edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Adams Amy: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Adams Amy: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:6012] 
AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Burns Brendon: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Burns Brendon: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:6010] 
BRENDON BURNS (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 I am very pleased to speak on Part 2. I particularly want to focus on the move through this bill to make clear some of the issues around relocation and overtime meal allowances. This is quite a vexed issue and it has been a concern to many people in the trade union movement for quite some considerable time. As I understand it about 15 years ago changes were made to the tax treatment of allowances. In the past the commissioner had been required to determine whether an allowance was taxable or exempt. That requirement was taken away and instead the onus was put back on the taxpayer to determine whether the allowance was taxable or exempt. Also the test changed from whether the expenditure was incurred as a necessary part of the employee earning his or her income to one based on whether the expenditure would have been deductible by the employee were it not for the prohibition in the Income Tax Act whereby employees cannot claim expenses in relation to their employment. I think the way these things have been tackled is somewhat Kafkaesque in its logic. 
In essence I was pleased that the committee was able to clarify at least two areas. In respect of relocation expenses where an employee is required due to the nature of the change of his or her employment to move town or even move across a city the employee is able to claim and able to deduct some expenses in relation to the extra costs that are incurred and also in relation to overtime meal allowances. For an employee who is in the situation where overtime is either a regular pattern or is an occasional imposition or request by his or her employer obviously the employee is incurring expenses that he or she may not have been able to anticipate in the case of sudden overtime if you like. In the case of what is built into overtime clearly the employee is not able to return to his or her home and have meals with the family and do this at the same price that an employee may pay on a worksite or near a worksite if he or she needs to pop out from work to get some food. 
I am very pleased that the committee was able to agree at least in part with the submission from the Council of Trade Unions. The council has been put in a most unlikely collegial relationship by the Institute of Chartered Accountants which acted on its behalf. It was a seminal moment to see representatives of the accountancy profession aligning and agreeing with members of the trade union movement that there was an area that needed to be clarified in favour of employees in this respect. I am very pleased that the committee has been able to deal with that issue.
Vote: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:6003] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 111 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 8 
Green Party 8. 
Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:6003] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 111 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 8 
Green Party 8. 
Amendments agreed to.
Cunliffe David: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Cunliffe David: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:6003] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairman. I apologise for interrupting the Committee but would it be possible for you to re-specify the nature of that motion before we cast our vote? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The motion that we are about to vote on is the Minister’s amendments as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 35.
Vote: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:6003] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 67 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3; United Future 1. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 8; Progressive 1. 
Amendments as amended agreed to. 
The question was put that the remaining amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 35 in the name of the Hon Peter Dunne to Part 1 be agreed to. 
A party vote was called for on the question that the amendments be agreed to.
Vote: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:6002] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 111 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 8 
Green Party 8. 
Amendment to the amendment agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment to insert new clause 214BB as amended and the remaining amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 34 in the name of the Hon Peter Dunne to Part 1 be agreed to.
Tremain Chris: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Tremain Chris: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:6002] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 Once the decision is made can you be very clear so that I can understand how each amendment will be put. And is Supplementary Order Paper 35 still out of order? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: These amendments are not out of order. The only amendments ruled out of order were put forward by Brendon Burns. His amendments have been ruled out of order under Standing Order 320. We have dealt with that matter. We are dealing with the request from the Opposition which was to split the Minister’s amendments. The Minister has agreed to that and we are just waiting for the format. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 35 in the name of the Hon Peter Dunne to proposed new clause 214BB set out on Supplementary Order Paper 34 in his name be agreed to.
Dunne Peter: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Dunne Peter: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:6002] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue) 
:  
In response to the member’s request I am happy to concede to the separation on the condition that the amendments in Supplementary Order Paper 34—and they transcend the parts—are in each case taken as one question and that the amendments to Supplementary Order Paper 35 are taken similarly. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: This is at the Minister’s discretion so I will just get the format in which to put the question.
