edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Vote: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:613;Page:9977] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 53 
New Zealand National 24; New Zealand First 12; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 67 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 3; New Zealand First 1; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 117 in the name of the Hon Peter Dunne to new section 13(3) in clause 6B be agreed to.
Barker Rick: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Barker Rick: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:7014] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister of Customs) 
: I am pleased to rise to speak on the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill and to follow a speaker from the ACT party who was speaking about double standards. I say that ACT members would know all about that considering that ACT is polling at below 5 percent. ACT is a party that said it would campaign on values not politics but when its members get into this House they want to make it a cafeteria. It is the ACT party that has nine votes in this House but only ever votes eight or less. It would know all about double standards. I think that member is excellently qualified to talk on that subject.
Pettis Jill: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Pettis Jill: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8088] 
JILL PETTIS (Junior Whip—NZ Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Benson-Pope David: Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) — In Committee 
Benson-Pope David: Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9543] 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Cullen Michael: Motions — Presidential Election USA—Congratulations 
Cullen Michael: Motions — Presidential Election USA—Congratulations 
[Volume:621;Page:16594] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 It is usual to declare these matters with the whips in advance as a matter of courtesy to all other parties. Obviously the Government would not object to such a motion being moved.
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:608;Page:5837] 
RODNEY HIDE (ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister of Maori Affairs asked to see the evidence of the email that was released under the Official Information Act. I took it across to him and as I gave it to him he called out across the front bench that I was a liar. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: This is a matter that happened during question time. The member should have raised it immediately. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: It happened during the last question. You have ruled before that one waits until the question is over. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: My ruling was when the particular question was over. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: It happened during question 12. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I ask the Minister whether he made an unparliamentary comment in which case I ask him to withdraw and apologise. 
Hon Parekura Horomia 
: I withdraw and apologise. I did say that.
Peck Mark: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — First Reading 
Peck Mark: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:4046] 
MARK PECK (NZ Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I move  
That the Status of Redundancy Payments Bill be referred to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee.
Vote: Taxation (Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill Taxation (Annual Rates of Income Tax 2004-05) Bill — Third Readings 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Taxation (Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill Taxation (Annual Rates of Income Tax 2004-05) Bill — Third Readings 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17838. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Taxation (Annual Rates of Income Tax 2004-05) be now read a third time. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand Labour 51; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 59 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9; Green Party 9; Maori Party 1. 
Bill read a third time.
Okeroa Mahara: Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Okeroa Mahara: Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6856] 
MAHARA OKEROA (NZ Labour—Te Tai Tonga) 
: I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Visitors — Papua New Guinea—Committee on a Pacific Economic Community National Parliament 
Visitors — Papua New Guinea—Committee on a Pacific Economic Community National Parliament 
[Volume:624;Page:19547] 
Tuesday 5 April 2005 
Madam Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Papua New Guinea—Committee on a Pacific Economic Community National Parliament 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that members of the Committee on a Pacific Economic Community from the National Parliament of Papua New Guinea are present in the gallery. I am sure that members would wish that the delegation be welcome.
Carter John: Maori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Maori) Bill — Third Reading 
Carter John: Maori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Maori) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5290] 
JOHN CARTER (Senior Whip—NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: We have dealt with the matter. 
JOHN CARTER 
: This is a fresh point of order. This House has to run with harmony. I think you will find that if we proceed down the path we are likely to we may cause some aggravation that may cause difficulties in running the House over the next while. Given that you have made the decision that you have and you have every right to do so I would like to the seek leave of the House even though you have started putting the question that nevertheless we continue with the debate and allow members of the House who want to make a contribution who have a right to—and our party is one and I think there are other parties—to do so. I seek the leave of the House for that so to happen. I see that the Deputy Leader of the House has come in and he may want to consult his whip. I am trying to suggest a way through an issue that may well otherwise cause some grave disharmony in the House. I am seeking leave for the debate to be allowed to continue.
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:616;Page:11999] 
RODNEY HIDE (ACT) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to table the letter from Irene Kereama-Royal that the Minister dismissed as a matter of personal grievance. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that letter. Is there any objection? There is.
