edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Sowry Roger: Points of Order — Notices of Motion Nos 6 to 10 Shane Ardern 
Sowry Roger: Points of Order — Notices of Motion Nos 6 to 10 Shane Ardern 
[Volume:611;Page:8821] 
Hon ROGER SOWRY (Deputy Leader—NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My understanding was—and maybe you were going to do it after question time—that you would come back to the House today on issues with regard to the charges that Mr Ardern faces in relation to the way that his statement was taken and whether that would be admissible in the court. Given that the House will be adjourned for the next 2 weeks I presume that any decision you make during that period of time will not be able to acted on. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I can assure the member that the member who raised the matter with me by way of privilege—not yourself of course—will receive an answer as soon as I have finished question time. I will be sending him an answer.
Turner Judy: Independent Police Complaints Authority Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Turner Judy: Independent Police Complaints Authority Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20349] 
JUDY TURNER (Deputy Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of United Future for the second reading of the Independent Police Complaints Authority Amendment Bill a bill that seeks to enhance the independence of the Police Complaints Authority in light of the shooting of Steven Wallace in Waitara and the ensuing civil case against the officer involved and of the independent review of the authority in the year 2000. The Gallen review recommended that the authority should be independent of the police and constituted as an Officer of Parliament rather than a Crown entity. It recommended that the authority should have a chair Maori representation and a lay person and that it should use and retain the discretion to maintain secrecy of investigations. 
The bill has incorporated most of those recommendations because the membership of the new authority has increased from one to three and it will be appointed in consultation with the Minister of Maori Affairs the Minister of Women’s Affairs and the Minister of Pacific Island Affairs. The authority has remained a Crown entity though but it will be now funded from Vote Justice and will not report to the Minister of Police. 
Funding will allow for a team of six investigators to be established which will enhance its independent investigative capacity. Previously it tended to review the results of investigations that had been already carried out by the police. The secrecy of investigations has also been maintained in this bill to ensure the protection of all parties involved. 
The select committee unanimously supported the passage of the bill subject to several amendments. The first was that the disclosure provisions were to be simplified to allow the authority to disclose information to a defendant if it may point to his or her innocence and upon request this information is able to be issued as a certificate that the defendant can admit as evidence in any court. 
Secondly the bill is clarified to state that the authority will have a similar ability to that of the Ombudsman to decline to investigate a complaint because the complainant had an adequate remedy that for whatever reasons the complainant chose not to exercise. United Future is happy to support the second reading of this bill.
Cosgrove Clayton: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
Cosgrove Clayton: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:20971] 
CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Dunne Peter: Retirements — John Lindell O’Sullivan 
Dunne Peter: Retirements — John Lindell O’Sullivan 
[Volume:607;Page:4506] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I want to join with other members who have spoken in tribute to John O’Sullivan as he retires as the General Manager of the Parliamentary Service. On behalf of United Future I want to say that we have appreciated his counsel his assistance and his practical view of things in coming to grips with the realities we faced in this Parliament. I for one am very grateful to him for his assistance at a personal level as well on many of those issues. 
As has been said John has been the face of Parliament in a managerial sense for the last decade at a time when huge change has occurred. I appreciate the point that Mr Carter made about John’s wish that so many matters relating to the conduct of Parliament did not stray into the public arena. It seems to me that the lasting tribute to John’s stewardship as general manager will be the extent to which we have managed to get about our business in an often controversial but quiet way without too many scandals coming to the public mind. There will always be the question of Mr Carter’s rental car and associated matters but they are the exceptions now rather than the rule. In earlier times more serious incidents might have come more regularly into public contention than has been the case in the last 10 years. Members have appreciated a general manager who has had the interests of both the public and members in mind—individually and in respect of their parties as well. 
We will miss John O’Sullivan but I am delighted that he will not be lost to us completely because he has a huge talent and experience that we ought to be able to draw upon. I wish him well for his planned retirement but I also express the hope—and I am sure Annette will forgive me for saying this—that we are able to draw on his expertise and services from time to time. John O’Sullivan is a man who has been in a unique position for the last 10 years. He has been a great general manager and has set a high standard for his successor to follow—I wish him well too in that challenge—and I hope that he has a long happy and very fulfilled retirement.
