edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6105. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Sure. This is what the Business Committee has agreed to. The debate and voting on amendments to Part 3 will be grouped as follows: first licensing requirements and conditions Subpart 1 other than minimum pricing proposals. Once we have dealt with that we will then put the amendments related to that section. Then we will move on and the second one is minimum pricing Subpart 1. The third is local alcohol policies Subpart 2. The fourth is licensing process and licensing bodies Subparts 3 to 7 and finally offences and enforcement Subparts 8 and 9. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Thank you Mr Chairman. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Members—[ 
Interruption 
] I stand corrected members. It is one debate on Part 3 but we are going to be dealing with those separate areas for separate votes in that order. All right? So it is a debate on Part 3—[ 
Interruption 
]—on the whole of Part 3. So the question is—
Chauvel Charles: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Chauvel Charles: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6105. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Could I just ask your indulgence? I think we have understood the manner in which the debate and the voting will occur. Would you mind just reading the subparts out one more time?
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6105. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: As I explained earlier we are actually splitting this into five separate debates within Part 3. So we are going to deal with those topics that I mentioned. Once we have completed that the amendments under those headings will be put—the questions will be put—and we will deal with those. Then we will move on to the next provision. Does the member wish to say something? Are we all comfortable—
Upston Louise: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Upston Louise: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6105. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
LOUISE UPSTON (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I am just seeking to clarify. I understood that all of the votes for this part would be taken in one go so it would be debated as one part.
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6105. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: We are just going back now to where I was before—Part 3. This is debate on clauses 12 to 284. The procedure we are going to follow is that the debate and voting on amendments to Part 3 will be grouped as follows: licensing requirements and conditions Subpart 1 other than minimum pricing proposals—so we will have the amendments related to that and then we will have the vote on those. The next one is minimum pricing Subpart 1. The third is local alcohol policies Subpart 2. The fourth is licensing process and licensing bodies Subparts 3 to 7. The fifth is offences and enforcement Subparts 8 and 9. So we now move to licensing requirements and conditions Subpart 1 clauses 12 to 74.
Vote: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6105. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 58 
New Zealand Labour 32 (Ardern J Chauvel Clark Cosgrove Cunliffe Curran Dalziel Dyson Faafoi Fenton Goff Hipkins Horomia Huo Jones King A Lees-Galloway Little Mackey Mahuta Moroney Parker Prasad Robertson G Robertson R Shearer Sio Street Tirikatene Twyford Wall Woods); Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 3; Mana 1. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 1 (Mallard); ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
New Part 7 not agreed to.
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6103. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: We now move to Part 3. This is debate on clauses 12 to 284. I will just explain the procedure that we will be following. The debate and voting on amendments to Part 3 will be grouped as follows: licensing requirements and conditions subpart 1 other than minimum pricing proposals— 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Just for clarification because I am trying to mark things off on this as we go through was the new Part 7 dealt with at that time or will that be voted on later? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: That part has been defeated. We have just had that. That was part of new Part 2A and new Part 7. We have dealt with that. We are now on Part 3. 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: I had different votes for the two parts. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Would you like to explain your position? 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: Well for Part 2A the amendments in the name of Mr Flavell we had 26 to 7 which is what I cast. For new Part 7 which was the alcohol advertising reform committee on Supplementary Order Paper 91 in the name of Lees-Galloway I had 32 in favour one opposed. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: So you are wishing to change your votes? 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: No—well how can I split the vote when they have been put together? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: This was an agreement of the Business Committee so— 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: No but not the votes. Certainly the debate was put together but I did not think the votes were put together. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: So what you are asking for is that on Iain Lees-Galloway’s amendments you wanted to separate out new Part 2A relating to advertising and have a separate vote on new Part 7 establishing an alcohol advisory reform committee—is that what you are asking? 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: Yes. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: You need to seek leave for that. 
Louise Upston 
: I thought we voted on Supplementary Order Paper 91 both of those components. Can you clarify whether we did or not? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: You are right; that is what we were doing. But what the member is asking for—in Iain Lees-Galloway’s amendment there is actually two parts to it. There is new Part 2A and new clause 220 relating to advertising. That is what they are suggesting shall be one question and the second question is on new Part 7 which establishes an alcohol advisory reform committee. That would be a second vote. To do it the member has to seek leave because I have already put the vote and I cannot change it unless the Committee approves that we go back to it and have the vote again.
