edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Urgent Debates Declined — Light Armoured Vehicles—Report 
Urgent Debates Declined — Light Armoured Vehicles—Report 
[Volume:623;Page:18469] 
Urgent Debates Declined 
Light Armoured Vehicles—Report 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received an application under Standing Order 373 from John Carter seeking to debate the report tabled yesterday on the acquisition and introduction into service of light armoured vehicles. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility but this matter has been the subject of a number of reports and consideration over a period of time and consequently I do not consider the tabling of the report yesterday requires the immediate attention of the House. The application is accordingly declined.
Cosgrove Clayton: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Cosgrove Clayton: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7806] 
CLAYTON COSGROVE (NZ Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 I rise to support not only this bill but also one of the most honourable members in the House. Despite all the patronising flummery from the previous speaker whose political career as an electorate MP is historic there would be few mean-spirited members in this Chamber who would disagree with me that very few members would exceed the work rate of the Hon Harry Duynhoven both as a Minister and as an electorate MP. He is an honourable person who works his guts out in his electorate and has returned huge majorities—[ 
Interruption 
] I am glad the two ACT members interject. He has returned huge majorities and mandates from his people unlike a number of members Mr Sowry included who were rejected by their electorates. 
When we talk about dual standards in this House I want members to reflect on a point I made earlier today. In my view there is a huge difference between holding dual citizenship taking up a foreign passport which gives one only the rights of a citizen and on the other hand sitting in this Chamber as a member elected to the New Zealand Parliament charged with advocating for one’s constituents but at the same time holding a warrant from a foreign power—being a diplomat appointed by a foreign power charged with advocating for that foreign power. If that is not a conflict of interest I do not know what is. I ask members opposite to reflect on their colleague Richard Worth who as we know is the honorary consul for Monaco. I ask them to reflect on that. 
The people of New Plymouth will have listened to this debate as will others around New Zealand. They will reflect on the puffery and arrogance of certain members of Parliament the time wasting and the money that has been wasted today by people not putting aside politics not acknowledging an honourable member. Members on the other side talk about principle. I find it ironic that none of them has stood to defend the position of Mr Worth or to explain his position. I ask them to reflect on that. I ask them to reflect on the scorn the ill manner and the ill spirit they have poured on Mr Duynhoven for hours today. I know that certain people around this country will also reflect on that.
Hunt Jonathan: Income Tax Bill — Referral of S.O.P. 195 to Finance and Expenditure Committee 
Hunt Jonathan: Income Tax Bill — Referral of S.O.P. 195 to Finance and Expenditure Committee 
[Volume:616;Page:11775] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There is not.
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:17182] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 74 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 42 
New Zealand National 27; Green Party 8; ACT New Zealand 6; Maori Party 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Worth Richard: War Pensions Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
Worth Richard: War Pensions Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4528] 
RICHARD WORTH (NZ National—Epsom) 
: 
 Again I invite the Minister in charge of this bill the Hon George Hawkins to make some contribution to this debate instead of his continued muteness. It is scarcely satisfactory that on issues relating to war pensions he is not prepared to burden the Committee with his contribution and neither is any other member of the Government. What a tragedy it is that the Minister will not say something in support of this legislation. He should do so particularly in respect of Supplementary Order Paper 67 which is his amendment to one of the schedules that we are now talking about. He proposes a new schedule 11 which relates to the rates of veterans pensions and a new schedule 12 which relates to payments on the death of a veteran or a veteran’s spouse. The plan is to adjust the rates in line with an increase of 2.72 percent in the all groups consumer price index. It is not for me to explain those issues to the Committee and to those listening on the radio. The Minister should be on his feet talking about these issues but he will not do so.
Ryall Tony: General Debates 
Ryall Tony: General Debates 
[Volume:611;Page:8548] 
Hon TONY RYALL (NZ National—Bay of Plenty) 
: 
 I did not take a point of order during the member’s amusing speech but I would like now to seek the leave of the House to table the police report on the allegation of forgery against the Prime Minister from which I quoted during my speech. It is to the Deputy Commissioner of Police and is dated 21 June 2002. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.
Vote: Medicines (Specified Biotechnical Procedures)  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Medicines (Specified Biotechnical Procedures)  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20604] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 37 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 9; Maori Party 1. 