Hartley Ann: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Hartley Ann: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21582] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is not. Thank you. The vote will be corrected.
Carter David: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
Carter David: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:14557] 
Hon DAVID CARTER (National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. The Minister’s amendment proposes to remove clause 65 so I assume on that basis we can talk about the rationale for it being in the legislation at the select committee stage and the reasons it is now being removed. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: That is correct.
Peters Winston: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Peters Winston: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:17098] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I seek leave for Rodney Hide to have an extension of time of another 5 minutes on the basis that New Zealanders love a joke.
Donald Rod: Estimates Debate —  Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Donald Rod: Estimates Debate —  Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7283] 
ROD DONALD (Musterer—Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I wish to foreshadow that when the House does resume I will be seeking leave for it to go back into Committee to extend this debate. [ 
Interruption 
] I seek your guidance. To enable my request to happen do I need to recall the Speaker now or can I make that request when the Speaker returns? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: You can make that request when the Speaker returns. Having just taken advice I note that we will have completed the estimates and put the vote before progress is reported so it would have to be done now. 
ROD DONALD 
: Having received your advice I will ask one further question. What happens to all the votes that we have not taken? Do they all have to be taken within the 8 hours or is the Government not able to spend those budgets if they do not— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: No they will be put as one vote at the end of the 8 hours. 
ROD DONALD 
: In that case I request that the Speaker be recalled so that I can seek leave for this debate to be extended. 
House resumed.
Vote: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7781] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Noes 61 
Labour 50; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Abstentions 1 
Hunt. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:626;Page:21144] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Port Waikato) 
: I seek leave to table the district health board hospital benchmark information of October-December 2004 which shows that 14 out of 21 district health boards failed to achieve triage time. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON 
: I seek leave to table a press release by Victoria University dated 30 May 2005 which states: “Concerns were also raised by some informants about the targeting of increased funding with claims that it had been imprecise and that money had been wasted.” 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? Yes there is.
Brownlee Gerry: Urgent Debates Declined — Government Transport Package Foreshore and Seabed Human Rights Review Tribunal Decision Points of Order 
Brownlee Gerry: Urgent Debates Declined — Government Transport Package Foreshore and Seabed Human Rights Review Tribunal Decision Points of Order 
[Volume:614;Page:10724] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If that is the case then the Prime Minister might like to explain why a media advisory has gone out in the last few minutes indicating that there will be an announcement tomorrow at 2 p.m. from the Beehive theatrette that it will be attended by senior Ministers that senior press gallery people will be invited to that theatrette that the documents will be available to them 1 hour earlier and that all those documents are embargoed until 3 p.m. tomorrow. If there is no decision how on earth do those documents get to the printers? Why is this House is being treated with utter contempt by the Government?
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Minister of Maori Affairs—Answer to Question 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Minister of Maori Affairs—Answer to Question 
[Sitting date: 19 June 2003. Volume:609;Page:6415. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
RODNEY HIDE (ACT NZ) 
: 
 We have an amazing situation here— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Please come to the point of order. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Yes it is this. The Leader of the House is saying that the Minister did not have enough time to discover on what date he learnt a piece of information. How hard is it for a “Minister of Information”—well he is the “Minister for Information”—I mean the Minister of Maori Affairs to find out when he discovered something given that he cannot do it in 24 hours? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I refer the member to Speaker’s ruling 130/2 concerning written replies. It states in part: “Ministers are under an obligation to the member concerned to follow up with a full reply as soon as possible thereafter.” That is the ruling that was given in 1995 and the ruling stands.
Hunt Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hunt Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:608;Page:5261] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I refer the member to Speaker’s ruling 127/4—a ruling from Speaker Harrison in 1978—that Standing Order 371 “does not allow another member to answer a question on behalf of a member of whom the question is asked.” Therefore the deputy chairperson of the committee cannot do it. But I think that the member has raised a very valid point of order. I will have a look at that over the weekend and I will ensure that he gets an answer on Tuesday in some way.
O'Connor Damien: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
O'Connor Damien: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17918] 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Minister for Racing) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Hunt Jonathan: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Hunt Jonathan: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7723] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I want to make a comment about that. There are 12 calls in this debate. Six calls go to the Government or its supporters and that has been the situation ever since the general election. Every second call goes to a Government MP. The Labour Party and the Progressive Party have 54 out of 120 seats and get every second call. The National Party will get its call in due course.
