edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Hartley Ann: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Hartley Ann: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21581] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: That is the end of the matter.
Pettis Jill: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
Pettis Jill: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:14581] 
JILL PETTIS (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Hughes Darren: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
Hughes Darren: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4242] 
DARREN HUGHES (NZ Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Robertson H V Ross: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9024] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member is free to move that at any time.
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Treasurer Commonwealth of Australia 
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Treasurer Commonwealth of Australia 
[Volume:606;Page:3551] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that the Hon Peter Costello Treasurer of the Commonwealth of Australia accompanied by the Deputy Prime Minister is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure members would wish that he be welcomed. 
Hon Peter Costello accompanied by the Deputy Prime Minister entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
Franks Stephen: Points of Order — Electoral Act—Debate on Report of Privileges Committee 
Franks Stephen: Points of Order — Electoral Act—Debate on Report of Privileges Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7897] 
STEPHEN FRANKS (ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The guidance I seek is as a member of the Justice and Electoral Committee faced with looking at legislation that says that the Speaker—as a trusted neutral officer of this House—will without delay take some action upon realising a state of affairs in the House. If we are to look at that as the select committee was asked to do we need to know whether one of the first recommendations we should make would be to strip the Speaker of that role—if the Speaker cannot be trusted to do it.
Motions — Guru Granth Sahib—400th Anniversary 
Motions — Guru Granth Sahib—400th Anniversary 
[Volume:616;Page:11957] 
Motions 
Guru Granth Sahib—400th Anniversary 
RICHARD WORTH (National—Epsom) 
: 
 I move  
That this House congratulate the Sikh community on the 400th anniversary of the installation of Guru Granth Sahib 
. The brief background is that the Guru Granth Sahib is the sacred Sikh scripture. This year marks the 400th anniversary of the first installation of the Guru Granth Sahib at the Dabar Sahib commonly known as the Golden Temple in Amritsar. 
Motion agreed to.
Cullen Michael: Urgent Debates Declined — Tariana Turia—Ministerial Dismissal 
Cullen Michael: Urgent Debates Declined — Tariana Turia—Ministerial Dismissal 
[Volume:617;Page:12554] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I wish to respond to one point only; the rest I regard as matters of judgment. On the last point there is no ministerial responsibility for the fact that the resignation has triggered a by-election. That is purely a choice made by Mrs Turia; not a choice made by the Government. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It has not triggered one yet because I have not received any advice to that effect from the member. I am not going to relitigate my ruling. I have explained it.
Vote: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4380] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Noes 107 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 36 in the name of the Rt Hon Helen Clark to clause 4 be agreed to.
Hughes Darren: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — In Committee 
Hughes Darren: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4398] 
DARREN HUGHES (NZ Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13028] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 76 be agreed to: 
to omit clause 76.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:606;Page:3849] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 On the latter point I will be discussing that with my friends in the House. [ 
Interruption 
] Then I shall be informing my enemies of the result of those discussions. On the Responsible Gambling Bill we have not set down a firm date at this point.
Pettis Jill: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Pettis Jill: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:15353] 
JILL PETTIS (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I will give the call to Sandra Goudie because she was on the select committee.
Beyer Georgina: Masterton Trust Lands Bill — Second Reading Third Reading 
Beyer Georgina: Masterton Trust Lands Bill — Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5200] 
GEORGINA BEYER (NZ Labour—Wairarapa) 
: 
 I move  
That the Masterton Trust Lands Bill be now read a third time 
. It is most gratifying to have the support of the House with regard to this bill. May I just comment on the remarks made by Mr Edwin Perry. He was quite eloquent and he certainly summed up a vast range of the kinds of activities the Masterton Trust Lands Trust has been involved in for the benefit not only of the Masterton community but more important of the wider Wairarapa because the areas that most of what the trust has been able to provide for—and this again was borne out by Mr Perry’s comments—are broader and more diverse than just within the apparent trust district. 