Clause 1 agreed to.
Pettis Jill: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Pettis Jill: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17776. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JILL PETTIS (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Maritime Security Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Maritime Security Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12209] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 49 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 71 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Robertson H V Ross: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Robertson H V Ross: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:624;Page:19557] 
5.  
H V ROSS ROBERTSON (Labour—Manukau East) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Education 
: What steps has the Government taken to improve the teaching and learning of technology in schools? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Associate Minister of Education) 
: 
 Yesterday I was very pleased to launch a new $6 million initiative to help support develop and promote outstanding examples of technology education in secondary schools. This is part of the Government’s growth and innovation technology strategy in which projects and practice identified as valuable and innovative will be helped to develop still further and then that best-practice knowledge will be shared with every school in the country. 
H V Ross Robertson 
: Can the Minister provide more detail about the key focus of this programme? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: Yes. The key focus of the new programme is enhanced professional development for technology teachers. Contributing to the professional development of staff across the education sector is a most important focus for this Government. We will spend over $67 million this year alone helping teachers and principals to further advance their skills and knowledge—a 125 percent increase in funding since 1999. We believe that is a very worthwhile investment.
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:20982] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; United Future 8. 
Noes 69 
New Zealand Labour 51; ACT New Zealand 7; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 17(3) be agreed to: 
to omit paragraph (a).
Soper Lesley: Fiordland (Te Moana o Atawhenua) Marine  Management Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Soper Lesley: Fiordland (Te Moana o Atawhenua) Marine  Management Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19897] 
LESLEY SOPER (Labour) 
: 
 I am proud to be in the House for the third reading of this important bill for my region and to hear such cross-party support for it. The bill implements a positive and sustainable local solution created using local knowledge. The Fiordland Marine Guardians to their credit have spent 8 years developing the Fiordland Marine Conservation Strategy and have achieved cross-sector support for their proposals which will ensure the preservation protection and sustainable management of Fiordland’s marine environment. This bill recognises that Fiordland is a globally unique environment with valuable marine resources and exceptional biodiversity. It is therefore worthy of special protection. 
The bill will contribute positively not only to Fiordland but also to the standing of New Zealand’s entire environmental protection and it is a credit to all those involved. All New Zealand wins from this bill.
Robertson H V Ross: Maritime Security Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Robertson H V Ross: Maritime Security Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12210] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The next vote to be taken also relates to clause 5. It is Peter Brown’s amendment to insert the words “and company security officer” in the definition of “port facility security officer”. Is that one withdrawn?
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:626;Page:21200] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I am sorry but that is not a point of order; it is a point of privilege and there is a process by which it can be pursued.
Cullen Michael: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH 
Cullen Michael: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH 
[Volume:610;Page:7874] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill that it take the bill part by part and consider any schedules as one question.
Samuels Dover: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
Samuels Dover: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:8941] 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS (Minister of State) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Tamihere John: Education (Disestablishment of Early Childhood Development Board) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Tamihere John: Education (Disestablishment of Early Childhood Development Board) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:611;Page:8564] 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE (Minister of Youth Affairs) 
: 
 I commend this bill to the House and make a number of comments as follows. We went to the last election with regard to the Review of the Centre policy. Make no mistake about it unlike the National Party we did have a policy in this area. We did campaign on it and we are starting to implement it now. What is the Review of the Centre? Put quite simply the ideological bent and drive for provider-funder splits that occurred in the 1990s is just that. We should always be looking at what is the most practical and pragmatic way to achieve an outcome—not whether it is an ideological process and be wedded to it as the National Party and the ACT party speakers are. This is a clear litmus test that differentiates us from them in terms of being business savvy—the best bang for the taxpayers’ buck with regard to getting the best possible outcome for the early childhood centres up and down this country regardless of whether they are kindergarten playcentre kohanga reo or others. 
I also wanted to note that whilst 44 percent of Maori babies still do not get into early childhood centres early childhood centres per se cannot be the panacea for that. That is an issue with regard to communities parenting etc. It is not an issue that the early childhood centres movement or the Early Childhood Development Board could have sorted. It is a very clear way of accounting and measuring participation performance; there is absolutely no doubt about that. So I am always gobsmacked when members of the National Party and ACT party get up and speak in this House and have no business case foundation in terms of cost-benefit analysis with regard to what we are doing in the Review of the Centre. We do need far more seamless delivery systems into our communities. The duplication of costs in terms of separate leaseholds separate information technology and separate human resources: all of these for what rationale and what outcome? 