Wong Pansy: Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Wong Pansy: Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6856] 
PANSY WONG (NZ National) 
: This is a substantial part of the bill and the Minister in the chair the Hon Judith Tizard should take a call on it. Many very worthwhile amendments have been put up and not just by National or ACT. The various political parties have put up a range of good amendments and most of those political parties including the National Party support the bill. Obviously when we support a bill and put forward amendments our only intention is to make sure the bill is more effective when it is implemented. The Minister should take a moment to reflect on the obvious good intention on the part of the Opposition parties and assess the need to amend the bill. 
First of all I would like to come back to clause 10 with regard to the Commerce Commission. The ACT party has put in an amendment to remove the word “not” which would make sure that in determining the Commerce Commission’s application for the granting of an interim injunction the court would take into account the fact that the commission is not required to give an undertaking as to damages. This is important. My good colleague Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith raised the point that unless there is a more level playing field any business organisation or anybody else can be required by the Commerce Commission to do all sorts of things and when the Commerce Commission take out an interim injunction if that is incorrectly done there will be no damages awarded for that. So this is not a level playing field. 
Of course my expectation that the Labour Government would take that into account has diminished somewhat. I am not as positive as my colleagues that the Minister or the Government will take into account such a sensible and correct amendment in the light of what occurred this morning when we saw the immigration bill being rushed through which gives total power to the Immigration Service’s chief executive officer and other officers to carry out all sorts of functions without having to explain or to justify that. But that does not make this measure correct. The Commerce Commission should be totally accountable for its actions so that if it has issued an interim instruction and happens to be incorrect then it should pay damages. That would serve as a reminder to Government organisations like the Commerce Commission to be very careful and really vigilant in making sure they have got everything correct before they issue an interim injunction. 
The other issues I want to raise are about the authority provided in clause 15 for the Commerce Commission to require a person to supply information or documents. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.00 p.m.
Hughes Darren: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
Hughes Darren: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12397] 
DARREN HUGHES (Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 I note that the House has been dealing with several pieces of fisheries legislation in recent times reflecting the fact that policy in that area has been progressed well and underlining the industry’s importance to the New Zealand economy. I support the passage of the first reading so that the select committee can get on with its very good work of considering this legislation.
Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18594] 
Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment 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 Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill that it take the bill part by part 
. 
Motion agreed to.
Vote: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:615;Page:11610] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments recommended by the Primary Production Committee by majority be agreed to. 
Ayes 81 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 7; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 31 
New Zealand National 23; ACT New Zealand 7; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Question agreed to.
Vote: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading 
Vote: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading 
[Volume:619;Page:15002] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) be now read a second time. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Bill read a second time.
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:621;Page:16712] 
10.  
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour—Waitakere) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What reports has he received on the value of school reporting requirements introduced in the Education Standards Act 2001? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I have seen a report that suggests that the requirements reflect a nanny State mentality and are the enemy of an effective education system. By contrast at the time the legislation was introduced the changes were welcomed and the Government was accused of stealing the ideas of the previous National Government. Both reports are inaccurate. The negative comments came from Dr Don Brash; the positive endorsement came from Dr Nick Smith—I think the doctors need to get their prescriptions together. 
Lynne Pillay 
: Does the Minister intend to promote any changes to the Education Standards Act; if not why not? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: No. Under the Education Standards Act schools have a single coherent charter and reporting document that incorporates a school’s vision its goals and objectives statistical and financial information and most important objectives and targets for student achievement. These reporting requirements give parents the information they need to make informed choices. It seems ironic that the very people who advocate additional parental choice want to starve parents of useful information in making those choices. 
Hon Bill English 
: What action is the Minister taking on the growing chorus of complaint from schools about the endlessly growing bureaucracy of the Ministry of Education the fact that it has by far the strongest growth in employment in the education sector and the creation of endless contestable pools to which many schools apply but only a few get money? What action is he going to take on those continuous complaints? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I am going to share with them the directive from Dr Brash that he would cut out the pools. I think they will find it particularly interesting that he has indicated that there will be no extra cash for education under any future National Government. It is safe for him to do of course because he will never be part of one. 