I would like to thank all of those who have been involved with bringing the bill to this point. I thank members of the Local Government and Environment Committee for the important contributions they have made and the Department of Internal Affairs the Parliamentary Counsel Office and so on for their considerations. All the select committee staff have done a brilliant job. I look forward to continued support for the remainder of the passage of this bill. 
Bill read a third time.
Peck Mark: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Peck Mark: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8064] 
MARK PECK (NZ Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Hunt Jonathan: Civil Union Bill — First Reading 
Hunt Jonathan: Civil Union Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:618;Page:13928] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have been advised by a number of parties that they will split their speeches. I have recognised all of those and so the first call goes to Mr Gerry Brownlee.
Burton Mark: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — In Committee 
Burton Mark: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:624;Page:19134] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Immigration Amendment Bill — Instructions to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Immigration Amendment Bill — Instructions to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8263] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 60 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
Noes 55 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; Green Party 9. 
Motion agreed to.
Hide Rodney: Speaker’s Rulings — Stranger in the Lobbies—President of Council of Trade Unions  
Hide Rodney: Speaker’s Rulings — Stranger in the Lobbies—President of Council of Trade Unions  
[Volume:620;Page:16104] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Would it not be appropriate that you be advised of them and of their names before the event? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No that has not been the case in all the 38 years that I have been here. It may be something to look at in the security policy and I will look at that particular issue. But at the moment I am going on the rule that advisers are there at the invitation of the person in charge of a bill—whether that is a Minister or a private member depending on the type of bill we are dealing with. I will ensure that that is the case.
Vote: Civil Union Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Civil Union Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17489] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 47 
Adams(P) 
Eckhoff 
Perry 
Tisch 
Alexander(P) 
English 
Peters J(P) 
Turia(P) 
Baldock(P) 
Franks 
Peters W(P) 
Turner(P) 
Brash(P) 
Gudgeon(P) 
Power 
Wang 
Brown 
Heatley(P) 
Prebble 
Williamson 
Carter D(P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Roy 
Woolerton(P) 
Carter J(P) 
Jones 
Ryall(P) 
Worth(P) 
Catchpole(P) 
Key(P) 
Scott(P) 
Coddington(P) 
Mapp(P) 
Shirley 
Collins(P) 
McNair 
Smith L(P) 
Connell(P) 
Newman 
Smith M 
Copeland 
Ogilvy(P) 
Stewart(P) 
Teller: 
Dunne(P) 
Paraone(P) 
te Heuheu(P) 
Smith N 
Noes 73 
Anderton(P) 
Duynhoven(P) 
King(P) 
Simich 
Ardern(P) 
Dyson(P) 
Laban(P) 
Sowry(P) 
Barker 
Ewen-Street(P) 
Locke(P) 
Sutton(P) 
Barnett 
Fairbrother(P) 
Mackey J(P) 
Swain(P) 
Benson-Pope 
Field(P) 
Mackey M(P) 
Tamihere(P) 
Beyer(P) 
Fitzsimons(P) 
Maharey(P) 
Tanczos 
Bradford(P) 
Gallagher(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Tizard(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mallard(P) 
Turei(P) 
Burton(P) 
Gosche(P) 
Mark(P) 
Ward(P) 
Carter C(P) 
Goudie(P) 
McCully(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Chadwick(P) 
Hartley(P) 
O’Connor(P) 
Wong(P) 
Choudhary(P) 
Hawkins 
Okeroa(P) 
Yates(P) 
Clark(P) 
Hereora(P) 
Parker(P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Hide(P) 
Peck(P) 
Cullen(P) 
Hobbs(P) 
Pillay(P) 
Cunliffe(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Rich(P) 
Dalziel(P) 
Horomia(P) 
Ririnui(P) 
Donald(P) 
Hughes 
Robertson(P) 
Donnelly 
Hunt(P) 
Robson(P) 
Teller: 
Duncan 
Kedgley(P) 
Samuels(P) 
Pettis
Vote: Budget Debate 
Vote: Budget Debate 
[Volume:618;Page:13741] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Appropriation (2003/04 Estimates) Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand Labour 51; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 43 
New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Abstentions 13 
New Zealand First 13.
