edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Bishop Chris: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBishop Chris: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 28 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:256. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.CHRIS BISHOP (National)to the Minister of Science and Innovation: What reports has he received on the performance of New Zealand’s technology sector?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Science and Innovation):Last week I attended the release of the latest TIN100 report the 10th annual report looking at the growth and success of New Zealand’s top 100 high-tech companies. The report notes that TIN100 companies now have $7.6 billion in annual turnover which is an increase of $1 billion a year over the last 5 years. This growth in the face of challenging international conditions and an unusually high New Zealand dollar is very impressive and those companies should be congratulated. It also shows the benefit of innovation and investment in research and development. Those TIN100 companies have lifted their investment in research and development a further 9.7 percent in the last year reaching just under $700 million across the 100 companies.Chris Bishop: How is New Zealand’s growing technology sector contributing to the wider economy?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: A very probing question. The really impressive aspect of the TIN100 report and the companies contained in it is how well they are competing and succeeding on the world stage. Since 2008 TIN100 company exports have increased by half a billion dollars to $5.6 billion per year or nearly 75 percent of their total turnover and for the top 200 technology companies exports are up to $6.1 billion a year. The report notes that this level of exports is higher than both meat and log exports. The Government is focused on assisting these companies to further increase their exporters by helping them increase their expenditure on research and development on skills and with infrastructure. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! If there are further supplementary questions—every member has a right to ask a question and a reasonable right to hear the reply without the level of interjection I was hearing from various quarters throughout that answer.Chris Bishop: What is the Government doing to develop New Zealand’s growing technology sector?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: A great question. The Government has made science and innovation a priority. Despite tight financial times we have significantly boosted funding in research and development to a total of $1.5 billion by next year. We have established Callaghan Innovation which as the member will be aware is based in the Hutt Valley which helps innovative Kiwi businesses get their ideas out of the lab and into the market. Through the grant system we have encouraged private sector investment in research and development with our goal of doubling business spending on research and development to 1 percent of GDP by 2018. Over the next 3 years we will continue to work to achieve that goal and assist our technology companies to be even more successful on the world stage.
Carter David: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 28 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:256. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: No. [Interruption] Order! If the member was not satisfied with the answer she had the opportunity at the time to ask another supplementary question. We have now moved well past question No. 2.
King Annette: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKing Annette: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 28 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:256. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon ANNETTE KING (Acting Deputy Leader—Labour):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Perhaps we could clear it up if I was to repeat the question because the Prime Minister—
Key John: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKey John: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 28 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:256. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):I assumed the question was in relation to the passing of information about a public servant. That is not a matter for the inquiry as I understand it. The information in relation to Mr Feeley is absolutely a subject of inquiry but I took the member’s question to be a completely different accusation.
Carter David: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 28 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:256. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: As the member has had explained to him before if any Minister in answering a question feels he wants to correct that answer then it is the responsibility of the Prime Minister or the Minister to decide when to do that. The member is right: it should certainly be done at the earliest convenience but it is not a matter for this House. It is a matter in this case for the Prime Minister if he deems it necessary.
Hipkins Chris: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 28 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:255. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I want to draw your attention to Speaker’s ruling 179/3 with regard to the correction of answers. We have a situation where the Prime Minister gave a very specific answer to Annette King’s supplementary question and she has subsequently tabled information showing that that answer was incorrect. I wonder whether he will be now taking the opportunity to correct that.
Carter David: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 28 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:254. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: The document has been described. It will be over to the House. I will put the leave. [Interruption] Order! Leave is sought to table these particular terms of reference. Is there any objection to them being tabled? There is not. They can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
King Annette: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKing Annette: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 28 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:254. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon ANNETTE KING (Acting Deputy Leader—Labour):In light of the Prime Minister’s answer to my last question saying that the review into Judith Collins had nothing to do with the release of information to Cameron Slater I seek leave to table the terms of reference for the Government inquiry which in fact in item 2 say just that.
