edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer—Remedies for Overdue Replies 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer—Remedies for Overdue Replies 
[Volume:671;Page:17523] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: This is not a matter to be raised by way of a point of order in the Chamber. I apologise— 
Hon Pete Hodgson 
: Well what are my remedies? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not what I expect from an experienced member. I apologise to him if I have not responded more promptly to his inquiry. I will look into the matter immediately. It is not difficult to call my office. My door is always open.
Hodgson Pete: Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer—Remedies for Overdue Replies 
Hodgson Pete: Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer—Remedies for Overdue Replies 
[Volume:671;Page:17523] 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Labour—Dunedin North) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I wish to draw to your attention the fact that I have three written questions to the Minister of Education that are now 5 weeks overdue. I wrote to you almost 2 weeks ago. I have heard back from neither you nor the Minister.
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Indonesia—Services Committee House of Regional Representatives 
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Indonesia—Services Committee House of Regional Representatives 
[Volume:671;Page:17523] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that the Services Committee of the House of Regional Representatives of the Republic of Indonesia led by Mr Bahar Ngitung is present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish that the delegation be welcomed.
Event: Members Sworn 
Event: Members Sworn 
[Volume:671;Page:17523] 
Members Sworn 
Jami-Lee Ross was presented to the Speaker made the affirmation required by law and took his seat in the House.
Smith Lockwood: By-Election — Botany 
Smith Lockwood: By-Election — Botany 
[Volume:671;Page:17523] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have been advised by the Electoral Commissioner that pursuant to section 185 of the Electoral Act 1993 the name of the member elected to the House of Representatives for the Botany electoral district is Jami-Lee Matenga Ross. I understand that Jami-Lee Ross is present and wishes to affirm. Would he please come forward to the chair on my right.
Hipkins Chris: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Hipkins Chris: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17603] 
CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. What role does precedent play in a decision such as this? I refer you particularly to an almost identical bill to the one that we are currently debating which was voted on in this Parliament in either 1997 or 1998. The original bill was almost identical and an amendment almost identical to Mr Robertson’s amendment was accepted by the then Chairperson. I was not here at the time so I was not involved. But there is a precedent that that amendment was deemed to be within the scope of the bill. The ruling you have made is inconsistent with that ruling so I am asking you what role precedent plays in decisions such as yours to make such a ruling. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Well there are two things. I say to the member that as a wiser man than me the Rt Hon David Lange said one time consistency is the last refuge of a fool. But having said that the point is that this is a new bill a new day and I have made the ruling. I have made the ruling that the amendment is out of order and I am not going to go back to it. The member’s point of order is seeking to challenge that ruling. The matter is closed. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 205 in the name of Gareth Hughes to new section 229A in clause 6 be agreed to.
Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer—Remedies for Overdue Replies 
Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer—Remedies for Overdue Replies 
[Volume:671;Page:17523] 
Points of Order 
Questions for Written Answer—Remedies for Overdue Replies 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Labour—Dunedin North) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I wish to draw to your attention the fact that I have three written questions to the Minister of Education that are now 5 weeks overdue. I wrote to you almost 2 weeks ago. I have heard back from neither you nor the Minister. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: This is not a matter to be raised by way of a point of order in the Chamber. I apologise— 
Hon Pete Hodgson 
: Well what are my remedies? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not what I expect from an experienced member. I apologise to him if I have not responded more promptly to his inquiry. I will look into the matter immediately. It is not difficult to call my office. My door is always open.
Visitors — Indonesia—Services Committee House of Regional Representatives 
Visitors — Indonesia—Services Committee House of Regional Representatives 
[Volume:671;Page:17523] 
Visitors 
Indonesia—Services Committee House of Regional Representatives 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that the Services Committee of the House of Regional Representatives of the Republic of Indonesia led by Mr Bahar Ngitung is present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish that the delegation be welcomed.
Members Sworn 
Members Sworn 
[Volume:671;Page:17523] 
Members Sworn 
Jami-Lee Ross was presented to the Speaker made the affirmation required by law and took his seat in the House.
By-Election — Botany 
By-Election — Botany 
[Volume:671;Page:17523] 
Wednesday 23 March 2011 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
By-Election 
Botany 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have been advised by the Electoral Commissioner that pursuant to section 185 of the Electoral Act 1993 the name of the member elected to the House of Representatives for the Botany electoral district is Jami-Lee Matenga Ross. I understand that Jami-Lee Ross is present and wishes to affirm. Would he please come forward to the chair on my right.