Vote: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21580] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 81 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 20; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 26 
New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; Green Party 7; Maori Party 1. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
Vote: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
[Volume:614;Page:10565] 
A party vote was called for on the question that the following amendment in the name of Steven Franks be agreed to: 
Ayes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 69 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
that all the words after “United Future 1;” be omitted.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:618;Page:13707] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I do not think a final decision on those matters has been taken at this stage. I will consult with the member about that later.
Dyson Ruth: War Pensions Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading 
Dyson Ruth: War Pensions Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:3950] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for ACC) 
: 
 It gives me great pleasure to speak in support of the War Pensions Amendment Bill (No 2) but before I speak to the specifics could I put on the record for the benefit of the member who has just resumed her seat the fact that Presbyterian Support Services now operates the Levin War Veterans Home— 
Darren Hughes 
: Very successfully. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: Very successfully according to the local member Darren Hughes who frankly— 
Jill Pettis 
: What’s his name? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: Darren Hughes who frankly knows a lot more about that issue and who has taken a very strong and active interest in the ongoing continuance of the Levin War Veterans Home. I was delighted to see a satisfactory resolution of what was a very unsatisfactory situation. I would like to acknowledge the leadership role that Darren Hughes played in ensuring that the home was able to continue in that fine town of Levin. I am disappointed that Mrs Rich chose to use what is basically non-political bipartisan-supported legislation to have some sort of dig at Presbyterian Support Services—an organisation that certainly does not deserve in any way shape or form any criticism. In my view it is a very strong supporter not just of our war veterans but of older people in our communities generally. It has my continued admiration for this. 
There are a number of quite strong philosophical themes running through the debate today and particularly support of the wish of the war veterans’ community to have their status specifically recognised by their being set aside from the rest of the social security system. That is not because there is any negative view towards anyone else who receives a benefit an allowance a pension or anything of any description at all in the benefit system; it is solely as a means of saying that war veterans do have special status in our society and our being able to recognise them in the social security system in that way is a very good thing for us to do as a Parliament. 
The second part of course is to allow veterans of working age to participate in voluntary or paid employment if they are able to do that without losing their veterans pension entitlement. This has been a wish of veterans for some time and I am delighted we are able to progress it. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17870. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Noes 110 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Rod Donald to clause 8 be agreed to: 
to add to new section 26J(1)(a) the following new subparagraph: 
(vi)total contingent liabilities.
Ewen-Street Ian: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
Ewen-Street Ian: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:14560] 
IAN EWEN-STREET (Green) 
: 
 Members may recall the television programme  
Yes Minister 
. In Britain that programme was a comedy. In Australia it was a tragedy. But in New Zealand I am afraid it was a documentary. One of the reasons I oppose the commencement date being this year is that there are so many errors that have been carried out over so long a period that I am certain the ministry has not got it right. I will give another example. What day is the commencement date? That is a very good question. Why do we have two commencement dates in the bill? It is pretty simple stuff. 
Another example of “What day is it?” was on 17 June when the ministry officials in response to a written request from the Primary Production Committee on how the allocations would change with boundary changes to the quota management areas came back with a form that was largely blank. We refused to accept it. Within an hour they came back and said: “Oh yes we remember now. We do have some figures there.” Then another couple of hours later they came back and said: “Oh sorry—oops those figures are wrong. These are the new figures.” Which figures do we actually believe? Is it the last ones? If it is the last figures then they do not add up. I tell the Minister to take my word for it. He should look at them. What day is the commencement day? Is it the day of the royal assent or the day after the royal assent? 