I commend the bill to the House and to the select committee in this regard. I am sure that when the bill is reported back on a number of these issues a cost compliance statement and a regulatory impact statement will be there and members of United Future will be able to confirm the bill in the second reading and third reading thereafter so I commend the bill to the House.
Hartley Ann: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
Hartley Ann: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15995] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Please be seated. I just say to Mr Sowry that he is not correct but if Mr Connell wants to yield to him that is fine. I call the Hon Roger Sowry.
Business of the House 
Business of the House 
[Volume:627;Page:22028] 
Business of the House 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (ACT) 
: 
 In accordance with a decision of the Business Committee this afternoon I seek the leave of the House for the Smoke-free Environments (Exemptions) Amendment Bill to be set down as members’ order of the day No. 1 tomorrow. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member is perfectly entitled to. Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none.
Peck Mark: Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Peck Mark: Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:12572] 
MARK PECK (Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:17049] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 10 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 109 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Metiria Turei to clause 11 be agreed to: 
to omit from subclause (3) the expression “Subsection (1)”.
Yates Dianne: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Yates Dianne: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:627;Page:22133] 
DIANNE YATES (Labour—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I wish to speak on this whole matter of health and I wish to thank the Government for the $200 million that is going into Waikato Hospital and Thames Hospital to improve emergency services in those hospitals. I am very thankful that my family has benefited from that money already and so have many many other people in the Waikato and the Coromandel. I am also pleased that Helen Clark spoke recently at a Grey Power meeting in Hamilton. The local chair of Grey Power was able to say with his walking stick in his hand: “I no longer need this because I have had my hip operation.” There are 7500 people who are also pleased that they can see more clearly because they have had their cataract operations. There are people whose prescription costs are now down to $3. 
Why does Mr Smith have to scream and yell on the other side of the Chamber instead of saying thank you to the Government on behalf of all the good people in Nelson who are receiving their hip operations? I probably know more people in Nelson who have received operations than he does. 
We are very very pleased that the primary health organisations are moving outwards. We had a briefing at the Health Committee yesterday about meningococcal meningitis and how it is already apparent that immunisations are affecting health particularly in Manukau where they began and how they are having results. We are very very pleased that the Hon Annette King Minister of Health has seen fit to continue with the meningococcal immunisation programme. We heard the National Party health spokesperson whatever his name is—Dr— 
Darren Hughes 
: Brash is it? 
DIANNE YATES 
: No I do not think it is Dr Brash. 
Darren Hughes 
: Hutchison? 
DIANNE YATES 
: Yes it is Dr Hutchison and he was critical of the flu vaccination but who did we see lining up to get a flu jab? We saw Dr Hutchison himself! He made sure he got one. We are very very pleased the programme is continuing. 
Another very good aspect of the Budget is the continued ring-fencing of money for mental health. Labour ring-fenced that money and will continue to do so. We are very very pleased about that. Do we hear nurses saying how sorry they are they did not get a pay rise? No because nurses did get their pay rise and we are pleased about that. 
In the Waikato we are very very pleased about Project Energize. That research programme is looking at the health needs of children in schools. Those children get free milk and free fruit. We are carefully monitoring the rate of reduction in obesity amongst children in our schools. This project is panning out well and making a great deal of progress. We thank the district health board and the Hon Annette King for the fruit in schools initiative and the tremendous amount of progress on preventive health care for our children. Once again that is a very very good policy from the Minister of Health. I am very proud of the Government. Labour Governments always perform very well on the basic needs of society—namely health education housing and jobs. Beat that!
Vote: Minimum Wage Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Minimum Wage Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5157] 
A party vote was called for on the question That 
the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 40 
Noes 76 
Amendment not agreed to. 
New Zealand National 26; ACT New Zealand 6; United Future 8. 
Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 3 be agreed to: 
to amend new section 4(1) by omitting paragraph (b).
