edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Gallagher Martin: Crimes (Intimate Covert Filming) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Gallagher Martin: Crimes (Intimate Covert Filming) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20324] 
MARTIN GALLAGHER (Labour—Hamilton West) 
: 
 I am very pleased that the Crimes (Intimate Covert Filming) Amendment Bill has been introduced and I note that it will be referred to the Government Administration Committee. That committee has done some very useful work in the whole area of censorship and in particular in protecting young people. 
As we are aware intimate covert filming is the making of surreptitious visual records of other people in intimate circumstances without their knowledge or consent and in circumstances where the person would reasonably expect to be strictly private. As was said by the Minister in his speech and by the previous speaker intimate covert filming is an increasing problem. It is the modern form of the peeping Tom the modern form of peeping and peering aggravated by technology such as cellphone cameras—the use of which is exploding—and computers that make it relatively easy to record and distribute widely what an electronic camera or phone observes. 
In the context of the Internet when we are talking about wide distribution we are talking about thousands millions of people; obviously we are talking about an international circulation. There are no borders in terms of the Internet. 
It is salutary to remind ourselves that no provisions currently exist to prohibit such behaviour. The act of covert filming is technically not a crime. The bill amends the Crimes Act of 1961 and I am pleased to see that it is an offence to make publish or distribute voyeuristic material recorded without consent and the offence will carry a penalty of up to 3 years’ jail. There will also be a penalty of up to 1 year’s jail for knowingly possessing such material without reasonable cause. International research shows a correlation between voyeurism and sexual offending and that it may be a gateway offence to more serious offending. In the context of protecting people particular our young people I believe that this is a very very overdue and needed bill. 
The bill will also enable the police to use their powers of search and seizure to investigate immediately the sources of images discovered on the Internet. Clearly this bill provides the victims of covert filming with an effective response. 
I have noted the Minister’s comprehensive introductory speech. I also note the observations made by the previous speaker and I am sure that he along with other colleagues will pick up on the issues that he raised in terms of the very important select committee work to come. I certainly agree with the previous speaker that we need to move with significant speed with reference to this bill and look forward to the Government Administration Committee taking appropriate action in terms of hopefully a relatively speedy process so that this bill can be reported back to the Parliament. I certainly commend the bill to the House.
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8090] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 as amended be agreed to 
. 
Ayes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
McNair Craig: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
McNair Craig: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3766] 
CRAIG McNAIR (NZ First) 
: 
 As I look through Part 3 and as I look to the Minister in the chair Steve Maharey I wonder what John Tamihere is thinking as he sits in his office in Bowen House or wherever his office is. I wonder what John Tamihere thinks of this bill. I wonder what the member for Tamaki Makaurau thinks about the bill in its entirety but as we are specifically talking about Part 3 I will say about Part 3. 
Progress reported.
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3819] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 60 
Noes 55 
Motion agreed to. 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Green Party 7. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Katherine Rich to clause 31 be agreed to: 
to amend subclause (1) by omitting paragraph (b).
Vote: Corrections Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Vote: Corrections Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:13144] 
A party vote 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 54 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 6; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Amendments agreed to. 
was called for on the question That the amendments be agreed to.
Vote: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:623;Page:18852] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 7 be agreed to 
. 
Ayes 98 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 22 
New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9. 
Schedule 7 agreed to.
Peck Mark: Holidays Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Peck Mark: Holidays Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:614;Page:10524] 
MARK PECK (Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Robertson H V Ross: New Zealand Day Bill — First Reading 
Robertson H V Ross: New Zealand Day Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:624;Page:19663] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: It is my understanding that the honourable member Katherine Rich will use the remaining time from the speech commenced by John Carter on the first reading of the New Zealand Day Bill. I allow that under Standing Order 117(2).