I think it is appropriate for the Minister to get up and take a call. I am really concerned about the advice he is getting and the fact that he is taking it at face value.
Hunt Jonathan: Obituaries — Hon Sir Richard Harrison Hon Merv Wellington 
Hunt Jonathan: Obituaries — Hon Sir Richard Harrison Hon Merv Wellington 
[Volume:611;Page:8439] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I regret to inform the House of the death on 5 September 2003 of the Hon Sir (John) Richard Harrison ED who represented the electorate of Hawke’s Bay from 1963 to 1984. He was junior National whip from 1970 to 1971 and senior whip from 1974 to 1975. Sir Richard was Chairman of Committees in 1972 and again from 1976 to 1977. He became Acting Speaker in 1977 during the illness of Sir Roy Jack and served as Speaker of the House in the period 1978 to 1984. I desire on behalf of this House to express our sense of the loss we have sustained and our sympathy with the relatives of the late former member and of all of those who are listening in to this at the funeral service. I now ask members to stand with me and observe a period of silence as a mark of respect for his memory. 
Honourable members stood as a mark of respect.
Rich Katherine: Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer 
Rich Katherine: Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer 
[Volume:607;Page:4126] 
KATHERINE RICH (NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I wish to draw your attention to some quite unreasonable time frames in terms of Ministers replying to written questions. In answer to my written questions Nos 16334 to 16336 Mr Maharey provided an interim answer and said he would endeavour to provide a final answer to the library which I imagined would occur within a reasonable time frame. That was 2 months ago and I seek your assistance. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the member for raising that with me. It will be investigated by me within the next few hours.
Vote: Border Security Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Border Security Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:13292] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 13 
New Zealand First 13. 
Noes 104 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 6; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Lindsay Tisch to clause 8C be agreed to: 
to omit clause 8C.
Eckhoff Gerrard: Racing Bill — Third Reading 
Eckhoff Gerrard: Racing Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:4085] 
GERRARD ECKHOFF (ACT NZ) 
: 
 I had real pleasure in speaking during the first reading of this bill. As I recall I emphasised just how important it is to ensure that the small rural clubs throughout New Zealand get a fair shake out of this new bill. There is no question about the importance of small clubs right throughout New Zealand. Most New Zealanders have been brought up with the country club meeting and whether it is on a Saturday a Sunday or midweek does not really matter; it is a great family day out. The whole ambience that has evolved around the racing industry has come very much from those small and very important little clubs. 
I think back to last New Year when one of the most popular small racing club events in New Zealand the Glenorchy Races was held. Some intrepid reporter spoke with the Department of Internal Affairs about how long the function had been going and so on. To the department’s shock and horror the Glenorchy Races had been going on for years and years highly successfully but without a licence so that shocking situation was remedied immediately. That illustrates how capable small clubs and rural people are in having a great day out without the excessive bureaucracy that seems to permeate so much of our lives these days. I am happy to say that as I understand it a great outcome has been achieved by the Glenorchy club—and indeed by the authorities—to ensure that the cost structures imposed on this industry are not so great as to force the closure of what is an increasingly popular day. I will certainly welcome my colleague from the Green Party Sue Bradford who has indicated a wish to come to Glenorchy and view that race on New Year’s Day. I look forward to that. 
In this bill we have decided on centralised control but it is the breeders who are responsible for this industry and who have made New Zealand famous. It is not the TAB or the New Zealand Racing Board that have bred the Phar Laps or the Sunlines. Our breeders go to Bahrain and Tokyo. They are fantastic ambassadors they put New Zealand bloodstock at the forefront of the racing world and it is hugely important that that continues. But I emphasis again that it is the breeders who have achieved that—without the rules the regulations and the centralised bureaucracy. They have relied on their individualism their brilliance and their knowledge of the industry to achieve those wonderful goals. It is the racing industry rugby and—dare I say it—the right-of-centre philosophies that have made New Zealand absolutely famous throughout the world. One would hope that that would continue well into the future. 