Vote: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17513] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the report be adopted. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand National 57; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 7; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Report adopted.
Parker David: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
Parker David: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17504] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I should have thought the Committee was entitled to know whether it was a party correcting its vote or whether it was an addition error. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: I can advise the member that if a party had called its voting numbers incorrectly it would have then been the responsibility of the party to seek the leave of the Committee to correct the vote. That was not the case. So by deduction the member is entitled to come to the conclusion that it was an arithmetical error. No leave was so sought.
Carter John: Appropriation (2009/10 Financial Review) Bill — Third Reading 
Carter John: Appropriation (2009/10 Financial Review) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:671;Page:17504] 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Minister of Civil Defence) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Finance 
: I move  
That the Appropriation (2009/10 Financial Review) Bill be now read a third time. 
Bill read a third time.
Parker David: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
Parker David: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17504] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Could I have clarification as to whether that is because a vote has been corrected or whether there was an addition error which meant that an adding error got four votes rather than five? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: I cannot tell the member precisely how the error occurred but the Clerk’s Office has advised me that there was an error. The advice is that the vote was incorrect and needs to be corrected. It has been corrected.
Barker Rick: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Barker Rick: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17452] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: The House is in Committee on the Appropriation (2009/10 Financial Review) Bill. The financial review debate is the Committee stage of the Appropriation (2009/10 Financial Review) Bill. The time allocated for this debate is 4 hours and comprises two distinct elements. The first is the debate on the annual financial statements of the Government as reported on by the Finance and Expenditure Committee. Once this has concluded the Committee debates individual financial reviews of departments Offices of Parliament and non-departmental appropriations as reported on by the select committees. The debate on the Government’s financial position may be fairly wide ranging but the debates on individual financial reviews of departments Offices of Parliament and non-departmental appropriations should be relevant to their performance in the 2009-10 financial year and their current operations. 
The compendium of financial reviews and non-departmental appropriations for debate is on the Table. A member may have no more than two calls on each financial review. At the conclusion of the debate a single question is put on the provisions of the bill. There is no amendment to or debate on this question. The Chairperson then reports the bill to the House and it is set down for third reading forthwith. There is no debate on the third reading.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Earthquake Christchurch—Announcement of Recovery Package 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Earthquake Christchurch—Announcement of Recovery Package 
[Volume:671;Page:17451] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from Hilary Calvert seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the announcement today of a $6.85 million recovery package for Christchurch. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. The test for whether a particular case of recent occurrence requires the immediate attention of the House is a high one. The business of the House should not be set aside just because a ministerial statement has been made even though it may be important. There must be an element of urgency that the matter must take precedence over other business. 
It is also relevant when considering whether a matter requires the urgent attention of the House to consider whether there are other parliamentary means of debating the subject. The House has before it today the financial review debate. This provides an opportunity to debate the current operations of the Ministry of Economic Development from where the $6.85 million funding will be realigned. I am not persuaded that the business of the House should be set aside today. The application is therefore declined.
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:671;Page:17449] 
10. 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) 
 to the  
Minister of Science and Innovation 
: What progress has been made in implementing the science and innovation business support package? 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP (Minister of Science and Innovation) 
: 
 Last week the 2011 round of technology development grants was announced. This was one of the major initiatives from Budget 2010. This year’s grants will total $48.3 million to support innovation-intensive businesses. It follows the first-year round of grants last year which saw 26 businesses receive grants totalling $92.6 million over a 4-year period. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: What reports has he seen of the impact of this package? 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: Good news here: a report released today by Statistics New Zealand noted that spending on research and development had gone up by 13 percent since 2008. The total is now $2.5 billion or 1.3 percent of GDP. Business is the largest single contributor to research and development investment boosted by Government support of course and businesses are collectively spending $1 billion. Clearly the policies introduced since 2008 have had a tangible and beneficial impact. 
David Shearer 
: What has his response been to the more than 60 percent of businesses that have been turned down by his bureaucracy when seeking to obtain a technology development grant given that they would have been eligible for assistance under the 15 percent tax credit? 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: That just shows us how popular the grant is. It is true that demand is exceeding supply. We have taken a responsible approach through our technology development grant unlike Labour’s fiscally irresponsible approach during previous years. Apparently Labour is still promising to take that fiscally irresponsible approach even now.