Cullen Michael: Customs and Excise Amendment Bill Immigration Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third Readings 
Cullen Michael: Customs and Excise Amendment Bill Immigration Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third Readings 
[Volume:618;Page:13988] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Deputy Prime Minister) 
: 
 I am delighted to rise and support the passing of these two bills. I will pick up on a couple of points the previous speaker made. He said absolutely rightly that border security has been a function of the Government for a long time and he said that people used to collect taxes on the way in and way out. He might care to think about that a bit further because these days we do not collect many taxes on the way in. The average weighted tariff is two-thirds of 1 percent in New Zealand. That is why we now have to actually charge for some of those services. 
In terms of border security the biggest increase in charges on exports is because of demands made by the United States for increased security and that is not a charge that will fall to the New Zealand Government. We might as well argue that we should pay for all the freight costs for exporters—who argue that they have to pay for the costs being imposed by the United States’ security requirements. 
What is the cost of this bill? The total cost on the export sector is $8 million a year. The Government is paying $4 million. The remaining $4 million represents .0000001 percent roughly of the total value of our exports. The Opposition just like every Opposition party says that every bit of money can be found from somewhere just like that. New Zealand First argued for a billion dollars extra on police this afternoon. Just like that! A million here a hundred million there a billion there—what does it matter? That is the Opposition’s response and that is why they are over there and we are over here and we will stay here.
Vote: Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:20952] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 53 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; United Future 8. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 6 be agreed to: 
to omit paragraph (c) from the definition of  
a breach of or interference with a specified right 
 in subclause (2).
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:615;Page:11514] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 Earlier this afternoon my colleague Ron Mark was stopped from tabling a document. During that time Mr Prebble raised an objection to comments made in respect of the judiciary. I fear that members are not having regard to Standing Order 113 which states: “A member may not use offensive words against the House or against any member of the judiciary.” and to Speaker’s ruling 31/6. There is a world of difference between saying something that is derogatory of the judiciary and saying that a judge has got it wrong has made a mistake or in fact has misdirected himself on the matters before him. I think my colleague is entitled to say what he said. That being the case his comments not being in my view—on the Speaker’s ruling and the Standing Order I cited—out of order we seek leave to table the document which is the sentencing judgment of Durie J in the Warwick Whare Reuben Kershaw case.
Peck Mark: Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) — Consideration of Report of Health Committee Procedure In Committee 
Peck Mark: Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) — Consideration of Report of Health Committee Procedure In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9523] 
MARK PECK (Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I am delighted to stand in support of this bill.
Tabling of Documents — Doha Declaration on the Family 
Tabling of Documents — Doha Declaration on the Family 
[Volume:622;Page:17667] 
Tabling of Documents 
Doha Declaration on the Family 
LARRY BALDOCK (United Future) 
: 
 I seek leave to table the Doha Declaration on the Family which was presented to the United Nations last Monday. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
LARRY BALDOCK 
: I also seek leave of the House to table the text of the New Zealand delegate’s speech on the Doha declaration presented on December 6 at the 12United Nations. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16191] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I note that the Government has started to move closure motions. We have been going now for 37 minutes or thereabouts. This is the final debate on very important legislation and it is the peroration of a number of debates during the Committee stage. It is important that we have an opportunity to express our views and a number of members on this side of the House would certainly like to do that. I bring it to your attention that we would certainly expect to have more calls than what the Government intends with its anticipated closure motions. I would ask that you give consideration to those members on this side of the House who have spoken during the Committee stage who are seeking calls now and who wish to make a contribution in this Committee stage. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I will not take any more points of order. I refer the member to Speaker’s ruling 70/1 and I will give that serious consideration.
Vote: Social Security (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Social Security (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:624;Page:19575] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 101 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 18 
Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; Maori Party 1. 
Part 1 agreed to.