Business of the House 
Business of the House 
[Volume:608;Page:5727] 
Business of the House 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (Senior Whip—NZ Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave for the Te Whanau-a-Taupara Trust Empowering Bill and the Palmerston North Reserves Empowering Amendment Bill to proceeddirectly from their second reading to their third reading today. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is not.
Vote: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16024] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Motion agreed to.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Standing Order 38—Minister Not Present Parliament Buildings—Media Access Standing Order 38—Minister Not Present  
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Standing Order 38—Minister Not Present Parliament Buildings—Media Access Standing Order 38—Minister Not Present  
[Volume:624;Page:19686] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. In that regard during the course of Dr Nick Smith’s previous point of order there was an interjection that I noted from your body language you did see. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I could not hear who it was though. I knew there was an interjection. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Even during Mr Peters’ point of order just a few moments ago a number of people perhaps only laughed but none the less interrupted that point of order. It certainly was not heard in silence. 
The Hon Bill English has a question set down for later in question time. He made one comment during a point of order—we do not challenge your ruling but he probably was unlucky in the circumstances to have been slung out of the House. We would appreciate it Madam Speaker if you would consider allowing him back into the House to ask that question. Certainly the custom has been that when Ministers—and I can think of a number—have angered the Speaker in the past they have been given a great deal of leniency because of questions addressed to them. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I take the member’s point. The Hon Bill English will be allowed back into the House for that question.
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:624;Page:19036] 
3.  
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour—Waitakere) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What advice has he received regarding tuition fees charged by New Zealand universities compared with those charged in other countries? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I have received advice that New Zealand university tuition fees are significantly lower than those in Australia and those being introduced in the United Kingdom. A law degree in New Zealand costs just over half what a comparable degree in Australia costs with fees for commerce and science degrees ranging from just over half to around two-thirds of those in Australia. 
Lynne Pillay 
: What steps has the Government taken to limit the growth in student tuition fees? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: When Labour became the Government we moved quickly to freeze fees in 2001 2002 and 2003. From 2004 a fee maxima policy has been in place to ensure that fees cannot be ramped up like they used to be. Between 1997 and 2000 average university tuition fees grew by over 41 percent. By contrast under Labour between 2000 and 2004 average university fees stayed about the same and dropped in real terms.
Gallagher Martin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Gallagher Martin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:617;Page:12543] 
4.  
MARTIN GALLAGHER (Labour—Hamilton West) 
 to the  
Minister of Broadcasting 
: What is the Government’s position on the public ownership of broadcasting assets? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Broadcasting) 
: 
 This Government is committed to keeping broadcasting assets in public ownership to serve the interests of all New Zealanders. We regard audiences the New Zealanders who own Television New Zealand and Radio New Zealand as having a stake in those assets. So our focus is on strengthening public service broadcasting unlike the National Party which has indicated there is support in its caucus for selling those assets. 
Martin Gallagher 
: What specific reports has the Minister seen on the possible sale of broadcasting assets? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I have seen one statement that: “National would review the Crown balance sheet with a view to selling Government-owned commercial enterprises which no longer need to be owned by the State.” and another by a National MP that the National Party would favour selling the Government’s interests in radio and television. It seems that on this issue Dr Brash and Georgina te Heuheu are agreed: they want to sell State assets. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Does the Government support TVNZ’s plans to set up a third publicly owned television channel; if so why on earth would the Government support the establishment of a third publicly owned television channel simply to show “a mix of reruns of current affairs local shows minority programmes and live broadcasts from Parliament”? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: We have not seen the business case from TVNZ on this matter yet so there is nothing to support or not to support.
Vote: Maori Television Service Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Maori Television Service Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:5070] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 61 
Labour 52; Green Party 9. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand National 23; New Zealand First 12; ACT New Zealand 6; United Future 8. 
Motion agreed to.