Vote: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17512] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand National 57; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 7; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Motion agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Before we vote on clauses 1 and 2 we have an amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 209. It is out of order as not being an objective description of the bill.
Gilmore Aaron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Gilmore Aaron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:671;Page:17444] 
5. 
AARON GILMORE (National) 
 to the  
Acting Minister for Economic Development 
: What measures has the Government recently announced to help support the economic recovery of Canterbury businesses? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport) 
 on behalf of the  
Acting Minister for Economic Development 
: This morning the Hon Gerry Brownlee and the Hon David Carter announced that the Government is committing a further $6.85 million to a targeted economic recovery package aimed at assisting businesses affected by the two major earthquakes to get back on their feet. The package has been developed in conjunction with the Canterbury business community and it is the next step in providing assistance to the business community and allowing a stronger Canterbury to emerge. 
Aaron Gilmore 
: What are some of the key details of the package announced today? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: The package covers a range of services including $1.7 million for 30 new business recovery coordinators a one-off donation of $2.5 million for the Canterbury Business Recovery Trust Fund and a $2 million fund to support visits to international markets by affected export businesses. Overall the package is aimed at rebuilding the confidence of businesses and assisting them to make well-informed decisions about their future. 
Hon David Parker 
: Is the Minister aware that a month after the 22 February earthquake most building owners and business tenants of buildings to which access is prevented have still not received communication advising whether or when they will be able to enter their business premises to obtain computers business records and the stock-in-trade that they need to restart their business and that this is putting into jeopardy the jobs of many many Christchurch people? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: The Minister appreciates the difficulty that the cordon is causing and it is a problem for businesses. But the reality is that we are talking about a very significant safety issue. Civil defence is working hard on a plan to increase controlled access for business owners and it hopes to have that in place very shortly. Until then we need to exercise patience and not lose sight of the facts that safety has to remain paramount and that the red zone remains an unsafe area. 
Aaron Gilmore 
: Is this the limit of the Government’s support for earthquake-affected businesses? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: No absolutely not. Today’s announcement is just one further element of the ongoing support that the Government is providing to Canterbury businesses. We are working with Canterbury business associations to constantly review and reassess the needs of affected businesses and we expect to take further steps to aid economic recovery in the near future.
Hughes Darren: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
Hughes Darren: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
[Volume:671;Page:17439] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Coming from that exchange you have just had one issue that arises is that when members vote in Maori the vote is not translated over the television or radio broadcast at that time. Given that the issue has come up I wonder whether you would take that into account. It is under your control for that to happen so that people who are watching the proceedings of the House are aware of which way parties have voted. It seems that now is a time to bring that up—while this issue about members’ understanding of te reo being used is before you. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the member wishes to pursue it with me further my understanding is that the interpretation of the voting taking place would be the same as during debates so the procedures to achieve the interpretation during debate should deliver the same interpretation during voting. If that is proving not to be the case I would appreciate the member— 
Hon DARREN HUGHES 
: I am sorry; I should have been clearer with you Mr Speaker. I was referring to viewers who are following it. For us in the House— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No I mean viewers of television. The procedures that viewers need to follow to pick up the English interpretation when Maori is being used during debates should pick up the interpretation of voting as well. But if that is not happening I am very happy to check the matter out further because it should be happening.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
[Volume:671;Page:17439] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The convention of the House is the  
Hansard  
records only the votes cast. It does not record particular words during voting. It records only the votes cast and there is no change to that.
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
[Volume:671;Page:17439] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is the  
Hansard 
; my question is whether the  
Hansard  
will accurately reflect what Hone Harawira said.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
[Volume:671;Page:17439] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have told the member that the matter has been dealt with. If he continues to raise points of order I will have to deal with him. I do not wish to do that. But the matter has been dealt with. The Chair at the time interpreted what he was advised by the interpreters in terms of the voting intention of the member I was recalled I made it clear how issues were to be dealt with in the future and that is the end of the matter. The vote was recorded as the member had intended and that is the end of the matter. The matter will not arise again so there is no further point of order.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
[Volume:671;Page:17439] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will not let the member carry on in this vein. The matter has been dealt with. The interpreters have been instructed that they are to interpret exactly what the member says so that the Chair can assess whether the Standing Orders of this House have been followed and that is the end of the matter. That is the instruction that has been given to the interpreters. I am not going to entertain any more points of order along that line. I have dealt with that matter.
