edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Adams Paul: Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Adams Paul: Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17280] 
PAUL ADAMS (United Future) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of United Future to speak on this section of the bill. I was on the Social Services Committee as this bill progressed. That was probably one of the most frustrating times I have had on a select committee because we discovered that the majority of the submitters’ concerns were not actually being addressed in this legislation we are dealing with tonight. 
The elderly are a segment of the population that we really do need to be concerned with and care for. We will all become elderly and some of us sooner than others of course. I am probably in the latter category. One of the major concerns submitters had was the cost of caring for the elderly. Apparently it is a Government decision to increase it and it is not dealt with in this legislation. That frustrated me and frustrated a lot of submitters but I think the main concern we have as has previously been said is that these particular facilities are closing down. We just cannot have that. We even have major problems with the pay structure for those who care for the elderly and it is a competitive market out there. We are thankful in this country that we have low unemployment but when we are starting to deal with the elderly and these types of issues we need to be very careful that we do not put those in desperate need into an even more desperate situation. 
I believe that the Government has a responsibility to attend to the conditions and careers of carers in New Zealand especially that dedicated group of people who care for the elderly in rest homes. I believe that if the Government is sincere in its intention to promote the care of the ageing in those homes then it must walk the talk. United Future has previously spoken on this bill and called on the Government to take the initiative gather the sector’s stakeholders and find a way out of this hole in respect of care for the aged. I note that around 31000 people—which is 7 percent of those aged 65 and over—are in long-term residential care. That is a lot of people. 
Dr Lynda Scott 
: An ageing population. 
PAUL ADAMS 
: It is an ageing population as my colleague has just said. On average people spend 2 years in long-term residential care and I know that many members in this Chamber would have gone through some of those rest homes and seen those people. They would have seen how they enjoy the company of others how they are well cared for how they are taken out on trips and that they do many other things. In those final years that is very very important. United Future is supporting this bill because we welcome the fact that asset testing has been removed— 
Dr Lynda Scott 
: It hasn’t been removed. 
PAUL ADAMS 
: —well it has been improved dramatically—but we have major concerns with the fact that we need to address the issues of the costs of the homes and the pay rates of the staff. Those issues are highly important to us and we hope that the Government will address them sooner rather than later.
Prebble Richard: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Prebble Richard: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5444] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 Perhaps Mr Robson might like to assure us that he was within the precincts of the House when the vote was called.
Vote: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8486] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 11 
Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 108 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 127 in the name of Sue Bradford to clause 88(e) and (f) be agreed to.
Vote: Social Security (Working for Families) Amendment Bill Taxation (Working for Families) Bill — Third Readings 
Vote: Social Security (Working for Families) Amendment Bill Taxation (Working for Families) Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:617;Page:13539] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Taxation (Working for Families) Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 78 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 6; United Future 8. 
Noes 26 
New Zealand National 21; ACT New Zealand 4; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Bill read a third time.
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:615;Page:11366] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have made the ruling. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Yes you have. But with respect I think you have missed the point. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No I have not missed anything. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The point is that there is a published question sheet for today. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will be seated. That was the very first point I made. At any time up until 2 o’clock when the question is being asked the question can be transferred. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: With respect that is not the point. The point I am making is that although the Government can transfer a question and there is no argument about that and we have not questioned that today surely it is our right to make apparent who that question was intended for. Today the Clerk’s Office published a sheet of today’s questions with this question addressed to the Prime Minister. That was withdrawn and I have to say that is extremely unusual. Then the question sheet was reprinted and recirculated with this question going to the Minister of Immigration who we now find will be answering to the House but will not be held accountable for anything he says. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That was provisional advice and I stand by my previous ruling.
Vote: Shop Trading Hours Act Repeal Act (Abolition of Restrictions) Amendment Bill — Consideration of Report of Commerce Committee 
Vote: Shop Trading Hours Act Repeal Act (Abolition of Restrictions) Amendment Bill — Consideration of Report of Commerce Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:12652] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Shop Trading Hours Act Repeal Act (Abolition of Restrictions) Amendment Bill do proceed. 
Ayes 58 
New Zealand Labour 18; New Zealand National 17; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 2. 
Noes 60 
New Zealand Labour 33; New Zealand National 10; Green Party 9; United Future 6; Progressive 2. 
Bill discharged.