Stewart Barbara: War Pensions Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
Stewart Barbara: War Pensions Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4528] 
BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) 
: 
 Like my colleague from National we believe that this part does contain the greater part of the bill. Its provisions are well set out in the contents. We believe too that this part meets the veteran community’s desire for its entitlements to be viewed separately from the wider social security system. We know that veterans are a very important group in our society to whom all of us here in Parliament and all New Zealanders owe a huge debt and we need to remember our returned service personnel. New Zealand First will definitely be supporting this part of the bill.
Collins Judith: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Collins Judith: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6995] 
JUDITH COLLINS (NZ National—Clevedon) 
: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I am sorry to interrupt the member who is about to speak. I thought I heard you say to the Hon Ken Shirley that we are not to debate the actual contents of schedule 1 which sets out the convention itself. Have I got that right? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: No. That was just a ruling that the previous Committee chairperson made in relation to Mr Shirley’s request. We are debating the schedules. 
JUDITH COLLINS 
: So when I do get to speak I can speak on them? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Yes the member may speak on the schedules.
Mapp Wayne: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Mapp Wayne: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7767] 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (NZ National—North Shore) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. When I read the words “To Elect Harry Duynhoven” and when I consider that there has been a Privileges Committee report on the issue—not on all of us but on one particular individual—I cannot see how you can possibly rule that such an amendment is frivolous. The proper course for you is to put the issue to the vote and the result will be the result. After all that is why the issue was referred to the Privileges Committee and this bill is a consequence of the Privileges Committee’s report.
Vote: Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14040] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 36 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Schedule 2 agreed to.
Vote: Land Transport Management Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Land Transport Management Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:613;Page:9677] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 33 
New Zealand National 25; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Noes 82 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:611;Page:8603] 
Business Statement 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week in the House on Tuesday and Thursday priority will be given to the remaining stages of the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill and the New Organisms and Other Matters Bill. Wednesday is a members’ day. 
JOHN CARTER (Senior Whip—NZ National) 
: 
 Just to confirm I ask the Deputy Leader of the House whether there is any chance of urgency next week. 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 If the member is offering a negotiation I will be happy to meet with him on that out in the lobbies. Without his offer there will not be urgency at this stage. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I wonder whether I might ask the Leader of the House whether the Prime Minister will deign to pay a visit to the House to answer questions today. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:613;Page:9787] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 No I do not anticipate any legislation before Christmas as the member would be aware if he had read the submission of the Waitangi Tribunal which is on the website.
Kelly Graham: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Kelly Graham: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:607;Page:4128] 
2.  
GRAHAM KELLY (NZ Labour) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: What is New Zealand’s assessment of the state of the diplomatic process with respect to the situation in Iraq? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 The diplomatic process being conducted through the UN Security Council is effectively at an end. The only chance now to avert a war is for Saddam Hussein and his sons to leave Iraq within the next 2 days and in the interests of their people I urge them to do so. 
Graham Kelly 
: What role does the Government see now for the United Nations in the Iraqi crisis? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: The Government believes that the UN will have a role to play at the end of the likely conflict when there will be huge humanitarian needs to meet and when huge reconstruction of Iraq will be required. We in the New Zealand Government are prepared to play our part in meeting those needs. 
Hon Bill English 
: If the Prime Minister believes that this war does not have sufficient sanction if she believes that our best friends are wrong and that war is always a catastrophe why has she not expressed that view more strongly and more publicly to Australia the UK and the US? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Mr Howard was our guest here for 3 days over the past weekend and he and I got the opportunity to discuss that fully. Our diplomatic posts have also ensured that the Governments of the US and the United Kingdom are well aware of the New Zealand Government view. 
Keith Locke 
: Why has the Government refused to initiate moves under General Assembly Resolution 377 to call the General Assembly into urgent session to demonstrate to the American British and Australian leaders that the great majority of UN members are against a war on Iraq? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I am not convinced that any especially useful purpose would be served by that. There have been two opportunities for open debates at the Security Council. It is a matter of record that many countries have not elected to take up the opportunity that that afforded to make a statement. New Zealand was one of those that did make a statement on both occasions.