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
[Volume:671;Page:17439] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I do not wish to contradict you in any way shape or form; however what you dealt with was that it was the obligation of a member who stands up in Parliament to vote to vote according to the rules which are the Standing Orders of Parliament. The issue I am raising is in fact a more serious one and it is that when a member speaks in Maori and the interpreter provides for the House something entirely different which is what happened repeatedly—
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
[Volume:671;Page:17439] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: This particular issue was dealt with at the time by the House and that is the end of the matter. It was not a case of what the member has just alleged. I dealt with the matter at the time. I was recalled to the House. The Chair of the Committee of the whole House had already dealt with the particular issue. I dealt with the wider matter when I was recalled as Speaker and that is the end of the matter.
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
[Volume:671;Page:17439] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Thank you for that. Will the House—and if so when—get an honest interpretation of what it was that Hone Harawira actually said when the vote was being taken? So far we have not had it.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
[Volume:671;Page:17438] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I can assure the member that the interpreters will give an accurate interpretation. I take it the member is referring to a vote that occurred in the House. The member will recollect I made it very clear at the time when I was recalled to the House that voting is a very serious business and that where members do not vote according to the Standing Orders their vote will not be counted. The interpreters have been instructed to make sure that they do interpret what is said by members during voting. If members do not comply with the Standing Orders their votes will not be counted.
Vote: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17513] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 207 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to insert new clause 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand National 57; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 7; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
New clause 2 agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: We have an amendment in the name of Hilary Calvert as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 209. This amendment is now out of order as it is inconsistent with a previous decision. 
House resumed. 
Bill reported with amendment.
Calvert Hilary Jane: Motions — Libya—United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 
Calvert Hilary Jane: Motions — Libya—United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 
[Volume:671;Page:17438] 
HILARY CALVERT (ACT) 
: 
 I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate relating to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 and the developing situation in Libya. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
HILARY CALVERT 
: I move  
That this House express its support for United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 condemning the gross and systematic violation of human rights by the Government of Libya and supporting United Nations member States taking any and all measures necessary to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas under threat of attack by Libyan Government forces. 
Motion agreed to.
Hide Rodney: Ministerial Statements — Earthquake Christchurch—Extension of State of National Emergency 
Hide Rodney: Ministerial Statements — Earthquake Christchurch—Extension of State of National Emergency 
[Volume:671;Page:17438] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 Of course the ACT Party supports the motion. Our thoughts and prayers are with the people of Christchurch as they get over the trauma of the earthquake and look to rebuild the city. 
This is an unprecedented experience in New Zealand’s history—not just the earthquake but to have these emergency powers extended for a fourth time. Mr Chauvel is correct in saying that the powers are wide ranging. We are already seeing some considerable discontent grow in Christchurch over the exercising of the powers and indeed a failure by us and by the civil emergency personnel to explain the use of the powers to the satisfaction of the people most directly affected by them. 
I suggest at this stage that the Government respond. I suggest a Government member take a call and provide for us—this Parliament which is granting this power—some timetable for the continuation of the state of emergency. Each week the Government has come here and said it requires 7 days then another 7 days then another 7 days and then another 7 days—four times. Will the extension be requested six times eight times 10 times or 12 times? What is the expectation about the extension of the emergency powers? 
It would also be helpful if in reply the Government explains to the House and to the people of Christchurch how the powers will be exercised because it is very uncomfortable to see business owners who are directly affected not being able to get answers to what appeared on the face of it to be very simple and straightforward questions.
Chauvel Charles: Ministerial Statements — Earthquake Christchurch—Extension of State of National Emergency 
Chauvel Charles: Ministerial Statements — Earthquake Christchurch—Extension of State of National Emergency 
[Volume:671;Page:17437] 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
: 
 Our thoughts and strong sympathies remain with the people of Canterbury as the House discusses the renewal of the state of national emergency. There is no doubt that an emergency exists in Canterbury as a result of the events of 22 February and subsequently and that extraordinary powers are required to deal with that emergency. The Labour Opposition supports such powers being made available there. 
The Minister of Civil Defence has made the judgment that a nationwide state of emergency should remain in force for a further period. A state of national emergency is the option that the Government has placed on the table and it is therefore the only option available so we are bound to support it. We note that the powers that accrue to the Government in respect of a state of national emergency are extremely wide. Across New Zealand not just in Canterbury the Government can order the evacuation of premises and places; entry to premises; the closing of roads and public places; the removal of aircraft vessels and vehicles; and the requisitioning of goods and services. 