Soper Lesley: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Soper Lesley: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21420] 
LESLEY SOPER (Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Cullen Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Cullen Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:623;Page:18745] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Firstly yet again this is not a point of order; it is a matter for debate. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have warned you Mr Brownlee. This is your final warning. Firstly you interjected in the second person and secondly you were talking during a point of order. Your points of order are always heard in silence; so will Dr Cullen’s points of order be. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: If a member cannot hear the answer to one question at the start of the day and translate that into the meaning of another answer later in the day it seems a bit rich to come back and raise a point of order about it the next day. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I cannot resolve disputes on whether an answer is correct. Is Mr Mallard seeking leave to table that document?
Swain Paul: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
Swain Paul: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4246] 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Associate Minister of Revenue) 
: 
 I want to make a couple of very quick comments. Firstly Pansy Wong asked what happened to the compliance cost statement. As the member may know it was attached to the bill as introduced. It goes to the select committee and then gets incorporated into this and therefore it drops off when the bill is reported back. That is just the way it is. We would not want to have a compliance cost statement following all the way through. It is for the select committee’s use. That was the purpose and the objective. So that is another promise honoured and kept. 
The second point the member raised which is quite a good point is what would happen if an intermediary were to go into liquidation or something like that. If the member were to look back to clause 45—she will remember this from when she read the bill very thoroughly—she would see that anyone who wants to be an intermediary and work in this way needs to set up a trust account and there are quite a lot of provisions about the sorts of criteria. For example someone who has been a discharged or undischarged bankrupt cannot be an intermediary etc. So there are certain provisions in the bill that an intermediary established under this bill has to abide by. They are on page 64 of the bill for the member’s interest.
Prebble Richard: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading 
Prebble Richard: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:13465] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I actually agree with Dr Cullen’s interpretation of the Standing Order and that is what I believe I did. I think we can now proceed.
Field Taito Phillip: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Approvals and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Field Taito Phillip: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Approvals and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:623;Page:18786] 
Hon TAITO PHILLIP FIELD (Minister of State) 
: 
 I rise to support the bill. It is good legislation and I commend the Minister for bringing it before the House.
Cullen Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Cullen Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:626;Page:21200] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 It certainly does help if the Speaker asserts her right to have her ruling obeyed and not shouted down and ignored by any member of this House however senior. As to the issue either Mr Hide was trying to raise an issue of privilege which is done by a completely different method or he was raising simply an interpretation issue which is a matter for debate and also is not a matter to be raised by way of a point of order during question time. I am sure everybody has every sympathy for the patient but Mr Hide was running a stunt for the television cameras.
Robertson H V Ross: General Debates 
Robertson H V Ross: General Debates 
[Volume:611;Page:8538] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank all honourable members for their contributions. They have certainly been taken into consideration. First of all I did not rule out all interjections. I ruled out vociferous interjections and Mr Mallard was more restrained after he was warned. Secondly Mr English made a hard-hitting speech. Some interjections can be expected but not so much as to drown out another speaker. The Speaker will not allow a member to be drowned out. Thirdly in relation to the point raised by Mr Prebble there is nothing wrong with a whip approaching the Chair.
Vote: Land Transport Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Land Transport Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21354] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Motion agreed to.
Sowry Roger: Land Transport Management Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Sowry Roger: Land Transport Management Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:613;Page:9670] 
Hon ROGER SOWRY (National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. It is a tradition in this Parliament that you go from side to side of the Chamber. The person on his feet was sitting on the Government side of the Chamber and in fact earlier in the debate when I went to take a call you went from the Opposition side over to the United Future side and then came back. You cannot classify United Future as being part of the Government for some calls and then as part of the Opposition side for others. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: No the member is not correct. It is not a Government party. I call Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith.
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Uganda—Parliamentary Delegation 
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Uganda—Parliamentary Delegation 
[Volume:609;Page:6329] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that a parliamentary delegation from Uganda led by the Hon Zachary Olum is present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish they be welcomed.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:423;Page:18542] 
12.  
Hon DAVID CARTER (National) 
 to the  
Associate Minister for Rural Affairs 
: When will legislation to enact the Government’s decision on public access to private land be introduced to the House? 