It is incumbent upon the new board to recognise that this House demands that it understands and respects the wishes of the industry. The industry too must respect the intent of this bill which is to give every racing club—and especially the small clubs like Glenorchy or wherever—a fair shake in this new and exciting era of racing in New Zealand.
Barker Rick: Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Barker Rick: Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12291] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice) 
: 
 With pleasure I move  
That the Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Bill be now read a third time 
. We have had a useful discussion in the House and it is pleasing to see that in the Committee of the whole House members agreed 110 to 9 which means there is general agreement in this House on this piece of legislation. It is eminently sensible legislation. It does not as some people have tried to characterise it extend the powers of the police the Security Intelligence Service or other Government agencies to intercept material. What it does do is put obligations on the telecommunications providers to facilitate interception and to be technically capable to intercept communications going through their networks. 
The bill is not prescriptive in the way in which interception is to be undertaken. There was nervousness and some apprehension on the part of the telecommunications providers that they would need to have technologies embedded in their systems. The bill is clear that that is not the case. Telecommunication providers will have the opportunity to determine what technologies they deploy how and when and will be able to reduce their costs accordingly. What we are interested in is an outcome not necessarily a technological solution. This bill does that. 
I want to praise the good work of the Law and Order Committee. It has managed to bring together a number of amendments give assurance to the industry and resolve a number of issues. I am very pleased about that; it was excellent work. I think the House has had a very good debate on this legislation and we are well and truly agreed on the merits of this bill.
Hughes Darren: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Hughes Darren: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:13368] 
DARREN HUGHES (Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 At the end of this first reading debate I just want to rise and signal the strong support I have for this bill. I do so on behalf of all the hard-working families in the Otaki electorate who will note with interest that only ACT and the National Party are opposing it.
O'Connor Damien: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
O'Connor Damien: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9404] 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Minister for Racing) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 4 be agreed to: 
to amend new section 35 of the principal Act by omitting subsection (3).
Masterton District Council (Montfort Trimble Foundation) Bill — Procedure 
Masterton District Council (Montfort Trimble Foundation) Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:614;Page:10391] 
Masterton District Council (Montfort Trimble Foundation) Bill 
Procedure 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move 
 That local order of the day No. 2 for the second reading of the Masterton District Council (Montfort Trimble Foundation) Bill be postponed until after local order of the day No. 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Carter John: Points of Order — Prostitution Reform Bill 
Carter John: Points of Order — Prostitution Reform Bill 
[Volume:606;Page:3552] 
JOHN CARTER (Senior Whip—NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave of the House that when we come to members’ order of the day No. 2 the Prostitution Reform Bill be discharged and referred back to the Local Government and Environment Committee.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is.
Vote: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18641] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 25; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9; Green Party 9. 
Noes 61 
New Zealand Labour 51; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Stephen Franks to clause 4B be agreed to: 
to omit subclause (3).
Jones Dail: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Jones Dail: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:12895] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 This is just a very brief call. It highlights as much as anything the failure of the National Party to make any contribution opposing this particular part of the legislation. This part of course summarises what took place at the Justice and Electoral Committee and the National Party is not interested. I take the point raised by Stephen Franks at the end of his speech and pass on an anecdote. As a lawyer one does come under pressure from one’s caucus colleagues who ask: “Why are you being so pedantic and so legalistic on an issue? Don’t worry about it. We the rest of this caucus know better than you and you shouldn’t be too concerned.” 
Well when I came into this House we had a vote for the first time on electricity legislation which was harmless enough. We had quite a number of legal members of Parliament in 1975 and we warned the caucus that there would be a debate from the Opposition on the right of entry into properties that electricity inspectors had—the absolute right for a meter reader to go on to a property and do the necessary inspection without any authority or proof whatsoever. We warned the caucus that that was what the Labour Party would take up. We were pooh-poohed by the rest of our National Party caucus. We were 55 they were 32 and it did not really matter. 