Vote: Corrections Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Vote: Corrections Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:13160] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 52 
New Zealand National 24; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 6; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Hughes Darren: Retirement Villages Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Hughes Darren: Retirement Villages Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9437] 
DARREN HUGHES (Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 I rise to take a short call in support of the third reading of the Retirement Villages Bill. In doing so I want to welcome this legislation which is in the final stage of its passage through the House. It is good legislation that covers a new type of accommodation in which a number of New Zealanders are choosing to live. About 26000 people already live in retirement villages and there is strong growth every year. My constituency of Otaki has the highest number of people over 65 of any constituency so there are lots of retirement villages and I know what an enjoyable way of life that can be for people. I assume I myself will end up there one day; some other members may precede me. I notice Mr Dail Jones speaking; I understand that he is a member of the residents’ committee of a retirement village in Auckland. The Minister Lianne Dalziel has done a great job on this bill ably assisted by the officials who were very helpful to the Justice and Electoral Committee as well which was chaired by Tim Barnett. I think we reported back a good piece of legislation which I very much support and I look forward to people in my electorate enjoying the fruits and benefits of it.
Brownlee Gerry: Tabling of Documents — Question No. 9 to Minister 
Brownlee Gerry: Tabling of Documents — Question No. 9 to Minister 
[Volume:606;Page:3355] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a page from a document supplied to me by the Shell Oil company that discusses the size of the Pohokura field and I think disputes the information given to the House today by Dr Cullen. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Brownlee Gerry: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee 
Brownlee Gerry: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20252] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 This is the part that makes possible the transfer of various properties from the land bank to in this case Ngati Tuwharetoa Bay of Plenty as part of the redress and the accumulated settlement arrangement. It is relatively straightforward and I do not think we need to spend a long amount of time on it. But I ask the Minister whether he would explain for the public record a couple of provisions in this part. 
The first is clause 124 “Roadways and rights of way”. It reads: “The permission of a council under section 348 of the Local Government Act 1974 is not required for laying out forming granting or reserving a private road private way or right of way required by clauses 6.3 or 6.4.6 …”. If that clause does in fact exempt Ngati Tuwharetoa Bay of Plenty from Resource Management Act provisions over land that is clearly not theirs but gives access to particular sites that are part of the settlement then I think that the Minister should explain why that is. The second provision relates to the issue of the Crown forests—or should I say the Crown forestry licences—on redressed licensed land. The issue there is that the trees above ground and any buildings above ground are excluded but—and I presume that the Minister could explain it to us—Ngati Tuwharetoa gets some right to use that land at some point. That of course brings about the question to the Minister of just how long the Crown Forestry Rental Trust will continue in existence. 
I noticed earlier in the day Mr Chairman that you were wearing a very fetching scarf and I am wondering where it has gone now.
Peters Winston: Urgent Debates Declined — Government Transport Package Foreshore and Seabed Human Rights Review Tribunal Decision Points of Order 
Peters Winston: Urgent Debates Declined — Government Transport Package Foreshore and Seabed Human Rights Review Tribunal Decision Points of Order 
[Volume:614;Page:10724] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You are being asked to grant an urgent debate on the nature of the issue on which a decision has been made. The Prime Minister confirmed that in her answer today—carelessly so. So did the Attorney-General and so did Tariana Turia. It defies credulity to think that we can sit here knowing this Government’s track record on spin and preparation and on getting all its ducks in order in terms of public relations and for them to say that it has not made a decision. Yet somehow—magically—in the next few hours it will make one not consult the full Cabinet and go public on it. That is balderdash and the Prime Minister knows it.
Gosche Mark: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Hours) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Gosche Mark: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Hours) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:624;Page:19717] 
Hon MARK GOSCHE (Labour—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 I wish to make a point of clarification before we put the question on the leave—as other members on the other side of the House quite regularly do. I point out that this debate actually gives a right of reply of 5 minutes at the end for Ms Kedgley and if she takes that now it will close the debate. I am quite happy if that occurs if the Opposition is as well.
Vote: New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12327] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 39 
New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 78 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 26. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Marc Alexander to add the following new subclause to clause 1 be agreed to: 
(2)In addition to the criteria set out in subclause (1) the Minister must ensure that the membership of the board includes at least 1 person nominated by the players’ committee.