Hon JIM SUTTON (Associate Minister for Rural Affairs) 
: 
 When it is ready. 
Hon David Carter 
: Does the Minister stand by his press release dated 22 December last year which stated: “The Government intends to introduce legislation by the middle of the year.”; if so how does he reconcile that statement with the Prime Minister’s statement in the House on Tuesday when she refused to confirm that the legislation would be introduced before the general election? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: If the legislation is ready by the middle of the year I will try to have it introduced by the middle of the year. The Prime Minister unlike members opposite does not make promises until she knows that she can keep them. 
Jill Pettis 
: Could the Minister please advise why the Government is doing the work on providing walking access to land? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: It is because access to the publicly owned assets of rivers lakes and beaches is part of a great New Zealand tradition but the Queen’s Chain is fragmented and it is difficult to tell where it applies and where it does not. The work we are doing seeks to unify access rules in a way that makes access certain practical free and enduring with the least possible impact on landholders. Our proposed policy where ownership remains in private hands and walking access is restricted to water margins will fulfil that. 
Dr Muriel Newman 
: What is the Minister’s response to rural women up and down the country who are saying that if this law is passed the Labour Government will be putting their families’ lives at risk of rape robbery and home invasion by giving gangs and other criminals the right to trespass legally on their property? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: The 50 to 70 percent of New Zealand water margins where there is an existing legal right of public passage do not have that impact and to suggest that filling in the gaps between those Queen’s Chains will have that effect is absurd scaremongering. 
Larry Baldock 
: What is the Minister’s response to those who continually claim that the Government’s public access policy will seek to trample on private property rights with provisions such as an unfettered right to roam? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: My response is that they should read the newspapers occasionally from which they would have learnt many months ago that the Government has rejected the policy of an unfettered right to roam. 
Hon David Carter 
: Why did a spokesperson from his office tell  
Rural News 
 in December last year that no work was continuing on the land access issue and that none would be done in the near future when within days of that statement the Minister released the Government’s plans? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: Obviously somebody misinterpreted someone from my office.
Tisch Lindsay: Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:20955] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I seek some clarification because the member Matt Robson was not in his own seat when he cast the vote. I wonder whether it is in order for him to cast the vote from anywhere in the Chamber other than from his seat. [ 
Interruption 
] My point of order is that the member cast a vote while standing but not from his own seat and there was also some doubt as to whether he was casting the vote for or against. I seek some clarification. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I remind members that there will be silence while a point of order is being raised. I thank the member for raising the point. I accepted the vote from Matt Robson. He did change it but I was certain as to what he wanted although I should have said before that that there is to be no talking during a vote and certainly no exclamation or assistance given to the voter. I just make that point clear.
Robertson H V Ross: Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Robertson H V Ross: Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12352] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I ask members to desist from calling out. Chaos may be the parent of creation but in this Chamber I will have order. I recognise what Mr Hide said but I did call the Minister to order. I asked him to desist from calling out and it was my understanding that he did desist.
Hughes Darren: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Hours) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Hughes Darren: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Hours) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:624;Page:19721] 
DARREN HUGHES (Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 I rise to support the first reading of this bill. The Labour Party and the Progressive Party will support its referral to the select committee.
Vote: Meat Board Restructuring Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Meat Board Restructuring Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:615;Page:11040] 
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 46 
New Zealand National 24; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Motion agreed to.
Carter Chris: Dog Control Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Carter Chris: Dog Control Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:613;Page:9861] 
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Local Government) 
: 
 I feel compelled to rise and rebut some points raised by the previous speaker that are simply not true. Rushing for example is not a new offence at all. It is contained in the 1996 legislation which continues in this legislation. It is given its own section in this new legislation but it was contained in the Act. Also rushing does not automatically lead to the destruction of a dog. A court may order a dog’s destruction through repeated and dangerous behaviour but it has that discretionary power. Attacking of course does lead to the destruction of a dog unless exceptional circumstances apply. 