Well would members believe it that is all the Labour Party ran on during that first reading in those days. The debate went on and on about the entry into property by those inspectors and the fact that the rights of a person to free occupation of his or her own home was being undermined. 
Well I think there are fewer practising lawyer members of Parliament today than there were in 1975. When I was on that select committee in 1975—the Statutes Revision Committee—we had about five members of Parliament who were fully practising lawyers and as well there were some others who were not on the committee. But times change and I think Stephen Franks’ view that he expressed at the end of his speech is a very important one. 
This bill will see pressure put on subsequent Ministers of Justice and subsequent Attorneys-General to make changes. We have seen it already and I think the Attorney-General who is now in the chair has made some appointments of people who perhaps have not supported her in the way in which she might have supported them and she has had to take the appropriate action in so far as they are concerned. That is the type of pressure that is put on a person. That is the type of pressure that will ensure that this legislation which the Labour Government wants to see go through the Committee today will come back to haunt this House in the future.
[Volume:625;Page:20495] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I move  
That members’ order of the day No. 1 for the first reading of the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill be postponed.
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Dominion Post Article 
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Dominion Post Article 
[Volume:612;Page:9250] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Yes and I said “to the very best of my knowledge no”. Occasionally I have on my table a bottle of wine given to me by someone and of course I automatically put it down to be shared with my colleagues and friends including people in the Opposition and in the press gallery. Members will know that I am reasonably generous in this regard. But to the best of my knowledge no and I certainly did not ask for it.
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:627;Page:22184] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Port Waikato) 
: 
 I seek leave to table the relevant pages of the July 2005 OECD survey. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Carter John: Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Carter John: Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12348] 
JOHN CARTER (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Mr Dunne has an amendment that would also need to be taken as a separate vote as a conscience issue and it should be included in the motion I think.
Mark Ron: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — In Committee 
Mark Ron: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4391] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Can I suggest a way forward so that the time of the Committee is not wasted and so that the Government is not made to look any more stupid than it currently looks. I brought this point clearly to the attention of the Minister and the Government whips. They consulted with officials and they proceeded to sit here and do nothing while the provision passed through. I suggest that the Government whips might like to consult quickly and approach other whips with a view to us going out of Committee moving on to the next order of business and taking some corrective action before the Government looks even more stupid than it currently does.
Vote: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21416] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 8 
Green Party 8. 
Noes 110 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Keith Locke to clause 7 be agreed to: 
to add to subsection (1) of section 15F the following new paragraph: 
(c)are causing or threatening to cause harm to Thailand because they are being produced without acceptable labour standards or in ways which detrimentally affect communities or the environment.
Vote: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15642] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 8 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 12; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Schedule 8 as amended agreed to.
Baldock Larry: Animal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill — Second Reading 
Baldock Larry: Animal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:624;Page:19012] 
LARRY BALDOCK (United Future) 
: 
 I stand on behalf of United Future to support the second reading of the Animal Products (Dairy Products and Other Matters) Bill. This bill is a worthy example of what can be done to ensure best industry practice fairness long-term sustainability and added value. There is nothing in the report back from the Primary Production Committee that suggests that United Future should re-evaluate its position of support for this legislation. It is a common-sense bill that will greatly benefit the dairy industry in this country. The introduction of reforms pursuant to this bill has been long awaited and is absolutely necessary to help ensure that New Zealand’s valuable dairy industry remains in good order. 
The bill is in large part a mechanism to bring the industry up to date and to ensure that standards of best practice and efficiency are firmly put in place. The bill before the House rescinds the antiquated Dairy Industry Act which is 51 years old and consolidates a mix of legislation some of which can be traced back to 1892. The Act is unyielding and prescriptive. The time has indeed come to put that Act out to pasture. 