Bernie Ogilvy 
: Does the Minister have any sympathy for schools suffering from bureaucratic overload as evidenced by the requirement for every school to possess a copy of either a birth certificate or a passport for every student; if so how will he ameliorate the situation? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I know that some schools are finding it tough but we have found that some people have attempted to avoid the foreign fee-paying student fees payable to schools and have bludged off the New Zealand taxpayers by pretending to be residents when they are not.
Hide Rodney: Amended answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 4 to Minister 2 March 
Hide Rodney: Amended answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 4 to Minister 2 March 
[Volume:615;Page:11626] 
RODNEY HIDE (ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Can I seek the assurance of the Minister that he will also be correcting his written replies to questions? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Hon Jim Anderton indicated “Yes” to that.
Beyer Georgina: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Beyer Georgina: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8155] 
GEORGINA BEYER (NZ Labour—Wairarapa) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Crimes (Abolition of Force as a Justification for Child Discipline) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Crimes (Abolition of Force as a Justification for Child Discipline) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:627;Page:22101] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Crimes (Abolition of Force as a Justification for Child Discipline) Amendment Bill be now read a first time 
. 
Ayes 63 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 2 (Brown Donnelly); Green Party 9; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 54 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 11 (Catchpole Gudgeon Jones McNair Mark Paraone Perry Peters J Peters W Stewart Woolerton); ACT New Zealand 9; United Future 7. 
Bill read a first time.
Vote: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:619;Page:15182] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 84 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 35 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 7; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Motion agreed to.
Vote: State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12185] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 18 
Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 102 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to the amendment to clause 5 in his name set out on Supplementary Order Paper 200 be agreed to: 
to amend proposed new section 77HA as set out on Supplementary Order Paper No 200 by inserting in subsection (1)(a) and (b) after the word “offered” in both places where it occurs the words “in writing”.
Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17249] 
Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment 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 Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill that it take the bill part by part. 
Motion agreed to.
Hunt Jonathan: Speaker’s Rulings — Stranger in the Lobbies—President of Council of Trade Unions  
Hunt Jonathan: Speaker’s Rulings — Stranger in the Lobbies—President of Council of Trade Unions  
[Volume:620;Page:16104] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the member for that comment. As far as I am concerned if a Minister wants to have an adviser he or she can have whomsoever he or she likes. But that is the Minister’s responsibility or that of the person who is in charge of a bill. It may be a private member’s bill and the private member can have an adviser in that capacity. I trust that when members and Ministers have advisers and have them representing them on their behalf they accede to the Standing Orders.
Hunt Jonathan: Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Hunt Jonathan: Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12347] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The question is  
That the amendments recommended by the Commerce Committee by a majority be agreed to 
. 
Amendments agreed to.
Hughes Darren: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
Hughes Darren: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8702] 
DARREN HUGHES (NZ Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
Sandra Goudie 
: This is an important debate. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Yes. I call Sandra Goudie.
Chadwick Steve: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6) — In Committee Third Reading 
Chadwick Steve: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6) — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:7101] 
STEVE CHADWICK (NZ Labour—Rotorua) 
: 
 I am pleased to support the Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6). I was really interested to hear the Hon Tony Ryall raging about how long it has taken for the bill to come to the House. We are facing issues about world security and powers of interception and the bill has provisions about computer technology and new techniques that we needed to consider for inclusion. It is absolutely timely that the bill has come before the House today and I am pleased to support it.
Tisch Lindsay: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH 
Tisch Lindsay: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH 
[Volume:607;Page:4360] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The member might want to seek leave to have the vote put again. That would be the tidiest way of proceeding. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Does the member seek leave for the vote to be put again?
Gosche Mark: Points of Order — Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate Parliament Building—Media Access Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate 
Gosche Mark: Points of Order — Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate Parliament Building—Media Access Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate 
[Volume:624;Page:19715] 
Hon MARK GOSCHE (Labour—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Earlier in the proceedings today a number of members who had interrupted a point of order were asked to leave the House. Dr Nick Smith quite audibly interrupted Sue Kedgley. I think that if that is the standard of behaviour that has been set earlier today Dr Smith deserves to go as well. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I am sorry I did not hear Dr Nick Smith do that.
