edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Gosche Mark: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Gosche Mark: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:697] 
11.  
Hon MARK GOSCHE (Labour—Maungakiekie) 
 to the  
Minister for Sport and Recreation 
: What changes have been made in Government support for elite athletes? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister for Sport and Recreation) 
: 
 Heaps. Investment in high performance sport has grown to $30 million in 2005-06. Athletes have benefited significantly from the introduction of Prime Minister’s Sports Scholarships with around 500 athletes receiving support during their tertiary education whilst training and competing. Three hundred athletes received performance enhancement grants to offset the costs of being an elite athlete. There has been considerable support to coaches. Unfortunately for the member’s interest that has not quite got us to the point of having the Warriors win frequently. 
Hon Mark Gosche 
: I am very sad about the last part of the Minister’s answer but what evidence has the Minister seen that these changes have made a difference? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The results of New Zealand athletes and teams at pinnacle events are steadily improving. We won 36 medals at world championship events in 2004-05. We have world champions in canoeing rowing softball netball cycling triathlon bowls mountain running and mountain biking. 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: How are we going in tennis? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: We placed 24th out of 202 nations at the 2004 Olympics and there has been a significant improvement on the 2000 Olympics when we placed 45th. I am afraid that I cannot be responsible for all sports although I understand that tennis is having quite an administrative review at the moment. As far as swimming and a number of other sports are concerned when they got their administration right they started winning. I recommend to the National Party that if it gets its administration right it might then win too. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: Are elite successful waka ama athletes who achieve international rankings funded to the same extent that other successful rowers achieve; if not why not? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: No because they are not part of the group of internationally recognised sports in the way that rowing is. I know there has been quite a lot of work especially by Dallas Seymour from Sport and Recreation New Zealand with people involved in the events but they do not have the same level of recognition as probably hundreds of other sports that are not true international sports.
Hereora Dave: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hereora Dave: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:695] 
9.  
DAVE HEREORA (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Research Science and Technology 
: What has the Government done to support the development of the biotechnology sector? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Research Science and Technology) 
: 
 The Government has a comprehensive programme to support biotechnology covering research commercialisation and the encouragement of investment. This includes spending $175 million each year on biotechnology research seed funds to support early-stage biotech companies a dedicated biotechnology investment fund to invest in New Zealand companies $12 million to fund commercial projects with Australia and support for two biotechnology incubators one in Waikato and one in the Manawatu. 
Dave Hereora 
: What has the Government done to ensure that New Zealanders are engaged with research in the biotechnology sector? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The Government has a number of innovative community engagement projects which include a website featuring examples of biotech for use in classrooms research programmes on ways to involve the public in decision making about new biotechnologies a network of experts to help the Government prepare for future biotech developments and the recent Talking Biotechnology conference which was a huge success. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: Can the Minister explain precisely why Nigel Kirkpatrick the former chief executive officer of Industrial Research Ltd resigned—or was pushed to resign—after he had been a consistently strong advocate for what has been described as one of New Zealand’s most promising biotechnology projects? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I am sure Industrial Research Ltd will thank the member for his endorsement of the company but Nigel Kirkpatrick was employed by the board of Industrial Research Ltd and his employment arrangements are a matter for the board not for me as the Minister for Crown Research Institutes. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I asked an absolutely clear question which the Minister ducked as to why Nigel Kirkpatrick had resigned. He has avoided the question. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No. The Minister very clearly in this case did address the question in terms of his authority. 
Dave Hereora 
: Has the Minister seen any reports on the value of the contribution biotechnology makes to our country? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Yes I just happen to. A recent study commissioned by the Ministry of Research Science and Technology has shown that four biotechnologies used in New Zealand primary sectors contribute between $300 million and $400 million each year to those sectors alone. With the recent biotech investments that the Government has made which I outlined earlier in my reply we expect that amount of money to rise significantly in the future.
Bradford Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Bradford Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:693] 
7.  
SUE BRADFORD (Green) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What advice will the Government as majority shareholder in Air New Zealand seek on proposals from the Engineering Printing and Manufacturing Union regarding Air New Zealand’s engineering capacity which are due to be presented today? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I have been advised by the Engineering Printing and Manufacturing Union of its proposals. I would expect the board to advise me of its response. As a general matter of good employment relations policy I would also expect and am confident that the proposals will be considered seriously. 
