edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Robertson H V Ross: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Robertson H V Ross: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:619;Page:14867] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: They have been withdrawn.
Cullen Michael: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — First Reading 
Cullen Michael: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:4046] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I am certainly not attempting to apply any pressure at all. I simply raised the issue because I thought there might have been some confusion about the vote given that United Future is opposing the bill. A procedural motion about which select committee the bill goes to is a different matter. It is not at all out of order for a party to change its vote before the vote has been called on the basis that it was confused about its position. That has been done a number of times.
Vote: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6) — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6) — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:7093] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 107 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Noes 8 
Green Party 8. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Jones Dail: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Jones Dail: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:622;Page:17675] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Perhaps the member before he asks the question or during the question could clarify the word in line four: is it “precedence” with a “ts” or “ce”? It is a little confusing at the moment; the two do mean slightly different things. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member raises a very good point. I have only just observed that not having read the question before but I tell the member that he has to read it as it is worded.
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3829] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 60 
Noes 56 
Amendments agreed to. 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Green Party 8.
Shirley Ken: Points of Order — Maori Language—Interpretation 
Shirley Ken: Points of Order — Maori Language—Interpretation 
[Volume:615;Page:11435] 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Deputy Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. On the last sitting day during question No. 11 the House got into some difficulty with regard to a question to Minister Horomia. You undertook to reflect on it over the weekend. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It is quite a complicated matter. I am dealing with it this afternoon and I will make a ruling tomorrow.
Hartley Ann: Land Transport Management Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Hartley Ann: Land Transport Management Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:613;Page:9659] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member will be seated. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: You get my point though Madam Chair.
Visitors — Japan—Parliamentary Delegation House of Councillors 
Visitors — Japan—Parliamentary Delegation House of Councillors 
[Volume:620;Page:15443] 
Wednesday 8 September 2004 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Japan—Parliamentary Delegation House of Councillors 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that a parliamentary delegation from the House of Councillors Japan led by Mr Takao Jinnouchi is present in the gallery. I am sure that members would wish that they be welcomed.
Donald Rod: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Donald Rod: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5444] 
ROD DONALD (Musterer—Green) 
: 
 I would suggest that Standing Order 157(2) is the relevant Standing Order. It clearly states: “In the case of a party vote proxies may be exercised for a number equal to no more than 25 percent of a party’s membership in the House but at least one proxy may be exercised for a party.” Mr Anderton cast the proxy for the absent member.
Vote: Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:623;Page:18428] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 46 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 1. 
Bill read a second time.
Peck Mark: Counter-Terrorism Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Peck Mark: Counter-Terrorism Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9342] 
MARK PECK (Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Peck Mark: Consumer Credit Bill — Second Reading 
Peck Mark: Consumer Credit Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:8012] 
MARK PECK (NZ Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 First I congratulate the Commerce Committee on the good work that it did on this bill and on two others that were reported back on the same day. I know I cannot refer to other bills that have been reported back but the Commerce Committee is a very busy committee and— 
Darren Hughes 
: A very good committee. 
MARK PECK 
: Well it is a very good committee. I also recognise that Darren Hughes is a member of that committee which is probably one of the reasons that it is such a good committee and gets through its work in a timely manner. 
This bill is quite a major piece of work. It does replace a number of statutes—the Hire Purchase Act the Credit Contracts Act—and consolidates them into one piece of legislation. The submitters were quite keen on that as it now means that we can essentially find our way through the credit contract law within one Act. That is a good thing—and it is about time it was done. 
For the record I also note that Sue Bradford was a member of the committee. Sue Bradford has long been a tireless worker on behalf of the oppressed and downtrodden and she was certainly there providing a voice for them—along with her Labour colleagues I might say who put a lot of effort into making sure that the interested consumers were well represented at that committee. 
I congratulate John Tamihere on uncovering the scam involved in the buy-back schemes. As a result of the work that he did the Minister of Consumer Affairs presented us with a Supplementary Order Paper. I congratulate her and her officials on getting that work to the committee in a timely manner as it was a major piece of work. There was a lot to consider as we went through the bill. Getting that Supplementary Order Paper included in the bill involved quite a bit of footwork but it was nicely manoeuvred along the way. That is one of the reasons that I do want to congratulate other members of the committee as well. There was unanimous agreement that the buy-back schemes needed to be dealt to. I do agree with the Minister’s speech when she said it is likely that that form of credit will disappear as a result of the provisions that are to be put into place by this legislation. 
