edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Policing Bill — In Committee 
Policing Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17834] 
Policing Bill 
In Committee 
Part 1 Preliminary provisions 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Police) 
: 
 I very much welcome the opportunity to go into the Committee stage of the Policing Bill because this bill contains some of the most significant legislative proposals on policing to come before this House in the last half-century. Fundamentally this bill is about renewing the New Zealand Police mandate to protect life and property to maintain law and order to prevent and to detect crime to minimise crashes and to prosecute offenders. 
As a Government we have invested heavily in giving the New Zealand Police the resources needed to act on this mandate. We now have a record number of New Zealand Police officers and more are on the way. They are operating out of over 34 new or refurbished stations around New Zealand and they are backed by new protective equipment. We have also encouraged a focus on tackling the root causes of crime by early intervention and by trying to stop the cycle of crime by stopping offending before it begins. 
The police as we all know have a critical role to play in trying to keep the criminals off our streets and ensuring that we keep people out of the criminal justice system. I believe that the New Zealand Police do a tremendous job. 
Progress reported. 
Report adopted.
King Annette: Policing Bill — In Committee 
King Annette: Policing Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17834] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Police) 
: 
 I very much welcome the opportunity to go into the Committee stage of the Policing Bill because this bill contains some of the most significant legislative proposals on policing to come before this House in the last half-century. Fundamentally this bill is about renewing the New Zealand Police mandate to protect life and property to maintain law and order to prevent and to detect crime to minimise crashes and to prosecute offenders. 
As a Government we have invested heavily in giving the New Zealand Police the resources needed to act on this mandate. We now have a record number of New Zealand Police officers and more are on the way. They are operating out of over 34 new or refurbished stations around New Zealand and they are backed by new protective equipment. We have also encouraged a focus on tackling the root causes of crime by early intervention and by trying to stop the cycle of crime by stopping offending before it begins. 
The police as we all know have a critical role to play in trying to keep the criminals off our streets and ensuring that we keep people out of the criminal justice system. I believe that the New Zealand Police do a tremendous job. 
Progress reported. 
Report adopted.
Vote: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:649;Page:17834] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 112 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand National 48; New Zealand First 7; Maori Party 3; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independents: Copeland Field. 
Noes 6 
Green Party 6. 
Bill read a first time. 
Bill referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee
Vote: Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill — Third Reading 
Vote: Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:649;Page:17827] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independents: Copeland Field. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 48. 
Abstentions 9 
Green Party 6; Maori Party 3. 
Bill read a third time.
Event: Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Event: Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17827] 
Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 
In Committee 
Clause 1 agreed to.  
Clause 2 agreed to.  
Clause 3 agreed to.  
Clause 4 agreed to.  
Bill reported without amendment. 
Report adopted.
Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill — Third Reading 
Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:649;Page:17827] 
Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill 
Third Reading 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill be now read a third time 
. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independents: Copeland Field. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 48. 
Abstentions 9 
Green Party 6; Maori Party 3. 
Bill read a third time.
Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17827] 
Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 
In Committee 
Clause 1 agreed to.  
Clause 2 agreed to.  
Clause 3 agreed to.  
Clause 4 agreed to.  
Bill reported without amendment. 
Report adopted.
Vote: Appropriation (2008/09 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
Vote: Appropriation (2008/09 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
[Volume:649;Page:17827] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Appropriation (2008/09 Estimates) Bill be now read a third time and the Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independents: Copeland Field. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 48. 
Abstentions 9 
Green Party 6; Maori Party 3. 
Appropriation (2008/09 Estimates) Bill read a third time. 
Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill read a second time.
Cullen Michael: Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill — Third Reading 
Cullen Michael: Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:649;Page:17827] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill be now read a third time 
.
Cullen Michael: Appropriation (2008/09 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
Cullen Michael: Appropriation (2008/09 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
[Volume:649;Page:17826] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave following the conclusion of this debate to proceed directly to the third reading of the Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill and for there to be a further 10-minute speech on this debate. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave has been sought for that course to be followed. Is there any objection? There is.
Cullen Michael: Appropriation (2008/09 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
Cullen Michael: Appropriation (2008/09 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
[Volume:649;Page:17826] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 There have been points of order during the debate and this is not a debate with a set number of speeches. It is a debate of a set time which is 3 hours and the time for the debate has elapsed. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I thank Mr Tremain and Dr Cullen for raising that issue.