Sue Bradford 
: Has the Minister in light of the potential impact on shareholder value considered seeking independent advice from outside Air New Zealand on this proposal or is the New Zealand Government shareholding simply a rubber stamp? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: No and no. 
Sue Bradford 
: When the Minister said in response to a question from Peter Brown the other week: “The fact that the Government is a majority shareholder … is a strong reason for not intervening in a case such as this” did he mean to say that when this Government has financial control over a company it should not exercise this control to benefit New Zealand’s workers? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The Government as a majority shareholder has to be particularly careful it does not intervene in a way that might affect the interests of minority shareholders. 
Peter Brown 
: Does the Minister accept that his answer to the principal question was somewhat vague where he “expects” and he “hopes” the engineers’ proposal will be given fair consideration; can he not use his legitimate influence to assure this House that the engineers’ proposal will be given fair and meaningful consideration by Air New Zealand? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: No. What I can say is I would expect it will be given serious consideration. 
Sue Bradford 
: Will the Minister ask Treasury and the Ministry of Economic Development to compare Air New Zealand’s proposals with those from the Engineering Printing and Manufacturing Union from a national interest so they might help the Government decide in a positive light about the union’s suggestions? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: No because this is a decision the board must take not the shareholders. In the end of course the board is accountable to shareholders for its custodianship of the company. 
Peter Brown 
: Does the Minister accept that the majority of voters who supported the Labour Party at the last election would at the very least expect him to use his legitimate influence to ensure that the engineers’ proposal is given full and fair meaningful consideration rather than just expect it would? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I have stated the shareholders’ expectation in my answer today. That is actually quite a strong statement.
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:685] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I thank the member for his comment and his reminder.
Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:685] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Whenever Government Ministers get into difficulty they have a habit of breaking a longstanding practice of this House and that is not to bring members’ families into the debate. In the course of the questioning of the Minister of Education about a quite proper public issue the marking of exams the previous Minister of Education responsible Mr Trevor Mallard chose to bring members of Mr English’s family into the debate. I think we need to rely on you Madam Speaker to ensure that the House is not dragged down into that territory.
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:685] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Does that member wish to stay in the House or not? All members know that during question time there is to be no chipping across the Chamber when questions are being asked. It came from all sides. We will start again but that is the final warning.
Pettis Jill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Pettis Jill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:685] 
JILL PETTIS (Labour) 
: 
 My question is to the—[ 
Interruption 
]
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:628;Page:681] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Of course if we finish this business by 1 o’clock on Wednesday we will have question times on both Wednesday and Thursday. If we finish by 1 o’clock on Thursday we will certainly have question time on Thursday—an ordinary Thursday sitting. Of course I am always open to further discussions.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:628;Page:681] 
Business Statement 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week the House will go into urgency and the likely business to be included in this motion is the remaining stages of the Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill the Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Approvals and Enforcement) Amendment Bill the Veterinarians Bill and any first readings of bills on the Order Paper. At the conclusion of that of course it is anticipated that if the business runs past 2 o’clock on Thursday the House will rise for the Christmas adjournment. 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 Noting that Dr Cullen expects the House to rise soon after 2 o’clock next Thursday I ask whether he can tell us what in his urgency motion is so pressing that he has to deny the Opposition the opportunity to have question time on 2 days next week. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Of course if we finish this business by 1 o’clock on Wednesday we will have question times on both Wednesday and Thursday. If we finish by 1 o’clock on Thursday we will certainly have question time on Thursday—an ordinary Thursday sitting. Of course I am always open to further discussions.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:628;Page:681] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 Noting that Dr Cullen expects the House to rise soon after 2 o’clock next Thursday I ask whether he can tell us what in his urgency motion is so pressing that he has to deny the Opposition the opportunity to have question time on 2 days next week.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:628;Page:681] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week the House will go into urgency and the likely business to be included in this motion is the remaining stages of the Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill the Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Approvals and Enforcement) Amendment Bill the Veterinarians Bill and any first readings of bills on the Order Paper. At the conclusion of that of course it is anticipated that if the business runs past 2 o’clock on Thursday the House will rise for the Christmas adjournment.