Because all parties in the House will support this legislation United Future will keep its contribution brief at this stage. We will make further comments at the third reading which we hope will occur later this week so that this useful and very common-sense legislation can be put into law for the benefit of the dairying industry.
Vote: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6976] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 47 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Noes 68 
Labour 52; Green Party 8; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Field Taito Phillip: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Field Taito Phillip: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16494] 
Hon TAITO PHILLIP FIELD (Minister of State) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Business of the House 
Business of the House 
[Volume:619;Page:15028] 
Business of the House 
MARK PECK (Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House for members’ notice of motion No. 3 in my name be taken at the conclusion of the second reading of the Misuse of Drugs (Industrial Hemp) Amendment Bill. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That was a reference to the members’ notice of motion about the Southern Institute of Technology. Leave is sought for that action to be taken. Is there any objection? There is none. So that will come after members’ order of the day No. 2.
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Floods Lower North Island—Government Response Minister of Immigration — Resignation 
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Floods Lower North Island—Government Response Minister of Immigration — Resignation 
[Volume:615;Page:11224] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received letters under Standing Order 373 from Gerry Brownlee relating to the resignation of the Minister of Immigration; from the Hon Bill English Rod Donald and the Hon Brian Donnelly relating to the announcement of a 5-year moratorium and on the school review programme; and from the Hon Peter Dunne relating to the Government response to floods in the lower North Island. I take Mr Dunne’s application first. Without in any way wishing to minimise the importance of the flooding I think that if I were to have accepted an application on that subject it would have been last week when the crisis was at its height. The Government response to flood relief will unfold over the next few months and can be explored by the House in other ways. I do not accept an application for an urgent debate today.
Vote: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18640] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 25; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9; Green Party 9. 
Noes 61 
New Zealand Labour 51; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Stephen Franks to clause 4 be agreed to: 
to amend subclause (1) by omitting proposed new section 3(1A)(b) of the principal Act and substituting the following new paragraph (b): 
(b)those 1 or more visual images alone or together with any other contents of the publication likely to be regarded by a normal person as sexual in nature.
Worth Richard: Treaty of Waitangi (Final Settlement of Claims) Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Worth Richard: Treaty of Waitangi (Final Settlement of Claims) Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:618;Page:13901] 
RICHARD WORTH (National—Epsom) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. An interesting issue has arisen. Mita Ririnui yielded to the previous speaker and in that circumstance the speaker who was speaking is entitled to continue. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: It was not a yield. As Chair I never called. It was a good try but Mita Ririnui has the call.
Peck Mark: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Peck Mark: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:620;Page:16092] 
7.  
MARK PECK (Labour—Invercargill) 
 to the  
Minister for Small Business 
: What recent reports has he received on economic growth in the small-business sector? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE (Minister for Small Business) 
: 
 More evidence that the economy is powering along under the great stewardship of this Government and its excellent Minister of Finance: according to the National Bank’s  
Small Business Monitor 
 released last Friday year-on-year growth in the small-business sector was 4.6 percent at the end of the December quarter. 
Mark Peck 
: What did the report highlight as the most significant concern for a small business? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: The major hurdle identified by small businesses is a skills shortage. Fortunately after years of neglect from National-led Governments this Government is working hard to solve that problem in a whole host of ways. Unlike those on the other side who continue to fight yesterday’s battles we like the business community are moving on with confidence.
Cunliffe David: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Cunliffe David: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4301] 
DAVID CUNLIFFE (NZ Labour—New Lynn) 
: 
 To quote the Hon Dr Nick Smith this bill matters. It is a good bill that will improve the implementation of the Resource Management Act. It will help to remove and reduce costs and delays without undermining the Act’s objective of delivering a healthy environment for all New Zealanders. The sad thing is to hear the Opposition playing politics with it and trying to have a buck each way. On the one hand the Opposition says that compliance costs are too high and on the other hand it tries to criticise us for moving expeditiously to reduce them. Every one of the issues contained in this bill was openly discussed and debated amongst the 400 submissions that were heard over several months. There is nothing new in this bill. It is simply a reformatting and some rejudgments—and they are often rejudgments on the basis of issues that the Opposition believes it stands for: reduction of compliance costs making the Environment Court more effective and making parliamentary democracy work. 