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8099] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Noes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendments not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 118 in the name of Hon Annette King to Part 3 be agreed to.
Vote: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8503] 
A party vote  
Ayes 60 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
Noes 55 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; Green Party 9. 
Amendments agreed to. 
was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.
Hughes Darren: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hughes Darren: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:609;Page:6261] 
12.  
DARREN HUGHES (NZ Labour—Otaki) 
 to the  
Minister of Statistics 
: What success has Statistics New Zealand had in selling software licences for internally developed systems to international statistical agencies? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE (Minister of Statistics) 
: 
 In recent years Statistics New Zealand earned $804000 in software licences through sales of internally developed systems to statistical agencies in Ireland South Africa and Fiji. It has also sold a licence for its balance of payments system to the Central Bank of Estonia. 
Darren Hughes 
: What non-financial benefits are derived from licensing software to and exchanging software with agencies in other countries? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: Exchanging data-processing techniques with other statistical agencies helps Statistics New Zealand access techniques that enhance its operational capacity. It gives me great pleasure to be part of a Government that can take pride in Government agencies’ success in developing information technology systems rather than finding them a source of controversy and embarrassment.
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3761] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 47 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Noes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 13 be agreed to:  
to insert in paragraph (b) of subclause (1) after the word “Minister” the words “other than by the authority of an Order in Council”.
Locke Keith: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Locke Keith: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16027] 
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. As I understand it we are on Part 1. The Minister talked about medical certificates which I understand come under Part 2. I have not taken a call yet but just want clarification that we are only on Part 1. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member is quite correct and there was also another reference to a matter that is not covered in this part as well. So I would caution members to stick to the content of Part 1.
Tanczos Nandor: Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee 
Tanczos Nandor: Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14153] 
NANDOR TANCZOS (Green) 
: 
 I seek leave for the votes cast by the Green Party in party votes on the Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill to include numbers cast for the Ayes and Noes and to record abstentions notwithstanding Standing Order 144(1)(b). 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There appears to be none.
Collins Judith: Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Collins Judith: Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11283] 
JUDITH COLLINS (National—Clevedon) 
: 
 I will take a short call in relation to the title of this bill. The Health (Screening Programmes) Amendment Bill as it was first brought to the Health Committee did come in for a change of name. That change made in relation to the advice from the Regulations Review Committee but it was also a concern of many of us on the committee that this bill was being used as a mechanism to set up screening programmes that could simply be enacted by the Ministry of Health when it issues a policy that should be debated in the House and that the people of New Zealand should have the opportunity to make submissions on through the select committee process. 
So even if we had not had that very good advice from the Regulations Review Committee there was a very good chance that we would have changed the name of this bill because we are very concerned to make sure that these programmes are set up properly carefully and with a great deal of consultation as they involve people’s private records their business and their health. Of course they cost a tremendous amount of money as well. So it is all money that is going into the health budget. If the money is going into a programme that will not be effective or that will help only a very small portion of the population then it could possibly go into other areas in health. I was very pleased to see that the Minister accepted our recommendations. That was a very good move from the Minister because we felt that no matter what we wanted to see any other screening programmes back here in the House. 
I take the point too that my colleague on the Health Committee and our spokesperson on health Dr Lynda Scott made. Men often talk about the fact that all they hear about in terms of cancer is cervical cancer and breast cancer. In other words they primarily hear about women’s cancer. I know Dr Scott has brought up issues about some of the specific men’s cancers but I would really like to hear more said about cancers that are prevalent among men—in particular more education about those cancers. I do not know that men will necessarily find the same level of help that women often find from the  
New Zealand Woman’s Weekly 
 on those issues—and I do not know which particular magazine we would have to put it in—but it would be great to be able to have something that is absolutely focused on men as well.
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Intelligence and Security Committee United Kingdom 
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Intelligence and Security Committee United Kingdom 
[Volume:612;Page:9035] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing honourable members that members of the Intelligence and Security Committee from the United Kingdom led by the Rt Hon Ann Taylor MP are present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish they be welcomed.