Choudhary Ashraf: General Debate 
Choudhary Ashraf: General Debate 
[Volume:621;Page:16811] 
Dr ASHRAF CHOUDHARY (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to speak on behalf of this very successful Labour Government and I am very proud that we have done so much for the people of New Zealand. I want to talk about the quality education and opportunities that this Government has provided for all New Zealanders. This afternoon we have heard about the scholarship that this Government has started this year for level 4 of the National Certificate of Educational Achievement. That shows the commitment that we have to providing quality education and promoting merit among students. 
Let me recount some of the commitments and achievements that we have made in this Government. In the 2004 Budget we have committed an extra $2 billion overall towards education for the next 4 years. That brings the total commitment to over $9.2 billion by 2007-08. In early childhood education we have committed $365 million to be spent over the next 4 years. That is certainly a landmark. From 1 July 2007 3 and 4-year-olds will be entitled to 20 hours’ free education per week and that is a great achievement by this Government. The Budget also provides $1 million over the next 4 years for the implementation of the national professional standards for kindergarten teachers head teachers and senior teachers as agreed between the Government and the New Zealand Educational Institute. 
In the area of compulsory education funding has increased by 3 percent for base funding and per pupil funding and has increased by 2.75 percent for most other operational funding components in excess of Treasury’s inflation forecast for 2005. Since 1999 we have increased overall school operational funding per pupil by an average of over 10 percent in real terms. Schools are now receiving over $85 million more in real terms than they were in 1999. That equates to an extra $82 for every pupil in the country after accounting for inflation and real growth. 
In terms of teachers the Budget provides an extra $37.86 million over 4 years to provide English for speakers of other languages for schools. That includes more resources for principals improved support material for teachers and students and intensive revision for high-needs students in the English for speakers of other languages programme. We have extended the laptops for teachers scheme to more primary teachers. We have committed an additional $12 million to allow 7000 primary school teachers of years 4 to 6 in about 2300 schools to become eligible for that scheme. In addition 400 primary school teachers of years 1 to 6 at area schools in rural areas have been added to the scheme. Since 1999 we have put more than 2000 extra teachers into classrooms over and above the number of extra teachers required for real growth. From 2005 we will put an extra 460 teachers into other schools; again over and above the number required for real growth. 
In terms of school property the remaining 400 schools have joined the 5-year property programme as well. Between them they are to receive $100 million in funding to upgrade and modernise existing school buildings.
Goff Phil: Motions — Polish Children—60th Anniversary 
Goff Phil: Motions — Polish Children—60th Anniversary 
[Volume:621;Page:16781] 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade) 
: 
 I move  
That this House commemorate the 60th anniversary of the arrival of 733 Polish children and 100 of their guardians to New Zealand on 1 November 1944; recognise the contribution the Polish community has made to New Zealand life; and reaffirm its desire for the continuation of friendly and cooperative relations between New Zealand and the Republic of Poland. 
The refugee children and adults arrived in New Zealand in November 1944 after enduring quite remarkable hardships: first the invasion and then deportation to Soviet labour camps. They came to New Zealand at the invitation of Labour’s wartime Prime Minister the Rt Hon Peter Fraser. We welcome the contribution that this community and its children have made to New Zealand and the richness and diversity that they have given to our society. Yesterday’s refugees have become today’s New Zealanders while retaining a strong pride in their culture and origins. I know that other parties will join with me in welcoming the commemoration of this occasion.
Hunt Jonathan: Speaker’s Statements — Ringing of the Bell 
Hunt Jonathan: Speaker’s Statements — Ringing of the Bell 
[Volume:608;Page:5457] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is perfectly correct and in fact it will ring when a sitting of the House is suspended. That means that if we have started a series of divisions at 5.45 p.m. for example and they go on until 6.15 p.m. the bell will be rung at the end of that series of divisions when I adjourn the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Shop Trading Hours (Easter Trading Local Exemption) Bill — First Reading 
Tisch Lindsay: Shop Trading Hours (Easter Trading Local Exemption) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:15507] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Assistant Speaker. If we are going to have a personal vote and there is going to be the ringing of the bells—
Vote: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8729] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 82 
Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 35 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Amendment agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 139 in the name of Paul Adams to omit and substitute subclause (1A) in clause 77 be agreed to.