Dalziel Lianne: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dalziel Lianne: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6104. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour—Christchurch East) 
: 
 I seek leave that a vote be taken on new Part 7 to establish an alcohol advertising reform committee on Iain Lees Galloway’s Supplementary Order Paper 91.
Vote: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6103. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 48 
New Zealand Labour 30 (Ardern J Chauvel Clark Cosgrove Cunliffe Curran Dalziel Dyson Faafoi Fenton Goff Horomia Huo Jones King A Little Mackey Mahuta Moroney Parker Prasad Robertson G Robertson R Shearer Sio Street Tirikatene Twyford Wall Woods); Green Party 14; Maori Party 3; Mana 1. 
Noes 72 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 3 (Hipkins Lees-Galloway Mallard); New Zealand First 8; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Vote: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6103. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand Labour 30 (Ardern J Chauvel Clark Cosgrove Cunliffe Dalziel Dyson Faafoi Fenton Hipkins Horomia Huo Jones Lees-Galloway Little Mackey Mahuta Mallard Moroney Parker Prasad Robertson G Robertson R Shearer Sio Street Tirikatene Twyford Wall Woods); Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 3; Mana 1. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 3 (Curran Goff King A); ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
New Parts 2A and 7 and amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 115 in the name of Dr David Clark to insert new clause 220A be agreed to.
Vote: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6103. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 44 
New Zealand Labour 26 (Chauvel Clark Cunliffe Curran Dalziel Dyson Fenton Goff Horomia Huo Jones King A Mackey Mahuta Moroney Parker Prasad Robertson G Robertson R Shearer Sio Street Tirikatene Twyford Wall Woods); Green Party 14; Maori Party 3; Mana 1. 
Noes 76 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 7 (Ardern J Cosgrove Faafoi Hipkins Lees-Galloway Little Mallard); New Zealand First 8; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
New Part 2A and amendment not agreed to. 
The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 44 Noes 66. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 91 in the name of Iain Lees-Galloway to insert new Parts 2A and 7 and to clause 220 be agreed to.
Calder Cam: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Calder Cam: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6101. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Mallard Trevor: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Mallard Trevor: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6079. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 No. I will give you a bit more of a hand if you like. I think if you look carefully at Speaker’s ruling 66/7 and what that indicates—and I will say that it is one of the less distinguished rulings in the Speakers’ rulings—what it indicates is that if a member themselves is voting in a way that agrees with the ruling of the Speaker or the Chairman they are not allowed to call for a party vote. My view is that in fact in these circumstances where there is a split vote it would be helpful if you indicated that in those circumstances they can. I think you might have just about done it already but it would be good if you did it in a more formal way.
Roy Eric: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6080. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Members the next debate is on new Part 2A and new Part 7. We come now to a group of proposals that will be taken as one debate relating to advertising and sponsorship. These comprise Te Ururoa Flavell’s amendments proposing new Part 2A and new clause 58A set out on Supplementary Order Paper 81; Iain Lees-Galloway’s amendments proposing new Part 2A new clause 220 and new Part 7 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 91; and Dr David Clark’s amendment proposing a new clause 220A set out on Supplementary Order Paper 115.
Vote: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6080. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to.  
Ayes 50 
New Zealand Labour 27 (Ardern J Chauvel Clark Cosgrove Cunliffe Curran Dalziel Dyson Faafoi Goff Horomia Huo Jones King A Little Mahuta Moroney Parker Prasad Robertson G Robertson R Sio Street Tirikatene Twyford Wall Woods); Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Mana 1. 
Noes 70 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 5 (Fenton Hipkins Lees-Galloway Mackey Shearer); Maori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1; Other 1 (Mallard). 
New Part 2A not agreed to.
Roy Eric: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6080. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Sorry to interrupt the member also but my interpretation of this was that it was to deal with a separate issue which may well have been time-wasting at the time. That is not in the purview of what we are doing here. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 121 in the name of Hone Harawira to insert new Part 2A be agreed to.