Tremain Chris: Appropriation (2008/09 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
Tremain Chris: Appropriation (2008/09 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
[Volume:649;Page:17826] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to have another 10-minute speech. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: The member can do that in a moment but I just want to say that Dr Cullen is absolutely right and I was right—the 3 hours has expired. But you may seek leave for anything at any time. 
CHRIS TREMAIN 
: I seek the leave of the House to have a 10-minute speech which I believe we had arranged for. I seek the leave of the House for that extra 10-minute speech for Maurice Williamson. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave has been sought for that course to be followed. Is there any objection? There is.
Tremain Chris: Appropriation (2008/09 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
Tremain Chris: Appropriation (2008/09 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
[Volume:649;Page:17826] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have been following this debate very closely tonight. Things got a little confusing when ACT and United Future did not turn up to take their 5-minute calls. We took the opportunity to take those 5-minute calls; I spoke with the Assistant Speaker at the time about taking those calls and it was allowed. I have been following this debate very closely and there is still a 10-minute slot available for Maurice Williamson. I am very sure about that; I have been following the debate very closely.
Hobbs Marian: Appropriation (2008/09 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
Hobbs Marian: Appropriation (2008/09 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
[Volume:649;Page:17820] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Marian Hobbs) 
: Before I take the next call can I clarify whether you are doing a 5-minute call? 
David Bennett 
: Yes. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Marian Hobbs) 
: You are doing a 5-minute call. Thank you.
Cullen Michael: Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill — First Reading 
Cullen Michael: Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:649;Page:17787] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill be now read a first time. 
Bill read a first time.
Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill — First Reading 
Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:649;Page:17787] 
Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill 
First Reading 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Imprest Supply (Second for 2008/09) Bill be now read a first time. 
Bill read a first time.
Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:649;Page:17770] 
11.  
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Justice 
: What is the Government doing to give communities more say in liquor licensing decisions? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Associate Minister of Justice) 
: 
 The Government has today introduced the Sale and Supply of Liquor and Liquor Enforcement Bill which will give community members the ability to object to licensing applications that affect their communities and will also give licensing authorities the power to take social impact into account when making licensing decisions. Most important we are giving real teeth to local alcohol plans by requiring licensing authorities to give effect to them. That means that if a local alcohol plan has a set closing time or a one-way-door policy then it will become a condition of all licences in that area. I have also today announced a Law Commission review of the sale and supply of liquor which will give a say to all stakeholders including the community and industry. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Why did the Government decide to include some measures in the bill and others in the Law Commission review? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: Apart from the new provisions I mentioned before the bill contains provisions that were the subject of earlier work and have broad-based community and industry support. It is important to progress those and also to address the problem of licensing being issued to dairies by another name despite Parliament voting in 1999 against the extension to dairies. The Law Commission has been given a very broad brief; in particular it will look at such matters as the proliferation of specific outlets the age at which liquor can be purchased the application of competition law to the sale of liquor and the management of risk around licensing and enforcement. With Parliament having a conscience vote on liquor issues the report will give an evidence base for good decision-making.
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:649;Page:17766] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the member please be seated. Normally if members have documents they wish to table they seek leave at the end of the question. We have moved on from the question but sometimes members remember later that they wish to table a document. There is no problem with that. It happened in this case and members had the opportunity to decide whether leave should be given.
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:649;Page:17766] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Are you suggesting that somehow I did it in the wrong order?
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Wilson Margaret: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:649;Page:17766] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No no. If we had explanations as to why people do not do things in the right order we would get nothing else done. Members know that they should seek leave at the appropriate time but sometimes they forget and that is human.
Jones Dail: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Jones Dail: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:649;Page:17765] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Could Mr Hide explain why he did not seek that leave when Mr Peters was in the House and why he sought leave when he knew that Mr Peters had had to leave the House—
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:649;Page:17765] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to table a report showing that New Zealand First in fact did receive money from Simunovich Fisheries. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? Yes there is objection.
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:649;Page:17765] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to table an article entitled “The Scampi Affair” which has Mr Peters saying “I’m saying no”— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? Yes there is.
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:649;Page:17761] 
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour—Waitakere) 
: 
 My question is to the Minister of Justice and asks—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I am not sure whether Mr Clarkson heard what Mr Peters just called out but I can tell you Madam Speaker that it was absolutely unparliamentary. I think Winston Peters should be asked to withdraw and apologise. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I am sorry but I did not hear what was said. I was too busy concentrating on the question. Did Mr Clarkson take offence and does he ask for what was said to be withdrawn and for there to be an apology? 