Cunliffe David: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Cunliffe David: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:6002] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. We gave notice earlier that on procedural grounds the Labour Opposition would be voting against the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 34 because it was not referred to the select committee. We accept that the Supplementary Order Paper 35 amendments are of a purely technical and drafting nature and we do not wish to oppose those. I seek through you Mr Chairman the Minister’s concurrence to putting the amendments on Supplementary Order Paper 34 separately so that we may not find ourselves unintentionally voting against matters that we otherwise support. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The Minister needs to give approval to that and I will need to reshape the motion.
Foss Craig: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Foss Craig: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:5993] 
CRAIG FOSS (National—Tukituki) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Huo Raymond: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Huo Raymond: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:5992] 
RAYMOND HUO (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to take a call on the Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill. This bill is so complex that almost all involved got wee wee’d up. The phrase wee wee’d up was invented by the oratorically gifted US President Barack Obama for when people get all nervous for no reason. I certainly got wee wee’d up for good reasons. The bill contains 824 pages. As the Hon David Cunliffe just pointed out it was a huge bill plus huge Supplementary Order Papers that had not even been sent to the Finance and Expenditure Committee at all. The size and the breadth of the bill combined with a tight report-back date put considerable pressure on the deliberation process. I appreciated what the Hon Peter Dunne just explained but it is fair to say that to some extent this is a rushed bill. 
Part 1 of the bill amends the Income Tax Act 2007. There are 431 clauses in Part 1. Some major issues are covered in this part such as emissions units under the Climate Change Response Act 2002 life insurance regimes rules for multi-rate portfolio investment entities associate persons etc. The committee recommends changing the application dates proposed in the bill to sufficiently allow for the progress of the bill through Parliament. Certain amendments were made in clauses 9 31 and 48 and in seven other clauses to provide for the tax treatment of emissions trading units. Most costs of emissions trading will be tax-deductible and the Government subsidy of emissions costs will generally be assessable. 
The specific taxation treatment depends on the emissions type. There are four such types Speaking on that point it is worth quoting what the chairman of the Environmental Defence Society Mr Gary Taylor said in the  
New Zealand Herald  
that the recent announcement by the National-led Government of a target of 10 to 20 percent reduction in greenhouse emission by 2020 was a big disappointment and continues a disturbing recent trend of bad decisions for the environment. 
More relevant to the various issues this bill aims to cover scientists say that developed countries need to reduce emissions by 25 to 40 percent by 2020. New Zealand is not yet even at the lowest point of that range with the offer announced by the Government. The overall costs to the economy of reaching the 2020 targets would be lower if we start now rather being forced to make big cuts later. Thank you Mr Chairperson.
Goodhew Jo: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Goodhew Jo: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:5992] 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Bridges Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Bridges Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:656;Page:5981] 
11.  
SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga) 
 to the  
Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations 
: What progress is the Government making towards its goal of settling historical Treaty claims by 2014? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 Tomorrow the Prime Minister and other Ministers will be attending the apology ceremony with affiliate Te Arawa iwi and hapu where the Prime Minister will formally deliver an apology on behalf of the Crown for breaches of the Treaty. The apology marks the completion of the affiliate Te Arawa iwi and hapu comprehensive Treaty settlement process. Te Pumautanga o Te Arawa and the Crown will be able to move forward together building a new relationship and a new future having settled the past. 
Simon Bridges 
: What other progress has the Government recently made towards its goal of settling historical Treaty claims by 2014? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: This week the Government introduced the Ngati Apa North Island Claims Settlement Bill and the Whanganui Iwi (Wanganui (Kaitoke) Prison and Northern Part of Wanganui Forest) On-account Settlement Bill. This follows on from the recent passing of the Taranaki Whanui settlement legislation the signing of joint terms of negotiation with the Nga Punawai o te Tokotoru iwi the signing of terms of negotiation with Ngai Takato the transfer of assets to Central North Island Iwi and the signing of an agreement in principle with Ngati Whare. 