I do not want to speak at any great length on this matter. This bill is good legislation that will protect the interests of consumers. It will also enable consumers to become informed at the time that they enter into contracts and it provides very clear transparent rules for charging interest fees calculating balances and things of that ilk. This is a good piece of new law and I look forward to its rapid progress through the House.
Woolerton R Doug: Wool Industry Restructuring Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Woolerton R Doug: Wool Industry Restructuring Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:7123] 
R DOUG WOOLERTON (NZ First) 
: 
 I want to correct a couple of things that may have inadvertently crept in. The first is the suggestion and I know that Mr Eckhoff did not mean this personally that we would even want to involve ourselves in the administration of the wool industry. [ 
Interruption 
] I know that it was not put in quite that way. We have just lost the last chance quite frankly to have somebody who is independent look over the process. It was not to involve ourselves or this Parliament in the administration and certainly not to be casting aspersions on the good names of any people who may be employed in the wool industry henceforth. We have just passed a critical time. 
I say to the woolgrowers of the future—and I am not lecturing them but this is an observation that I think all members of the select committee would make and agree with me on—that the lack of participation in the industry by growers is lamentable. I know many of the reasons for that. It is a matter of having been ground down over the years. It is a feeling that their voices have not been heard. It is all those things. But it is very hard for a select committee and for a Government—those of us who are involved in the process—to get a fair understanding from such a small participation of grower members. 
I would like to make a comparison but not necessarily suggest that they follow the same route as the Fonterra board which put up three people for re-election. The price was not as they had hoped it would be and the returns were not as they hoped they would be so two of the directors were fired. The farmer participation dealt to them very very quickly. I am not so naive as to believe that it is just the farmers. There was a lot more politics. Further to that we have had the summary dismissal of Fonterra’s chief executive officer in favour of another person. That level of participation is very very healthy. I urge the woolgrowers of this nation to involve themselves in the new structures that are being put in place and to watch over them very very carefully because a lot of the things that we suggest could go wrong and that some people may profit from individually are beyond the scope of this bill. They are in the companies that are set up under the Wool Equities banner. 
Mr Eckhoff is absolutely right. We have no place meddling in those companies. We have no place directing people how to administer those companies but we do surely have the ability—and I suggest the responsibility—to urge farmers to participate fully in the democratic process in those companies and to ensure that the things we hope and pray will not happen do not happen.
Shirley Ken: Retirements — John Lindell O’Sullivan 
Shirley Ken: Retirements — John Lindell O’Sullivan 
[Volume:607;Page:4505] 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Deputy Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 On behalf of the ACT party I would like to join with others and express our appreciation of the services given to members by John O’Sullivan. I have had considerable dealings with him and have always found him to be very courteous very diligent and very considerate. I would certainly acknowledge his fierce loyalty in terms of the protection of the staff around Parliament Buildings because they can get caught up in all sorts of difficult situations and I believe that John O’Sullivan has been very consistent and very determined to protect the interests of staff. I do not believe that any training or previous experience—and I acknowledge John’s very distinguished career in the public service—could actually equip him for the job he has had as chief executive officer of the Parliamentary Service. Mention has been made of the “prima donnas” around this place and as a governance body I think the Parliamentary Service Commission is a very difficult forum. Whether it is an appropriate governance body is an outstanding matter that needs to be addressed because it must be incredibly hard to run what is essentially a department of State with a governance body like that. Although they make the rules for society in many respects and given the nature of the beast legislators are possibly not very good at making the rules for themselves. 
In summary I would say that in his job John O’Sullivan really has been the meat and the mustard in a very squelchy sandwich. I believe that he has discharged his responsibilities very fairly very diligently and very thoroughly. Certainly we would like to give him our best wishes for his retirement and for the projects he has in mind.