King Annette: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKing Annette: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 28 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:250. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]2.Hon ANNETTE KING (Acting Deputy Leader—Labour)to the Prime Minister: Did Cameron Slater provide him with the information that led him to say on 12 February 2014 in Parliament regarding the Rt Hon Winston Peters that “I will accept that member’s word that he did not discuss untoward things when he went to the Dotcom mansion three times.”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):No. As I said at the time I can read. I believe the reference came from an item I read in the New Zealand Herald on 7 February 2014.Hon Annette King: When he said on 14 February at a press conference regarding the specific details of calls he made to Cameron Slater that he would “have to go and look at my files” were those files ministerial files or does he hold files regarding his interaction with Cameron Slater in his capacity as a husband?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I can certainly confirm that I am not married to him and I do not have any files.Hon Annette King: Was Cameron Salter correct when he wrote last week that the Prime Minister is always the Prime Minister or he has double standards; if not does he explain to Mr Slater when he texts and calls him that he only talks to him as a private citizen?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Actually Mr Slater is correct about one thing: I am always the Prime Minister for areas where I have prime ministerial responsibility. I am also always the leader of the National Party. I am surprised that the member does not know that because Helen Clark used to lecture this House about that difference all the time. But maybe the member does not remember that or maybe this is the reason why Labour is polling so badly—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That answer will not help.Hon Annette King: That’s right get stuck in.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have not called the member yet. Supplementary question—Hon Annette King.Hon Annette King: Well has he ever called or texted Cameron Slater in his capacity as Prime Minister?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No I do not believe so.Hon Annette King: Well try this one Prime Minister. Did he give instructions to his ministerial colleagues to avoid ministerial responsibility when asked embarrassing questions about contact with Cameron Slater; if not is he aware that Judith Collins in July this year denied texts phone calls and correspondence with Mr Slater in her ministerial capacity?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In answer to the first part no. The only embarrassing thing is the way that Labour performed in the election campaign.Hon Annette King: In light of the review that is now under way into Judith Collins and the release of information to Cameron Slater will she be excused if she uses the Prime Minister’s excuse that she was not acting as a Minister when she passed on information but that she was acting as a private citizen?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: That is not what the review is in relation to.
Carter David: Visitors — Fiji—Deputy Speaker and Parliamentary DelegationText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Visitors — Fiji—Deputy Speaker and Parliamentary Delegation[Sitting date: 28 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:249. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members I am sure the House would wish to welcome a parliamentary delegation from the Parliament of Fiji led by Deputy Speaker Ruveni Nadalo who is present in the gallery.
Visitors — Fiji—Deputy Speaker and Parliamentary DelegationText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVisitors — Fiji—Deputy Speaker and Parliamentary Delegation[Sitting date: 28 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:249. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Tuesday 28 October 2014Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.VisitorsFiji—Deputy Speaker and Parliamentary DelegationMr SPEAKER: Honourable members I am sure the House would wish to welcome a parliamentary delegation from the Parliament of Fiji led by Deputy Speaker Ruveni Nadalo who is present in the gallery.
Speaker’s Rulings — Oral Questions—Ministerial ResponsibilityText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSpeaker’s Rulings — Oral Questions—Ministerial Responsibility[Sitting date: 23 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:199. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Speaker’s RulingsOral Questions—Ministerial ResponsibilityMr SPEAKER: Yesterday members raised points of order asking that I reflect on answers given by the Prime Minister during question No. 3. In practice a wide view is taken of the concept of ministerial responsibility. In each case it will depend on a consideration of the legislative and administrative circumstances surrounding the question. While the Prime Minister is answerable for all actions taken and statements made as Prime Minister the Prime Minister is not answerable for statements or actions taken as the leader of a political party or in a personal capacity although this can be a hard distinction to make.I have reviewed each of the answers given by the Prime Minister during question No. 3 yesterday. On reflection there is one answer to a supplementary question that troubles me. The primary question was a very general one. It revealed no particular connection to any action taken in a ministerial capacity. Dr Russel Norman’s eight other supplementary questions were answered in a way that gives me no concern. However Dr Norman’s third supplementary question in asking about a conversation with Mr Slater made a connection to the actions of the Prime Minister in relation to the Government’s response to the Pike River mine tragedy. A connection having been made to a matter of ministerial responsibility an informative answer should be given. To simply say “I am not going to describe conversations I have in a capacity other than as Prime Minister.” is not acceptable where the question is linked to matters of ministerial responsibility.Although considerable weight must be given to a Minister’s claim that actions or statements were not made in a ministerial capacity this can never be definitive. Ultimately the Speaker will take a view. This is what I have done. Where I judge a question to reveal a reasonable likelihood of a connection to ministerial responsibility an informative answer must be given.
