edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Heatley Phil: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHeatley Phil: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11488. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei):I rise to support the Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2). The Auckland Council itself has stated that the power of local boards to delegate enables them to operate efficiently and effectively. Legislation rather than regulation is required to give effect to this and to provide certainty for the Auckland Council and its local boards. The regulations were enacted to meet the time frame for the constitution of local boards on 1 November 2010 you will recall and this interim measure allowed time for better understanding of local board operations to develop which could then be developed into amending legislation.I think all members recall that reforming Auckland local government was recommended by the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance. At that time of course the Labour Party called for the royal commission because it was not actually prepared to move on anything. Those were the heady days when the Labour Party would call committees and then it would call an inquiry and then it would get someone else to head up some sort of an investigation and then it would pass it on to the Auditor-General. Decisions just were not made. They were sort of kicked off to inquiries kicked off to committees and kicked off to judges and all sorts of eminent people but actually acting and doing something were not taken up. New Zealand sort of stagnated because decisions were not being made.Anyway the royal commission came back and thank goodness we were in Government. We took those recommendations and we put them into place. I think the Labour Party possibly would have had an inquiry into a committee to look at what the royal commission said. Rather than have another committee another inquiry and another investigation into the royal commission we decided to act and of course this legislation is a part of putting those recommendations into actual operation.Ratepayers need to know that their council is spending money wisely. These reforms are a part of that also to introduce transparency. I happily commend this bill to the House and I trust that New Zealanders prefer action rather than more inquiries more committees and more investigations which the Labour Party tends to have rather than decision making.
Dean Jacqui: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDean Jacqui: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11486. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki):What the Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) does is amend the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009. What that is going to do is enable local boards to delegate various functions and powers to committees of the local board or to a council officer so it is a further devolution of responsibilities that were there by regulation under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009. The transitional powers that were given under that Act will expire at the end of October this year. The provisions of this bill replace the current provisions and in fact do not add any new policy. What the bill does is replace regulation with new legislation—so it lifts the provisions if you like.The Auckland Council has stated that the power of the local boards to delegate really gives local boards the opportunity to operate efficiently and effectively. It really forms part of National’s Better Local Government reforms package with the intention very clearly of helping make local government more efficient. It is a large body now the Auckland Council. It is more efficient and more responsive to local needs. In particular it is well focused on the needs of its ratepayers—I was going to call them constituents; I guess they are but they are also ratepayers—in its local area.So what this Government is doing is recognising that it is important to empower local boards and to put the “local” back into local government. So with this briefcontribution I do look forward to the consideration of the Local Government and Environment Committee on this bill. I commend the bill to the House.
Vote: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11486. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill be reported to the House by 16 August and that the Commerce Committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 188 and 191(1)(b) and (c).Ayes78New Zealand National 59; Green Party 13; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; Mana 1; Independents: Dunne Horan.Noes33New Zealand Labour 33.Abstentions7New Zealand First 7.Motion agreed to.
Vote: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11486. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the question be now put.Ayes63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; Independent: Dunne.Noes48New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 13; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Abstentions7New Zealand First 7.Motion agreed to.
Hayes John: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes John: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11485. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOHN HAYES (National—Wairarapa):I moveThat the question be now put .
Dean Jacqui: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDean Jacqui: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11481. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki):I moveThat the question be now put .
Robertson H V Ross: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11475. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): The question is that the motion—point of order the Hon Trevor Mallard.Hon Trevor Mallard: No no. I am just going to make a speech.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Well you have jumped up too soon Mr Mallard. I have not put the question yet.Hon Trevor Mallard: Well away you go.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): The question is that the motion be agreed to. Those of that opinion will please say Aye—Hon Trevor Mallard: Mr Assistant Speaker I am calling. I called. It is a debatable motion. Wakey-wakey!The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Oh I am sorry. I call the Hon Trevor Mallard. It is one of those evenings Mr Mallard.