Bob Clarkson 
: Madam Speaker I did not hear it so I will let him slide this time. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Thank you. I also just remind members that if they make comments that lead to disorder they do occasion a breach of the Standing Orders. In future I will be asking members to leave the Chamber when that occurs so that we can proceed with business.
Cullen Michael: Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Bill — Procedure 
Cullen Michael: Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:649;Page:17751] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Pursuant to an agreement in the Business Committee I seek leave for the debates on the questions that the Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Bill be read a second and third time to be taken together as a single debate of twelve 10-minute speeches. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Bill — Procedure 
Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:649;Page:17751] 
Wednesday 6 August 2008 
Madam Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Bill 
Procedure 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Pursuant to an agreement in the Business Committee I seek leave for the debates on the questions that the Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Bill be read a second and third time to be taken together as a single debate of twelve 10-minute speeches. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Burton Mark: Policing Bill — Second Reading 
Burton Mark: Policing Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:649;Page:17749] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Labour—Taupo) 
: 
 I have pleasure in taking a short call on the Policing Bill. What more could illustrate how important this is than the fact that the Minister of Police has given time for an appointment with a police dog? I think that only at 2 minutes to 10 could we hear that in this House. 
Seriously I want to acknowledge the good work of the Minister Annette King Martin Gallagher Ron Mark as the chair of the Law and Order Committee and all the members of the select committee who saw this bill through. Superintendent Hamish McCardle who is still in the gallery is a real stayer. We have seen that with the bill and indeed with the fact that he is here tonight. Really I think it underscores the quality of the debate in the House. I regret only that none of this debate has been witnessed by the members of the media in the gallery this evening. This is I think a good example of quality debate and I acknowledge every member of the House who has taken a call. We have had some serious considered debate and we have raised some quite important issues that will require further consideration during the remaining stages of the bill’s journey through the House. That is as it should be. 
This bill is laying the foundations 50 years after the bill that it replaces for a 21st century policing structure. It ensures as preceding speakers have indicated that certain core principles are preserved and if anything rightly strengthened. The independence of the Commissioner of Police and police officers—constables—lies at the heart of that. It is my pleasure tonight to support the progress of this bill. I look forward to its further progress in the House and to I am sure hearty debate and serious consideration of the important matters the bill brings before the Parliament. 
Bill read a second time.
Guy Nathan: Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Guy Nathan: Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:649;Page:17734] 
NATHAN GUY (National) 
: 
 National supports the Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill at its second reading this evening. It is important legislation. It is good that we had a very good look at this legislation in the Standing Orders Committee. In the past we did not realise that we had no law that members may be paid over the approximately 2-week period—and that can vary—between polling day and declaration day. So this bill will tidy up that anomaly in order to allow members to be paid over that 2-week period. The examples I would like to raise for the House this evening are those whereby a member will be required by his or her caucus to fly to Wellington after polling day presuming that that member will be declared a member of Parliament. Therefore some accommodation contribution will need to be paid by Parliamentary Service. 
The other important point to make to the House and to those listening is that current sitting MPs have leases on their offices and also phone-rental expenses. That was an important aspect that the select committee looked at in order to ensure that those two very important components were funded over that 2-week period on average. 
We received no submissions when this legislation went out into the public arena but I need to acknowledge the good work of the Standing Orders Committee. I also endorse the comments that Dr Cullen made about the general manager making those decisions and I think it is important that the Chief Electoral Officer can declare those results as quickly as possible on the night of or certainly on the Sunday after election day. We are looking forward to the contributions at the Committee stage of this bill as it traverses through the House. 
Bill read a second time.
Parker David: Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Parker David: Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:649;Page:17733] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister of State Services) 
on behalf of the  
Minister for the Environment 
: I move  
That the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill be referred to the Primary Production Committee 
 with an instruction that the committee presents its final report on or before 25 August 2008 and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting except during oral questions during any evening on a day in which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 195(1)(b) and (c) and 192. 
Motion agreed to.
Moroney Sue: Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Moroney Sue: Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:649;Page:17725] 
SUE MORONEY (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to take just a short call on the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill at its first reading. This Government is getting on with it I say to Mr Roy. I thank the member for his encouragement for the Government to get on with it. This is just another example of this good Labour-led Government getting on with it once again. 