Simon Bridges 
: What support has the Government received in reaching these and other recent milestones in Treaty settlements? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: I have received invaluable support from the Maori Party whose members are extremely committed to progressing Treaty settlements. With their support I have been able to secure an extra $22 million in this year’s Budget to help speed up Treaty settlements; additional claimant funding especially for those claimant groups not eligible for Crown Forestry Rental Trust funding; and promoting greater use of chief Crown negotiators and independent facilitators. Those initiatives sit alongside the two Treaty settlement hui I hosted alongside the Minister of Maori Affairs this year. Together we are committed to a process that enhances the mana of the Crown and of claimant groups and makes up for the shameful performance of the previous Government.
Parker David: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Parker David: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5979] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In light of those two documents which I had not sighted when I raised my points of order earlier today I ask you to look at that issue. I will provide the documents to you. They clearly show that the committee did deliberate and that the report includes a minority report from the Maori Party and that report should be published in this House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have already undertaken to look at the particular issue raised by the Hon Trevor Mallard and the Hon Pete Hodgson. Obviously in doing that I will be looking at the wider issue but what I have said to the House previously is quite correct: it would appear from what we have been told that the committee’s adoption of the report was conditional. Where there is confusion about those conditions the committee has not finally agreed the report and needs to resolve the confusion. It is not a matter for this House.
Parker David: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Parker David: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5978] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to table the draft minutes of the Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee meeting of last week which record that the report was deliberated on including the minority report of the Maori Party tabled by 5 p.m. that day. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Parker David: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Parker David: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5978] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to table an email from the Clerk’s Office today dated Thursday 27 August that states: “The minority view of the Maori Party has been pulled from the report this morning.” 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:656;Page:5978] 
8.  
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
 to the  
Minister of Labour 
: Does she stand by all answers to supplementary questions given on her behalf in the House yesterday; if not which were not accurate? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 Yes. 
Carol Beaumont 
: How does the Minister reconcile her statement to the Auckland District Law Society that her reason for not attending a National Distribution Union executive meeting was diary clashes with a message to the union secretary left by the Minister’s staff member saying that the Minister would not attend because the risks of attending were too high given that another union had been involved in strike action against Telecom? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: There was obviously some confusion in my office. I will take responsibility for that because I actually believe in good employment relationships and I believe in backing my employers. But at the end of the day it was a diary clash. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think the member made a mistake. I am not trying to be disruptive. I think she meant “employees”. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No the member cannot do that! 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Where was the Minister between 10 o’clock and 11 o’clock yesterday morning? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the Minister is happy to answer the question she can but I am not sure about its direct relationship to the primary question. 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: I was in Auckland. I was at a meeting that involved one of my other ministerial portfolios. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Who decides whether the Minister cancels meetings—her or her staff? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: The decision to reprioritise my diary was mine. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Why did the person who left the message on the Minister’s behalf tell the National Distribution Union that the risks of her attending the meeting were too high? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: Unfortunately the department did advise that there were some risks but as I said there was confusion in my office. I find it really disappointing that a union that stands for protecting employees and employees’ rights is prepared to drag one of my staff through the media just as a political ploy for the Labour Party. 
Question time interrupted.
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:656;Page:5977] 
7.  
JOHN BOSCAWEN (ACT) 
 to the  
Minister of Police 
: Who decides what the operational tolerances are when deciding whether to investigate or prosecute people for smacking children? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Police) 
: 
 I am advised that the attending and/or investigating officer decides whether to prosecute people for smacking children. Operational tolerances are outlined in the  
Police Practice Guide for New Section 59 
 in relation to the Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Act 2007 and the  
Solicitor-General’s Prosecution Guidelines 
. 
John Boscawen 
: What advice would the Minister give to members of the New Zealand Police who are confused by a law that forbids a smack for the purposes of correction and by a Prime Minister who has expressly told the police to ignore that law? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: That would be an operational matter but I have to say that good advice would be to follow the police guidelines that I outlined in my answer to the primary question. 