Carter Chris: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Carter Chris: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:6651] 
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 I intend to make just a very short contribution as I cannot let the words of that previous speaker go unchallenged. This Government enjoyed record success in the last election and enjoys record success in opinion polls of well over 50 percent because we do keep our promises. The people of New Zealand saw that in the last election. They have seen it as a hallmark of the Clark-led Government that it keeps its word to the people. In 1999 we promised—and we repeated that promise in last year’s election—that there would be no rise in income tax and there has not been. We have kept our promise.
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17578] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 2A be agreed to. 
Ayes 66 
Anderton(P) 
Dyson(P) 
Laban(P) 
Shirley(P) 
Barker(P) 
Ewen-Street  
Locke(P) 
Simich (P) 
Barnett 
Fairbrother(P) 
Mackey J(P) 
Sutton(P) 
Benson-Pope  
Fitzsimons(P) 
Mackey M 
Swain(P) 
Beyer(P) 
Gallagher(P) 
Maharey(P) 
Tanczos(P) 
Bradford(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Tizard(P) 
Burton  
Gosche (P) 
Mallard(P) 
Turei(P) 
Carter C (P) 
Hartley(P) 
Mark(P) 
Ward(P) 
Chadwick(P) 
Hawkins 
Okeroa 
Wilson(P) 
Choudhary(P) 
Hereora 
Parker(P) 
Wong(P) 
Clark(P) 
Hide(P) 
Peck(P) 
Yates (P) 
Coddington (P) 
Hobbs(P) 
Pillay 
Cullen(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Prebble  
Cunliffe(P) 
Horomia(P) 
Rich(P) 
Dalziel(P) 
Hughes  
Ririnui  
Donald(P) 
Hunt(P) 
Robson(P) 
Donnelly(P) 
Kedgley(P) 
Roy(P) 
Teller: 
Duncan  
King(P) 
Samuels(P) 
Pettis  
Noes 54 
Adams(P) 
Duynhoven(P) 
Ogilvy(P) 
te Heuheu(P) 
Alexander(P) 
Eckhoff(P) 
Paraone(P) 
Tisch(P) 
Ardern(P) 
English(P) 
Perry(P) 
Turia(P) 
Baldock(P) 
Field(P) 
Peters J (P) 
Turner(P) 
Brash(P) 
Franks  
Peters W (P) 
Wang(P) 
Brown(P) 
Goudie(P) 
Power  
Williamson(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Gudgeon(P) 
Robertson(P) 
Woolerton(P) 
Carter D (P) 
Heatley(P) 
Ryall(P) 
Worth(P) 
Carter J (P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Scott(P) 
Catchpole(P) 
Key(P) 
Smith L (P) 
Collins(P) 
Mapp(P) 
Smith M (P) 
Connell(P) 
McCully(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Copeland  
McNair  
Sowry(P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Newman(P) 
Stewart (P) 
Teller: 
Dunne(P) 
O'Connor (P) 
Tamihere(P) 
Jones  
Schedule 2A agreed to.
Vote: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:623;Page:18841] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 4 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 98 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 22 
New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9. 
Part 4 as amended agreed to.
Burton Mark: State Sector Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Burton Mark: State Sector Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7285] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the State Sector Amendment Bill that it take the bill part by part and consider any schedules as one question. 
Motion agreed to.
Speaker’s Statements — Chamber Sound System—Microphones 
Speaker’s Statements — Chamber Sound System—Microphones 
[Volume:616;Page:11628] 
Speaker’s Statements 
Chamber Sound System—Microphones 
Mr SPEAKER 
: During the last sitting period I undertook to respond to members’ concerns about the sound system. Action is being taken to refine the sound quality from speakers in the Chamber and in the galleries with some modifications also being made to the equipment in the broadcasting booth. At the beginning of the year members should have received information about operating the new microphones. I am having this information recirculated to members. 
I would just like to repeat two main points. Once I have called the member please pause before you speak to allow the sound technician to switch on your microphone. When speaking members should adjust the microphones so that they are turned towards them. Please speak towards the microphone from about 20 to 30 centimetres away; if you are too close to the microphone sound distortion may result.