Carter David: Obituaries — Charles Philip Littlejohn CBE LLMText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Obituaries — Charles Philip Littlejohn CBE LLM[Sitting date: 23 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:197. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I regret to inform the House of the death on 14 September 2014 of Charles Philip Littlejohn CBE LLM who was Clerk of the House of Representatives from 1976 until 1985. I desire on behalf of this House to express our sense of the loss we have sustained and our sympathy for the relatives of the late former Clerk. I now ask members to stand with me and observe a brief period of silence as a mark of respect for his memory.Honourable members stood as a mark of respect.
Business StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBusiness Statement[Sitting date: 23 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:197. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Business StatementHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):When the House resumes on Tuesday 28 October the Government intends to continue the Address in Reply debate and progress the Employment Relations Amendment Bill and the Accounting Infrastructure Reform Bill and other bills on the Order Paper. On Tuesday and Wednesday afternoons at the times agreed by the Business Committee a number of members will make their maiden speeches to the House.
Obituaries — Charles Philip Littlejohn CBE LLMText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeObituaries — Charles Philip Littlejohn CBE LLM[Sitting date: 23 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:197. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Thursday 23 October 2014Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.ObituariesCharles Philip Littlejohn CBE LLMMr SPEAKER: I regret to inform the House of the death on 14 September 2014 of Charles Philip Littlejohn CBE LLM who was Clerk of the House of Representatives from 1976 until 1985. I desire on behalf of this House to express our sense of the loss we have sustained and our sympathy for the relatives of the late former Clerk. I now ask members to stand with me and observe a brief period of silence as a mark of respect for his memory.Honourable members stood as a mark of respect.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:196. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat Part 1 as amended be agreed to.Ayes62New Zealand National 60; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes59New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11; Māori Party 2.Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:196. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11.Noes64New Zealand National 60; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendments not agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:195. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11.Noes64New Zealand National 60; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendments not agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:195. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11.Noes64New Zealand National 60; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendments not agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 10 in the name of Andrew Little to clause 44 be agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:195. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11.Noes64New Zealand National 60; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendments not agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 12 in the name of Denise Roche to clause 30 be agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:194. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11.Noes64New Zealand National 60; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendments not agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:194. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the amendment be agreed to.Ayes57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11.Noes64New Zealand National 60; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 13 in the name of Denise Roche to clause 12 be agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:194. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the amendment be agreed to.Ayes57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11.Noes64New Zealand National 60; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment not agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 4 in the name of Andrew Little to clause 11 be agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:193. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11.Noes64New Zealand National 60; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendments not agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 3 in the name of Andrew Little to clause 9 be agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:193. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes62New Zealand National 60; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes59New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11; Māori Party 2.Amendments agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:193. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the amendments to the amendment be agreed to.Ayes57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11.Noes64New Zealand National 60; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendments not agreed to.
Lees-Galloway Iain: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:196. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North):Part 2 relates to the application savings transitional and consequential provisions of this bill. It is reasonably technical in nature but it does include the insertion of new schedules—schedules 1 and 2 in this bill. Schedule 1 will ultimately become schedule 1AA in the principal Act once it is amended by this legislation. Clause 2 of schedule 1AA relates to amendments to Part 5 of the principal Act which relates to collective bargaining. What clause 2(2) says in schedule 1AA is that the amended section 33 of the principal Act which was amended by clause 9 of this bill will apply “to all bargaining whether the bargaining commenced before on or after the commencement of [this amendment] Act.”This is a genuine question to the Minister: why is this legislation being applied retrospectively? For those who have forgotten and it has been a while since we talked about clause 9 of this legislation clause 9 refers to the duty of good faith requiring parties to conclude collective agreements unless there was genuine reason not to which of course was amended to “Duty of good faith does not require collective agreements to be concluded”. So the sum total of these clauses combined is that collective bargaining that is already under way and that started before this legislation is enacted will be subject to this legislation. So employers and unions that went into collective bargaining in good faith with one another particularly the unions that went into bargaining in good faith now face the prospect of this legislation applying to bargaining that started under the current legislation. In other words—Progress reported.Report adopted.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:192. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the question be now put.Ayes64New Zealand National 60; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 6 in the name of Andrew Little to the proposed amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 1 in the name of the Hon Michael Woodhouse to insert new clause 12A be agreed to.
Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:195. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard):Andrew Little’s amendments to delete clauses 51 and 56 as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 11 are ruled out on a similar basis to previously.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 11 in the name of Andrew Little to Part 1 be agreed to.
Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:195. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard):Andrew Little’s amendments to delete clause 30 and new section 69G(3) in clause 32 as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 7 are ruled out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 7 in the name of Andrew Little to Part 1 be agreed to.
Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:194. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard):Andrew Little’s amendment to delete clause 17 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 9 is ruled out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 9 in the name of Andrew Little to Part 1 be agreed to.
Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:194. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard):Andrew Little’s amendment to delete clause 11 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 8 is ruled out of order as being inconsistent as I previously outlined.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 8 in the name of Andrew Little to clause 13 be agreed to.
Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:193. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard):I will just warn the Committee that as a result of that amendment being agreed to there are a couple of Supplementary Order Papers later that will be ruled out of order because they are inconsistent with the decision that we have just taken.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 5 in the name of Andrew Little to Part 1 be agreed to.
Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:193. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard):The Minister’s amendments go first. There are quite a few amendments which we will work our way through and I am pretty sure that when we get to the second page we will get to yours.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 1 in the name of the Hon Michael Woodhouse to Part 1 be agreed to.
Roche Denise: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoche Denise: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:193. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DENISE ROCHE (Green):I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I just wanted to find out what happened to my Supplementary Order Papers 12 and 13—whether they were going to be put. They are amending Part 1.
Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:193. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard):We now move on to the Minister’s amendments. The question is that the Minister’s amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 1 be agreed to.
Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:192. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard):I am happy to rule now. I acted in error in calling Iain Lees-Galloway. I should not have done that but having done that I thought it was probably better to give his colleague Sue Moroney who was also a leader on the bill a similar opportunity. As a result of that the debate was somewhat extended.
Dyson Ruth: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDyson Ruth: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:192. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills):I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Do you want my assurance that I am not going to trifle with you as well Mr Chairman? I want you to explain why during the course of the debate you have gone against what I consider is a respected practice and that is to call members who are receiving the call for the first time rather than as you have done on two occasions call members for the second time. My colleagues Kelvin Davis Dr Megan Woods and I have all been here since 7.30 actively seeking a call at every opportunity. You were not here for the first hour. I will hold your predecessor responsible for that but you are in the same position. Since that time you have called my colleagues Iain Lees-Galloway and Sue Moroney more than once so I would like some explanation—
Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:192. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard):Yes they can.
Lees-Galloway Iain: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:192. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North):I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): You are not going to trifle are you Mr Lees-Galloway?IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: I am not going to trifle—not at all. I just want to query your knowledge of the Standing Orders. Can a member raise a closure motion more than once in one debate?
Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:192. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard):The question is that the question be now put.
Hayes Joanne: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:192. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (Third Whip—National):I move That the question be now put.
Ross Jami-Lee: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:190. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National):I move That the question be now put.
Hayes Joanne: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:189. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (Third Whip—National):I move That the question be now put.
Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:188. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard):I want to warn the Committee that I am getting very close to taking the closure. What I will be looking for now is not only relevance but novelty. We have got to have some new arguments and new material.
Ross Jami-Lee: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:188. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National):I move That the question be now put.
Hayes Joanne: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:187. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (Third Whip—National):I move That the question be now put.
Ross Jami-Lee: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:186. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National):I move That the question be now put.
Foster-Bell Paul: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:185. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National):I move That the question be now put.
Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:183. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard):Can people just settle down? I am going to take another call but I do want to remind members again that this is a Committee stage for debate about specific clauses in the bill or in the amendments.
Yang Jian: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYang Jian: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:183. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr JIAN YANG (National):I move That the question be now put.
Dowie Sarah: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDowie Sarah: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:181. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill):I move That the question be now put.