This bill amends the legislation governing aquaculture in order to clarify the original intent of the aquaculture law reform. The bill is required because of an Environment Court decision that allowed applications for aquaculture activities to be made before aquaculture management areas were defined in regional coastal plans. I know there are many of those regional coastal plans where people have taken a lot of time to think about these areas very carefully and to think about the development of aquaculture management areas in their region. This bill clarifies the position that applications for aquaculture activities are to be made only for aquaculture management areas in regional coastal plans. 
I ask members whether such planning is not a very fine thing brought to bear on this country by this Government. I think that in regard to the good old market-led days of the National Government—where it thought that anything could go that no rules were needed that no planning was needed and that anyone could just be allowed to do whatever he or she wanted to do—those days fortunately are gone. These days we actually do plan. We take our time over things we get them right and we get good plans in place. 
The bill also cancels any applications made after 9 May 2006 that did not relate to these aquaculture management areas in the operative regional coastal plans. It freezes the applications made between 1 January 2005 and 9 May 2006 and allows them to be processed only if the area concerned becomes an aquaculture management area in an operative regional coastal plan. It clarifies the process for creating those management areas and clarifies the various provisions of the aquaculture legislation relating to non-aquaculture activities in the aquaculture management areas. It also clarifies the obligation to provide new space for iwi and the assessment of areas of aquaculture management areas that are already subject to an existing marine-farm approval. So with those few words in outlining the real purpose of this bill at its first reading I commend the bill to the House.
Vote: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Vote: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17720] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the votes the preamble clauses 1 to 12 and schedules 1 to 7 be agreed to. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independents: Copeland Field. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 2. 
Abstentions 10 
Green Party 6; Maori Party 4. 
Votes preamble clauses 1 to 12 and schedules 1 to 7 agreed to. 
Bill reported without amendment. 
Report adopted.
Robertson H V Ross: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17720] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The time for this debate has expired. Therefore the remaining votes and provisions of the bill will be put as one question and there is no debate. 
The question was put that Vote Housing Vote Consumer Affairs Vote National Archives Vote National Library Vote Pacific Island Affairs Vote Statistics Vote Foreign Affairs and Trade Vote Official Development Assistance Vote Racing and Vote Revenue the preamble clauses 1 to 12 and schedules 1 to 7 be agreed to.
Peters Winston: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Peters Winston: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17715] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 Having received clearance from both the National Party and the Greens that they do not wish to take part in the debate on Vote Racing when they had first of all signalled they would can I move that this matter therefore not be discussed and the estimates carry on as was previously arranged albeit short of one item? 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member would have to seek leave. Is the member seeking leave? The Committee is the master of its own destiny. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Yes. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is none.
Peters Winston: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Peters Winston: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17714] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 It is a sad thing in this House when people cannot understand English and they therefore deny themselves the chance albeit for a brief time in their political lives to cooperate. It was a very reasonable request. I used the words “subject to the availability of the Green member”. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the member. I understand that that discussion is taking place now.
Heatley Phil: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Heatley Phil: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17714] 
PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. The point that we made when we were speaking to the point of order—[ 
Interruption 
] Sit down junior. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member will be seated. There is no need for that Mr Heatley. That leads to disorder in the House on both sides and I have to deal with it. The member will be seated. The point of order will be short and to the point. 
PHIL HEATLEY 
: The point we are making is that clearly the Greens and New Zealand First have to talk about whether the Green speaker is available when the Minister wants to be in the Chamber. So our suggestion is that the Minister seek leave when he knows that that is the case and the Greens are happy with it. So rather than seek leave now and have us make a decision now could the member seek leave when he knows that the Greens are available? That is our point. Otherwise we do not object. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I understand that that is what will happen.
Peters Winston: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Peters Winston: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17713] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 Mr Chairperson I said “subject to the Green member being able to be down here” which means that if she can get down here and it is OK with Mr Locke who is looking after the affairs in the Committee now then we can expedite this issue. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: That is fine. Is there any objection to that course of action being taken if it is agreed to? [ 
Interruption 
] He is going to come back first? We need to wait until it is organised; it should not take too long.
Locke Keith: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Locke Keith: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17713] 
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
: 
 Mr Chairperson I have to check on the speaker’s availability. I cannot just say offhand. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Can I suggest that the two members get together and organise that in the next 5 or 10 minutes.