John Boscawen 
: How can we expect the public to take the law seriously when the Prime Minister tells the police to disregard it? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: I do not believe that the Prime Minister made any such statement. I believe that the Prime Minister takes this issue extremely seriously and I think that any reflection on police practice and Child Youth and Family practice will show that the law has been working.
Street Maryan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Street Maryan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:656;Page:5976] 
6.  
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister for Tertiary Education 
: What consultation did she undertake in preparation for the Education (Polytechnics) Amendment Bill? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister for Tertiary Education 
: The Minister met with representatives of Institutes of Technology and Polytechs of New Zealand and representatives of the Metropolitan Institutes of Technology and Polytechnics group. The Minister has also had discussions with individual polytechnic chief executives chairs and councils. 
Hon Maryan Street 
: Did the Minister consider approaching the Eastern Institute of Technology as a well-run polytech that has never been in difficulty for advice on how a well-run institution manages and whether a cut in council numbers was desirable; if not why not? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The Minister has consulted widely on this matter and made determinations that are reflected in the current Government position. 
Allan Peachey 
: What reports has the Minister received of members of Parliament seeking to interfere with the decisions of tertiary education institutions? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The Minister has seen a report about the intended building upgrade at Aoraki Polytechnic in Timaru. The report says that one member of Parliament has stated “she would visit Aoraki Polytech next month and would then decide if the upgrade was necessary.” That member of Parliament is Maryan Street. It is not currently possible for the Minister for Tertiary Education to intervene in this way. It is clearly Labour policy that Maryan Street should be able to intervene in this way. 
Hon Maryan Street 
: Would the Minister even now consider consulting model polytechnics about their recipe for success; and if the presence of more representative groups on councils is desirable in their experience would she consider amending her legislation accordingly? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The bill is currently before a select committee. The Minister will of course be interested in submissions to that select committee. 
Hon Maryan Street 
: Is the Minister saying by that answer which was a bit indeterminate that it does not matter what submitters to the Education and Science Committee say about representation on polytechnic councils because she will not be listening to any views that differ from her own? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: No. 
Hon Maryan Street 
: I seek leave to table a letter from Robert Anderson of Hastings who is a member of the Eastern Institute of Technology council published in the  
Dominion Post  
this morning saying that the Minister does not want to talk to successful councils. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table a letter that has been published in the newspaper. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is objection.
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:656;Page:5976] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Prime Minister) 
: 
 I seek leave to correct an answer I gave earlier. I am advised that the Hon Paula Bennett did write to the select committee chair in June or July asking for the report back to be delayed.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5971] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I wish to seek some advice on what the member has sought. I apologise to members; the issues that have been raised are a little unusual. Leave has been sought and there is no problem with my putting it to the House. Leave is sought to table a minority report of the select committee. Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is objection. 
Question time resumed.
Parker David: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Parker David: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5971] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to table the Maori Party minority report in the Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee report which was deliberated on last week.
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5968] 
JEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am genuinely not trying to try your patience but the point I have been trying to make all the way through is to ask whether it is a matter for the Speaker and this House if a decision made by the committee was not adhered to. That is the central part of the question. The facts are these: three minority reports were tabled at the committee; if in fact the fourth minority report was sent to the Clerk before 5 o’clock on Thursday then that was the matter that met the requirements of the select committee decision. If the report was later withdrawn then that is very different from whether that report was not submitted at all. That is the matter on which I was seeking information earlier. The committee no longer meets so we cannot find that out. But it seems to me there is a big difference between extending the time because someone did not get a report in and receiving that report sending everything off for proofreading and then having someone want to withdraw that report. That is what I am trying to establish. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: We will now go to question No. 1.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5968] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I say to Opposition members that I have been very patient with the time. The House has wasted over a quarter of an hour on this matter which is a matter for the committee; it is not a matter for the House. I will look at the issue that has been raised by the Hon Trevor Mallard and the Hon Pete Hodgson because I am interested in the historical precedent there. I will look at that matter of at what point the report becomes a matter for the House and not the committee. I will look at those matters but the House will not take further time on them today. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Point of order— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It had better be a different point of order.