Peck Mark: Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) — In Committee 
Peck Mark: Criminal Justice Amendment Bill (No 7) — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9542] 
MARK PECK (Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Hughes Darren: Standing Orders 
Hughes Darren: Standing Orders 
[Volume:614;Page:10734] 
DARREN HUGHES (Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The question is that the question be now put. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There may be some misunderstanding about the Business Committee agreement on this matter. I consulted with my colleague Dail Jones and he has made it very clear to me that there was never any agreement on the part of New Zealand First to prescribe for this debate. In the nature of things we have considerable time left for this debate to continue. I would like to know why we are being confined to one speech per party.
Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:625;Page:19750] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I stood to get a point of clarification which would enable me to make a decision as to whether I would object to the leave that was being sought. You promptly sat me down. Then within split seconds my leader the Rt Hon Winston Peters took a point of order on precisely the same point and you heard him. What is it? Do we have a discriminatory policy running in the House? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the member please be seated. When the Rt Hon Winston Peters rose you sat down. He said he was talking to the same point of order. You received the point of clarification; therefore you had an opportunity to decide whether to object. 
Ron Mark 
: No I did not. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: You did.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Debate on Iraq 
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Debate on Iraq 
[Volume:606;Page:3919] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Noting that the Prime Minister has in recent days talked of a likely conflict in Iraq beginning on 17 March I seek leave for the House to set aside time for an unlimited debate on the situation in Iraq on Thursday of qthis week after question time. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is.
Cullen Michael: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
Cullen Michael: 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:10004] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I have been out of the Chamber but listening to a succession of points of orders that are out of order. When one seeks leave one seeks leave. One does not give a speech either before or after the seeking of leave. The seeking of leave is done precisely—that is “I seek leave to take a speech.” One’s history marital relationships and various other things are irrelevant to the matter of seeking leave. A very formal procedure is adopted in this House that has been used for many generations.
Vote: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6316] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Motion agreed to.
Social Workers Registration Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH 
Social Workers Registration Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH 
[Volume:607;Page:4847] 
Social Workers Registration Bill 
Instruction to CommitteeCWH 
JOHN CARTER (Senior Whip—NZ National) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House for there to be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House that we have one wide-ranging debate on the Social Workers Registration Bill. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection? There appears to be none. Leave is granted.
Ryall Tony: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Ryall Tony: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:624;Page:19533] 
Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay Of Plenty) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. The Minister of Police gave a figure as being the number of other unallocated cases around the country—I think he said it was 680 or something. The document that he tabled shows that to be quite a different number and I wonder whether the Minister would be able to take the opportunity within the next hour to correct that information that he gave to the House. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That is a matter of debate not a point of order. The point has been made.
Duncan Helen: Industry New Zealand and Trade New Zealand Integration Bill — First Reading 
Duncan Helen: Industry New Zealand and Trade New Zealand Integration Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4351] 
HELEN DUNCAN (NZ Labour) 
: 
 I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak to the Industry New Zealand and Trade New Zealand Integration Bill. It is designed to allow two fine well-performing organisations to merge in order to allow a more efficient use of resources and to provide a better service to those using those organisations. Under this Government the stories from the regions are ones of growth and progress and this merger will provide businesses with a one-stop shop for seeking advice and information on developing their enterprises. This bill will be good for industry and trade in New Zealand and I recommend it to the House.
Voting — Correction 
Voting — Correction 
[Volume:625;Page:20731] 
Voting 
Correction 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Before I call the next member I would like to announce a correction to a vote. The vote on the first reading of the Oaths Modernisation Bill was incorrectly announced as Ayes 83 Noes 36. The correct result is Ayes 84 Noes 35.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:611;Page:8533] 
10.  