I asked the Minister on a previous occasion to consider whether he needs to be able to exercise those wide powers across the country or whether the Government might rely on a regional declaration bolstered by the very very broad powers that are conferred by the Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Act which the House passed unanimously last year in the wake of the original earthquake. I would like to renew that request of the Minister to consider all the options on the table. On the next occasion that he reports to the House about his deliberations on the need for emergency powers in Canterbury to continue it would be helpful to be assured that he has considered those options particularly whether those wide emergency powers are required in Auckland Hamilton Dunedin and anywhere in between. 
Meanwhile we all have seen the reports that the people of Christchurch are struggling with issues such as getting insurance sorted on purchases and house transactions. Concerns have also been expressed about rising prices and rents. Many members will have already received correspondence from a wide range of people in Canterbury about the day-to-day struggles that they face. As I said earlier our hearts go out to the people of Canterbury and we continue to support them but it is useful to be reminded that they are watching us in this place and they expect us to look after their welfare in the round.
Carter John: Ministerial Statements — Earthquake Christchurch—Extension of State of National Emergency 
Carter John: Ministerial Statements — Earthquake Christchurch—Extension of State of National Emergency 
[Volume:671;Page:17437] 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Minister of Civil Defence) 
: 
 I wish to make a ministerial statement under Standing Order 347 on the fourth extension of the state of national emergency over Christchurch City. On Saturday 19 March I further extended the duration of the state of national emergency for Christchurch City under section 71 of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002. It was the fourth extension of the state of national emergency since it was first declared on 23 February. 
The situation in Christchurch City has improved and water and power supplies have been restored to most residents outside the central business district. However the remaining response tasks are still challenging and require the Director of Civil Defence Emergency Management to continue exercising his powers and functions under the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act. I therefore consider it necessary to extend the state of national emergency. I will continue monitoring progress in Christchurch and make further extensions as required.
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
[Volume:671;Page:17438] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It shoots to the heart of the integrity of our Parliament and it is this: what assurance are you able to give this House that the Maori interpreters who operate in this House under your jurisdiction will not repeatedly mislead Parliament as happened on Wednesday last week?
Appropriation (2009/10 Financial Review) Bill — Third Reading 
Appropriation (2009/10 Financial Review) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:671;Page:17504] 
Appropriation (2009/10 Financial Review) Bill 
Third Reading 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Minister of Civil Defence) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Finance 
: I move  
That the Appropriation (2009/10 Financial Review) Bill be now read a third time. 
Bill read a third time.
Motions — Libya—United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 
Motions — Libya—United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 
[Volume:671;Page:17438] 
Motions 
Libya—United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 
HILARY CALVERT (ACT) 
: 
 I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate relating to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 and the developing situation in Libya. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
HILARY CALVERT 
: I move  
That this House express its support for United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 condemning the gross and systematic violation of human rights by the Government of Libya and supporting United Nations member States taking any and all measures necessary to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas under threat of attack by Libyan Government forces. 
Motion agreed to.
Urgent Debates Declined — Earthquake Christchurch—Announcement of Recovery Package 
Urgent Debates Declined — Earthquake Christchurch—Announcement of Recovery Package 
[Volume:671;Page:17451] 
Urgent Debates Declined 
Earthquake Christchurch—Announcement of Recovery Package 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from Hilary Calvert seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the announcement today of a $6.85 million recovery package for Christchurch. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. The test for whether a particular case of recent occurrence requires the immediate attention of the House is a high one. The business of the House should not be set aside just because a ministerial statement has been made even though it may be important. There must be an element of urgency that the matter must take precedence over other business. 