Prebble Richard: Points of Order — Question No. 4 to Minister 13 May 
Prebble Richard: Points of Order — Question No. 4 to Minister 13 May 
[Volume:608;Page:5678] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 The House has to accept the explanation given to you by Dr Cullen. There is no doubt that the proper way to correct an answer is by a personal explanation. There is also no doubt that it has to be at the first available opportunity. I know there is a view by some members that errors at question time should be corrected at the beginning of the next day’s question time because the whole House is here at question time. I was here at 7.30 p.m. and I doubt whether there were a dozen members in the House and there was no one in the gallery. But that does not alter the fact that under the Standing Orders that was the appropriate time for the explanation. 
The other issue is that it may well be that everything the Rt Hon Winston Peters says is correct that the House is incredulous that a Minister cannot remember that the bill says all these things. Everything that Mr Peters says is correct but we have to accept the Prime Minister’s statement that she is not conscious;we have to accept that.
Choudhary Ashraf: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Choudhary Ashraf: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:611;Page:8241] 
6.  
Dr ASHRAF CHOUDHARY (NZ Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What initiatives if any has the Government taken to encourage children to become familiar with New Zealand authors? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 The Ministry of Education will provide funding over the next 3 financial years to support the writers in schools programme which funds New Zealand writers to visit schools as part of four week-long programmes each year. It is targeted specifically at children in low-decile schools and aims to foster a love of books reading and writing. 
Dr Ashraf Choudhary 
: How does that initiative fit within the Government’s wider policy agenda? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The Government is committed to improving the reading and writing skills of our children. We have invested considerably in literacy development over the past 4 years particularly in areas of teacher professional development and learning resources. The programme also encourages children to become familiar with New Zealand authors thereby supporting the Government’s goal to foster a strong national identity. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Given the intention of Government to encourage children to become more familiar with New Zealand authors would it be Government policy that people should read books before they write about them—particularly noting that one of the Minister’s Cabinet colleagues believes it is possible to write about a book without having read it? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: There is a wide variety of fiction available in New Zealand including Nicky Hager’s  
Seeds of Distrust 
.
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3821] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 55 
Noes 60 
Amendment not agreed to. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Green Party 7. 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Stephen Franks to clause 31 be agreed to: 
to add the following subclauses: 
(4)Shareholding Ministers must in the exercise or purported exercise of their powers under this or any other law in relation to TVNZ protect and uphold the political neutrality and impartiality of TVNZ and its subsidiaries. 
(5)Shareholding Ministers must not do or so far as it is within their lawful power permit to be done anything that will allow any statement of intent or the weighting of conflicting or competing functions or objectives or any other application of the Charter to prejudice the political impartiality and neutrality of TVNZ and its subsidiaries.
Sowry Roger: General Debates 
Sowry Roger: General Debates 
[Volume:611;Page:8538] 
Hon ROGER SOWRY (Deputy Leader—NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is a serious case when you give a ruling at the beginning of a speech. I want to point out that this happens every single Wednesday—not just today. Every Wednesday when the Leader of the Opposition leads the debate two things happen: firstly Speaker Hunt leaves the Chair and somebody else comes in and secondly Bill English has to raise a point of order to stop Mr Mallard from interjecting. It is the same every single week. This week you ruled that you would stop the continuous stream of interjections. You were approached by the senior Opposition whip and rather than breaking the speech he brought to your attention the fact that Mr Mallard was continuing to interject. Then following that there were another 11 interjections. I have to ask where the fairness is and when the Speakership will start backing its own rulings.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Messages from Governor-General 
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Messages from Governor-General 
[Volume:617;Page:13449] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I cannot recall an occasion after a first reading when the first thing the Speaker did was to stand up and say: “I have a message from the Governor-General.” The Governor-General must of course have extremely fleet feet if she was able to get that message to the Chair in such a short period of time. Leaving that aside I cannot recall a time when such a recommendation has been made so quickly. It makes a complete mockery of the whole process that is occurring this evening. The Government has said: “Here is our centrepiece of legislation and we want the nation to know what it’s all about. We want to clear up some of the clear misconceptions that people must have got when they voted in the  
Holmes 
 poll this evening.” However it would seem that the Government has organised for the Governor-General to send down her recommendation on the basis that it does not matter what Parliament might conclude as the bill will be funded anyway. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Can I just inform the House that the Governor-General always makes a recommendation before the passing of a bill and the Government can procure a message at any time. This is perfectly normal.