Foss Craig: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoss Craig: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11475. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon CRAIG FOSS (Minister of Commerce):I moveThat the Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill be reported to the House by 16 August and that the Commerce Committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 188 and 191(1)(b) and (c).
Vote: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11475. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill be now read a first time.Ayes96New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 33; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; Independent: Dunne.Noes1Independent: Horan.Abstentions21Green Party 13; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1.Bill read a first time.Billreferred to the Commerce Committee.
Macindoe Tim: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11475. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West):Tēnā koe. Tēnā koutou e te Whare. I too was moved and considered it a privilege to be in this Chamber earlier this evening for the dedication and unveiling of the three commemorative plaques. I wish to acknowledge all those who served our nation in Afghanistan Timor-Leste and recent peacekeeping missions. In particular I acknowledge the sacrifice of those who fell. They will be for ever remembered in these plaques. It is a wonderful thing that they have been unveiled in this Chamber.I thank all who have contributed to the debate on the Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill and I am pleased to offer it my support.
Robertson H V Ross: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11472. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I call the honourable member Dr David Clark. A split call.
Mitchell Mark: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Mark: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11472. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney):Could I also please just mention that it was a real honour to be a part of the commemorative service tonight for the servicemen and women of our New Zealand Defence Force and also our New Zealand Police Force for the service that they have given in Afghanistan and Timor-Leste and on missions in support of peace. Can I just acknowledge the families who were with us in this Chamber tonight and tell them that we cannot really feel or understand the pain and the suffering that you are going through but certainly I know that all my colleagues in this Chamber and New Zealand as a whole try to share and carry some of that burden with you.I would just like to speak very briefly in support of the Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill. It is another very good bill that Minister Foss has brought to the House. It makes perfect sense. It allows cinemas time to make the switch-over to digital and I know that I have spoken to the owners and operators of the two cinemas in my own electorate—in Matakana and Whangaparāoa—and obviously they are both very supportive. This is important for them in terms of their own business. I am very happy to commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11469. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National):Sat sri akaal Mr Speaker. First of all I would like to pay my tribute to the New Zealand Defence Force for its peacekeeping role around the world. Because of its sacrifices we are standing here today and debating freely in this Chamber.Talking about the Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill this bill imposes a temporary ban on the parallel importation of films for commercial purposes for 5 months from the date of the first release to the public. The ban applies only to the importing of films for commercial use and does not prevent consumers from importingfilms for their personal use. In February 2013 the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment undertook a public consultation in order to review the ban on the parallel importation of films. The ministry received submissions in support of both extending the ban and allowing the ban to lapse. In consideration of these submissions and in engagement with other parties the Government has agreed to introduce legislation to amend the Copyright Act to extend the ban which was due to expire on 31 October 2013.Before I conclude I would like to share that I am also a big fan of watching movies. I go to the theatre every month with my family to have some entertainment. In India the cheapest form of entertainment is watching films. They produce almost 1200 movies every year. So I have followed that same passion over here and I go to the theatre every month to watch movies. The cost of production is going up every day and we have to protect this industry. With these words I commend this bill to the House.
Lotu-Iiga Sam: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLotu-Iiga Sam: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11467. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie):Tēnā koe Mr Speaker and good evening to you and my fellow colleagues here. Before I talk on the Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films) Amendment Bill may I just acknowledge the service that we held tonight in this Chamber for the dedication and unveiling of commemorative plaques which are to my right in the Chamber for Afghanistan Timor-Leste and missions in support of peace; those who have given their lives so that we can stand in this Chamber and debate issues that matter to New Zealanders; and their families who are here tonight to commemorate the sacrifices of our armed forces overseas.But I will return to the bill. As has already been stated across this Chamber there is great support for this bill. I am glad that the Minister of Broadcasting is in the House to hear the deliberations and the oral submissions of members on the first reading of the bill. As has already been stated this bill imposes a temporary ban on the parallel importation of films for commercial purposes not personal use of films for 5 months from 31 October this year. Given the two 5-year periods under which the ban has already been imposed in previous legislation I think it is welcome given the consultative process that was conducted in February of this year that that period is reduced to 3 years and that the ban on importation from the first release of the films to the public has been reduced from 9 months to 5 months.It is a commendable bill and it is one that we will certainly debate rigorously in the select committee process. It provides for digital expansion and transition to occur in the next 3 or 3½ years and it is certainly to be accepted that in that period as Clare Curran and my other colleagues have stated we will see a convergence of technology such that hopefully we will not be requiring this bill after 2016. I commend this bill to the House and I thank the Minister for bringing it to this Chamber.