Urgency 
Urgency 
[Volume:609;Page:6716] 
Urgency 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the introduction and first reading of the Immigration Amendment Bill the introduction and passing of the Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) the first reading of the Border Security Bill; and the passing through their remaining stages of the Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3) the Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill the Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Amendment Bill the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill and of any bills into which those bills may be divided; the second reading of the Retirement Villages Bill; and the passing through their remaining stages of the Biosecurity Amendment Bill the Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6) the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill and the Wool Industry Restructuring Bill and of any bills into which those bills may be divided 
. 
The motion is moved first of all in order to enable the Immigration Amendment Bill to proceed to its first reading and a select committee without the standard 3-day separation—I think members who have been briefed on this will understand the reasons for that—and because of administrative reasons that arise out of the first bill to enable the passing through all its stages of the Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2). In relation to the remainder of the bills the motion is moved in order to gain extra sitting hours to enable the House to consider those bills which members of this House and others have indicated they are keen to see passed as rapidly as possible. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That urgency be accorded. 
Ayes 60 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Green Party 9. 
Motion agreed to.
Swain Paul: Amended answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 8 to Minister 5 August 
Swain Paul: Amended answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 8 to Minister 5 August 
[Volume:619;Page:14733] 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 On Thursday 5 August in response to a supplementary question regarding the Auckland Central Remand Prison I stated that the previous National Government did not fund the prison after the expiry of the current contract. The correct response was that the previous National Government did not fully fund the prison following the expiry of the current contract.
Vote: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:16355] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 41 
New Zealand National 20; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Noes 75 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 4; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 267 in the name of the Hon David Benson-Pope to insert new clause 69A be agreed to.
Peters Winston: Motions — New Zealand Cricket—Tour of Zimbabwe 
Peters Winston: Motions — New Zealand Cricket—Tour of Zimbabwe 
[Volume:627;Page:21949] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 New Zealand First would support any action by the United Nations in respect of the Mugabe regime but the effect on sport of cancelling the cricket tour would be extraordinarily serious and envelope many innocent people. The future of New Zealand’s holding the Cricket World Cup would be in jeopardy and the future of New Zealand’s holding the Rugby World Cup would be in jeopardy as would the right to play sport of people like Cara Black who has come here from Zimbabwe to play many many tennis tournaments in this country. And all the time trade with Zimbabwe is not affected. I notice that China has come out in support of Robert Mugabe yet we as a country have two parties obsessed with signing a free-trade agreement with China. 
There are three of us in this Parliament who remember what Sir Robert Muldoon said about Robert Mugabe 25 years ago. He of course was pilloried by the Labour Party at the time and by the usual card-carrying members of the Labour Party working in the media. There is nothing so antiseptic as the statement that he was right but about Robert Mugabe he was right. Twenty-five years later on with the enormous human tragedy that has occurred in that country we have learnt to regret some of the rash judgments we made about that person at that time. 
New Zealand First supports this motion in so far as it expresses abhorrence of the behaviour of the Mugabe regime but we are concerned at the perceived hypocrisy when it comes to the question of sport. Sadly many nations suffer from despotic inhumane regimes and we play sport with them. The question is how are they really different from Zimbabwe under the Mugabe regime. The answer is they are not but because of their size and influence we blind our eyes to the facts head off to play sport with them and in fact welcome our association with them. All we in New Zealand First are asking is that rather than posturing and posing why we do not—for the first time on this issue—try to be consistent.
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8156] 
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 7; Green Party 9. 
Noes 60 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 122 in the name of Pita Paraone to insert new subclause (2) in clause 114 be agreed to.
Vote: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8514] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 62 
Labour 52; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 55 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; Green Party 9. 
Amendments agreed to. 
The question was put that Part 4 as amended be agreed to.
Vote: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Vote: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6508] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 3 be agreed to. 
Ayes 61 
Labour 52; Green Party 9. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 12; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 8. 
Motion agreed to.
Pettis Jill: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Pettis Jill: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7744] 
JILL PETTIS (NZ Labour—Whanganui) 
: 
 Sometimes some of the most amazing things that have happened around this place have been when parties that are in trouble on a range of issues—particularly legislative issues—try to deflect attention away from themselves because the ice they are skating on is very very thin. They are spreading the net looking at who they can blame and attack so that they can deflect attention away from themselves and that most certainly is happening in this case. This is a very important and very interesting debate. I suggest that we move on and get on with passing it through the House.
Vote: Immigration Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Immigration Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:6735] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 46 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Motion agreed to.