Border Security Bill — Instruction to Committee 
Border Security Bill — Instruction to Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:13233] 
Border Security Bill 
Instruction to Committee 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Border Security Bill that it take the bill part by part. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 47 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Motion agreed to.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:616;Page:11775] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I have noticed on the Order Paper and in the other documents that we receive to get some lead on where the Government is going that there is no legislation that will put the seabed and foreshore into Crown ownership. I seek leave for a bill in the name of the honourable member Richard Worth that does exactly that to be placed on the Order Paper for first consideration next week. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought is there any objection? There is.
Franks Stephen: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Franks Stephen: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9023] 
STEPHEN FRANKS (ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I wonder whether some assistance might be derived by looking at the strict meaning of the words in the first sentence. If you were to rule or if we were to get a ruling on what is meant by the word “provision” it may help. If “provision” is the same as “clause” then the outcome for which Mr Sowry is arguing would happen anyway. If instead “provision” in that line means “part” then we still have the difficulty Mr Sowry raises. I suggest that you take it in that order—that we need to look first at “provision”. I believe that the purpose of the rule probably was to have it taken provision by provision and the member could elect to have everything dealt with within a clause. Otherwise if a member whose amendments were taken as one question went first the outcome would be that he or she could then knock out a whole range of potentially valid amendments later. However if the bill is dealt with provision by provision that will not happen within a part.
Brownlee Gerry: Christchurch City Council (Robert McDougall Gallery) Land Vesting Bill — Procedure Second Reading 
Brownlee Gerry: Christchurch City Council (Robert McDougall Gallery) Land Vesting Bill — Procedure Second Reading 
[Volume:611;Page:8799] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In the course of the Hon Mark Burton’s contribution to the House earlier he made statements that to say the least impugned my integrity. I think it is important for the House to understand that the Business Committee is a group that works under the chair of the Speaker in a very informal manner that the resolutions of that committee are reached by consensus and that the greatest beneficiary of that committee’s activities is in fact the Government because it is for the greater part facilitating the Government’s business. We routinely allow select committees a longer period of time to report bills than the date for the report back put on the bill when it was sent by the House. We make arrangements for members to be able to participate in select committee business where they have a particular interest. The Leader of the House is often able to indicate on a confidential basis where he thinks the legislative programme is going and to indicate some priorities that the Government sees on different sorts of legislation. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: What is your point Mr Brownlee? 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: My point is this. The accusation was that somehow I have welshed on the deal that was made on the day. The deal was that provided that United Future had no objection because United Future is like a sore toe to the Government—very tender and hard to make progress with—provided that United Future was happy with arrangements around the bill then it could progress through all stages today. Leave would be sought at the start of the proceedings that there be a second reading and that we then progress to the third reading with no debate and a vote. All that we asked for was some consideration of local Christchurch members’ interest in speaking on this bill and that there be another 30 minutes of contribution from members who wanted to make it. The Government in the sort of bloody-minded approach that it takes to all these things decided to refuse that. 
I suggest to the Deputy Leader of the House that he might like to get on the blower to his superior the Leader of the House and ask whether he thinks some of the arrangements he has been discussing with us—that are known to me and to our senior whip and to no one else in our party—are likely to progress if he keeps up this sort of attitude. There is no doubt that people listening to this will be absolutely flabbergasted by the utter waste of time that has gone on here tonight. It could have all been fixed if there was just as much goodwill from the Government to a members’ day piece of legislation as the Opposition is routinely required to show to the Government in the advance of its own business. 
With regard to the impugning of my integrity I do take offence and I ask the Chair to indicate an action to the member concerned to put that right.