Mallard Trevor: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Mallard Trevor: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6080. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 Thank you Mr Chairman. Just briefly by way of summary I thank you for your conclusion and suggest that both you and the senior Government whip could look to the midpoint of 66/7 which makes it clear that that is not about personal votes it is about party votes. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: And also time-wasting. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Not at all—this is not time-wasting. This is making sure that we do not have things ruled out later and cause a lot of wasted time.
Roy Eric: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6079. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Look I think I am on top of it. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: You’ve read further into it? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Yes I have. When you look at it in some depth there are two contrary points of view here. I think that is the point that the member is alluding to. I have indicated quite clearly at the end of question time that we want to get the best possible outcomes for this. So in terms of calling for a party vote for the purpose of this piece of legislation the Alcohol Reform Bill I am prepared to let any member whatever proxies they are calling call for the vote. I think the inconsistencies between these are for another time and maybe for the Standing Orders Committee. A considered opinion needs to be given but in terms of getting the right outcomes here I think I understand the point that the member has made and I will permit that to happen.
Woodhouse Michael: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Woodhouse Michael: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6079. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I have two quick points. Firstly Speaker’s ruling 66/7 relates to personal votes and as the Speaker has clarified earlier today there are only two types of votes: one is a personal vote and one is a party vote. It has been this party’s experience on a number of occasions in the 50th Parliament where I on behalf of other parties vote in a way different from that which I would myself vote because I hold the proxies. This is quite a simple equation. It is articulated in  
McGee 
 pages 206 and 207. Any member is entitled to call for a party vote and the whips can then vote according to the proxies that they hold. That is called a split vote.
Roy Eric: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6079. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: I am a little perplexed by the member’s point of order in this regard: you call for a party vote but then if a member is holding proxies on both sides of the argument why could they not call for a party vote? The member means party vote not personal vote?
Mallard Trevor: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Mallard Trevor: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6079. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I would like to draw your attention to what I think is a gap in the Standing Orders and Speakers’ rulings when it comes to split party votes. I would like to refer you to Speakers’ ruling 66/6 from Speakers O’Rorke and Lang who were distinguished Speakers of the House and 66/7 from Mr Ian Revell who I think it is fair to say was a less distinguished Chairperson of the Committee. What they indicate when taken together is that there does not appear to be provision for members who are personally voting as part of a split vote but who hold the proxies for a split vote to call for a party vote on a particular issue. I think it was highlighted in one of the earlier votes when notwithstanding the fact that I was voting for something and that was a declared vote I asked for and got from the Chairperson a ruling that there could in fact be a party vote. What I am looking for is a ruling from you that where a member is holding the proxies for a split vote they can in fact call for a party vote notwithstanding the fact that they do themselves agree with the ruling that you have made as to the result.
Harawira Hone: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Harawira Hone: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6078. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
HONE HARAWIRA (Leader—Mana) 
: 
 First of all I would like to thank Mr Nathan Guy for supporting this Supplementary Order Paper 121. Thank you Nathan. It is most appreciated. I have heard many of the arguments both for and against my Supplementary Order Paper for a review of the ages for sale and purchase of alcohol on licensed premises within 5 years of the commencement of the Alcohol Reform Bill. I thank all of the members for their consideration. But I simply ask: what could be wrong with a review? It is not an overturning of the age for those who support the 18-18 scenario. It is simply a review of the situation. I am not going to relitigate all of the debate that has been had in the past couple of hours—excellent korero. Suffice to point out that when I spoke to a number of MPs after the vote was taken on this issue some weeks ago some of them told me that they actually voted for the 18-18 scenario not out of a deeply held conviction that it was the right thing to do but because they thought that in an environment where 18 to 20-year-olds have so much voting power it might be a bit risky to vote against something that 18 to 20-year-olds patently wanted so much. 
Michael Woodhouse 
: That’s cynical. 