It is also relevant when considering whether a matter requires the urgent attention of the House to consider whether there are other parliamentary means of debating the subject. The House has before it today the financial review debate. This provides an opportunity to debate the current operations of the Ministry of Economic Development from where the $6.85 million funding will be realigned. I am not persuaded that the business of the House should be set aside today. The application is therefore declined.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:671;Page:17440] 
1. 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: Does she agree with the Children’s Commissioner who has stated that “providing culturally affirming education and care was considered important for supporting parents from minority cultures”; if so what will she do to demonstrate she is listening to the views of parents? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
on behalf of the  
Minister of Education 
: Yes. The Government is always listening to the views of parents and we recognise the value of culturally appropriate early childhood services. That is why we have invested $91.8 million in community-driven initiatives based on community needs to ensure that any local barriers to participation in early childhood education can be addressed. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: How will she respond to the call from the report for “more community services to be available in te reo Maori.”? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: We recognise that it is important to ensure that early childhood education is responsive to the different communities in New Zealand. This year early childhood education TeachNZ scholarships have been targeted at people who have experience working with Maori or Pasifika communities who want to teach in the early childhood sector. The Government also introduced the 20 hours’ free attendance at kohanga reo. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: Does she agree with the Children’s Commissioner that parents need more choice in childcare including greater flexibility in the hours they pay to put their babies into childcare; if so what response will she make to the recommendation that there should be better funding support for parents who choose to stay at home to look after their infants? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: The Government is still considering its response to this report in conjunction with the findings of the independent task force on early childhood education which is due to report back in the next few weeks.
Tisch Lindsay: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17513] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I move  
That the report be adopted 
.
Barker Rick: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
Barker Rick: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17504] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Members I feel that someone should say “groundhog day”. I need to advise members of a vote correction. The result of the vote on Wednesday on the question of Hilary Calvert’s amendment to clause 37(2) to omit “38 to 44” and to substitute “38 to 44 or to local authorities.” was incorrectly announced as Ayes 4 and Noes 114. The correct result is Ayes 5 and Noes 114. The record will be so corrected.
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Voting—Accuracy of Interpretation 
[Volume:671;Page:17439] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Will this House get an interpretation of what it was—
Finlayson Christopher: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
Finlayson Christopher: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17508] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 I thank the honourable member Kelvin Davis for the latter part of that contribution which I thought hit the nail on the head. I think the confusion that comes out of the ACT Party on this issue is because they do not know the difference between the marine and coastal area and the beach so all the scaremongering which was so evident tonight comes because they presume that we are talking about the beach. 
The only example I could give at the great celebrated Rotary Club of Remuera debate last night was about Kaingaroa at the very northern tip of the Chatham Islands because I think there was an urupa that was very much part of what is called the foreshore and seabed the common marine and coastal area. The example that the member gave about the waka is another example. So I think it is simply scaremongering. What I find surprising is that when the honourable member John Boscawen was at the debate last night—and maybe we should have more debates at the Rotary Club of Remuera—he was on his best behaviour but when he comes down to Parliament I am afraid the honourable member goes feral. 
I will say something about clause 77. Let us just go back to basics when we are dealing with wahi tapu areas. Clause 77(2) states: “A wahi tapu protection right may be recognised if there is evidence to establish … (b) that the group requires the proposed prohibitions or restrictions on access to protect the wahi tapu or wahi tapu area.” It is not carte blanche to stand at the top of a cliff and decide that all before me is wahi tapu. So yes there can be restrictions on the right of access but the first point is that they have to get to establishing a wahi tapu area. As I said earlier today in question time the conditions that may be imposed may be of a temporal kind for one or more defined periods an indefinite period a recurring period of a stated kind or directed to a specified area. 
So my advice to the ACT Party is that the wahi tapu question is a very interesting one but as Mr Davis so accurately said it will not be a massive issue in the practical world simply because we are dealing with wahi tapu areas in the common marine and coastal area. So stop trying to scare people and at the same time diminish the concept of wahi tapu. Let us concentrate on the issues that divide the parties in this Parliament and they are codification versus no codification or agreements being permitted. They are the big issues that divide us. The scaremongering and the imbecility have to stop.
King Annette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
King Annette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:671;Page:17444] 
4. 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
 to the  
Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: Is she proposing to reduce funding to family violence programmes; if so why? 
Hon TARIANA TURIA (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 No. 
Hon Annette King 
: In light of that answer why have non-governmental organisations providers of family violence services in Te Rito programmes and child advocates from all around New Zealand heard that funding to their services is to be cut? What did she say to Maori Television last week for it to announce that there will be such funding cuts with $50 million going to Whanau Ora initiatives? 
Hon TARIANA TURIA 
: It would be wonderful if $50 million was going to Whanau Ora initiatives but the information that that person has put in the House is quite inaccurate. 
Hon Annette King 
: What did the assessment of the effectiveness of the Te Rito coordinator’s position show following the Ministry of Social Development’s report of 2009? 
Hon TARIANA TURIA 
: The decisions surrounding the programmes that the Hon Annette King is talking about will be made as part of Budget 2011. 