Cullen Michael: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Cullen Michael: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9026] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I am really having considerable difficulty here because that is not what the Standing Order says. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Point of order— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Dr Cullen has the call. The member will come next. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I have the floor and I am trying to understand— 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Point of order— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I said Dr Cullen has the call. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Well you might have but he did not call for a point of order. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will be seated. If he makes another comment he goes. I am talking to Dr Cullen. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Point of order— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No—I am listening to Dr Cullen. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Well hang on Mr Speaker— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am listening to Dr Cullen. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: On what basis? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: On the fact that he called a point of order. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: He did not. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: He did. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Well  
Hansard 
 will not show that sir. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: 
Hansard 
 will and I say it will and the member will now be seated. Dr Cullen. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I come back to my example. If there is an amendment to each clause then whether or not the Minister desires to take her or his amendments as one that cannot be done. Standing Order 301 is simply circumvented by moving amendments to the part. Given that we are dealing with a bill part by part that is the place in the bill that we are at at this point and amendments become amendments to the part because the question is that part 1 or whatever it is stand part followed by the amendments that are made to whatever clause it may be—clause 1 clause 14 clause 17 and so on. 
 We have now managed to come up with an interpretation that renders the first sentence of Standing Order 301 in practice non-existent unless there are no other amendments to the part. That is not the way that this has been dealt with up to this point. It may well be why we have decided in the past to deal with those things at the end of each part because it makes more sense than Opposition amendments being knocked out in advance by the Minister’s amendments.
Vote: Holidays Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Holidays Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:614;Page:10556] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Motion agreed to.
Points of Order — Official Information Act Requests 
Points of Order — Official Information Act Requests 
[Volume:608;Page:5543] 
Points of Order 
Official Information Act Requests 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. As you are aware the Opposition is dependent upon accurate information to be able to carry out its role of scrutinising the executive. I want to bring to your attention the fact that on 14 March of this year the office of the Hon Trevor Mallard the Minister of Education received an application under the Official Information Act from one of our staff seeking a range of material pertaining to a specific issue existing at that time to do with private school funding. It was acknowledged— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. I am not responsible for the Official Information Act. That is the Minister’s office; no responsibility for this Parliament. 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY: 
 Speaking to the point of order— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am not really involved in this. I cannot see how it is a point of order. 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: I was going to ask whether there was any way you could assist us here but I guess the question is in terms of the processes in this House what courses of action are available other than going to the Ombudsman which uses time. So I am seeking advice. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There are no processes in this House. This is a statutory requirement.
Vote: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Vote: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5499] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 68 
Noes 47 
Motion agreed to. 
Labour 52; Green Party 8; United Future 8. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: There are five amendments in the name of the Hon Dr Nick Smith to clause 1. They are amendments to the title in subclause (1). They are all out of order as they are not serious amendments.
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8224] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 13 
New Zealand First 13. 
Noes 98 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 23; ACT New Zealand 7; Green Party 8; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 115 in the name of Pita Paraone to insert new clause 243A be agreed to.
Hartley Ann: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
Hartley Ann: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9074] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: I call Sue Kedgley.
Hunt Jonathan: Address to Her Excellency the Governor-General—Presentation 
Hunt Jonathan: Address to Her Excellency the Governor-General—Presentation 
[Volume:617;Page:13212] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before I put the respectful address I would like to give my personal thanks to all of those who have made such kind comments this afternoon. I regard this as an almost emotional day for me. It is a great experience to be here on this 150th anniversary. 
I will now read the proposed address. 
ADDRESS FROM THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
to 
Her Excellency The Honourable Dame Silvia Cartwright Chancellor and Principal Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit Dame Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire Principal Companion of The Queen’s Service Order Governor-General and Commander-in-Chief in and over New Zealand. 
YOUR EXCELLENCY— 
WE the House of Representatives respectfully convey our appreciation that Your Excellency is joining with us to celebrate the occasion of the 150th anniversary of the first sitting of our House. 
We commend to Your Excellency the contribution to the House and the affairs of the country made by members past and present and the service given by officers of the House and other parliamentary staff.We welcome the publication of the story of the House from 1854 to 2004. 
May Your Excellency be assured that the House looks forward to playing a vital role in our democracy in the years ahead. 
Address agreed to.
Prebble Richard: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
Prebble Richard: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15725] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (ACT) 
: 
 Mr Copeland should have read out the whole of that Speaker’s ruling because it goes on to state: “(2) there is no breach of the convention in referring to the fact that a member was not a member of the committee and so did not attend committee hearings when evidence was being heard.”As I understand it Mr Copeland’s main argument is that he was not a member of the committee which is exactly what Mr Brown was pointing out to the Committee. Of course Mr Brown was perfectly entitled to say that United Future members could have gone to the Business Committee and could have made themselves members of the Commerce Committee but they did not. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I thank both Mr Prebble and Mr Copeland. I tell Mr Copeland that he has no basis to his argument; Mr Prebble is quite right.