HONE HARAWIRA 
: Cynical? That is also true. One of the MPs—so that you know—was a member of the National Party. I will not tell you who. It was not Minister Collins. But this issue is not one where we should be wavering nor is it one where we should be necessarily accommodating to people just because of age. I am comfortable with the votes of those who genuinely think the age should be 18-18 but I know that the vote on the night was not what many members wanted so I simply want to provide the opportunity to revisit this matter at the earliest opportunity. 
I took note of one comment though from Mr Lees-Galloway who felt that he could not bring himself to vote for my Supplementary Order Paper because he thought that any review should cover a wider range of issues. Well all I can say to that is that if he wanted to put forward some of the other issues then I would have been happy to support them. But I sincerely hope that he can still see the value in supporting something because it is right rather than opposing it just because it does not cover all of the things that he necessarily wanted it to say. 
But coming back again to my first point this Supplementary Order Paper is not to change the law. This Supplementary Order Paper is not an attempt to overturn what this House has already determined. This is simply providing an opportunity for all members to reconsider in 5 years’ time the vote that was taken on the issue of age some weeks ago. Ka nui tera maku. Kia ora tatou katoa. 
[ 
That is enough from me. Thank you to us all. 
]
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6078. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Yes. That is substantive amendments by a certain date. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.
Dalziel Lianne: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dalziel Lianne: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6078. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour—Christchurch East) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. My understanding was that the agreement of the Business Committee around amendments to the bill in the Committee stage was that Supplementary Order Papers that sought to extend the scope of the legislation were to be tabled by a particular time but I did not understand that there was any further extension.
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6078. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The short answer to that is no. If you wanted to broaden the scope then you would have to do it by way of an instruction when the House was sitting as opposed to being in the Committee and there has been no instruction. So in answer to your question the only way that you could broaden the scope of the bill is by way of instruction when the House is sitting as opposed to in Committee if you wanted to broaden the scope of the bill because anything that is within the scope of a bill can be changed only by amendments in the Supplementary Order Paper process. It is not to say that you cannot debate on the points that have been made about broadening the scope later on—that is fine—but at this stage the answer to your question is no it cannot be included.
Hague Kevin: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hague Kevin: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6078. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
KEVIN HAGUE (Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I do intend to seek a call in this debate but can I first of all seek your guidance about a matter that has been raised in the debate on this Supplementary Order Paper 121 today which is around the suggestion of a wider review indeed of the Alcohol Reform Bill once it is enacted. In the lead-up to this Committee of the whole House debate on the Alcohol Reform Bill there has been a procedure followed through the Business Committee whereby a deadline was set for the submission of Supplementary Order Papers. It seems to me that in the debate that we have heard over the last half an hour or so there have actually been some interesting points made about a wider review of the bill as enacted and I wonder whether it would be in order for the Committee to receive further Supplementary Order Papers on that matter.
Collins Judith: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Collins Judith: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6073. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 Thank you for the opportunity to speak in relation to Supplementary Order Paper 121 that Hone Harawira has put up to amend the Alcohol Reform Bill. I have been waiting for Mr Harawira to speak in favour of his Supplementary Order Paper. He has certainly had a lot of help from the Hon Lianne Dalziel and the Hon Maryan Street but unfortunately he has to date remained silent. The fact is that any member of this House can bring in a member’s bill to change the age for the purchase of alcohol. It does not need a review to do it; it can be done any time. The fact is that this Parliament has recently decided to vote to retain the age of purchase at 18 which I believe was a mistake. I think that as the evidence becomes more obvious to people particularly as we know now around the development of young people’s brains—the frontal lobe—Parliament made a mistake. I do not think we need to have a review committee to tell us that. But the fact is that Parliament has made a decision and I respect it. The amendment proposed by Mr Harawira is something on which I think if he expects other members to vote for it he should be able to speak to it himself.
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6070. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: We now move to new Part 2A. We have a number of amendments that propose new parts and related new provisions. The first of these is an amendment in the name of Hone Harawira set out on Supplementary Order Paper 121. This proposes a new Part 2A relating to the review of ages for the sale and purchase of alcohol.
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tisch Lindsay: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6070. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: We now move to Part 2. There is no debate on Part 2 in accordance with the determination of the Business Committee; however there is an amendment. The Minister’s amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 132 proposes to delete Part 2. This is a direct negative of the question. We move to the vote on Part 2. The question is that Part 2 be agreed to. 