Hunt Jonathan: Speaker’s Rulings — Contempt Finding—Hon Dr Nick Smith 
Hunt Jonathan: Speaker’s Rulings — Contempt Finding—Hon Dr Nick Smith 
[Volume:616;Page:11989] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: As members will appreciate since the finding of contempt against the Hon Dr Nick Smith the Clerk of the House and I have received numerous media inquiries as to the effect of the finding on Dr Smith’s membership of the House. We have both declined to comment on the ground that any advice on such a matter should be given to this House rather than to individual members of the media. The media can learn my views by reporting the proceedings of this House. 
I have not seen any order of the court with regard to Dr Smith nor have I seen the court’s judgment. In those circumstances the question is academic at present. I also understand that Dr Smith is contemplating an appeal. Ultimately whether a vacancy has arisen is a matter for me as Speaker to be satisfied of. I refer members to section 129(1) of the Electoral Act. 
I am certainly not satisfied that a vacancy exists at this time. In the meantime I therefore intend to adhere to the provisional view expressed by the Clerk of the House to the Business Committee on 24 August 2003—a copy of which was handed out at that meeting and all parties were there—that if Dr Smith were to be found in contempt of court no disqualification would follow.
Simich Clem: Christchurch City Council (Robert McDougall Gallery) Land Vesting Bill — Procedure Second Reading 
Simich Clem: Christchurch City Council (Robert McDougall Gallery) Land Vesting Bill — Procedure Second Reading 
[Volume:611;Page:8780] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: We are on a matter of leave Mr Ron Mark and in any case you are free to seek leave for any proposition you might have. We have had a seeking of leave. Everyone is clear on what will happen. I think it is a matter of goodwill. There is no reason for instance that one side cannot have 12 speeches in a row—none at all. It is a matter of goodwill—though it may not happen. Leave has been sought. Is there any objection to that course being followed? There is.
Benson-Pope David: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Benson-Pope David: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13512] 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Minister of Fisheries) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Maharey Steve: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Maharey Steve: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14369] 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Associate Minister of Education (Tertiary Education)) 
: 
 On the second issue I simply invite the member to make that information available to the Minister of Education because he would be very interested in the kinds of facts that the member is exploring. I can tell from Mr English’s speech that he wants to verify some of the things that are in the booklets himself. Obviously he should do that and then pass on the information to the Minister’s office. 
In relation to the Education Review Office review of Cambridge High School and whether the Education Review Office can be relied upon I draw the member’s attention to the notes that have come from the Education and Science Committee where the issue was discussed in relation to Education Review Office reviews and where questions were definitely raised. Issues were also raised about the Education Review Office being connected to other agencies so that it can have better access to data. The committee arrived at the conclusion that the new agreements that are being made around the Education Review Office the New Zealand Qualifications Authority and so on give more faith that the Education Review Office reviews can be relied on in relation to Cambridge High School. So yes the issue is a live one and it has been discussed and dealt with in the notes from the Education and Science Committee. 
Once again on the second issue the member should verify the data as he wants to do and then I think the place that the information should go to is the Minister’s office. 
Vote agreed to.
Peters Winston: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Peters Winston: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5442] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. Mr Anderton just voted for two votes in favour. I want to know where his second vote is.
Stewart Barbara: War Pensions Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
Stewart Barbara: War Pensions Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4529] 
BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) 
: 
 New Zealand First will be supporting these schedules. Like my colleague Richard Worth we are disappointed that the increase was a mere 2.7 percent. We would have liked a greater increase but we understand why this increase has not been given at this particular point in time. We will definitely be supporting this schedule. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Papers 53 and 67 in the name of the Hon George Hawkins to schedule 1 and schedule 2 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to and schedules as amended agreed to. 
Bill reported with amendment.
Vote: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Vote: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:15206] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 55 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; United Future 8; Maori Party 1. 
Amendments agreed to.
Cullen Michael: Points of Order — Foreshore and Seabed Bill—Availability of Supplementary Order Paper 
Cullen Michael: Points of Order — Foreshore and Seabed Bill—Availability of Supplementary Order Paper 
[Volume:621;Page:16875] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 The Supplementary Order Paper will be made available as soon as it is printed—it will go to the Bills Office. I will also be seeking leave subsequently once the copies are available to table what is called a redline version of the bill which will look like a report-back version of the bill had the Fisheries and other Sea-related Legislation Committee been allowed to do its job properly.