Brownlee Gerry: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Brownlee Gerry: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13495] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 That is just a load of rubbish. Parliament itself determines how it receives information from Ministers relating to bills. If the legal advice is that the New Zealand First amendment is out of order and should therefore be vetoed it seems to me that it is only consistent if the Government’s own amendment—which is exactly the same—should also be vetoed. 
I do not believe that the veto power given to a Minister and to the Government is there for the exercise of political preference. It is there to protect the Government against the excesses of changes to Budgets. Therefore I think it would be quite unfair and unparliamentary for the Chair to accept that Mr Brown’s amendment can be vetoed by the Government but the Government itself can propose exactly the same arrangement and have it allowed. That is a Minister manipulating Parliament for political preferment and I am not sure it would be a good thing for that to happen. While I welcome your comments on this I would like to reserve our position until we get a ruling on this matter from the Speaker.
Beyer Georgina: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
Beyer Georgina: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:8929] 
GEORGINA BEYER (NZ Labour—Wairarapa) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Peck Mark: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peck Mark: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:612;Page:9314] 
12.  
MARK PECK (Labour—Invercargill) 
 to the  
Minister for Small Business 
: What benefits does he expect to flow from the appointment of the Small Business Advisory Group? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE (Minister for Small Business) 
: 
 Last week I announced the appointment of the new Small Business Advisory Group. This group will ensure the Government hears the views of people in real small businesses which can be very different from what big business bureaucrats or academics are telling us. On this side of the House we believe that the best people to tell us how to support small business are those involved in running small businesses day to day. 
Mark Peck 
: How was the group selected? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: Over 240 applications for the positions were received. The nine members appointed represent a diverse range of sectors and regions. The most important factor in selecting these nine members was hands-on experience in small business and strong networks within the small business sector and in their communities. The appointment of this group combined with other initiatives such as implementing over 80 percent of the recommendations of the business compliance cost group represents at least 95 percent of potential benefits to business.
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3756] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 55 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8. 
Noes 61 
Labour 52; Green Party 9. 
Amendment to the amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Katherine Rich to new clause 10 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 57 in the name of the Hon Steve Maharey be agreed to: 
to omit subparagraph (v) from subclause (2)(a).
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Commonwealth of Australia—Minister for the Environment and Heritage Italy—Parliamentary Delegation United Kingdom—Constitutional Affairs Committee House of Commons 
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Commonwealth of Australia—Minister for the Environment and Heritage Italy—Parliamentary Delegation United Kingdom—Constitutional Affairs Committee House of Commons 
[Volume:621;Page:16593] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that the Hon Ian Campbell Minister for the Environment and Heritage from the Commonwealth of Australia 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. 
The Hon Ian Campbell accompanied by the Hon Pete Hodgson entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
Vote: Families Commission Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Families Commission Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:614;Page:10309] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 49 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 69 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 173 in the name of the Hon Steve Maharey to Part 1 be agreed to.
Parker David: New Zealand Superannuation Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Parker David: New Zealand Superannuation Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:12564] 
DAVID PARKER (Labour—Otago) 
: 
 I rise in support of the bill. The need for it arises from the fact that the accord on retirement income has fallen into disuse. The Retirement Income Act which this bill repeals has become redundant through the passage of time. 
I agree with Gordon Copeland that it is important to plan properly for superannuation savings so as to make it more likely that future State-funded schemes are able to be funded but also to enable them to be supplemented by private contribution-based schemes. I also agree with him that the lead taken by the Government in introducing contribution-based schemes partly funded by employer contributions goes some way to meeting that need. A lot more has to be done. I am keen to see this bill proceed to the select committee so I recommend it to the House.
Cullen Michael: Appointments — Ombudsman—Beverley Wakem 
Cullen Michael: Appointments — Ombudsman—Beverley Wakem 
[Volume:622;Page:17662] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That pursuant to section 3 of the Ombudsmen Act 1975 this House recommend Her Excellency the Governor-General to appoint Beverley Anne Wakem of Wellington as an Ombudsman for a term commencing on 1 March 2005.