Part 2 not agreed to.
Vote: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6070. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 118 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 30 (Ardern J Chauvel Clark Cosgrove Cunliffe Curran Dalziel Dyson Faafoi Fenton Goff Hipkins Horomia Huo Jones King A Lees-Galloway Little Mackey Mahuta Moroney Parker Prasad Robertson G Shearer Street Tirikatene Twyford Wall Woods); Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; Mana 1; United Future 1; Other 1 (Mallard). 
Noes 2 
New Zealand Labour 2 (Robertson R Sio). 
Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Roy Eric: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6064. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Did you call? 
Hon David Parker 
: I did Mr Chairman. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: I call the Hon David Parker.
Roy Eric: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6062. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Iain Lees-Galloway has been trying for a while. I will give him the call.
Wagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Wagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6040. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
7. 
NICKY WAGNER (National—Christchurch Central) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What steps is the Government taking to ensure meaningful consultation with school communities in Greater Christchurch? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education) 
: 
 We are taking a number of steps. The first step involved two rounds of consultation in the 18 months since the initial earthquakes out of which a set of proposals have been developed. The next set of steps have included: on 13 September schools received 2 weeks’ introduction of the proposals; on 28 September schools were given 10 weeks to provide feedback; independent facilitators have been offered to each of the schools to assist boards of trustees in managing the consultation process and developing their feedback; schools can hold a consultation support day which is effectively a teachers only day; online communities are being developed which will allow 24/7 discussions; and a dedicated task force has been set up including the appointment of an independent executive adviser. 
Nicky Wagner 
: What steps is the Minister personally taking to ensure that parents’ concerns are heard? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: Over the next 3 weeks I am going to be spending the bulk of my time in Christchurch visiting school communities and listening directly to them and to the parents of those school communities. 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: I seek leave to table the executive summary of the 500 submissions that were made that were referred to by the Minister where it said that questions relating to the compulsory school sector dominated responses with the largest number of responses saying small schools were preferred for building community reducing negative social and educational— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 









Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Robertson H V Ross: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Robertson H V Ross: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6047. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: We are in Committee on the Alcohol Reform Bill. Before we commence the debate on Part 1 I need to correct the vote on the minimum age for sale and purchase. The vote for 18 years is 68 not 69. The vote for 20 years remains 53. The record will be amended accordingly.
Mallard Trevor: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Mallard Trevor: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6047. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 Not quite Mr Speaker. There were two further matters and the first is that on votes that you have indicated you are not going to allow a personal vote on but which some parties in the Chamber have a conscience vote on whether or not a bell will be rung for those. And then the next question is for those votes although I understand that members have given proxies to other members for the party votes as you have indicated whether there was provision for members who want to wait and listen to the debate to then vote in the category of “any other votes”? 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: There can be only a party or personal vote. The bell is rung only for a personal vote. Party or collective voting has not been removed from the ultimate right of a member to vote on any question he or she sees fit. Where a party vote is held all members will be able to vote but it will be a member’s responsibility to be present and have a party vote issued. So it is up to the individuals.
Roy Eric: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6047. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I thank the member for the point of order because we do need some clarification around these points. All members will have received from the Speaker a list of those amendments that will be deemed personal votes. There are five of them. I will just run through them now. 
The sinking lid on off-licences—and that is the amendment on the Te Ururoa Flavell Supplementary Order Paper 81 to clause 35B—is one; a ban on off-licences within 1 kilometre of schools is on Supplementary Order Paper 107; reduced trading hours is on Te Ururoa Flavell’s Supplementary Order Paper 81; reduced trading hours is on Andrew Little’s Supplementary Order Paper 110; and there is the amendment requiring regulations to ban the sale of ready-to-drink beverages when they contain more than 5 percent of alcohol. Those are the five. 
I will expect that those chairing each session in the Chamber will make very clear as we approach those what the procedures will be in relation to the ringing of the bell and the various procedures that will take place in relation to the votes at the time. I think we want to have a very clear understanding of what the outcomes will be and that will be made clear from the Chair because some of these are some time ahead and there may even be some developments but I expect members will have a very clear understanding at the time. I hope that answers the member’s question.