The previous speaker from the ACT party said the Government was rushing to get this bill through in time for this summer so we could have a draconian and sort of holocaust approach to dogs. Actually the issue is about getting this legislation through before the summer holidays begin so that we can keep children safe in our community. Members of the House will remember that last summer there was a series of very dangerous dog attacks where some children were very badly injured and suffered life-threatening injuries. We do not want to see that repeated in our community. 
The speaker from the Green Party Mr Ward raised a question about timing. I want to clarify for him that the provisions of the legislation apply as far as the provisions on dangerous and menacing dogs are concerned from the time the bill is signed into law. So for this summer the provisions about keeping dogs on leashes muzzling dangerous breeds and so on will apply so that communities especially children will be safer.
McCully Murray: Points of Order — Urgent Question to Minister of Police—Shane Ardern 
McCully Murray: Points of Order — Urgent Question to Minister of Police—Shane Ardern 
[Volume:614;Page:10437] 
Hon MURRAY McCULLY (National—East Coast Bays) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think you will recall that a matter of privilege was raised with you some time ago in relation to the matter that Mr Brownlee has just raised with the House. You made a ruling that relied on the fact that a prosecution was in the offing to turn the matter down. In the light of these new circumstances I ask whether you will now revisit the matter that was earlier put before you. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No I dismissed the complaint at that time and that is the end of the matter. If any other letters are on their way that is then up to the members concerned.
Simich Clem: Social Security (Child Benefit) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Simich Clem: Social Security (Child Benefit) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:12694] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Reference has been made to a financial veto. By Standing Order 314 such a veto can be exercised only at the third reading of a bill. Therefore a veto is not relevant at this stage to the progress or otherwise of this bill.
Vote: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:15289] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 74 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 43 
New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Points of Order — Prostitution Reform Bill 
Points of Order — Prostitution Reform Bill 
[Volume:606;Page:3552] 
Points of Order 
Prostitution Reform Bill 
JOHN CARTER (Senior Whip—NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave of the House that when we come to members’ order of the day No. 2 the Prostitution Reform Bill be discharged and referred back to the Local Government and Environment Committee.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is.
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Professor Dr Herta Daubler-Gmelin 
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Professor Dr Herta Daubler-Gmelin 
[Volume:606;Page:3975] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that Professor Dr Herta Daubler-Gmelin Chair of the Committee for Consumer Protection Food and Agriculture from the Federal Republic of Germany is present in the gallery. I am sure she should be welcomed.
Vote: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — First Reading 
Vote: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5350] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the New Organisms and Other Matters Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 105 
Noes 9 
Bill read a first time. 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 8. 
Green Party 9.
Smith Lockwood: Taxation (Annual Rates GST Trans-Tasman Imputation and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Smith Lockwood: Taxation (Annual Rates GST Trans-Tasman Imputation and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:613;Page:10104] 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
: 
 In addressing Part 1 I endorse what my colleague John Key has again said about it. I was recently overseas and for the Minister to claim that these tax rates have not driven New Zealanders off shore is simply arrant nonsense. I met taxation refugees from New Zealand around the world who were escaping from— 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.
Naming and Suspension of Member 
Naming and Suspension of Member 
[Volume:608;Page:5714] 
Naming and Suspension of Member 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I name the Hon Dr Nick Smith for defying the Chair. The question now is  
That the Hon Dr Nick Smith be suspended from the service of the House. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Hon Dr Nick Smith be suspended from the service of the House. 
Ayes 89 
Noes 27 
Question agreed to. 
Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
New Zealand National 27.
Prebble Richard: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading 
Prebble Richard: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:621;Page:16447] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In the light of the comments made earlier in question time can I inquire whether Mr Tamihere will communicate with us all by phone on this matter? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order.