Cullen Michael: Address in Reply—Presentation to Governor-GENERAL 
Cullen Michael: Address in Reply—Presentation to Governor-GENERAL 
[Volume:628;Page:681] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That Her Excellency’s reply be entered in the  
Journals of the House. 
Motion agreed to.
Wilson Margaret: Address in Reply—Presentation to Governor-GENERAL 
Wilson Margaret: Address in Reply—Presentation to Governor-GENERAL 
[Volume:628;Page:681] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have to announce that accompanied by members I attended upon Her Excellency the Governor-General with the Address agreed to by the House in reply to the speech at the opening of this Parliament. Her Excellency was pleased to make the following reply: 
MADAM SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: 
I receive with much pleasure the Address which has been adopted by the House of Representatives in reply to my speech at the opening of the First Session of the Forty-Eighth Parliament of New Zealand.I thank you for your assurance that the matters referred to in my speech will receive your careful consideration. 
Silvia Cartwright Governor-General.
Address in Reply—Presentation to Governor-GENERAL 
Address in Reply—Presentation to Governor-GENERAL 
[Volume:628;Page:681] 
Thursday 8 December 2005 
Madam Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Address in Reply—Presentation to Governor-GENERAL 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have to announce that accompanied by members I attended upon Her Excellency the Governor-General with the Address agreed to by the House in reply to the speech at the opening of this Parliament. Her Excellency was pleased to make the following reply: 
MADAM SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: 
I receive with much pleasure the Address which has been adopted by the House of Representatives in reply to my speech at the opening of the First Session of the Forty-Eighth Parliament of New Zealand.I thank you for your assurance that the matters referred to in my speech will receive your careful consideration. 
Silvia Cartwright Governor-General. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That Her Excellency’s reply be entered in the  
Journals of the House. 
Motion agreed to.
Guy Nathan: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Approvals and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Guy Nathan: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Approvals and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:628;Page:815] 
NATHAN GUY (National) 
: 
 It is interesting that Mr Donnelly talked about the legislation being as dry as Ayers Rock because I had a look at it and thought the same thing. The previous Minister for the Environment Marian Hobbs talked about a few things that I thought were interesting to do with the whole administration of the legislation by regional councils. I fear that it will just impose another compliance cost that will be a burden on the ratepayer like so many other things passed through this House. This bill is complex legislation that we need some time to digest. I would personally favour amending the whole Act but I heard Mr Donnelly say that that might be quite a task. In speaking to this legislation I am following on from my learned colleagues Dr Hutchison and Dr Nick Smith who have added a lot of value to the discussion here tonight. I agree with a comment made by Dr Smith that we have to work more closely with Australia to get this legislation through across the Tasman. It is also worth noting as Dr Hutchison mentioned and as you would know Madam Assistant Speaker from my farming background that this legislation— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the member but the time has come for me to leave the Chair.
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates of income Tax 2005-06) Bill Taxation (Urgent Measures) Bill Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates of income Tax 2005-06) Bill Taxation (Urgent Measures) Bill Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:628;Page:809] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Taxation (Annual Rates of Income Tax 2005-06) Bill the Taxation (Urgent Measures) Bill and the Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill be now read a third time.  
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 2. 
Bills read a third time.
Peters Winston: Taxation (Annual Rates of income Tax 2005-06) Bill Taxation (Urgent Measures) Bill Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Peters Winston: Taxation (Annual Rates of income Tax 2005-06) Bill Taxation (Urgent Measures) Bill Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:628;Page:809] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Minister of Foreign Affairs) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I move that we have an extension of time. I have just received a call from an old constituent whose Mogadon is not working and she reckons that 10 more minutes of such a speech would be perfect. So I move that we have an extension of time. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: The member can only seek leave. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: I seek leave on behalf of an elderly constituent who rang me to say that her Mogadon is not working for an extension of time. She tells me that 10 more minutes should just about do it. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: The member knows that he can seek leave only for himself.
Peters Winston: Taxation (Annual Rates of income Tax 2005-06) Bill Taxation (Urgent Measures) Bill Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Peters Winston: Taxation (Annual Rates of income Tax 2005-06) Bill Taxation (Urgent Measures) Bill Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:628;Page:804] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Minister of Foreign Affairs) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. If you think we are being unreasonable I want to make this point of order very clear because one would not normally stop a member of Parliament from giving a personal explanation. I want to make this one point: if he came down here with his return of electoral expenses we would know who was telling the truth. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: That is not a point of order. An explanation is not sought. Leave has been denied. That is the end of the matter.