Hodgson Pete: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Hodgson Pete: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5968] 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Labour—Dunedin North) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It might help if I cite Speaker’s ruling 92/2 from Speaker Steward in 1892 and gently offer it to the Speaker for some reflection. I can read it out. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No that it is all right; it is a long Speaker’s ruling. The House does not need to hear all of it. 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Just as long as you are aware of it because it has been around for a hundred and something years.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5968] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the member can cite the Standing Order under which I do that I will hear him later on in the session.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5968] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am going to ask you to give a considered ruling on the matter. You are the only person once a committee is finished—as it has because it has deliberated and reported—who can rule on whether papers submitted to the committee as part of its work are available to the public.
Dunne Peter: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Dunne Peter: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5967] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 The committee resolved as I said that minority reports could be submitted up to 5 p.m. last Thursday. Subsequent to that date one of the parties that had submitted a minority report sought to withdraw that minority report. That is what is delaying the publication of the final report. That was the point I raised with you Mr Speaker. Because the committee did not deliberate on the minority reports—and in this case it ruled that it would not—then it must be the prerogative of those that have submitted the reports either to submit them or to withdraw them. That is the point that has delayed the publication of the final report.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5967] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Let me put it in very simple terms for the member. The chair of the committee has advised the House that when the committee deliberated it decided that parties could attach minority reports to the report. The chair of the committee is waiting for that to happen so that he can present the report to the House. I believe that that is what the chair told the House.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5967] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 No I am asking you to rule on whether a committee can again pick up a bill on which it has already resolved to report.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5967] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Can I be clear with the honourable member. I believe that he is litigating the same issue.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5967] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think we need a further ruling from you on the position between when a bill is reported to the House and when a committee has resolved to report it. It has always been my understanding that when a committee has passed a motion—
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5966] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have made it very clear that this is not a matter for the House. Under no Standing Order is this a matter for the House; it is a matter for the committee. I have ruled that this matter must not be raised further. I have ruled on it. 
Hon David Parker 
: Point of order— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Hon David Parker might note that the Speaker is on his feet. 
Hon David Parker 
: Point of order— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: He will sit down while I am on my feet. I have made no move to sit down. I have ruled on the matter. It is not a matter that can be handled in this way in the House. I listened carefully I sought advice and I have made a careful judgment on the matter. That is the end of the matter. I warn any members who wish to trifle with that ruling that they do so at their own risk.
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5966] 
JEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. With the greatest of respect I think a matter has been missed in the debate. I do not want to challenge your ruling but I do not know how else to do it. It is the question of whether—
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5966] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not need to hear any more on the matter. The chair of the committee has told the House what the committee agreed. The House cannot dispute that. The chair of the committee advised the House that the committee agreed that when the main report was deliberated on the parties were at liberty to attach minority reports to it and there is some delay in one or more parties doing so. That is not a matter for the House to take further time on. We cannot doubt the word of the chair of the committee. If there is concern among the committee that the matter has not been reported to the House I am sure the committee can get together again should it wish to do so. The report is not out of the hands of the committee until it has been reported to the House. It has not been reported to the House and the House must take the word of the chair of the committee why it has not been. There is no further matter that the House can consider under the Standing Orders. 
Hon Members 
: Point of order— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It must be on a different matter because I have ruled on that matter. I will take Jeanette Fitzsimons’ point of order first.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5966] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
:  
We have been over this. The process that is being followed is one that the select committee determined for itself. If the Labour Party has decided that it does not want a smaller party to put in a minority report then that would be OK that is a political position it can take. There is no procedural breach here at all. The Hon Peter Dunne as the committee directed him is giving the parties concerned an opportunity to present their minority reports.