Peters Winston: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Peters Winston: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17713] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 Well thank you for the courtesy of telling me! I have been down here three times this afternoon. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I have been notified that the Greens may take a call on Vote Racing. If they do so then the Minister will need to be here. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: They are not taking a call on Vote Racing. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: In that case Minister you are free. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: I do not want to have any special privileges Mr Chairperson— 
Keith Locke 
: Yes we are taking a call on Vote Racing. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: If that is the case can the debate on Vote Racing be held soon please. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The Minister is quite entitled to seek leave to— 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: I seek leave to have the debate held when the Green member gets down here.
Guy Nathan: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Guy Nathan: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17713] 
NATHAN GUY (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 The National member who wished to take a call on Vote Racing is no longer here this afternoon so unfortunately we will not be taking a call on Vote Racing this evening. 
Hon Members 
: Oh! 
NATHAN GUY 
: I have alerted the whips about this.
Peters Winston: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Peters Winston: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17713] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I have had to rejig a whole lot of meetings late this afternoon because I understand I am to be involved as a Minister in respect of the estimates shortly. Is there any chance of my being heard pretty soon so I can get back to meetings; if so does anybody have any objections to that? 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: What vote did the member wish to speak to? 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Well I do not—I am told that other members of the Committee have intimated they want to have a discussion on Vote Racing. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Obviously the Committee is the master of its own destiny.
Hobbs Marian: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Hobbs Marian: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:17699] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Marian Hobbs) 
: Before I call anybody else who may wish to speak I just remind people that when using phones in the Chamber they need to keep their voices down. I do not really want to hear entire conversations being relayed across the Chamber. Thank you.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:649;Page:17689] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a letter from the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment dated 4 August stating that the report was to be tabled in Parliament yesterday. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Fairbrother Russell: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fairbrother Russell: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:649;Page:17684] 
9.  
RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: What recent reports if any has she received on the Working for Families package? 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 I have received a press statement from the National Party finance spokesperson Bill English saying that the Working for Families package would remain unchanged if National became the Government so that families would have “certainty about their incomes.” 
Russell Fairbrother 
: Has the Minister received any other reports on the Working for Families package? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: I have received a subsequent report from Mr English saying that National actually wanted to change Working for Families but it could not do it “without taking money off them.” He continued: “punters are keen to keep it. … The last thing we want is to spend the whole election campaign with families of four on TV saying ‘Mr Key’s taking money off us’. You can’t do that. … So later on we’re gonna have to have a bit of a sort out. Yeah we’re gonna do something but we can’t do it now.” And he has just confirmed it in the House. 
Russell Fairbrother 
: Has the Minister received any other recent reports on the Working for Families package? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: I have seen transcripts from Television One’s  
Breakfast  
programme and the  
Agenda  
programme where the National leader Mr Key also gave conflicting statements about the fate of Working for Families should National become the Government. So far from National providing certainty for families the signals from Mr Key and Mr English are that the fate of Working for Families would be extremely uncertain under a National-led Government.
Locke Keith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Locke Keith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:649;Page:17682] 
7.  
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: What concerns if any has her Government expressed to the Chinese Government about its continuing clamp-down on dissent contrary to promises made to the international community to improve human rights by the time of the Olympics? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 The Government regularly raises the issue of human rights with the Chinese Government at all levels of government—most recently in July. I personally raised with the Premier during my visit in April the issue of human rights and the need for restraint and dialogue in respect of Tibet. 
Keith Locke 
: Does she think that brave pro-democracy campaigners like those attacked by police near Tiananmen Square yesterday deserve the support from democratic nations like New Zealand; and what is her Government doing to support such people at such time of the Olympics? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I have heard only media reports of the particular matter to which the member refers. I will obviously seek further official advice on that and then a judgment will need to be made as to whether this is something the New Zealand Government would specifically wish to raise with the Chinese authorities. 
Keith Locke 
: Has the New Zealand Embassy in Beijing experienced any delays in getting approval for its diplomats to visit China to assess the human rights situation there; if so what was the nature of the delays and problems that the embassy experienced? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I do not have any recent advice on this. I have some recollection that it has not been easy for diplomats to be able to enter Tibet but I have no other recent advice. 
Keith Locke 
: Will the Prime Minister be advising New Zealand’s Olympic athletes to wear face masks in the lead-up to their events as the US Olympic team is doing in order to protect them from air pollution that is well in excess of World Health Organization standards? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: No I will not be offering that advice. I was interested to see on media reports at the weekend that for whatever reason—perhaps stronger winds or perhaps the fact that factories have been closed for some time—the air did appear to be clearing and there were even signs of blue in the sky. 