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: On what basis does she claim that the Minister of Immigration is a conscientious and hard-working Minister? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 On the basis of my personal knowledge. I note that that opinion is shared by the head of the Employers and Manufacturers Association (Northern) who said recently: “Lianne Dalziel has done more to have a sensible policy than any Minister of Immigration I can think of before her” and he added: “I just don’t see where Winston Peters is coming from.” 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Instead of tirelessly repeating that unmitigated drivel why does the Prime Minister not tell the 23-year-old New Zealand - born woman who may be paralysed for life after having been shot in the back by an illegal Afghan immigrant Wali Javad Allahayi that that situation would not have happened had that man not been allowed into this country in the first place by that incompetent irresponsible Minister? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: A crime like that is deplorable whoever commits it and I hope the full rigour of the law will be applied. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I ask the Prime Minister again why she repeats that statement about competence hard work and conscientiousness when we have in this country under her administration and under that Minister these immigrants and refugees guilty of rape murder numerous kidnappings abductions blackmail fraud and forgery—all of which have cost this country a fortune; and can she tell the victims of those crimes how responsible for that that Minister is and she is herself as Prime Minister? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Every New Zealand Government has admitted refugees; every New Zealand Government will find that a very small number will let it down. The Somali whom Mr Peters was drawing attention to earlier was admitted to this country when Mr Peters was Deputy Prime Minister. I do not see him taking personal responsibility for that. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Could you ask the Prime Minister to verify what she has just said rather than making it up as she goes along? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member knows full well that if that is the case he has the recourse of writing to me about it.
O'Connor Damien: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
O'Connor Damien: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14357] 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Acting Minister of Health) 
: 
 It is very frustrating to sit here and listen to the garbage coming from the ACT member who is intent on unnecessarily stirring up and putting fear into the minds of parents up and down this country. 
Hon Bill English 
: Plunket Line is gone. 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR 
: Plunket Line has not gone. Under the tenure of the Hon Bill English Plunket almost went down the drain. We stepped in and secured its future. All one has to do is ask the chief executive of Plunket himself Mr Paul Baigent who says that the move is an exciting one for Plunket Line because it secures its future. It will provide a 24-hour nationwide service. The problem with the Opposition speakers in the debate and with Mr English as well is that they will not listen and they do not want to hear the truth. 
The fact is that Healthline has been piloted in my region along with the regions of Northland the East Coast Gisborne and Canterbury very very successfully providing a service for people who have neither the transport nor the ability to get directly to a general practitioner a nurse or an emergency department and the assessment of Healthline has been very very positive. In fact 97 percent of people calling had a higher satisfaction rate than was expected and 85 percent of calls were answered within 20 seconds. I doubt whether there is another health service in the world that could match that sort of service delivery. 
The fact is that Plunket Line which was an invaluable service for parents up and down this country has been under constant threat. Plunket admitted that it has struggled to get funding for that ongoing service. The Government has secured Plunket Line along with Healthline and committed to roll out that service to the entire country. We ran the four pilots on Healthline proved its success and then moved to secure Plunket Line services for parents throughout this country. That is a good-news story. No matter what Heather Roy does to try to twist that around that is one of the success stories of this Government along with the billions of dollars of funding. 
Hon Bill English 
: Why didn’t the Minister go on television? 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR 
: I cannot speak for the Minister. I am not concerned and I am not sure whether the Minister is concerned about going on television. Mr Bill English is suffering from withdrawal symptoms. He finds it hard to get on television now. The Minister does not have to go on television to roll out what is one of the most crucial vital and appreciated services in this country in order to secure its future. 
The Plunket Line is being wrapped in with the Healthline and it will now be extended across the whole country. This is another of the remarkable success stories that we have rolled out across this country under a Labour-led Government in the area of health care.
Parker David: Care of Children Bill Status of Children Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Parker David: Care of Children Bill Status of Children Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:621;Page:16726] 
DAVID PARKER (Labour—Otago) 
: 
 During the various stages of this debate we have seen an attack by the National Party Opposition on rights that have been enjoyed by women in New Zealand for two decades. We have seen National’s attempts to amend clause 37 to interfere with the confidential relationship between doctors and young women and we have seen the start of that party’s agenda on women’s issues. It is no wonder that the National Party has so little support amongst women because women know that the election of a National Government would put at threat the women’s rights that they have fought for over the years. 
This legislation focuses on the rights and interests of children. Clause 3 of the Care of Children Bill states that the purpose of the legislation is to promote children’s welfare and best interests. The paramountcy of the interests of children is emphasised in clause 4 which states that the welfare and best interests of the child must be the first and paramount consideration under the Act. Everything hangs off that paramountcy of the interests of the child as it ought. I recommend this legislation to the House.
