member Brian Donnelly. He made the point that he could not vote for this legislation because he said we were making a discrimination between de facto couples of the same sex and other de facto couples. I tell him that on 1 April 2007 same-sex de facto partners will be treated the same as people who are married or in a civil union. We have decided to give them time to adjust up until that time. The reason for that is quite simple. If on 26 April we had imposed that provision there would have been many couples with little children who would immediately have been faced—and some without warning because people may not read the newspapers or know that these things are happening—with a loss of $126 a week. This period is giving people time. It is out of sheer kindness and a care for children that we are giving de facto partners time to adjust. 
People who enter civil unions were not given the same lead-in period on the basis that they had consciously made that decision. But this provision is for de facto same-sex people—[ 
Interruption 
] I am not entering into an argument; I am just trying to clarify what I consider to be some fairly misleading statements.
Yates Dianne: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Yates Dianne: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20008] 
DIANNE YATES (Labour—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I think that the previous speaker loves to latch on to anything that is lascivious in each little piece of legislation. He said that the matters he referred to were withdrawn from the bill—they were never in the bill. They were never in the draft bill and they were never in the final bill that went to the Law and Order Committee. 
I have from time to time sat on the select committee which gave long and careful consideration to some very delicate issues about which there are some long and complex case studies. I particularly want to speak on the area of consent because the Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) has incorporated a member’s bill I had had before the House on the issue of drug rape. 
I commend the select committee and the officials. My member’s bill was a short bill on consent of basically one sentence. That has now been transferred into at least 2 pages in the bill and defines the areas of consent. It states that people cannot consent to sexual activity if they are asleep unconscious or so affected by alcohol or drugs that they are unable to refuse or to give consent. It refers to those who are affected by an intellectual mental or physical condition and it refers to mistaken identity. I will concede that it gives a much better definition of consent and one that is more likely to guide the courts in the area of rape than the present law. Many and varied opinions were received on that. 
One of the difficulties in many of these crimes is that they are witnessless crimes. Nobody is there to see what happens and to give evidence and we rely on individual cases coming to court. We rely on the evidence of the victims and those who are before the courts. Those cases are very difficult and often about very delicate areas and much case law has informed the select committee. Having sat on that committee at various times I know that it agonised and worked backwards and forwards over and over in rewording and reworking to try to get the best decisions and the best wording that would stand up in court. 
I commend the legislation to the House but I am very very wary of those people who want to make political points about other people’s misfortunes. What we have to ensure is the safety of New Zealanders of all ages and that is the intention of this bill. It concentrates on the safety of young people and of people who might fall foul of others. So I commend the second reading of the bill to the House and look forward to its progress.
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3758] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 47 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Noes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendment to the amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Katherine Rich to new clause 10 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 57 in the name of the Hon Steve Maharey be agreed to: 
to omit subparagraph (v) from subclause (2)(b).
Vote: Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:20952] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 53 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; United Future 8. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 6 be agreed to: 
to omit from subclause (1) the words “or on behalf of”.
Police Complaints Authority (Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
Police Complaints Authority (Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:12863] 
Police Complaints Authority (Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct) Amendment Bill 
Instruction to Committee 
Hon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Police Complaints Authority (Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct) Amendment Bill that it take the bill part by part. 
John Carter 
: 
 Point of order— 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister for Courts) 
: 
 Mr Speaker may I explain? I had spoken to the whips to try to get acceptance that it be taken as a single question but I have been told by one party that it will not grant leave for that to happen. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Well that of course has to be done by leave but now the member has moved a motion to take the bill part by part. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 47 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Motion agreed to.
Jones Dail: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Jones Dail: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:618;Page:13761] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
:  
I apologise to the House. I intended to seek leave to table something at the end of the last question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am sure that the House will not object. 
DAIL JONES 
: I seek leave to table an answer given by the Minister of Corrections to my question regarding the involvement of Dr David Chaplow indicating the Government intends to do nothing about a judicious— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that answer. Is there any objection? There is.
Smith Nick: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Deferment 
Smith Nick: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Deferment 
[Volume:625;Page:20524] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. When a person is making a point of order that is clearly outside the Standing Orders—and the comments of the Minister of Education in respect of my colleague Murray McCully were way outside the Standing Orders and way outside what a point of order can be—what is a member meant to do? We are meant to rely on the Speaker to intervene.