Now Dr Smith has alleged—and I think it is an abuse of the Office of the Clerk—that this is a violation of parliamentary process. If that were true this bill and this motion would never have been cleared for introduction into the House. That member is reflecting on the Speaker’s office and on the Office of the Clerk. He may think that he is attacking the Government but he is attacking Parliament. If the Speaker or the Clerk believed that the Standing Orders were being violated they would simply not have allowed the motion. If you want to have more of a say you should put that call in the Committee stage and see how many numbers you get. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member must not bring me into the debate. 
DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I am sorry I mean that member. 
To conclude: as a result of the Government’s initiatives we are moving ahead on a raft of initiatives to reduce compliance costs of which limited notification is only one. I commend this bill to the House.
Gudgeon Bill: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Gudgeon Bill: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15907] 
BILL GUDGEON (NZ First) 
: 
 There are groups in society who for one reason or another are not able to have children. In clause 3 among the purposes provided it is explained that the bill is: “(d) to provide a robust and flexible framework for regulating and guiding the performance of assisted reproductive procedures and the conduct of human reproductive research:”. Having said that I say that technology has moved ahead but it has to be better. It needs to be precise especially when we are dealing with life. Technology is more stringent than it was before and research gives an assurance of protection. There is also the direction and guidance in the bill to privacy and areas that are sensitive. 
There will be areas of dissatisfaction. To various ethnic groups this technology will be a no-no because of their beliefs and spiritual backgrounds. As mentioned by previous speakers genealogy or whakapapa links are important and will be a concern for Maori and Pacific Island groups. By way of explanation from a Maori perspective I tell members that historically the perpetuation of the family and blood lines was a very important event. When a child was born the placenta was kept and buried in the area where that child came from. The pito or umbilical cord symbolically tied that child to its tribe its whanau its hapu and the land it inherited. I do not know whether those concerned ever looked at that for it is where disputes could start because of that spiritual belief—the perpetuation of family and its link in this case for Maori and I think for most Pacific Island people to their land. That has always been historically important and still is today. 
My presentation on this bill will be brief but I would like to ensure that those things are taken into consideration because life to all of us in this House and to those outside its boundaries is sacred. It must be treated as such. If not this technology and all the regulations and laws that go with it can go out the window. 
First on the priority list of this House is to consider how people look at this legislation and at the sanctity that is brought into the family. Without that sanctity and respect for life and the sacredness in which most people hold life the legislation cannot be considered. However New Zealand First at this stage supports the bill but the bill has to be stringent. The protection of the child conceived and of the parents has to be taken care of. There is no doubt that when the child is born it will be treated as any other ordinary person and that it will have its parents’ love kindness respect and care. That is paramount and it must be. If parents are not prepared as the previous ACT speaker said to take care of the child where do we go to from here? 
I admire the tenacity with which Dianne Yates has presented the bill but all these things have to be taken into consideration as well as the Supplementary Order Paper of Dr Hutchison.
Barker Rick: Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Barker Rick: Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9292] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister for Courts) 
 on behalf of the 
 Minister of Conservation 
: I seek the leave of the House that when we go into Committee on the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill we take the Committee stage as a single question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There is not.
Benson-Pope David: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Benson-Pope David: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17776. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Minister of Fisheries) 
: 
 I move  
That the Committee divide the bill into the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 4) the Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 5) the Conservation Amendment Bill (No 2) the Biosecurity Amendment Bill (No 3) the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Bill the Te Ture Whenua Maori Amendment Bill (No 3) and the Aquaculture Reform (Repeals and Transitional Provisions) Bill 
 pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper 320 in my name 
.