Young Jonathan: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYoung Jonathan: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11462. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth):I am very pleased to stand in support of the Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill. It was interesting to hear the preceding speeches as everybody talked about I guess theirhistory their memories and these sorts of things. I think that there is a very good case and cause for us to see the extension of this provision in the Copyright Act which ensures that we retain the opportunity for employment and incomes and provision of movie theatres in our communities in which many people find great enjoyment.I remember of course all those times as a kid as I am sure everybody else does as well when we enjoyed the latest and greatest movies—Tarzan The Terminator —as they came rolling through our communities. It was fantastic for kids. I remember 50c to get in and 10c for an iceblock. [Interruption ] Clare remembers the first talkies.I received correspondence from people in Taranaki who are involved in the cinema industry imploring me to speak about this to the Minister of Broadcasting and the Minister of Commerce the Hon Craig Foss and it is great to see that he has supported the concerns of people in our communities. They say for example that fewer titles will be released to cinemas if we do not extend this provision meaning fewer movie choices for customers. Holiday titles will have to release on the same dates as in the US which means they will not release during New Zealand holiday periods at their peak earning time in New Zealand. All of this will affect the earning capability of these theatres. They went on to say that they need to maximise earnings during the peak holiday periods to survive between holiday periods. It is quite a seasonal industry as we know.Also cinemas are currently facing the prospect of having to make major investment to convert to digital projection technology. If they do not invest in the new technology they will have to close and they cannot afford the deterioration of their financial viability. So this bill goes a long way to bring reassurance to these people. In consideration of these submissions and engagement with the other parties the Government has agreed to introduce legislation as we have done tonight to amend the Copyright Act to extend the ban that was due to expire on 31 October 2013. Thank you.
Carter David: Speaker’s Statements — Chamber—Commemorative PlaquesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Speaker’s Statements — Chamber—Commemorative Plaques[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11462. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: During the dinner break we have unveiled three commemorative plaques for Afghanistan Timor-Leste and missions in support of peace. These plaques acknowledge and honour our service personnel and are a reminder to us as members as we sit in this House of the magnitude of each decision to send our service personnel overseas on active operations.I will now read the names of those who have fallen during these operations. Captain Kelly Ross Banks Major Neil John McNutt Warrant Officer Class 2 Tony Michael Walser Staff Sergeant William Edward White Private Leonard William Manning Private Boyd Reagan Hēnare Atkins Private Dean Russell Johnston Lieutenant Timothy Andrew O’Donnell Private Kirifi Mila Corporal Douglas Grant Lance Corporal Leon Kristopher Smith Corporal Douglas Charles Hughes Lance Corporal Pralli Durrer Lance Corporal Rory Patrick Malone Corporal Luke Douglas Tamatea Lance Corporal Jacinda Francis Elyse Baker Private Richard Lee Harris. I thank members.