Vote: Holidays Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Holidays Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:15984] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Holidays Amendment Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 75 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 45 
New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Bill read a second time.
Benson-Pope David: Consumer Credit Bill — First Reading 
Benson-Pope David: Consumer Credit Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:3523] 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (NZ Labour—Dunedin South) 
: 
 I am pleased to rise in support of this legislation and commend to the House its passage to the select committee.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:621;Page:16798] 
8.  
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: How does the New Zealand Immigration Service respond when it receives a letter of complaint alleging that individuals require the service’s investigation? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 I am advised that depending on the nature of the complaint allegations are referred to the department’s fraud unit or the border investigations branch for investigation. Complaints are acknowledged and further information sought where appropriate. Complaints are prioritised according to the seriousness of the allegations. Where a complaint is substantiated the matter may be dealt with by way of removal revocation deportation and/or prosecution. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Can the Minister explain why we have a fistful of letters of complaint that have never been acted on by his department and will his investigation of Asha Ali Abdilledeal with her treatment of staff at the Red Cross in Wellington and Christchurch which involved threatening to pour petrol on one person and spitting in another receptionist’s face and the bizarre circumstances at the Hastings police station in which she threw a bucket of faeces over a constable and also the support letter from a member of Parliament regarding the immigrant fraudster BahmanFakharzadeh who has allegedly cheated four Government departments and is driving a taxi around Wellington? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: I think there are three questions. If the member has a fistful of letters that have not been acted on I would be very appreciative of receiving them so that I can look into the matters further. As far as Ms Abdille is concerned that case is being investigated as the member knows and the allegations are being looked into. As far as the taxi-driver is concerned I am not certain about that matter. I have seen a number of allegations about taxis—who pays or does not pay their fares—and it would be interesting to see whether the issue raised is related to that particular case. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Could I just assure the Minister that the issue is not related to any particular case other than to the fact that he never ever replies to tell a member of Parliament that something has been done about it. Accordingly we have hundreds and hundreds of people running around this darn country who should be offshore because they are here illegally. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I know. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It is matter of politics. I know the member is good at that but it is not a point of order.
Mackey Janet: Motions — Floods—Eastern Bay of Plenty 
Mackey Janet: Motions — Floods—Eastern Bay of Plenty 
[Volume:618;Page:14293] 
JANET MACKEY (Labour—East Coast) 
: 
 I concur with the sentiments expressed by the Hon Tony Ryall. Having visited the region yesterday I can testify to the strength and dedication of that community in repairing the damage and in moving on with their lives. I also want to draw special attention to those agencies both governmental and non-governmental that have moved right outside their comfort zones and core business to take their skills—skills that are not normally needed in that community but that are in demand now—and use them to help the people of the community rebuild their homes and their lives. I am sure that members of the Labour Party agree with the sentiments expressed by Mr Ryall and we wish the people of the community all the best for their redevelopment.
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:17121] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 10 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 107 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Metiria Turei to clause 91 be agreed to: 
to omit from new subsection (4) of section 94D of the principal Act the words “ in the opinion of the consent authority”.
Cunliffe David: Income Tax Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Cunliffe David: Income Tax Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12072] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Associate Minister of Revenue) 
: 
 I seek leave for the Committee stage of the Income Tax Bill to be a single debate on all the provisions of the bill and for the preliminary provisions parts and schedules to be put as one question at the conclusion of the 3-hour debate. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none.
Burton Mark: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Burton Mark: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15915] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. In the spirit of good communication I can assure the member that subject to the normal ability of any member to seek a closure motion if he or she feels the debate is deteriorating and to seek the decision of the chair I do not think Government members are in any hurry to curtail this debate.
Gallagher Martin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Gallagher Martin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:623;Page:18750] 
5.  