Hon Annette King 
: Is she proposing cuts to the It’s Not OK campaign for action on family violence which in June 2010 won the Prime Minister’s Supreme Award at the Institute of Public Administration New Zealand Public Sector Excellence Awards; if so why? 
Hon TARIANA TURIA 
: That decision will be made as part of the 2011 Budget decisions.
Tremain Chris: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
Tremain Chris: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17512] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:671;Page:17449] 
11. 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN (Deputy Leader—ACT) 
 to the  
Attorney-General 
: Is it Government policy that the right of the public to access beaches conferred under clause 27(1) of the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill is subject to prohibitions imposed by wahi tapu under clauses 27(2) and 78 of the bill? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 I refer the member to the definition of “marine and coastal area” in clause 7 of the bill and to clauses 27 and 78. Those clauses do not mention beaches. 
Hon Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The question asked about the Government policy. It is very hard to see how the Attorney-General’s answer addressed that question in any way shape or form. It was after all on notice. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It seemed to me that the Minister addressed the question in some detail. He referred specifically to clause 27—that was one of the clauses I remember him referring to—and pointed out that it did not refer to beaches if I heard him correctly. It seems to me that the answer was not faulty. Maybe the question needs to be fine-tuned somewhat. I feel that I cannot ask the Minister to answer further if he has disputed the basis of the question in his answer. 
Hon John Boscawen 
: Is it Government policy that the right of the public to access the common marine and coastal area which is conferred under clause 27(1) of the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill is subject to the prohibitions imposed by wahi tapu under clauses 27(2) and 78 of the bill? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: Much better! Yes. I also refer the member to clause 77(2) which states that any conditions on wahi tapu must be those necessary for the protection of the wahi tapu area. It does not hold that this necessarily means public access will be restricted. I also refer the member to clause 27(2) which sets out the way in which restrictions may operate. They may be temporal; they may relate to the particular area or parts of the particular area. 
Hon John Boscawen 
: Why did he tell members of the Rotary Club of Remuera last night in relation to wahi tapu areas that in terms of people walking over it he did not think access could be denied? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: Having referred to Mr Jones’ question about having a picnic in a wahi tapu area and people being out to lunch I then went on to discuss the possibility of a person wanting to walk over a wahi tapu area. I used the example of an urupa. It does not necessarily follow as I told the meeting that access would be denied or restricted. If however someone wanted to excavate an urupa or a wahi tapu area that may be a different question. 
Hon John Boscawen 
: I seek leave to table a transcript of part of the debate between me and Mr Finlayson at the Rotary Club of Remuera last night in which Mr Finlayson is asked a very specific question about wahi tapu.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17478] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Members that is the sound of the new bell just so you are aware of what it is. 
Report noted.
Quinn Paul: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
Quinn Paul: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17510] 
PAUL QUINN (National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17513] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand National 57; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 7; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Clause 1 agreed to. 
Clause 2 not agreed to.
Shanks Katrina: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Shanks Katrina: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:671;Page:17447] 
7. 
KATRINA SHANKS (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: What is the Government doing to support Cantabrians through the earthquake recovery? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 We are focused on getting Cantabrians through the recovery and back on their feet. For my department alone this cost has totalled over $160 million or $5.7 million a day since the February quake. 
Katrina Shanks 
: How is Work and Income supporting those who have been left without jobs as a result of the earthquake? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: Work and Income staff are doing a remarkable job but we have also started up an employment hub. It has been set up and will be fully operational from this week to support businesses and employment needs. The hub will be staffed by the Ministry of Social Development the Inland Revenue Department the Department of Labour Te Puni Kokiri and the Canterbury Development Corporation. 
Hon Annette King 
: How many workers from national and multinational companies have been eligible for and received individual assistance from Work and Income and what guarantee can she give that any error in processing of claims by Work and Income will not disadvantage already stressed and struggling workers? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: I do not have the number of individuals to hand but I can assure the member that we found particularly in the early days that we had individuals applying for job loss cover as well as their employers. Obviously communication was hard between them in the early days so we had double-ups. We have been looking at what we need to do in relation to that. But to date it seems to be working out and the policy in relation to that is to always err on the side of helping the individual.
Goodhew Jo: Sittings of the House 
Goodhew Jo: Sittings of the House 
[Volume:671;Page:17657] 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 Given the progress that the House has made at this end of the week I seek leave for the House to now rise. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought for an early rising. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? There appears not to be. Leave is granted.