Keith Locke 
: I seek leave to table a recent report on the China Olympics Human Rights Act passed by the US Congress recently which asks the US President to publish strong statements condemning China’s human rights abuses. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
Keith Locke 
: I seek leave to table an item from Sky News yesterday about the dangers of asthma attacks skin conditions infections and sickness— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? Yes there is.
Wilson Margaret: Visitors — Timor-Leste Democratic Republic—President Australia—Hon Dean Wells MLA Queensland 
Wilson Margaret: Visitors — Timor-Leste Democratic Republic—President Australia—Hon Dean Wells MLA Queensland 
[Volume:649;Page:17667] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in further informing members that the Hon Dean Wells from the Legislative Assembly Queensland is present in the gallery. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed.
Wilson Margaret: Visitors — Timor-Leste Democratic Republic—President Australia—Hon Dean Wells MLA Queensland 
Wilson Margaret: Visitors — Timor-Leste Democratic Republic—President Australia—Hon Dean Wells MLA Queensland 
[Volume:649;Page:17667] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that His Excellency Fernando Lasama de Araujo President of Parliament National Parliament of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed and accorded a seat on the left of the Chair. I am sure the House would also wish to welcome members of his delegation present in the gallery.
Visitors — Timor-Leste Democratic Republic—President Australia—Hon Dean Wells MLA Queensland 
Visitors — Timor-Leste Democratic Republic—President Australia—Hon Dean Wells MLA Queensland 
[Volume:649;Page:17667] 
Tuesday 5 August 2008 
Madam Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Timor-Leste Democratic Republic—President 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that His Excellency Fernando Lasama de Araujo President of Parliament National Parliament of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed and accorded a seat on the left of the Chair. I am sure the House would also wish to welcome members of his delegation present in the gallery. 
Australia—Hon Dean Wells MLA Queensland 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in further informing members that the Hon Dean Wells from the Legislative Assembly Queensland is present in the gallery. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed.
Moroney Sue: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Moroney Sue: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:648;Page:17661] 
SUE MORONEY (Junior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 One vote in favour. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: One vote in favour.
Vote: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Vote: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:648;Page:17662] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Vote Labour be agreed to. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independents: Copeland Field. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 48. 
Abstentions 9 
Green Party 5; Maori Party 4. 
Vote agreed to.
Mallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Mallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:648;Page:17661] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 This is a very serious matter because on a confidence vote if a vote has been cast directly against the wish of the member by a member who has no right to cast it I think it could well be a matter of privilege. I think we need a very quick apology in order for that not to occur.
Groser Tim: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Groser Tim: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:648;Page:17661] 
TIM GROSER (National) 
: 
 I withdraw the vote recorded for Gordon Copeland Mr Chair. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Thank you Mr Groser. Is someone going to speak for Gordon Copeland?
Moroney Sue: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Moroney Sue: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:648;Page:17661] 
SUE MORONEY (Junior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. In relation to the vote that was just recorded for Gordon Copeland I tell the Committee that Labour holds the proxy vote for Mr Copeland on this legislation.
Mallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Mallard Trevor: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:648;Page:17656] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 In case the member Nicky Wagner had not noticed—and I know that there was not a lot of publicity about it although a former Minister for the Environment Simon Upton seemed to notice it—the draft national policy statement was released last week or possibly even the week before. I know that it is a bit much to expect that member to stay up to date but to criticise people for not releasing something when it was released so recently is really— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: No the issue was the Cabinet paper on allocation. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Dear oh dear! 
I want to refer to the Canterbury problem because there is certainly a problem with the allocation of water in Canterbury. The core of the problem is that the Canterbury Regional Council does not have an operating plan—unlike I think every other regional council in the country. Some of them are up to their second iteration; they are on a renewal 10 years on. Unfortunately because of a lack of competence on the part of past district councillors in the Canterbury region there is not a proper operating plan. There is a very real problem. It can certainly be argued that there already has been an over-allocation of water in Canterbury. That is bad for the economy and there are dangers to the environment—certainly in terms of recreational aspects. There are lots of problems as a result of that. 