Foss Craig: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoss Craig: Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11460. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon CRAIG FOSS (Minister of Commerce):I moveThat the Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Commerce Committee to consider the bill. At the appropriate time I intend to move that the bill be reported to the House by 16 August and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting except during oral questions during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House. I acknowledge and am thankful for the support and cooperation of parties across the House in facilitating the introduction of this bill and I look forward to their continued support and I offer my cooperation as it progresses through its various stages.The Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill imposes a temporary ban on the parallel importation of films for commercial purposes for a period of 5 months from the date of the film’s first release to the public. A ban on parallel importing is necessary to enable cinemas to exclusively screen films for a limitedperiod before copies of films on formats such as DVD and Blu-ray are brought to the New Zealand market. Although many films are released in New Zealand cinemas at the same time as international releases many films are delayed for several weeks or months due to factors such as seasonality screen availability profitability assessments and competition with other films. Without a ban in place parallel-imported copies of films could potentially be sold in competition with screenings in cinemas. This could potentially affect the viability of cinemas.The bill reinstates the existing ban for a reduced period. The current 9-month ban which is due to expire on 31 October this year is now outdated as the gaps between international and New Zealand film releases have reduced considerably since the ban was first introduced. Although the ban is still necessary the ban needs to be shortened to reflect developments in film distribution and technology. A 5-month ban will continue to protect the cinemas for a limited period while enabling retailers to parallel import copies of films earlier than is currently the case. The ban will also have flow-on effects to New Zealand consumers. The ban will continue to give authorised distributors confidence to bring a wide variety of film into New Zealand.The film industry is in the middle of a large-scale makeover as cinemas across the country convert to digital technology. The conversion is well under way and is expected to be completed within the next 2 to 3 years. The ban will remain in force for 3 years to support the film industry through the conversion to digital technology. I commend this bill to the House.
Vote: Royal Succession Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Royal Succession Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11460. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the Royal Succession Bill be now read a first time.Ayes104New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 33; New Zealand First 7; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; Independents: Dunne Horan.Abstentions15Green Party 14; Mana 1.Bill read a first time.Billreferred to the Justice and Electoral Committee.
Tisch Lindsay: Royal Succession Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Royal Succession Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11460. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I am going to ask the Greens to cast a vote. The Green Party—if it would like to stand and cast its position.Hon Trevor Mallard: No everyone else has to.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Sorry a party vote has been called for. We will start the process again.
Mallard Trevor: Royal Succession Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Royal Succession Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11460. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Just to give a little bit of advice to my friends in the Greens the appropriate thing is that when the Speaker declares that the Ayes have it that is the point when you say: “Party vote called for.”Holly Walker: And that’s what I did.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: Well we did not hear it.
Tisch Lindsay: Royal Succession Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Royal Succession Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11460. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I accept that and that is why I am prepared to accept it.
Hughes Gareth: Royal Succession Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHughes Gareth: Royal Succession Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11460. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GARETH HUGHES (Musterer—Green):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Just to explain the position previously I had advice from the Clerk—and this is something that needs to be fixed up at the Standing Orders review. We are not calling a No vote but we still have to cast a vote. When the Speaker calls for those in favour to say Aye and those against to say No we cannot say No and that is the only point we can actually call a division.
Tisch Lindsay: Royal Succession Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Royal Succession Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11459. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Members this debate has concluded. The question is that the motion be agreed to. Those of that opinion will say Aye to the contrary No. The Ayes have it.Holly Walker: Party vote called for.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): When I put the vote the member must call for a party vote at the time not after we are moving on to the next piece of legislation. I do—Holly Walker: Point of order Mr Speaker.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): No I am on my feet. I do know that during the two speeches that were given by the Green Party we were told that it intended to cast a vote other than in the affirmative so I am prepared to allow it to dothat. But I am making it very clear that in the future when I put the vote that is it and we will have no exceptions. It was clearly indicated however by the two members of the Greens that they would not be supporting the bill in the affirmative.
Gilmore Aaron: Royal Succession Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGilmore Aaron: Royal Succession Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11459. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National):Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. There is eager anticipation here in New Zealand and all around the world about the imminent arrival of our Queen’s newest great-grandchild. Thanks to the provisions in this Royal Succession Bill backdated to 2011 for the first time this baby will become our monarch irrespective of its gender. This contrasts with the status quo where a first-born girl would become an heir presumptive but younger brothers could gazump their big sister upon arrival. Frankly I find it a little bit mystifying and somewhat disgraceful that any party would abstain on a measure that brings gender equality into the New Zealand law.We can be very proud of the role played by New Zealand at the vanguard of these reforms. The Prime Minister John Key was acknowledged by the British Minister of State for Justice Lord McNally as leading the discussion on modernising royal inheritance among the premiers of the Commonwealth realms. As a former vice-chair of Monarchy New Zealand I am delighted we are moving to a system that is more in tune with our modern values of everyone male or female being treated equally before the law while retaining all the advantages of a constitutional monarchy—its stability its surety and its strong sense of service to the nation. I take pleasure in commending this bill to the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Royal Succession Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Royal Succession Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11456. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I understand that the next call is a split call. I call Sue Moroney.