Hide Rodney: Taxation (Annual Rates of income Tax 2005-06) Bill Taxation (Urgent Measures) Bill Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Hide Rodney: Taxation (Annual Rates of income Tax 2005-06) Bill Taxation (Urgent Measures) Bill Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:628;Page:804] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: Mr Hide I have ruled on the matter. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Yes I know. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: Is this a new point of order? 
RODNEY HIDE 
: : Yes. I seek the leave of the House under Standing Order 350 to make a personal explanation. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: Leave is sought for the member to make a personal explanation—[ 
Interruption 
] 
RODNEY HIDE 
: It is about the allegations Mr Peters made about spending in Epsom. [ 
Interruption 
] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: The member is on his feet with a point of order. Would the member please clarify again what he is seeking leave for. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Yes. I want to make a personal explanation—[ 
Interruption 
] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: That member knows that while a point of order is being heard there will be silence. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: What’s it about? 
RODNEY HIDE 
: If Mr Peters would shut up for 2 minutes I would tell him. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: This is the final warning. When a member is on his feet with a point of order he has the right to be heard. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Let me make this very plain. Mr Peters through his speech and he has done it before made allegations about my breaking the electoral law and in fact committing corrupt practice—about overspending on my campaign in Epsom. I would like to use the opportunity in this House under Standing Order 350 to make a personal explanation to rebut those allegations. That is what I am seeking leave to do. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: The member has sought leave to make a personal explanation as he has outlined. Is there any objection? There is.
Hide Rodney: Taxation (Annual Rates of income Tax 2005-06) Bill Taxation (Urgent Measures) Bill Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Hide Rodney: Taxation (Annual Rates of income Tax 2005-06) Bill Taxation (Urgent Measures) Bill Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:628;Page:803] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 In the interests of consistency of ruling it is very flattering to have the new Minister of Foreign Affairs spend his 10-minute third reading speech on the member for Epsom. People of Epsom appreciate the attention. Mr Peters spoke for only 33 seconds on the legislation. When I was responding to the honourable Doug Woolerton you were on your feet to pull me back—quite rightly—but how come Mr Peters could stand up and I think members in the House will support me and speak for over 9 minutes on nothing to do with the legislation whatsoever. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: The member was brought back to the topic on a couple of occasions. Certainly he had a wide-ranging speech and introduced matter from the legislation into his speech.
Hide Rodney: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 7 to Minister 
Hide Rodney: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 7 to Minister 
[Volume:628;Page:791] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. We had the same issue last week and it is about correcting an answer at the earliest possible opportunity. I am just interested as to how the Minister came to realise at this particular point that he had misheard the question. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I say to the member that as Speaker I do not know when people first have the information available to them. The member is an honourable member. He has indicated to the House that he has taken the first available opportunity to inform the House of that and he has done so.
Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 7 to Minister 
Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 7 to Minister 
[Volume:628;Page:791] 
Amended Answers to Oral Questions 
Question No. 7 to Minister 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 I seek leave to correct an answer I gave to a supplementary question in the House today. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There appears to be none. 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: Today in question time I misunderstood a question from Ms Collins when she asked: “Has the Minister since spoken to or briefed in advance the Prime Minister or any caucus colleagues about the handling of the police report …” etc. I can confirm that I had not spoken to or briefed the Prime Minister in advance of the release of the police files but I have spoken to the Prime Minister since their release. 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. We had the same issue last week and it is about correcting an answer at the earliest possible opportunity. I am just interested as to how the Minister came to realise at this particular point that he had misheard the question. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I say to the member that as Speaker I do not know when people first have the information available to them. The member is an honourable member. He has indicated to the House that he has taken the first available opportunity to inform the House of that and he has done so.
Benson-Pope David: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 7 to Minister 
Benson-Pope David: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 7 to Minister 
[Volume:628;Page:791] 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 I seek leave to correct an answer I gave to a supplementary question in the House today. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There appears to be none. 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: Today in question time I misunderstood a question from Ms Collins when she asked: “Has the Minister since spoken to or briefed in advance the Prime Minister or any caucus colleagues about the handling of the police report …” etc. I can confirm that I had not spoken to or briefed the Prime Minister in advance of the release of the police files but I have spoken to the Prime Minister since their release.