I find it slightly interesting that the member is criticising the problems with water in Canterbury and blaming them on the Government when it is my understanding that that member was a member of the council that did not do the work that it was meant to do. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: She was a very good member. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: She was a very good member of a group that was not competent and did not do the job in the way that other— 
Nicky Wagner 
: 50 years! 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The member cannot say 9 years to me. That member— 
Nicky Wagner 
: Nothing is ever his fault! 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Actually I refuse to take responsibility for the Canterbury Regional Council not putting a plan in action. Maybe I should sack its members. I have the right to sack them for not doing it. But the trouble is that I would be sacking the people who are trying to fix it up now whereas it was other people who should have done the job and did not do so. One of those people is sitting opposite me in the House and she had the cheek and the gall to raise the issue now. I do not know whether she has been spending too much time with Nick Smith sharing the same air as him—I do not know what the problem is—but I regret the fact that the National Party gives such a low priority to environmental matters that it appoints those two people to do the job.
Cunliffe David: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Cunliffe David: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:648;Page:17651] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of Health) 
: 
 I had not intended to take another call right now but there were some significant factual inaccuracies in Dr Jackie Blue’s contribution. For the sake of New Zealand women particularly those who are vulnerable and worried because they have Herceptin-positive breast cancer— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I would trust Jackie Blue any day. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: The public would not trust Dr Smith; nor would the courts. I suggest he just cans it. 
The facts of the matter are that the FinHer trial is statistically significant for disease reduction. That is not in contention. What is also not in contention is that the mean efficacy of the FinHer trial is very close to—actually slightly better than I understand—the mean efficacy of a number of the 12-month trials. What this debate boils down to is a technical debate about the additional value of additional sample size. It is an extremely complex debate and I think that is why it is very good that we have an independent technical body that is advised by clinicians and that goes through a transparent and rigorous process to answer those questions. It is not about politicians debating in the House and saying “Oh I think the wind is blowing that way.” It is about serious rigorous analysis as it should be because this is about the lives of New Zealand women. 
Pharmac is consulting. I understand that Pharmac will be making an announcement next week and the Government will have something to say at around that time. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: You will have to eat some humble pie because Jackie is right. It will be time for humble pie. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I guess Dr Smith must be a doctor of philosophy not a doctor of medicine; otherwise he would not be making such a fool of himself. 
The facts are that this is a complex debate. The facts are that we have a very robust process under way and I understand that Pharmac has been working very very hard on this issue for some considerable time now and has heard all sides of the story. We will all have to wait to see what the announcement will be next week. Thank you.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:648;Page:17650] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. With regard to the statement made by the Minister around the word “racism”— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Marian Hobbs) 
: I warn the member to be very careful. That is a debating point. Are you going to enter into debate? If so you will have to take another call. 
TE URUROA FLAVELL 
: No I just want to say that that reference was taken out of Dr Harwood’s report; that is all. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Marian Hobbs) 
: Thank you.
Cunliffe David: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Cunliffe David: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:648;Page:17649] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of Health) 
: 
 I take just a quick call to say that I was very tempted to take a point of order on the grounds of my taking offence at the use of the word “racism”. 
This Government cares very deeply about inequalities and about reducing those inequalities and is very passionate about the health of Maori people. Investment in Maori health runs to the tune of many billions of dollars under this Government; under the population-based funding formula Maori have significantly higher funding per capita than non-Maori. Some of these improvements are showing up in the fact that for example under Labour infant mortality has declined in the total population by 28 percent yet has declined in the Maori population by 43 percent. Infant mortality for Maori has declined by 43 percent during the life of this Government—that is nearly double the rate for the general population. 
Of course there is more to do but neither the member nor the public should be in any doubt that the Government’s heart is in the space of wanting to help Maori and work with Maori. That is not about paternalism; it is about understanding that the way to reach Maori communities is through iwi hapu whanau and using Maori providers—by Maori for Maori. That is why in this year’s Budget we have brought in a much larger funding stream for Maori provider development. That funding is on top of the money that is going to Maori health through the district health board system. 
So this is just a short call to say that. I do not want to disagree with the member—I think Maori health is essential. Apart from anything else—apart from the ethics and apart from the principles of the Treaty that we adhere to—there is a reality here that by 2020 one-third of all New Zealanders will be Maori or Pasifika in origin and if we do not have all our people healthy educated and productive we will all go down the economic toilet together.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:648;Page:17650] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I was not sure whether the Minister took a point of order. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Marian Hobbs) 
: No he did not. He called to speak which he is entitled to do. He can take multiple calls.