Tanczos Nandor: Families Commission Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Procedure 
Tanczos Nandor: Families Commission Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:614;Page:10294] 
NANDOR TANCZOS (Green) 
: 
 I do not think that the Families Commission Bill even begins to describe what it sets out to do. I think it would be better described as the “United Future Derision Bill”. One could say that United Future is just having a laugh but I do not think that is the reason the bill should be called that. It should be called the “United Future Derision Bill” because with this move United Future has become the laughing stock of the country. The bill is an absolute waste of $28 million. It replicates good work already being done by a number of community groups church groups and even Government departments. 
One could call it the “Misuse of Taxation Revenue Bill”. That would be a more accurate description of what the bill does. It would be far more effective more efficient and sensible to put that money into supporting the many excellent community groups that work in the area and are screaming out for adequate funding and I mention the Child Poverty Action Group Plunket and Homebuilders. The Green Party opposes the squandering of that tax money. The title does not begin to describe what the bill does at all. 
Another approach would be to call it the “Intolerance Bill” because the usual reaction from United Future to anyone who opposes its policy proposals has been personal abuse—regardless of the fact that members like my colleague Sue Bradford have a far greater wealth of experience and knowledge of this area and in working on the ground. Personal abuse is the usual retreat of United Future when faced with disagreement in a policy area. 
We could also call the bill the “Venal Bill”. We are all familiar with how that term has been used. We have received an abusive letter from Mr Peter Dunne—surprise surprise—that describes opponents to the bill as “venal”. How interesting! How is fulfilling the functions inherent in the role of a member of the House of Representatives to protect the public interest venal? I cannot begin to imagine. What I would describe as venal is accepting $28 million in an election bribe.
Robertson H V Ross: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
Robertson H V Ross: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9393] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: This is outside my jurisdiction. The second reading has been agreed to. I ask that we all be sensible in recognising that fact and that we progress to the Committee stage. Members will be given adequate time to put their case to the Committee.
Hobbs Marian: Prostitution Reform Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Hobbs Marian: Prostitution Reform Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4476] 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 I rise very briefly to speak to this bill. I want to support it. I have taken quite a long time to reach that decision spending about 2 years listening talking and working in my own electorate which is Wellington Central. The reasons I want to support it are twofold. First I support it for reasons of the health and safety of the workers involved in that particular job. I want to support them and ensure that their health and safety are secure. Many times I hear people saying that they would not like their child to be involved in the sex industry. If a child of mine were involved my greatest hope would be that they were safe and healthy. I kind of share the member’s opinion that the morality or judgment of that work is for that person alone. 
The second comment I want to make comes from people in Wellington’s large civil service who have said: “I would not be in this job if I had ever been convicted of the work I had done previously.” In other words had they been charged as a prostitute—a profession they had worked in earlier in their lives—they would not have been able to change their careers. I would like to say to those people who profess Christianity that the ability to change the direction of one’s life if one wants to is incredibly important—and I am not making any moral judgement about that. A criminal conviction for prostitution is not a great thing to have on one’s record if one is going for a job in the public service. It is a crime at the moment but it is not a crime that hurts other people. 
The last thing I want to say is that I did one of those things that MPs do in their electorates where they send out letters to people and most of them put them in the bin. But over 800 people I think replied. About 500 said they supported decriminalisation about 100 said they had no opinion whatsoever and about 160 were against. Because this is a conscience issue I do not vote on those numbers alone but I found it interesting. 
I have been trolling and working and thinking about this issue over the last 2 or 3 years. I went through this very strong feminist stage thinking oh my God this is dreadful; here am I a strong feminist and what am I doing? Feminists wrote to me quite strongly but some of the most brilliant human wonderful letters I have had and visits to my office have been from prostitutes. Some of them might have been members of the Prostitutes Collective or whatever but they have boosted my belief in the humanity of people and in their goodness and humour. I want to use this opportunity tonight to say thank you. There has not been one miserable thing or one negative closed object. It has been warm and human and loving and I want to thank those people because I admire them for that.
Vote: Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Vote: Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6864] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 47 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Noes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Deputy Foreign Minister of Vietnam 
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Deputy Foreign Minister of Vietnam 
[Volume:608;Page:5983] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that His Excellency the Hon Mr Nguygen Dinh Bin Deputy Foreign Minister of Vietnam accompanied by the Minister for Trade Negotiations is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed. 
His Excellency the Hon Mr Nguygen Dinh Bin accompanied by the Minister for Trade Negotiations entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.