Shanks Katrina: Royal Succession Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShanks Katrina: Royal Succession Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11456. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KATRINA SHANKS (National):It is my pleasure to take a call on this bill the Royal Succession Bill especially after that great orator Shane Jones who was obviously filling in his 10 minutes with whatever he could think of at the time. This bill modernises the historic royal succession rules by removing aspects of both gender and religious discrimination. This is a really timely bill in terms of Kate and William expecting their first child coming up. What it will do is allow an older daughter to precede a younger son in the line of succession if that need be—obviously maybe not so much in this case. I think the timing of this bill is really nice actually.New Zealand is a country that has a proud tradition of being the first country for positive social change. We led the world in women’s suffrage. We had the first women to occupy the highest levels of Government judiciary and business. And in fact an interesting fact is that we have had a female head of State for 70 percent of the time since the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi. This bill is very timely and very relevant and I am proud to be part of the Government that is supporting this. Thank you.
Ngaro Alfred: Royal Succession Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNgaro Alfred: Royal Succession Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11454. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ALFRED NGARO (National):I rise and take a call on the Royal Succession Bill in its first reading. Its purpose is very clear and again it is heartening to hear that both New Zealand First and Labour are also supporting this going to the Justice and Electoral Committee where there will be robust debate. There are issues that do need to be discussed and talked about. This bill changes the restrictions around royal succession to make them better reflect today’s modern values while still preserving the important traditions. It is important that New Zealand’s constitutional institutions maintain their history and traditions but it is also important that these rules that govern those institutions evolve with the times.There was some conversation around the constitution and there was also from the Green member Kennedy Graham some concern about the impact of this on the other nations of the realm. In fact recently I attended a meeting for constitutional consultation where three nations of the realm the Cook Islands Niue and Tokelau did talk about this. Under this bill those countries do not have to make any legislative changes for themselves as they are under the realm of New Zealand and effectively share the same head of State. Therefore New Zealand law changes will flow through to them as well. There is also the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade leading some consultation with those territories as well.This is a bill that again has three parts to it: the abolition of precedence for younger brothers over older sisters the abolition of exclusion from succession of people who marry a Roman Catholic and the abolition of the Sovereign’s consent to and the invalidity of certain royal marriages. This bill is a good bill. We look forward to it going to select committee. There is room for conversation consultation and debate. We commend this bill to the House.
O'Connor Simon: Royal Succession Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Simon: Royal Succession Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11452. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SIMON O’CONNOR (National—Tāmaki):I rise to speak to the Royal Succession Bill. I did not think I would be quoting Voltaire but to Dr Graham can I say: “Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.” Voltaire was quite correct—there are always ways that we can improve things and I encourage the Green Party to support democracy to support good constitutionalism and to support gender equality in this Parliament.It is interesting too that we have been talked to by people over 50 years of age who have been telling us that the youth are not interested in the monarchy whereas in fact the second biggest group of supporters in New Zealand are people my age and younger. We have heard from one speaker that the 1688 Bill of Rights was a bad bill. We heard that from Andrew Little. That was legislation that allowed Parliament to actually overrule the monarchy.We have heard people talking about the Queen of England. Well there has not been a Queen of England for hundreds of years. We have heard about the Church of England in New Zealand. Well strangely enough the Church of England is a problem for the English not for the strong independent mature bold country of New Zealand which freely chooses to engage with 15 other realms to share a head of State. You would think that the likes of the Labour Party and particularly the Greens would like that idea of cooperation—that we freely share a head of State with 15 other nations which have between themselves a remarkable record of democracy. Here is an interesting fact. For about 70 percent of New Zealand’s history since the Treaty we have had a woman as head of State. That is almost unrivalled in any other place in the world.I just want to sum up my position with a quote that I think sums up the importance of this bill—the importance of this bill in constitutionalism and the importance of this bill for democracy. Excuse me that this is gender-specific but we can always substitute: “A king is a king not because he is rich and powerful not because he is a successful politician not because he belongs to a particular creed or to a national group. He is King because he is born. And in choosing to leave the selection of their head of State to this most common denominator in the world—the accident of birth—[people] implicitly proclaim their faith in human equality; their hope for the triumph of nature over political manoeuvre over social and financial interest; for the victory of the human person.”This bill comes down to the birth of a child. New Zealand’s democratic constitutional system rests on the birth of a child which this Parliament freely and democratically accepts to be our head of State a New Zealander a New Zealand head of State. I support this bill.