Hughes Darren: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Hughes Darren: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5966] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have two points to make to you. Firstly the select committee existed only with one item of business before it. Now that the committee has reported—or the committee at least thought it had reported; it directed the chairperson to make the report—the committee cannot meet again because it was set up only by a motion of the House to do one thing. So your ruling that the committee could meet again to talk about the matter further cannot be so. It has completed its work. It no longer exists once its report is made. 
Secondly Speaker’s ruling 93/2 makes clear that “As soon as the chairperson of a committee is directed to make a report to the House it should be made with the least possible delay.” You have commented on that timing by saying that about a week is acceptable. From what I understand the Hon David Parker said a week has passed today. Today is the House’s last sitting day before an adjournment for 1 week. The matter being reported on was so important to the House that it resolved to set up a special select committee to consider it. I just wonder whether we could have some guidance from you as to when you believe the period of delay is no longer acceptable. The committee has resolved that Mr Dunne present the report to the House. A week has now passed and I think the House is entitled to know why a different process has been used from what is ordinarily the case.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5965] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No I do not need the matter to go on any further; I think I have heard quite sufficient on it. The point the Hon Gerry Brownlee made is perfectly correct in that as long as the procedures of the committee are within the Standing Orders the committee is the master of its own decision making. It seems from what the chair of the committee has said that the committee deliberated and decided that minority reports could be attached to the final report. That is therefore a decision of the committee and not a matter that can be litigated in the House. In fact the report is a matter for the committee to agree and if there is doubt about the decisions the committee has made then the committee should probably reconvene and agree a process of confirming the report outside of a committee meeting. It is a matter for the committee whether minority reports are included; it is not a matter for the House. The remedy for the questioner—and it was a perfectly fair question—is that as long as the committee is proceeding within the Standing Orders these matters are matters for the committee to sort out not the House to sort out.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5965] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I just want to make clear two things. The first relates to Standing Order 244 and to Standing Order 245. They deal with the way in which reports of select committees are to be delivered to the House. What is salient in this case is that neither of those two Standing Orders applies because no specific report-back date was applied to the bill. Secondly that takes us to the position that was outlined by the Hon Peter Dunne which is that the select committee itself has given authority for him to accept minority reports from other parties. Mr Speaker you have said that you wish that to be done in a manner that is speedy and respectful of the House. I do not think the short time we have had since that decision by the committee represents anything other than that exact process and Mr Dunne has indicated today that he accepts your ruling. I think that sets aside the concerns that the Hon David Parker is raising in a somewhat political manner. 
Hon David Parker 
: Mr Speaker—
Parker David: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Parker David: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5965] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 Although I respect the Hon Peter Dunne’s opinion on such matters his opinion must be wrong. The report is a report of the select committee and once the select committee has deliberated on the report to Parliament it cannot withdraw it. The select committee has made its report to Parliament. All that happens thereafter is that the report is published. It may be embarrassing for a party to have discovered that it made a mistake or it might have changed its mind for reasons of political imperative or negotiations but that matter is outside of the report of the select committee. It can in no way be in order for any clerk of the committee or any member of the committee to amend the report once it has been deliberated upon by the committee. The committee is functus officio as soon as it has deliberated.
Dunne Peter: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Dunne Peter: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5965] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I simply raise another point by way of a question upon which your guidance would be appreciated. It is this: if a member or a party submits a minority report the custom has always been to treat it as being that particular party’s or individual’s responsibility. So presumably if the member or party wishes to withdraw a minority report or to amend it prior to the publication of the final report that responsibility also rests with them rather than with the committee as a whole.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5964] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Such allegations must not be made under a point of order. The matter that I as Speaker must consider under the point of order is whether there is any problem in respect of the Standing Orders in terms of the length of time it is taking for the chair of the committee to submit the report. I point out to the House as I read the Standing Orders that it is the responsibility of the chair of the committee to present the report. The Hon David Parker is quite correct; the report should be presented to the House as soon as possible after a decision is made by the committee. But there are situations in which the Standing Orders recognise that there may be a reason for some delay. In fact Speakers’ rulings point out that a delay of a week in reporting to the House is quite acceptable. The explanation given by the chair of the select committee seems perfectly reasonable at this stage. I ask that the chair of the committee makes sure the report is presented to the House as soon as possible but the explanation he gave for why there has been a small delay sounds reasonable given the decision of the committee to allow minority reports to be attached. The fact that a member had not completed his or her minority report to his or her satisfaction seems a reasonable explanation.