Woodhouse Michael: Address in ReplyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWoodhouse Michael: Address in Reply[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:165. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister of Immigration):I move That this debate be now adjourned.Motion agreed to.
Borrows Chester: Address in ReplyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Address in Reply[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:131. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:The point is well made. The House will observe some courtesy while members are speaking.
Hipkins Chris: Address in ReplyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Address in Reply[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:131. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Before the next speaker commences I wonder whether you might want to bring the House to a little bit of order. I could barely hear what Simon Bridges was saying and I think there are a number of things happening around the House that mean the next speaker is not going to get a fair hearing either.
Bridges Simon: Address in ReplyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBridges Simon: Address in Reply[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:131. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Energy and Resources):Before the adjournment yesterday evening I was talking about transport and the fact that in New Zealand over the last few years after a very long period of under-investment this Government has spent many billions of dollars investing in roads of national significance regional roads and the like. That is a fantastic record. This morning I had great pleasure—and Phil Twyford given the urbanist he is will be very delighted in what I am saying—to go to Redwood Station here in Wellington and see part of what is nearly a half-billion-dollar investment by this Government in metropolitan rail. The $88 million project is about a third of the way through. I was there with my friend the Hon Todd McClay. That is part of $1.7 billion this Government is investing in metropolitan rail in this country because we believe in roads we believe in public services and of course we believe in cycleways where we are investing $100 million over the next 3 years into projects all around New Zealand.Of course in energy the other portfolio I am delighted to be Minister in—a great portfolio—we are going to sensibly explore our opportunities and resources out at sea and in New Zealand. We will do that with the highest environmental and health and safety standards and that is absolutely right. But we are pursuing a balanced approach where we are also doing great work in renewables whether it is bioenergy solar wind geothermal or the like.To conclude my remarks in this debate it is a privilege to be back as part of a Government that is focused on what matters to New Zealand that has a renewed sense of purpose and vigour and that is going to govern resolutely and humbly for all New Zealanders in this country.
Carter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Islamic State Conflict—Government Response State Housing—Sale of Housing Stock Judith Collins—Resignation as Minister and Inquiry into Compliance withCabinet ManualText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Islamic State Conflict—Government Response State Housing—Sale of Housing Stock Judith Collins—Resignation as Minister and Inquiry into Compliance withCabinet Manual[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:130. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from the Hon Phil Goff seeking to debate under Standing Order 389 the decision by the Prime Minister to consider the deployment of troops against Islamic State of Iraq and Syria forces in Iraq. In order for an urgent debate to be held there must be a particular case of recent occurrence. The Government has not yet made a decision about the deployment of troops to Iraq. An absence of action on the part of the Government cannot be a particular case of recent occurrence. If a decision is made in the future to deploy troops there are likely to be opportunities to debate it at that time. The application is therefore declined.I have also received an application from Phil Twyford seeking to debate the Government’s decision to sell a large number of New Zealand’s State houses. The member bases his application on media reports of the Government’s ideas for reform of State housing and plans to sell some of the country’s State houses. The urgent debate procedure is a means of debating matters that have occurred not what might or might not occur. An urgent debate cannot be granted on the basis of media speculation. A particular case of recent occurrence occurs at the point in time when a decision is publicly announced. The House is currently considering a motion for an Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne. This is a wide-ranging debate. This provides the opportunity to debate ideas for reform. This application is therefore also declined.I have further received an application from Dr Megan Woods on the decision by the Prime Minister to accept the resignation of Judith Collins as a Minister and to initiate an inquiry into allegations that as Minister of Police Ms Collins acted inappropriately to undermine the then Director of the Serious Fraud Office. This is a case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility because this is the first sitting of the House at which the matter could be raised. However not every resignation of a Minister will occasion an urgent debate. Ms Collins was a Minister in the previous Government and an independent inquiry into the allegations regarding her has been set up under the Inquiries Act 2013. While the House has before it a debate as wide-ranging as the Address in Reply debate the bar for the acceptance of an urgent debate is somewhat higher. Members can address issues related to Ms Collins’ resignation in that debate. The time to consider any wider issues is when the inquiry reports. This application is therefore also declined.