Vote: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8705] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 82 
Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 35 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12348] 
16:16:22Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that. Is there any objection? There is not.
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Presentation of Report of Privileges Committee 
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Presentation of Report of Privileges Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7638] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: This is an important issue and I want to give everyone the opportunity to contribute. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: The member is lucky I am not going to push it—he can stay.
Franks Stephen: Sex Offenders Registry Bill — First Reading 
Franks Stephen: Sex Offenders Registry Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7502] 
STEPHEN FRANKS (ACT NZ) 
: 
 I want to express the support of Deborah Coddington’s ACT colleagues for this bill. We believe she is doing what she came to Parliament to do. It is what she said she would do to achieve the changes directly that she was crusading for as a journalist—throwing sunlight into dark corners and trying to make sure that there is more sunlight in a lot more young lives. 
We are against name suppression. We believe that it shelters the well-connected that it does not contribute to upholding the law and that it does not uphold our traditions of open courts and transparent justice. Convictions are in open court. If a reporter is present at a sentencing it can be recorded and reported for ever but if the justice establishment gets away with that formal process and a conviction is not reported the system clams up thereafter to protect the guilty. There is no right to a criminal record even though every entry in it might have been delivered in open court. So ACT has reservations. We are concerned that this bill is not reopening justice it is not Megan’s Law and it does not supplant Deborah Coddington’s book. It really helps the police and law enforcement only because only officials approved by the Minister are able to have access to this register. 
Why then do we support the bill when it is so limited? Why do we run the risk of exhausting Parliament’s ration of attention to this issue? Because it is a start—it is better than where we are now and it might take New Zealand society back in a more healthy direction. It is a hesitant recognition that all of the social work all of the counselling all of the insiders’ claims of “Just leave it to us we know what we’re doing” and all of the official resources will not restore the assumption of trust that New Zealanders had in their fellow New Zealanders. Trust will not be restored until the community as a whole has active informed confidence that the entire community shares the abhorrence of crime and of this particular kind of crime. We need to tell offenders that it is not condoned. 
Those offenders nurse some very strange delusions. One paedophile whose parole application I had to think about earlier this week said that he was just expressing his affection for the 6-year-old boy he had anally violated. This register says to those offenders: “Don’t delude yourself. Society is not secretly condoning your vice by giving you secrecy. Justice will be open.” Although this bill is only a start ACT is delighted to be able to support it.
Vote: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:619;Page:14874] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 37 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Clause 1 agreed to.
Vote: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12265] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 47 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Bill read a third time.
Newman Muriel: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Newman Muriel: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:621;Page:16802] 
1.  
Dr MURIEL NEWMAN (Deputy Leader—ACT) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Social Sevices Committee 
: When is the Disabled Persons Employment Promotion (Repeal and Related Matters) Bill due to be reported back to the House and did she request that families likely to be affected by this bill give evidence? 
GEORGINA BEYER (Chairperson of the Social Services Committee) 
: 
 I am pleased to reply to the deputy chair of the Social Services Committee that the Disabled Persons Employment Promotion (Repeal and Related Matters) Bill is due to be reported back to the House by 25 November 2004 and also that the Social Services Committee advertised for submissions on the bill. Sixteen submissions were received and all of those who requested to give oral evidence on their submissions were heard by the committee. 
Dr Muriel Newman 
: What steps have been taken to ensure that the thousands of families likely to be affected by the passing of this bill—which submitters have warned will lead to the closure of sheltered workshops around the country—have been fully and appropriately consulted? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The question relating to what steps the committee has taken is in order. 
GEORGINA BEYER 
: As I said in answer to the primary question the committee advertised for submissions and set a closing date of 28 June 2004. I have mentioned that the committee received 16 submissions and heard evidence from 15 submitters. There were two meetings—on 21 October and 4 November. The 21 October meeting happened to be chaired by the deputy chair I understand and there were hearings of evidence from 15 submitters.