Parker David: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Parker David: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5964] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 Again I cannot be certain because the process is opaque to members which I find very surprising but my understanding is that a form of the minority report was submitted by email. I cannot verify that but there are email copies of the minority report. From my perspective as an Opposition member what appears to be happening or what may be happening is that the Government is having negotiations behind closed doors trying to suggest to a minority party that was quite entitled to make—
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5964] 
JEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Green) 
: 
 I was also a member of the committee. I think probably in that case it would be wise to determine whether a report was submitted by 5 o’clock last Thursday as the committee accepted or whether the matter has been left hanging. I do not know the answer to that question but the clerk will.
Dunne Peter: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Dunne Peter: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5964] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. As chair of the select committee can I just add some comments which as I understand them may be relevant to your consideration. What the member says is correct; the committee did deliberate last week. As part of its deliberations it passed a resolution giving those who wished to submit minority reports until 5 p.m. last Thursday to do so. My understanding is that one of the submitters of a minority report is in the process of reviewing whether he or she wishes to continue with presenting such a report and that that is what is delaying the presentation of the final report to the House. I think that is a relevant factor in your consideration. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the honourable member.
Parker David: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
Parker David: Points of Order — Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee—Report Back 
[Volume:656;Page:5964] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I just heard from the Clerk on your behalf that there has been no report received from the Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee. That committee deliberated finally on Wednesday 19 August—last week. 
Craig Foss 
: Thursday 20! 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: I stand corrected; on Thursday 20 August. The report according to the Standing Orders should immediately thereafter have been presented to the House. It has become apparent from statements made to the media today that have been publicly recorded—reported by NewsRoom and also in a press release from a Government member—that the report has been suppressed because after deliberation by the select committee once the select committee had finished its business and there was then a report to the House a member of the select committee sought to change a minority report and has stopped publication of the report. That is a most serious and egregious breach of the privileges of the House. As a member of the committee I am in breach of privilege if I talk about the report before it is presented to the House. I seek your authority not the authority of the House to table the report now because the select committee has authorised it to be tabled. I ask you to give me a ruling on the matter. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will seek a little advice on the matter the member has raised. It is a most unusual matter of order and I will seek some advice on it.
Brownlee Gerry: Sittings of the House 
Brownlee Gerry: Sittings of the House 
[Volume:656;Page:5963] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Mr Speaker—[ 
Interruption 
] Those members just lack politeness; it is unbelievable. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: You’ve only worked 1 day this week! 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Well if I have worked only 1 day this week it is 2 days longer than Darren Hughes; that is for sure. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It is the last day of term. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I seek leave of the House to sit on the ringing of the bell on Thursday 10 September 2009 following an official luncheon for the general secretary of the Communist Party of Viet Nam. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:656;Page:5963] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 The Government views the passing of both those bills as something that will be considered somewhat urgently by the nation let alone this House. It remains to be determined exactly how it is progressed through this House but those bills will be progressed during the next session. As for the stand-alone debate the members know that there are ways in which he might request that of your good self Mr Speaker. Therefore the decision is most certainly out of my hands.
Hughes Darren: Business Statement 
Hughes Darren: Business Statement 
[Volume:656;Page:5963] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I wonder if the Leader of the House could confirm whether it is correct that urgency will be used to progress both the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill and the Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill and furthermore whether he could confirm to the House or offer to the House the ability for a stand-alone debate within the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill on the issue of Maori representation on that council.