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:786] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 2. 
Motion agreed to.
Cullen Michael: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Cullen Michael: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:786] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Committee divide the bill into the Taxation (Annual Rates of Income Tax 2005-06) Bill the Taxation (Urgent Measures) Bill and the Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill  
divided into Taxation (Annual Rates of Income Tax 2005-06) Bill Taxation (Urgent Measures) Bill Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill 
 pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper 6 
.
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:786] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 2 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 2. 
Clause 2 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:786] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 2. 
Clause 1 agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 7 in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen to clause 2 be agreed to.
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:786] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put.  
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 2. 
Motion agreed to.
Barnett Tim: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Barnett Tim: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:786] 
TIM BARNETT (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Yates Dianne: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Yates Dianne: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:784] 
DIANNE YATES (Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
King Colin: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
King Colin: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:780] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 Like my Hawke’s Bay colleague and being from Marlborough myself as the member for Kaikoura may I thank those who worked long and hard. We must not forget about our sauvignon blanc which of course is a very fresh beautiful lemony-tasting wine that is very enjoyable and I have great pleasure in referring to that. We should bear in mind that at the moment in Australia there is still a lot of pressure upon the wine industry; a lot of vines are being pulled out and there will be ongoing pressure; so I say in congratulating the committees and the Government that have worked hard on this legislation that it will be appreciated by the winegrowers in Marlborough. However we should not forget that we must keep scanning the horizons for any Government that does try to impose embargoes and obstructions to the importation of our products. So I am also very pleased on behalf of all the winegrowers in Marlborough Hawke’s Bay and elsewhere in New Zealand to say “thank you” for this and we will be supporting this legislation when it comes to the vote. 
Part 4 agreed to.
Foss Craig: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Foss Craig: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:780] 
CRAIG FOSS (National—Tukituki) 
: 
 I will take a short call to pick up on Minister Cullen’s point. I also extend my congratulations to all members supporting this part of the bill and also members of the Finance and Expenditure Committee who saw the absolute common-sense of pushing and assisting this part of the bill in the best way possible. Congratulations must also go to the New Zealand Grape Growers Council which lobbied very hard very quickly and went straight to the top and managed to make some material change to a proposal from Australia that would essentially have seen many New Zealand wine producers actually go out of business. 
But the interesting point to note as I pointed out earlier is that so many of those New Zealand producers are already partially or majority owned by Australian winemakers anyway. So there is a bit of a circular argument going on here. It is great for wine growing in New Zealand. It is great for my province the glorious Hawke’s Bay. I thank everyone who is supporting this part of the bill and I fully endorse our support of it. 
One more quick point though: as I referenced before I am constantly concerned about the Australianisation of New Zealand—of many things New Zealand be it food safety be it banking regulation or be it tax law such as this and I do wonder whether we are taking on board some Australian tax laws and tax policy etc. I note that Mr Howard recently pointed out that Australians will be enjoying the benefits of tax cuts forthcoming so I look forward to New Zealand adopting some of those parts of Australian fiscal policy as well. 
As I said it was only a quick call and congratulations to those assisting with this part of the bill.
Cullen Michael: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Cullen Michael: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:779] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 All of this part relates to the wine equalisation tax issue. I just want to repeat again my earlier thanks to all parties—and all members of the House individually indeed—for allowing by leave these matters to be inserted in the bill because it is of course controversial in its other parts. I think we can take some pride in the fact we can actually work sensibly recognising that it is very important to get this particular part of the bill through in order that our wine producers are not penalised by the wine equalisation tax that the Australians introduced in their Budget.
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:779] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 3 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand Labour 50; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand National 48; New Zealand First 7; ACT New Zealand 2. 
Part 3 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:778] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 2. 
Amendments agreed to.
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:778] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 2. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 7 in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen to Part 3 be agreed to.