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates — Energy—Project Aqua Cancellation 
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates — Energy—Project Aqua Cancellation 
[Volume:616;Page:12054] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received letters from Gordon Copeland Jeanette Fitzsimons and the Hon Ken Shirley seeking to debate under Standing Order 373 the decision by Meridian Energy that it will not proceed with its planned Project Aqua development. This is a particular case of recent occurrence and it involves ministerial responsibility. Given the significance of the decision I consider that it requires the immediate attention of the House. I therefore give priority to the first application I received that of Gordon Copeland. I call upon him to move the motion.
Peters Winston: Points of Order — Donna Awatere Huata 
Peters Winston: Points of Order — Donna Awatere Huata 
[Volume:606;Page:3257] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You have mentioned the position in respect of the ACT party in this House. I would be curious to know whether we have a chance to reflect upon what you have said and to revisit it with you. It is a simple matter. This is the first day of the House’s sitting. You have given a ruling—or it sounds like a ruling—from the very start. There was a part of it that from my own experience I personally could not agree with. We would therefore like to raise the matter with you at another time—and would like to know whether it is still open for that to happen.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am quite happy for members to reflect on anything I say and for them to come and see me at any time about anything I have said.
Kedgley Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question No. 3 to Minister 
Kedgley Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question No. 3 to Minister 
[Volume:617;Page:13311] 
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
: 
 I seek leave to table two documents in relation to question No. 3 which I forgot to do at the time. The first is a document from Pharmac in which it expresses its severe reservations about the joint agency proposal. 
Documents by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Kedgley Sue: Points of Order — Standing Order 38—Minister Not Present Parliament Buildings—Media Access Standing Order 38—Minister Not Present  
Kedgley Sue: Points of Order — Standing Order 38—Minister Not Present Parliament Buildings—Media Access Standing Order 38—Minister Not Present  
[Volume:624;Page:19681] 
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
: 
 Now that the Minister has confirmed that he did use a mechanism available to him to close down the House last night which precluded the completion of debate on my bill and other issues on the Order Paper it would be helpful Madam Speaker if you were able to give us a ruling as to under what circumstances you would consider it acceptable for a Minister to use that mechanism to close down the House and under what circumstances you would consider it unacceptable for a Minister to use such a mechanism. I think that that would be very helpful.
Vote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
Vote: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16469] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Motion agreed to.
Jones Dail: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations  and State Enterprises — In Committee 
Jones Dail: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations  and State Enterprises — In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:21302] 
DAIL JONES (Junior Whip—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. Can I just clarify something? I take it this is a fixed 3-hour debate so if we have pointless votes we are cutting into our own speaking time. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Yes that is exactly right. 
DAIL JONES 
: And that last vote was called by the National Party? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Yes. 
Reports noted.
Gallagher Martin: Corrections Bill — First Reading 
Gallagher Martin: Corrections Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4701] 
MARTIN GALLAGHER (NZ Labour—Hamilton West) 
: 
 One thinks that whenever the volume gets turned up on the Opposition benches as per the recent performances then things truly are happening up on the third floor in the Leader of the Opposition’s office. As we read in the media no doubt the numbers are running. I sense that the loud voices down here are concealing the huge disquiet upstairs. 
In the brief time I have I will just repeat what this bill is about. The purpose of the bill is to provide a new legal framework for the corrections system. The current legislation the Penal Institutions Act was passed in 1954. I was 2 years old when that bill was enacted and I think it is probably time for a review and a bringing up to date. This is an outdated piece of legislation—it must be if it is from 1954 nearly 50 years ago—and it no longer suits the needs and sizes of prisons in 2003. 
The other important point which is my contribution to this debate is that the law governing the administration of the corrections system needs to be compatible with the recently enacted Sentencing Act the Parole Act and Victims’ Rights Act. On the basis that this bill will go to the Law and Order Committee it will give us great pleasure to deal with it in a sane and rational manner without some of the histrionics we have just heard. I look forward to this bill being referred to the committee.
Cullen Michael: Appropriation (2002/03 Financial Review) Bill — First Reading 
Cullen Michael: Appropriation (2002/03 Financial Review) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10507] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Appropriation (2002/03 Financial Review) Bill be now read a first time. 
Bill read a first time.