Shirley Ken: Privilege — Allegations—David Benson-Pope MP 
Shirley Ken: Privilege — Allegations—David Benson-Pope MP 
[Volume:626;Page:21039] 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Without wanting to debate further the matters that you have already ruled on I would draw your attention to your final comment that you had discovered or had studied previous cases on this matter. There will be a few members in this House who can recall one other case—and I can recall only one other case—where a member of Parliament was accused by an outsider of lying when that person had taken a particular statement in the House which is the situation we have here. That one other case was when the Hon Richard Prebble was accused of reading the newspaper while driving. That matter was referred to the Privileges Committee which adjudicated on it and decided that there was no case to answer. But that is the only precedent that I am aware of—certainly over the last 20 to 30 years. With respect Madam Speaker I would ask you to reconsider your saying you have studied the precedent cases because that is the only one that I can recall.
Simich Clem: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Simich Clem: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3756] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: The next amendment in the name of Katherine Rich is to omit new clause 7 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 57. I rule that amendment out of order. It is inconsistent with the previous decision of this Committee. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Katherine Rich to new clause 10 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 57 in the name of the Hon Steve Maharey be agreed to: 
to omit subparagraph (iv) from subclause (2)(a).
Hunt Jonathan: Standing Orders 
Hunt Jonathan: Standing Orders 
[Volume:614;Page:10736] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order. The decision of the Chair is not to be entered into when the Chair accepts a closure motion. 
Ron Mark 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I was seeking your advice and assistance as to why you had not taken my point of order. You would not know what my point of order would have been until I had opened my mouth. Indeed you are only now aware of what it is I would have said to you but you did not even give me the opportunity to have my point of order heard and I would like to know why.
Ryall Tony: Points of Order — Urgent Question: Public Health Issue 
Ryall Tony: Points of Order — Urgent Question: Public Health Issue 
[Volume:606;Page:3699] 
Hon TONY RYALL (NZ National—Bay of Plenty) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. At lunchtime today I sought your permission to ask an urgent question of the Minister of Health about the public health issue now at Lake Rotoiti near Rotorua and you chose to decline that request. I now seek leave to ask a question of the Minister of Health about those public health concerns. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to ask this question. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Vote: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:21686] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 66 
New Zealand Labour 50; Green Party 9; United Future 5; Progressive 2. 
Noes 41 
New Zealand National 24; New Zealand First 12; ACT New Zealand 5. 
Motion agreed to.
Yates Dianne: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Yates Dianne: Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10326] 
DIANNE YATES (Labour—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I wish also to rise in support of this bill and wholly support Mr Benson-Pope’s comments about the ACT member whose remarks I thought were quite amazing at this particular stage.
Sowry Roger: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Sowry Roger: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:608;Page:5836] 
Hon ROGER SOWRY (Deputy Leader—NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I was just going to support Mr Jones in the sense that the Minister has taken a small extract from the letter and it may well be that New Zealand First does not support the mechanism of a Statutes Amendment Bill. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That will be seen if the letter is tabled. The member will be able to judge that. 
Hon ROGER SOWRY 
: To get accuracy particularly for people who are listening I think the member should read the whole letter. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the member has read out the information accurately I seek the leave of the House to table the document. Has the member read the letter out accurately? 
Hon Rick Barker 
: It’s an accurate reflection yes. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: He said yes.
Tamihere John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question No. 3 to Minister 
Tamihere John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question No. 3 to Minister 
[Volume:617;Page:13313] 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE (Minister for Land Information) 
: 
 Yes Mr Speaker. I was not aware that they were not attached. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: And is the Minister going to table them? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: Yes. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister has given an assurance that he will table them.
Hobbs Marian: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
Hobbs Marian: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9076] 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 I move  
That the Committee divide the bill into the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Amendment Bill the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill (No 2) the Medicines Amendment Bill (No 2) and the Biosecurity Amendment Bill (No 2) pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper 144.
McNair Craig: Income Tax Bill — Third Reading 
McNair Craig: Income Tax Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12535] 
CRAIG McNAIR (NZ First) 
: 
 In speaking to the third reading of the Income Tax Bill I want to focus on a submission that I briefly touched on at the Committee stage. It was a submission from Business New Zealand PricewaterhouseCoopers the Institute of Chartered Accountants of New Zealand and the New Zealand Law Society. The group’s submission stated that a transitional provision should indicate that the provisions of the rewritten Act must be interpreted in light of the corresponding provisions of the Income Tax Act 1994 and of associated judicial interpretation other than intended policy changes. The transitional provision should also make clear that the rewritten Act is not intended to change the meaning and effect of the Income Tax Act 1994. 