O'Connor Damien: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
O'Connor Damien: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:778] 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
King Colin: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
King Colin: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:778] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 I commend the members of my caucus around me who have spoken so wisely and fully about the bribe of the election loan. I also take the opportunity to point out to members opposite that I do not recognise too many of them as being representative of the people I come from—that is the people who roll up their sleeves take their towel to work and earn a living having made a decision to back themselves when it comes to earning a living. From that point of view I take this opportunity to say quite frankly that the university of life is where we get our best value. This interest-free loan stuff devalues the workplace as a learning place. What I am increasingly hearing from employers is that we are breeding a generation of people who are not aware of what a full day’s work is. 
My view is exactly as other National Party members have said—that the cost of a tertiary education is an investment in a person’s future income potential. That makes sense to me and to an enormous number of New Zealanders. On that basis it appals me and I find it quite repugnant to see policy being pushed through—solely for the purpose of winning an election—that disenfranchises the majority of New Zealanders. I endorse and highly value education but what I see here is a very warm fuzzy policy that denies what New Zealand was in the past and what it should be in the future. Courage and enterprise are what made New Zealand great. 
I am concerned that as Dr Cullen steps forward into the tertiary education scene to ensure that we have value and high-quality education he actually spawns through free student loans another wave of people becoming students. I am totally opposed to this policy. Quite frankly the best means to address this issue was tax relief. If former students had had that money left in their pockets they could have shown a bit of prudence and paid their loans off sooner.
Gosche Mark: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Gosche Mark: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:778] 
Hon MARK GOSCHE (Labour—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Blumsky Mark: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Blumsky Mark: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:776] 
MARK BLUMSKY (National) 
: 
 It is wonderful is it not that so many Kiwis start up small businesses and luckily stay in them because they become the lifeblood of New Zealand. People start on the road to building their futures as a part of the university of life—the “university of small business’’ trying to make some money. A guy for example goes to a bank and says he is about to start a small business and he asks for a loan. The bank manager says: “Of course you can have a loan. I need your house. I’d like your house as collateral for the loan.” Well ouch that hurts but nevertheless the man says: “OK that’s fine. But if I’m giving you my house Mr Bank Manager can I please have that loan interest-free?”. The bank manager says: “You’ve got to be joking! Do you think I’m stupid? That is totally irresponsible because that is not the way the big world operates. There is no such thing as free money Mr Small-businessman because you’ll go broke.” 
So let us look at Part 3 of this bill. What signals are we sending these students about the way the big wide world operates? Dr Cullen wants to give students in New Zealand free money. There is no such thing as free money. Students need to learn that they do not get it easy in the big wide world. They will not get things like interest-free loans. Dr Cullen is misguided on this one. We can help these students by letting them learn the real lessons of life. Dr Cullen should tell students that if they want to pay their loans off they should go and get a part-time job and he should change the tax levels on the money they will earn in that part-time job. He should make it so that they are not paying secondary tax of 33 percent. Let us have a rate of 19 percent as John Key indicated quite recently. 
Why I ask the Minister do we not teach students that there is no such thing as free money and that there is in fact a big upside to life if they do in fact pull their finger if they have aspiration and ambition? It is not fair I say to Dr Cullen that a very large section of our community a group called small-business owners is getting whacked around the head by his tax burden by his compliance costs and by high interest charges when it is those people those small-business owners who pay him the very high taxes he will then give away to another group called students who will receive a very unfair privilege from his very big-spending Government in the form of an interest-free loan. 
I want to know what the Minister will say to those small-business owners who go to the “university of small business” trying to make some money. What will he say about Part 3 when he goes to those small businesses and says: “I’ve given free money to students but you will have to continue to pay those very very high taxes.”? Those small businesses are the lifeblood of New Zealand but Dr Cullen will cripple them in order to give students free money.
English Bill: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
English Bill: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:768] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (National—Clutha-Southland) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Does that mean we will pass another question when we have debated Part 3 in order to pass the rest of those amendments? 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: It does and it will relate purely to Part 3.
Smith Lockwood: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Smith Lockwood: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:768] 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I thought I did hear your question but I do not recollect hearing you say those parts of Supplementary Order Paper 7 relating to Part 2. But I may have misheard. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: No you did not mishear. That is standard practice as to how it is actually done.