Mallard Trevor: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Mallard Trevor: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6046. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Before you put the House into Committee on the Alcohol Reform Bill can I seek from you a clear statement about which votes you have decided are to be personal votes and which are not; also an indication as to where some parties are having conscience votes and others are not and you have decided that they will be party votes and not personal votes whether or not a bell will ring because I know that some members are going to be listening to the debate in Committee before committing themselves to a particular position; and the third leg of the treble if you like is an indication that although in some cases there will be a split party vote individual members are still able notwithstanding the fact that the party has voted on a split basis to vote as individuals under the category “any other votes”?
Roy Eric: Urgent Debates Declined — State-owned Assets Sales—Potential Legal Challenges 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Urgent Debates Declined — State-owned Assets Sales—Potential Legal Challenges 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6046. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Hon Clayton Cosgrove seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 Cabinet’s decision today that an Order in Council is to be made to revoke Maori court action. The urgent debate procedure is a means of debating matters that have occurred. For there to be a particular case of recent occurrence there must be either a new situation of importance or a new development in an existing situation of sufficient importance in itself to warrant setting aside the business of the House. A proposal to discuss a continuing matter such as this is not one contemplated by Standing Order 386 as a particular case of recent occurrence. Furthermore an application cannot be accepted when to do so would inevitably involve a breach of the rule against referring to a matter pending adjudication in any court. The application is therefore declined.
Roche Denise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roche Denise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6046. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
2. 
DENISE ROCHE (Green) 
 to the  
Member in charge of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill 
: What is the purpose of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill? 
METIRIA TUREI (Member in charge of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill) 
: 
 The purpose of the bill is to apply the civil forfeiture regime to casinos. The bill amends the definition of “unlawfully benefiting from significant criminal activity” to include casinos that knowingly having regard to best international practice in detecting problem gambling in a criminal activity derive a benefit from significant criminal activity. 
Denise Roche 
: What is the effect of the amendment? 
METIRIA TUREI 
: Casinos that have failed to demonstrate that they have used the best international practice to detect or to deter problem gambling and criminal activity will be required to forfeit any profit they retain from problem gambling or money laundering. In the case of serious problem gambling the money is often obtained unlawfully from family friends community organisations and businesses. This bill will encourage casinos to implement the best possible practices to protect against problem gambling and money-laundering and therefore to better protect small businesses community organisations and individuals from gambling-driven crime.
Roche Denise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roche Denise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6045. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
1. 
DENISE ROCHE (Green) 
 to the  
Member in charge of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill: 
: Why did the member draft the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill? 
METIRIA TUREI (Member in charge of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill 
: 
 I drafted this bill because casinos are widely known to profit from money-laundering and theft driven by gambling addiction. Under the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 private individuals are not entitled to retain profits or property derived from significant criminal activity whether or not that person is involved in the criminal activity and neither should casinos. This bill requires casinos to forfeit any profits they obtain from gambling that results from a significant criminal activity. 
Denise Roche 
: Was there any other reason? 
METIRIA TUREI 
: The issue of casinos retaining profits from criminal activity arose during the debate on the Skycity convention centre deal negotiated by the National Government. That deal would significantly increase the risk of criminal activity to feed both problem gambling and money-laundering and therefore increase profits to the casino. That deal is currently subject to an investigation by the Auditor-General.
Sabin Mike: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Sabin Mike: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6044. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
11. 
MIKE SABIN (National—Northland) 
 to the  
Minister of Customs 
: What is the Government doing to combat the smuggling of precursors used to manufacture methamphetamine? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister of Customs) 
: 
 In 2009 the Government launched a multi-faceted Methamphetamine Action Plan. Three of the key elements of that plan are that firstly we invested in enhanced tracking and surveillance equipment to assist the Customs Service to identify high-level organisers behind the drug importing syndicates; secondly 2 years ago we established an integrated targeted and operations centre which allows the Customs Service to assess threats and target border risks more effectively; and thirdly we have developed a closer relationship with China’s customs service to better target the supply end. I signed a memorandum of cooperation with my Chinese counterpart in late 2010 and just last week both countries agreed to work even more closely in the areas of intelligence targeting and operations to combat drug trafficking. 