Ross Jami-Lee: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoss Jami-Lee: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11443. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany):I commend the Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill to the House.Bill read a second time.
Robertson H V Ross: Points of Order — Royal Succession Bill—ProcedureText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Points of Order — Royal Succession Bill—Procedure[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11443. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): All right well thinking about that I would have to take advice on that because it is another jurisdiction. I take on board what the Minister has said and I am inclined to agree with the Minister but I will seek some advice and I will come back.
Collins Judith: Points of Order — Royal Succession Bill—ProcedureText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCollins Judith: Points of Order — Royal Succession Bill—Procedure[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11443. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice):This House is not subject to the courts of Quebec in whatever form they might be. This House has full jurisdiction to hear the Royal Succession Bill and to deliberate accordingly. The member should know that. He is supposed to be a member of this Parliament. He should know that we are not subject to the laws of Quebec.
Horan Brendan: Points of Order — Royal Succession Bill—ProcedureText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHoran Brendan: Points of Order — Royal Succession Bill—Procedure[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11443. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRENDAN HORAN (Independent):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I came at the earliest possible convenience but I would like to ask for your considered ruling in the time available before the conclusion of this debate as to whether the Royal Succession Bill the next bill on the Order Paper can properly be debated today. The reason I ask this is that this legislation is subject to judicial challenge through the courts. As you know in this House we are guarded by the principle of comity the mutual respect of Parliament and the courts for each other’s jurisdictions. We work in ways to maintain this respect and I am concerned that we may be about to breach these.What is unusual about the Royal Succession Bill is that changes are required in 16 nations where the Queen is head of State. Papers were filed several weeks ago—and I am happy to provide you with a copy now—in the Superior Court of Quebec by Professors Motard and Taillon. They are two of Canada’s pre-eminent constitutional experts. The motion for declaratory judgment is set down for hearing on 18 July. Normally I would not think that proceedings half a world away would give the House reason to pause but given the unique nature of this bill and the need for concurrent changes in multiple legislatures I suspect that it would be best for this House to wait until the Quebec proceedings are resolved. For that reason I ask for your considered ruling.
Robertson H V Ross: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11441. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Thank you. I just advise members that this is a split call. I call the honourable member Clare Curran.