Smith Lockwood: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Smith Lockwood: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:767] 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. My point of order was to ask whether we had passed all of Supplementary Order Paper 7. I may have misheard; I thought it was the whole of Supplementary Order Paper 7 that we voted on just then. Most of the changes proposed by that Supplementary Order Paper concern Part 3 which we have not yet debated. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: My understanding Dr Smith is that we have actually passed only those amendments related to Part 2. Because Part 2 was the main part being debated the amendments voted on related to Part 2.
Smith Lockwood: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Smith Lockwood: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:767] 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Could I seek your clarification as to where the Committee has got to because as I heard your call—and I may have heard it incorrectly—Supplementary Order Paper 7 was just passed as part of Part 2 but according to the explanatory note most of the changes proposed by that Supplementary Order Paper concern Part 3. So I wonder whether your question concerned those parts of it relating to Part 2 or whether it concerned the entire Supplementary Order Paper 7. Forgive me if I misheard you but much of that Supplementary Order Paper appears according to the paper itself to relate to Part 3. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: As I understand it Dr Smith the Minister’s amendments on the Supplementary Order Paper apply to clause 4B of Part 2. In terms of Part 3 the Supplementary Order Paper applies to clause 12.
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:767] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 2. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:767] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 2. 
Amendments agreed to.
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:767] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; Maori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 2. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 7 in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen to Part 2 be agreed to.
Hughes Darren: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Hughes Darren: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:766] 
DARREN HUGHES (Junior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Fenton Darien: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Fenton Darien: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:765] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Bennett David: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Bennett David: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:763] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 That was a very impressive speech from Lockwood Smith our member from Rodney who gave a very impressive outline. It was followed by a speech from a member of New Zealand First who just came in behind saying the Government spiel. It was quite interesting to see what New Zealand First was like during the campaign. It was quite a different story. Now that it is in Government it is backing Labour to the hilt. I say to Doug Woolerton that it is amazing how things have changed. 
I think taxation is the key thing because that was Dr Cullen’s biggest weakness during the election campaign. National was given a chance thanks to Dr Cullen’s Budget which just did not deliver on taxation. Everybody in the country had built up expectations that there would be tax cuts and they did not come. People out there wanted tax cuts. 
This policy sends three signals to people. First it sends the signal that for people on things like the unemployment benefit there is not much incentive to go to work. Secondly the policy shows that if people are on the Working for Families package there is no incentive to do overtime or anything like that because they will lose some of their hard-earned money. Thirdly the policy means that people will be reluctant to take promotions and pay rises and reluctant to get that education and do that training in order to get better incomes and jobs. Those are the wrong signals but they are the signals that this Government intends to send to hard-working New Zealanders through this legislation. 
So National members cannot support this bill. It sends the wrong signals and provides the wrong incentives to hard-working New Zealanders.
Woolerton R Doug: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Woolerton R Doug: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:762] 
R DOUG WOOLERTON (NZ First) 
: 
 Dr Lockwood Smith goes on about this topic ad nauseam in the Finance and Expenditure Committee. If a householder had tuned into the radio while Dr Smith was giving his speech he or she may well have wondered what was happening in the world and may be seeking out Dr Cullen and wanting to put him in jail for stealing money from families. But in fact if any rational person chose to check the situation out that person would find out that this has always been the case and that at the margins these sorts of things always happen in a taxation system because there has to be a cut-off point. At that cut-off point at the margin there is always a problem of this nature. Dr Lockwood Smith knows that but he does not tell people that. In saner moments in the Finance and Expenditure Committee he acknowledges that and furthermore he acknowledges that he does not know what to do about it either as I am sure people would realise. 
The fact of the matter is that New Zealand First supports this part of the bill. The next question is why we support it. We do so because it helps people at the lower end of the economic tier. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: How does paying 101.2 percent in tax help people? 
R DOUG WOOLERTON 
: It does help people. Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith knows that and he chooses not to say that which is not a good thing for him to do. There may be a technical issue but the question is whether the measure helps lower-income people. Yes it does. Would we prefer to see these things have some universality or should they be targeted? Of course everyone would love these things to have universality but they cannot. They must be targeted and that is where this problem comes in. 
We have a clash of ideologies here. To argue ad infinitum that this measure hurts families and that that is something that should not be gone into is simply not sustainable and I do not think the National Party should perpetuate that myth.