Carter David: Points of Order —  
Carter David: Points of Order —  
[Volume:620;Page:16081] 
Hon DAVID CARTER (National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is this a new point of order? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: It is certainly a new point of order. It seems to me that the list you have read out does not in any way incorporate the president of the Council of Trade Unions. The reason why I think we need this matter resolved urgently is that I understand that at the end of question time we are to move back into a debate around employment relations. We now no longer know whether the Government and perhaps the Speaker is giving Mr Ross Wilson special status requiring him to be in constant contact with officials and Ministers during the Committee of the whole House on the employment legislation.
Tanczos Nandor: General Debates 
Tanczos Nandor: General Debates 
[Volume:611;Page:8552] 
NANDOR TANCZOS (Green) 
: 
 I wanted to make the point that a number of members have stated that the Hon Harry Duynhoven said he would table that paper. I thought he said that he would “consider” tabling the paper.
Coddington Deborah: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Coddington Deborah: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4776] 
DEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT NZ) 
: 
 The whole point about this legislation is that it is not necessary. It is specialist industry legislation and there is nothing new in that. There are always certain industry sectors that lobby for specialist legislation. [ 
Interruption 
] That is the whole point. When we ran this country like a Polish shipyard only the wealthy could afford to buy cars but those days have long gone and now cars are accessible to a lot more people. Families do not have just one car; they can buy two or three cars. My car is worth about $500 and that is fine. It has done 220000 kilometres but it gets me from A to B. I am going to keep driving it to see how long it lasts. It is a Subaru and it is a wonderful little car. 
The point I am making is that when cars were out of the reach of most people and they had to go on to a list to get a new one and they had to give the dealer a bottle of whiskey to have themselves put further up the list the family car was often the second-most-expensive possession that people owned after their houses. That was why we needed legislation to protect people in the industry. There was a huge amount of money at stake. These days we need regulation that is a lot lighter but that is not what we have with this bill. The neo-socialists always fall for this. They see a problem and they think they can solve it by passing more law. We end up with legislation that is cumbersome and fraught with difficulty. 
I noticed that Harry Duynhoven said he welcomed the end of the fidelity fund— 
Hon Member 
: No he certainly did not. The member spoke of the end of the Motor Vehicle Dealers Association. 
DEBORAH CODDINGTON 
: I do not welcome the end of that but I welcome the end of its compulsory membership. If an organisation is good then people will join it voluntarily—just like unions. If unions are good people will join them voluntarily. It is the same with students’ associations. We can get rid of the compulsory membership of the Motor Vehicle Dealers Association but we cannot apply that to students’ associations! Never mind there is hope; we are the party of influence and we will keep working. We will influence both sides of the Committee but it is very difficult when there is a concrete-bound mentality. 
I return to Part 2 of this legislation. It deals with exemptions from registration. First of all the Crown is exempt from registration so it will not have to be policed or pay levies when the Customs Service seizes cars that it suspects have had their odometers tampered with and sells them. The Customs Service is exempt from registration. That involves something like a thousand cars a year. 
Debate interrupted. 
Sitting suspended from 12 midnightto 9 a.m. (Thursday)
Robertson H V Ross: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:17098] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member over there will take down the visual aid. That is outside the Standing Orders. The member will remove it. He has his first yellow card. He knows what that means. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I am on a point of order. It happens to be an Opposition point of order so the rules change. We noticed that the last time the closure was taken the Government whip Mr Hughes got himself in quite a flap. He was running around the Chamber saying that we had spent 2 hours on a part and that it was time we shut it down. We noticed that immediately after that the debate ceased. That worries us because this as has been pointed out numerous times is a very complex bill. The substantial Supplementary Order Paper which is effectively an amendment bill and will soon be titled as such was seen by us for the first time yesterday. It deserves a little more scrutiny than is usually the case.