To make a long story short officials agreed in the end that the bill should contain transitional provisions that indicate that no change in the effect of the law is intended. Where the meaning of the provision in the rewritten Act is unclear or gives rise to absurdity the old law is to be used as an interpretive guide to ensure that no unintended changes in the law occur. Transitional provisions should not apply to notified changes in law arising in the rewrite nor to subsequent amendments to provisions in the rewritten Act. 
Officials agreed with this approach as it will ensure that the plain words of the rewritten legislation have full effect from the commencement of the new Act in conjunction with the Government’s wanting to promote retrospective legislation to correct unintended changes. These further transitional provisions will provide the level of protection sought by the practitioners. In other words this provision gives critical certainty that the old law should be an interpretive guide but an interpretive guide only. 
Lastly I note also that in debating this bill as it passed through the different stages some members brought up the issue of the 19.5 percent tax rate for Maori authorities. In speaking to the Taxation (Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill in March 2003 I moved an amendment on behalf of New Zealand First that all sections of the New Zealand community should be able to take advantage of the proposal that related to basic tax rates of 19.5 percent. New Zealand First did not support that part of the bill because we felt it was unfair. I reiterate that New Zealand First wants to treat all New Zealanders equally and at that time I put forward an amendment to give effect to this view. 
The Federation of Maori Authorities welcomed that Supplementary Order Paper. One of our Maori members Edwin Perry—and I have his permission to share this—is the chairman of a trust managing 4000 acres. He has 80 beneficiaries and they have told him that they do not want to be treated any differently from anybody else either. 
In closing New Zealand First always supports good legislation opposes bad legislation and is glad that this bill is being passed.
Hughes Darren: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
Hughes Darren: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15648] 
DARREN HUGHES (Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:12566] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Motion agreed to.
Robertson H V Ross: Voting — Correction 
Robertson H V Ross: Voting — Correction 
[Volume:623;Page:18907] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Before I call on private and local orders of the day Nos 1 and 2 I wish to inform the House that yesterday when the House was considering the motion referring the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Approvals and Enforcement) Amendment Bill to a select committee the result of the vote on the Hon Dr Nick Smith’s amendment to the motion was incorrectly announced. The correct result is Ayes 45 Noes 74.
Heatley Phil: General Debates 
Heatley Phil: General Debates 
[Volume:618;Page:13866] 
PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) 
: 
 I seek leave to table the Ngati Tama settlement that gave them 10 percent of allocated space. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Leave has been sought for that. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Vote: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8715] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment 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. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 47D be agreed to: 
to omit this clause.
Vote: Transport Legislation Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Transport Legislation Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:619;Page:14910] 
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 68 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 7; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3821] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
Noes 60 
Amendment not agreed to. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Green Party 8. 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Stephen Franks to clause 33 be agreed to:  
to amend subclause (1) by omitting the words “Nothing in this Act authorises any shareholding Minister to” and substituting the words “No shareholding Minister or any other Minister and no person acting by on behalf of or at the direction of a shareholding Minister or any other Minister may”. 
Amendment agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) Health and Safety in Employment Amendment Bill (No 2) Human Rights Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) Health and Safety in Employment Amendment Bill (No 2) Human Rights Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:621;Page:16286] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Health and Safety in Employment Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a third time. 
Ayes 63 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Bill read a third time.
Hunt Jonathan: Civil Union Bill — Procedure Third Reading 
Hunt Jonathan: Civil Union Bill — Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:622;Page:17638] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before we commence the third reading of the bill I want to say that when I called the second reading I said there were to be no injections and I thought that the resulting debate was a first-rate one with all points of view expressed. I am now applying that rule to the third reading. Further when I am asked for calls I will call in the order of the usual third reading party list but I will give preference to members who did not speak in the second reading if two people seek the call.
Hughes Darren: Immigration Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Hughes Darren: Immigration Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:6732] 
DARREN HUGHES (NZ Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 After that speech it is not hard to see why 26 members of the National Party found it necessary to be at a caucus committee meeting somewhere else. 