Mike Sabin 
: What is the flow-on effect from all these measures? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: I have to say the results have been nothing short of spectacular. From a peak of 1200 kilograms coming across our border in 2009 this year—after 9 months—the figure runs to just 300. So even annualising that it is round about one-third of the level of interceptions we were getting just 3 years ago. We believe that the measures the Government has taken have resulted in the reduced supply of those precursors. The Customs Service tells me there is evidence to suggest we have managed to contain the supply of methamphetamine and recent surveys indicate fewer people are now using it. By reducing the amount of P precursors coming across the border we prevent millions of dollars of harm to this nation.
Calder Cam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Calder Cam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6042. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
9. 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Health 
: What progress has been made on the introduction of a comprehensive clinical assessment tool for older people in rest homes? 
Hon JO GOODHEW (Associate Minister of Health) 
: 
 Training of nurses has started with 178 expected to be trained by the end of this year. Last week the Government announced we are accelerating the time frame for the roll-out of comprehensive clinical assessments to every aged-care resident. As a result older New Zealanders in rest homes will have tailor-made health plans to ensure they are getting a consistently high standard of customised care in their rest homes. By June 2014 all residential care facilities will have started to participate in the roll-out and it will be mandatory from July 2015. 
Dr Cam Calder 
: What prompted the Government’s decision to fast track this roll-out? 
Hon JO GOODHEW 
: The Auditor-General’s September 2012 report entitled  
Effectiveness of arrangements to check the standard of services provided by rest homes 
 emphasised the importance of comprehensive clinical assessment in monitoring the quality of care for older people. In essence this cannot wait. The sooner comprehensive clinical assessment is introduced the sooner we will see improvements in aged residential care services through improved needs-assessment and performance benchmarking. 
Dr Cam Calder 
: What is the purpose of comprehensive clinical assessments for older New Zealanders receiving aged care? 
Hon JO GOODHEW 
: This is a personalised health and well-being plan that covers about 22 different areas of a person’s health. Information from across all rest homes will be anonymised and accumulated to provide a measure of rest home care and quality. This Government wants demonstrable and independent measures of quality so we have also introduced spot audits we are auditing the auditors and we are publishing audit results online to support older New Zealanders and their families. All this is part of improving the quality and accountability of aged care for older New Zealanders.
Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6041. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
8. 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Since he assumed ministerial responsibility for it has the Government Communications Security Bureau undertaken surveillance of any person who is a citizen or resident of New Zealand other than Mr Kim Dotcom? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 It is on the public record that the interception of communications in the Megaupload case included Kim Dotcom and other individuals. Mr Dotcom his family and one of his associates were found to have been unlawfully intercepted due to their residency status. I also refer the member to my public statement on 3 October in which I noted the Government Communications Security Bureau could not assure me that the legal position of three other cases was totally clear. These cases are not connected to the Dotcom case. This does not mean that these cases involve unlawful interception. However the Government Communications Security Bureau has referred these cases to the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security for further consideration. 
Charles Chauvel 
: In respect of the matters that have been referred to the Inspector-General by the Government Communications Security Bureau does the Prime Minister know when it is likely that he will have a response to those matters and does he intend to share that response with the House? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: No. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Did the Government Communications Security Bureau tell him at the meeting that he held with the agency on Wednesday 22 August that on the Friday beforehand—17 August—the Acting Prime Minister had signed a ministerial certificate to prevent disclosure of the Government Communications Security Bureau’s role in the surveillance in the Dotcom case? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: No. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Has he requested a file review of the same nature as that which was undertaken following his 29 February briefing from the Government Communications Security Bureau in respect of the 22 August meeting; if not will he do so and will the results of that file review if it occurs be shared with the House? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I have asked the Government Communications Security Bureau to review all paperwork in relation to any matters including the Dotcom file and my office. That included all audio all video for the very reasons we pointed out last week when Labour was chasing hares and hounds and various other things. All the paperwork that we have is only that day of 29 February.