Vote: Registered Architects Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Registered Architects Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19932] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 84 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 34 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Amendments agreed to and Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Beyer Georgina: Social Security (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Beyer Georgina: Social Security (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:15807] 
GEORGINA BEYER (Labour—Wairarapa) 
: 
 The disappointing aspect of the speech from the member who has just resumed her seat was the lack of policy from the National Party. That member stood there and whinged for 10 minutes about the Social Security (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill in its first reading. The only positive thing she had to say was that National would vote the bill through its first reading and we are grateful for that. I hope it will come to pass that the whole House will support the bill through its first reading because it is likely although it has not yet been confirmed that it will go to the Social Services Committee which I am fortunate enough to chair. That is where the Minister has requested it go I believe. Fortunately Mrs Rich happens to be a member of that committee so we hope we will see some more philosophy of the National Party regarding these particular matters drawn out from its members and thrown on the table for us all to consider. The wonderful thing about the select committee process is that those kinds of things can be nailed. That is what this Government has done with this proposed legislation. 
I remind members of the House of the key points mentioned by the Minister in his speech. They are that this legislation ensures fairness and security and that it makes three significant amendments to the social security system by firstly extending eligibility for accommodation supplement to residents of retirement villages who have “licence to occupy” tenure; secondly ensuring that benefit applicants who work for part of the year are not financially disadvantaged—for example seasonal workers; and thirdly changing the regime to encourage sole parents to establish paternity for their children and apply for child support. 
The internal tensions that are obvious between Katherine Rich and Dr Brash have stopped the National Party from making any progress in developing its welfare policy. When this bill gets despatched to the select committee we hope we can draw out some of that policy from National Party members.
Smith Nick: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Smith Nick: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5391] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (NZ National—Nelson) 
: 
 Is the word “porky” misleading? Mr Anderton said in his first reading speech that this bill was designed to attack youth drinks. I think I very eloquently expressed to the House that indeed the Minister told a big porky. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: I am asking the member to withdraw the remark about telling porkies. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I do not think I have said anything wrong in expressing my views about Mr Anderton’s speech which I listened to very carefully. If it was not a porky I do not know what else it might be. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member knows that that is a phrase that has been commonly associated with not telling the truth and I ask the member to withdraw. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I withdraw.
Vote: Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:615;Page:11185] 
A party vote  was called for on the question  
That the Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Amendment Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 108 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 9 
ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Bill read a second time.
Benson-Pope David: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Benson-Pope David: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4672] 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (NZ Labour—Dunedin South) 
: 
 I am pleased to have the opportunity to rise in support of this legislation.
Ogilvy Bernie: Public Records Bill — First Reading 
Ogilvy Bernie: Public Records Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:15782] 
BERNIE OGILVY (United Future) 
: 
 I just want to take a brief call in the first reading of the Public Records Bill. United Future wishes to see this bill go through to the select committee. By and large we are quite impressed with both the content and purposes of this bill. We have been alerted to a history that has occurred over the last 47 years and it is probably good at this stage to bring it into the 21st century with an appropriate update and empowerment in terms of record-keeping. To that end we are very happy to see this bill progress. 
On the other hand as others have pointed out areas of concern have been raised. The select committee in doing its task will probably look at those and I hope will seriously consider some of the matters that have already been raised. 
There are a couple of other matters that I would like to bring to the attention of the Minister and the select committee. One has to do with clause 14 which deals with the Archives Council. The clause states what the composition of the council ought to be and subclause (3)(b) insists that there are at least two people on it who have a knowledge of tikanga Maori. I do not think anyone should have any problem with that but I am concerned that it may be limiting when we compare it with clause 7 that talks about the well-defined Treaty of Waitangi rights and purposes. 
There are other great peoples and languages in New Zealand. For instance not too long ago we were looking at the role of the Chinese population as a wave of workers in our country and this Parliament has made an apology to that population over some of the issues that took place. If I recall correctly we made a clear statement to the Chinese people that we wanted to honour them. 
I am sure then that some of the archiving of our history will require the use of other linguistic skills. Therefore we need people on the Archives Council—or at least access to such people written into that clause—who can understand the languages of some of the other groups that have settled in New Zealand—Yugoslavs come to mind. It may be that we should not limit that clause just to the current position; so I would like the select committee to look at who is required to be on the council. 