MARTIN GALLAGHER (Labour—Hamilton West) 
 to the  
Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade 
: What reports has he received on the extent of damage caused by cyclones Nancy and Olaf in the Pacific and what if anything has New Zealand been asked to do to assist? 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade) 
: 
 I am receiving regular reports. Fortunately these show that the damage to Samoa and the Cook Islands appears to be less substantial than was originally feared. We do however have a very significant concern about the well-being of the crews of it now seems four fishing boats in Samoan waters. One of these vessels has sunk and the other three were reported as being in distress after having encountered 190-kilometre-an-hour winds and 15-metre seas. A Royal New Zealand Air Force Orion is currently in the region leading a search and rescue mission. At the time I came into the House that mission had not yet detected any of the vessels. 
Martin Gallagher 
: Has New Zealand conveyed specific offers of assistance to both the Cook Islands and Samoa? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: Yes. In addition to the search and rescue mission New Zealand has aircraft on stand-by and can in conjunction with our disaster relief partners France and Australia also provide technical support and relief supplies. As of midday I had received a message back from the Cook Islands to the effect that it did not need any immediate assistance. Later today I expect to receive a full assessment on Samoa and on whether we will be required to provide any assistance there.
Vote: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17768. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 36 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 9. 
Amendments agreed to.
Vote: Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) — In Committee 
Vote: Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9543] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 46 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendments in the name of the Hon Phil Goff to proposed clause 2 and proposed clause 49A set out on Supplementary Order Paper 161 in the name of the Hon Phil Goff be agreed to: 
to amend clause 2 set out on Supplementary Order paper No 161 by adding the following new subclause: 
(2)Despite subsection (1) if the date appointed under that subsection is prior to the commencement of section 4A of the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act 1995 section 49A comes into force on that commencement; and 
to omit new clause 49A as set out on Supplementary Order Paper No 161 andsubstitute the following: 
49AAmendments to Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act 1995 
(1)In this section the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act 1995 is called “the Act”. 
(2)Section 2(1) of the Act is amended by adding to paragraph (c) of the definition of  
conviction  
the word “; and” and by also adding the following paragraph: 
(d)a finding that the person is unfit to stand trial;—. 
(3)Section 4A(1) of the Act is amended by repealing paragraph (c) and substituting the following paragraphs: 
(c)in or on leave from a hospital— 
(i)under section 46 of the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 1993; or 
(ii)following an application under section 45(2) of the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 1993; or 
(iii)under an order under section 34(1)(a)(i) of the Criminal Procedure (MentallyImpaired Persons) Act 2003; or 
(d)in or on leave from a secure facility— 
(i)following an application undersection 29(1) of the Intellectual Disability (Compulsory Care and Rehabilitation) Act 2003; or 
(ii)under an order under section 34(1)(a)(ii) of the Criminal Procedure (MentallyImpaired Persons) Act 2003.” 
(4)Section 46(1) of the Act is amended by adding to paragraph (d) the word “; or’ and by also adding the following paragraph: 
(e)in a facility under the Intellectual Disability (Compulsory Care and Rehabilitation) Act 2003.
Copeland Gordon: Health (Screening Programmes) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Copeland Gordon: Health (Screening Programmes) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:613;Page:9915] 
GORDON COPELAND (Whip—United Future) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I want to now raise the point I have already raised with you privately. It refers to how it is that in this debate United Future is getting the eighth call rather than the seventh. You have explained to me that that has happened because when New Zealand First failed to take the call in the order we had agreed after much consultation between all the parties you then gave that call to the National Party and reverted later to New Zealand First and went back to the speaking order. 
I want to suggest to you that that is rather a perverse outcome. It means that a party is quite innocent—and in this case it is our own party which did not fail to take its call at the allotted time but we have been degraded from seventh to eighth. I think the alternative call you might have made and I would like you to consider this would have been to go to the Green Party—in which case we would have gone from seventh up to sixth in the speaking order. 
I guess the point I want you to consider is what sort of precedent we are establishing here because it is important for the future. I think we need to think about the perversity of what has happened tonight and whether that should become the norm for the future. I would like you to consider that matter.
Vote: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Vote: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:15205] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 47 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; Maori Party 1. 
Motion agreed to. 
A party vote was called for on the question that clause 1 be agreed to. 
Simon Power 
: Point of order—