Woods Megan: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWoods Megan: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:128. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram)to the Prime Minister: What are the allegations that led to him establishing the Chisholm inquiry into the allegations regarding Judith Collins and a former Director of the Serious Fraud Office?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):The allegations are that during her time as Minister of Police with responsibility for the Serious Fraud Office Judith Collins acted inappropriately to undermine the then director of the Serious Fraud Office Mr Adam Feeley. These allegations have been totally rejected by Ms Collins and she asked that I establish an inquiry so her name could be cleared. I was happy to oblige. I do not believe it is in the public interest for me to make any further comments while the inquiry is still in progress.Dr Megan Woods: Is he still expecting the findings of the inquiry to be reported back to him by 28 November 2014 and when does he expect to publicly respond to it?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In answer to the first part of the question yes. In terms of the second part of the question I am not sure at this point.Dr Megan Woods: If the inquiry clears Judith Collins of the accusations will she be reinstated to his ministry forthwith?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I have made that clear. The answer is no not forthwith.Dr Megan Woods: Has he received specific information about Judith Collins’ conduct as a Minister since the initiation of the inquiry into the matter; if so what is the information?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No.Dr Megan Woods: What factors including any other activities of Judith Collins not included in the inquiry are preventing him from giving a guarantee to reinstate her to his ministry?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: People are appointed to the ministry when I feel it is appropriate that they are and when we have an opportunity. As the member will be aware we have just announced a new Cabinet line-up. That is where it stands at the moment.
Sabin Mike: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSabin Mike: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:127. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]10.MIKE SABIN (National—Northland)to the Minister of Corrections: What announcements has he recently made to help improve safety for frontline corrections officers in our prisons?Hon Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA (Minister of Corrections):Yesterday I announced the release of a tender for 1000 on-body cameras for our front-line corrections officers. This follows a successful 6-month trial for these cameras conducted in high-security Rimutaka Prison and maximum-security Auckland prison. We want prisoners focused on their own rehabilitation through education skills and training and not on causing disruption to other prisoners and staff. Front-line correction officers are well trained and resourced to deal with difficult situations in our prisons but we remain focused on continually improving the safety of our staff and prisoners. These cameras will be another measure available to de-escalate what can sometimes be highly tense situations.Mike Sabin: What did the 6-month trial of on-body cameras in both Rimutaka Prison and Auckland prison reveal?Hon Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA: When we compared the average rate of prisoner-related incidents during the 180-day trial with the same 180-day period during the previous year there was a 15 to 20 percent reduction in both trial units. This was compared with a 4 to 5 percent reduction for the wider trial prison sites. The trial also revealed that the use of cameras reduced the severity of incidents and allowed staff to use the footage in their debriefs as evidence of misconduct in staff development and prisoner coaching. As I said in answering the primary question we want prisoners focused on their own rehabilitation and working on learning upskilling and training for a productive and meaningful life outside prison.
Yang Jian: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYang Jian: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 22 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:127. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.Dr JIAN YANG (National)to the Minister of Education: What recent updates has she received on the progress of the Government’s $359 million Investing in Educational Success initiative?Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education):Tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakahaere otirā tēnā koutou tātou huri noa i tō tātou Whare.[Thank you Mr Speaker and salutations indeed to you and to us collectively throughout our House.]I recently received an update that shows momentum and enthusiasm are growing as we implement this initiative to raise teaching quality and school leadership to deliver a better education to every student. This is evident by the keen interest already being shown in the process to form these new communities of schools. It is also very clear from what I have been hearing as I have been up and down the country visiting schools and talking with parents.Dr Jian Yang: What has she heard from others about the importance of this initiative and lifting achievement for kids?Hon HEKIA PARATA: I have also been hearing and receiving a lot of other support. For example the Secondary Principals’ Association of New Zealand has said: “Let’s keep the best teachers in the classroom. Let’s share the best practice that we’ve got in communities of schools.” The Ngā Kura-ā-Iwi has described the initiative as a winner potentially transformational and providing a real solution to improving achievement for kids. A top chief executive has said: “It’s the encouragement of inspirational teachers that sees kids from tough homes lift their sights”. That is why we are continuing to do the work that needs to be done and that gets this right for kids their parents and their schools.