Other clauses worth looking at that I want to draw to the attention of the select committee are clauses 61 and 62—in particular clause 62 which deals with penalties. I wonder whether the amounts of the fines—in the case of an individual $2000 and in every other case a maximum of $5000—will be adequate deterrents and whether they will help in maintaining archives in New Zealand. Certainly I think that that value system should be looked at. 
It is on that note of referring those items to the attention of the select committee that I say on behalf of United Future that this bill is really worthwhile for our nation. I commend it to the next stage.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:623;Page:18737] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I am happy to give an assurance that we can discuss those matters at the Business Committee. The member will also receive very soon—if he has not received it already—some additional information that I think will help in terms of the return to the Committee stage of the bill. With regard to the presence of Ngati Awa I can tell members that the third reading date has already been set subject to later matters and I simply urge members to get on with the proceedings. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: This is a business statement. I am prepared to let the Rt Hon Winston Peters have a word but that is it.
Pettis Jill: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Pettis Jill: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:15203] 
JILL PETTIS (Senior Whip—Labour) 
:  
Yes because everybody else will want one. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: No they will not. I want just one more call. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action? There is.
Vote: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Vote: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:627;Page:22162] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Vote State Services be agreed to 
. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand Labour 51; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 36 
New Zealand National 26; ACT New Zealand 9; Maori Party 1. 
Abstentions 17 
New Zealand First 12; Green Party 5. 
Vote State Services agreed to.
Beyer Georgina: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Beyer Georgina: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:620;Page:15872] 
3.  
GEORGINA BEYER (Labour—Wairarapa) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: What reports has he received on outcomes from the 2002 domestic purposes and widows benefit reforms? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 Since enhanced case management and the annual development of employment plans were introduced in 2002 we have seen the following: more domestic purposes beneficiaries and widows beneficiaries are exiting the benefit each month; domestic purposes beneficiaries and widows beneficiaries who do exit are less likely to return; more domestic purposes women-alone and widows beneficiaries are engaged in part-time work; the proportion of domestic purposes benefit recipients leaving the benefit because they have secured work has increased; and the number of people on the domestic purposes benefit and widows benefit has declined despite New Zealand having higher numbers of women of childbearing age. All of these findings say that these reforms have been valuable. 
Georgina Beyer 
: What other reports has he received on the 2002 domestic purposes widows and benefit reforms? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I have heard claims that the changes would increase the number of people on the domestic purposes benefit to 120000. I heard claims that thousands more would go on to the benefit each year. I heard claims that fewer would leave the benefit. I heard claims that fewer would get a job. Every one of those claims came from National and ACT members of Parliament and they have been proven utterly wrong. 
Sue Bradford 
: Has the Minister read the recent reports on the outcomes of the Wisconsin welfare reforms which show that only 25 percent of participants are in a genuine job and that there is not the slightest improvement in poverty rates over the last 10 years; if so can he give that information to the National and ACT parties which continue to promote aspects of the Wisconsin programme despite it being outdated and ineffective? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Yes I have read that research and yes I can make it available to members of the ACT and National parties. However they might like simply to purchase a copy of this week’s  
Listener 
 where they will see that these programmes are working whereas the Wisconsin ones do not.
Hawkins George: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Referral to Health Committee Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hawkins George: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Referral to Health Committee Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 15 October 2003. Volume:612;Page:9246. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Minister of Police) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Simich Clem: Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Simich Clem: Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17815. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: There were a number of amendments proposed to Part 5 by Gordon Copeland. They were vetoed. The relevant certificate has been sitting on the Table. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 287 in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen to insert new clause 236 be agreed to.
Power Simon: General Debate 
Power Simon: General Debate 
[Volume:625;Page:20240] 
SIMON POWER (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The schedule I have in front of me indicates that United Future is due to take the fourth call. If some arrangement has been made to swap those particular slots around to help out the Labour Party I think that the rest of the House is owed an explanation as to what is going on in this deviation from the schedule.
Cunliffe David: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Cunliffe David: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16495] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of State) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:17007] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Noes 109 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Metiria Turei to proposed new clauses 2A and 3 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 302 in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen be agreed to: 
to omit these clauses.
Pettis Jill: Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Pettis Jill: Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14181] 
JILL PETTIS (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.