Mitchell Mark: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Mark: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11440. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney):It is a pleasure to take a call on the second reading of the Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill. I would like to acknowledge the Minister of Commerce Craig Foss because he brought a veryimportant bill to this House. We have all seen as a country the amount of suffering and hurt that have been caused to Kiwis and Kiwi families through the poor and sometimes criminal behaviour of company directors. So this is a very very important bill.I would like to refer to just one of the provisions in this bill. It is a provision that requires each company registered in New Zealand to have an identifiable individual who is the one point of contact in New Zealand and that this person must be a director of the company or a director of a company in a country where New Zealand has a reciprocal arrangement for the enforcement of criminal sanctions. What this means is that if you do get a company director or directors who behave poorly who behave criminally actually there is nowhere to hide. I think that this is a very very good and a very very important provision in this bill. It is my pleasure to commend this bill to the House.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11438. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National):Sat sri akaal. Thank you for the opportunity to speak on the Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill. The Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill proposes significant changes to both the Companies Act 1993 and the Limited Partnerships Act 2008 to strengthen the rules applying to the governance and registration of companies and the registrations of limited partnerships. Of course the larger aim is to protect New Zealand’s interests and ensure that it remains a trusted place to conduct business. The bill will promote investors’ confidence and participation in our capital market.The Government is introducing measures to tighten the requirements around companies’ registration and resident directors such as ensuring that for every company and limited partnership there is at least one person who lives in New Zealand who is legally responsible for the entity and administration. This resident agent will be responsible for providing the Companies Office with accurate information. In the case accurate information is not provided then the agent stands liable for breaching the record-keeping and filing requirements under the Companies Act.This bill empowers the Registrar of Companies with investigative authority in order to deal with non-compliance with the Companies Act. The bill also introduces criminal offences for directors who commit a serious breach of their duties so as to lead to risk of significant losses to the company’s creditors. Directors who commit such offences are liable for imprisonment of up to 5 years and a fine of up to $200000. The registrar will be granted enhanced investigative and removal powers to take action where there is any concern that a company or a limited partnership is not being used for a legitimate business purpose. It is not surprising that such a law is being enacted by the National Government because it believes in providing such confidence to the financial sector. I commend this bill to the House.
Robertson H V Ross: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I call the honourable member Andrew Williams.Hon Trevor Mallard: So do we.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I am pleased about that Mr Mallard.
Lotu-Iiga Sam: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLotu-Iiga Sam: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11436. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie):It is a pleasure to speak on the second reading of the Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill. I am glad that the last speaker Julie Anne Genter has stated that the Green Party is prepared to support this bill because the Green Party has become known in this country for opposing anything related to growth to jobs to opportunities and to promoting the prosperity of our families and our communities. So thank you to the Green Party for once in this House during this term supporting a bill that is promoting jobs and opportunities.What does this bill do? Well as all the other speakers have stated it requires each company registered in New Zealand to have an identifiable individual who is the point of contact in New Zealand. Transparency and accountability have been the catchcry of this Government and this bill supports the Business Growth Agenda that we have put on the table as part of our long-term plan to bring this country out of recession and put it forward in terms of prosperity and in terms of our desire to live the Kiwi life—the good Kiwi life—that we have become accustomed to. This bill also gives new powers to the Registrar of Companies to investigate and deal with non-compliance under the Companies Act. It will allow the removal of companies from the register if they provide inaccurate information or persistently fail to comply with this legislation. It really is about providing to the registrar tools to get after those companies that do not comply with the accountability and transparency provisions within this bill.This bill does not do everything. In response to some of the concerns around the transparency of companies the Companies Office has established the registries integrity and enforcement team which in the short time it has been in operation has seen the removal from the register of over 6000 companies—those that were not doing anything and those that had been covertly in operation and not transparent with their operations.The Commerce Committee received 13 written submissions and we heard eight of those submissions. In response the select committee has said companies must have a director who lives in New Zealand or who lives in and is a director of a company inNew Zealand. We have required the provision of date and place of birth information of company directors as well as requiring the name and details information of any company that ultimately controls a New Zealand company to be disclosed to the registrar. Supplementary Order Paper 249 allows the Registrar of Companies to bring about more transparency.Again I support this bill because what it does is bring more confidence and trust into the financial markets and more confidence and trust into the operations of the Registrar of Companies and it brings prosperity to this country. I support this bill.
Tisch Lindsay: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11434. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member; his time has expired. I call Julie Anne Genter.Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga: Sorry Mr Assistant Speaker.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Is this a point of order?Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga: No I am taking a call.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): No I have called Julie Anne Genter.
Carter David: UrgencyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgency[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11425. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I am satisfied with the reasons that have been given by the Hon Gerry Brownlee.
Mallard Trevor: UrgencyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Urgency[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11425. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I would just like you to confirm that as well as having a lecture on the shortness of time we have had a specific reason for the urgency for these bills.