I believe that this piece of legislation is a very good move on behalf of the Government to take a comprehensive look at immigration policy for the first time in about 10 years. The aim is to get some meaningful match-up between people who want to make New Zealand their home and also make sure that there is a win-win for both the migrant coming into New Zealand and what we are trying to do against the growth and innovation framework. It is a very good move and I support the bill.
Vote: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6) — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6) — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:7106] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Crimes Amendment Bill (No 6) be now read a third time. 
Ayes 107 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Noes 8 
Green Party 8. 
Bill read a third time.
Peters Jim: Masterton District Council (Montfort Trimble Foundation) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Peters Jim: Masterton District Council (Montfort Trimble Foundation) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10427] 
JIM PETERS (NZ First) 
: 
 On behalf of New Zealand First along with my local colleague from the Wairarapa Edwin Perry we support the further movement of the Montford Trimble Foundation. The foundation trustees now have the constituted trust to move into the modern world. The nature of the board membership the nature of their remuneration the nature of their tax status—all these matters—can now be handled. It is unfortunate that the trustees have had to wait as has already been mentioned by the Hon Ken Shirley for some weeks because of a certain Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill. In the mind of the Government that took priority over this important local issue. But putting that aside on behalf of New Zealand First I wish the trustees well in their endeavours and may the forest and afforestation in the Wairarapa confines right across to Pahiatua be able to be sustained in the future for the enjoyment of all. 
Bill read a third time.
Swain Paul: Holidays Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Swain Paul: Holidays Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:15405] 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the Holidays Amendment Bill be referred to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee for consideration 
referred to Transport and Industrial Relations Committee 
 that the committee report the bill by 4 October 2004 and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time during a sitting of the House except during questions for oral answer during an evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 191 and 194(1)(b) and (c).
Pettis Jill: National Library of New Zealand (Te Puna MAtauranga o Aotearoa) Bill — Second Reading 
Pettis Jill: National Library of New Zealand (Te Puna MAtauranga o Aotearoa) Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4733] 
JILL PETTIS (NZ Labour—Whanganui) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to speak on this bill. I was very pleased to be able to be on the select committee that considered this bill. Libraries are one of my favourite places. I have a very wise mother who took her children to all the free places in town when we were very young and libraries were one of those places; and repeating those same skills that I learnt from my mother I did the same with my own children. It was a pleasure to participate in the debate on this bill through the select committee. 
The bill replaces the National Library Act so it is timely that we have a review of the legislation as it has stood for almost 40 years. Minister Hobbs has a special interest in this bill. I am delighted with the good work that she has done as our Minister in this regard. It is always good to work on legislation when we have a Minister who is so sincerely interested in that legislation. We were delighted to work with Marian Hobbs in progressing this bill through the select committee. The select committee worked very cooperatively and it was a pleasure to work on the bill during those stages. 
I just want to mention very briefly the aspect about the collection of electronic material. Following recommendations from the select committee the library aims to selectively collect electronic material. This will be developed following consultation with electronic publishers. We are all aware of the rapid changes that have taken place with technology and the need for our collection methods to be modern and timely. The bill will allow the library to collect information for preservation purposes only and any public access to it would be granted only in agreement with the publisher. That is an important safeguard included within the bill. 
The bill is important because it secures our heritage for future generations. It is a more interesting aspect of human nature that as we mature we become more interested in preserving the past. The National Library most certainly plays a pivotal role in that because having access to the historical documents of our nation is incredibly important. We are very grateful for the role that the National Library and its most skilled and expert staff have in protecting the resources for future generations and protecting the history of this nation for future generations. I am delighted to commend the bill to the House and wish it a rapid passage through its processes.
Tisch Lindsay: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — Procedure 
Tisch Lindsay: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:620;Page:15844] 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 I wondered whether you Mr Assistant-Speaker could tell us what the votes were or whether the Clerk can let the House know exactly what the votes were. [ 
Interruption 
] We know what the totals were but I am particularly interested in what the United Future member voted because that is what we are going to reconsider. So can you tell us what the votes were for each party or more specifically what the vote was for United Future so that we know which way United Future members voted? 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I think that what we need to do in this case is for the honourable member Judy Turner to take a call and explain to the House exactly what she wishes to do with the votes that have been cast. Then we can seek leave of the House to do so.
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:6304] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Noes 110 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 9 be agreed to: 
to insert after subclause (2) the following subclause: 
(2A)In performing its functions NZTE will act in accord with prudent financial management and business practices.