Paraone Pita: Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Paraone Pita: Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:627;Page:21877] 
PITA PARAONE (NZ First) 
: 
 I thought that it would be only proper for me to respond to the questions put by the ACT member. I would like to refer the ACT member to the first and the third readings of the last claims settlement bill that came before this House—that is the Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill. I recall the looks on the faces of the officials when I stood to offer the support of New Zealand First’s vote for that bill. In that first reading debate the ACT member may like to read particularly the comments made by my colleague the Hon Brian Donnelly where he explained the reason for New Zealand First taking its stance in spite of the inclusion of those words à la the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. During the second reading of that same bill the ACT member in the House at the time questioned the stance taken by New Zealand First. So my colleague Dail Jones submitted an amendment that requested the deletion of those very words from the bill and—surprise surprise—the only two parties that objected to that amendment were ACT and National. So I think it is a bit rich for those members to then question the stance we are taking and in particular the policies that we are expounding with regard to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security—Comments Marine Farm Resource Applications 
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security—Comments Marine Farm Resource Applications 
[Volume:614;Page:10286] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from Keith Locke seeking to debate under Standing Order 376 reported comments of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security. The comments constitute a particular case of recent occurrence. While the Prime Minister has certain responsibilities under the relevant legislation she has no responsibility for the comments the inspector-general has made and it is those comments that form the basis of this application. The application is consequently not accepted.
Cullen Michael: Motions — Presidential Election USA—Congratulations 
Cullen Michael: Motions — Presidential Election USA—Congratulations 
[Volume:621;Page:16594] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Deputy Prime Minister) 
: 
 The Government joins obviously in congratulating the successful candidate in the United States elections. It was pleasing that in the end there was a clear majority and so an avoidance of what happened at the last election in the United States. We look forward to cooperating with the re-elected Bush administration.
Swain Paul: Land Transport (Unauthorised Street and Drag Racing) Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Swain Paul: Land Transport (Unauthorised Street and Drag Racing) Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4569] 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Minister of Transport) 
: 
 The ACT member struggles with the title. Maybe she might reflect on a couple of points before she comes to speak on further aspects of the bill. As I recall when the bill was introduced Ken Shirley said: “The ACT party supports the introduction of this bill. We welcome tougher measures to deal with illegal street drag racing. Indeed this bill is in keeping with ACT’s campaign for zero tolerance on crime. Members of the House have probably seen our billboard campaign around the country—colourful striking billboards calling for zero tolerance in crime. That is ACT’s message to the country and to Parliament. It will certainly be at the forefront in the election campaign.” I ask the member to reflect on those comments which were made prior to her becoming a member of the House. Maybe she will then reflect on that further as we go through the legislation. One would assume from comparing the speech she has just given with what Ken Shirley said that that is the reason the ACT party is at 6 percent in the polls and hovering.
Vote: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4381] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 107 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Noes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Part 1 as amended agreed to.
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:6286] 
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 3 be agreed to: 
to omit from subclause (2) the words “as directed by the Government” and substitute the words “in accord with prudent management of taxpayers’ money”.
Hunt Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hunt Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:609;Page:6474] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before Dr Scott asks the question I point out that I have consulted her and that the question she originally submitted has had a slight change in wording. I have allowed the change and I have advised the Minister.
Robertson H V Ross: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Robertson H V Ross: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17579] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Supplementary Order Paper 314 sets out a number of amendments to schedule 3 all in the name of Richard Worth. The first second third fourth fifth seventh ninth and tenth amendments to Part 1 of schedule 3 and the second and third amendments to Part 2 of schedule 3 are out of order as they are inconsistent with previous decisions of the committee. 
The question was put that the following amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 314 in the name of Richard Worth to schedule 3 be agreed to. 
to omit from Part 1 the item relating to the Care of Children Act 2004.
Chadwick Steve: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3) — Referral of S.O.P. 298 to Health Committee 
Chadwick Steve: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3) — Referral of S.O.P. 298 to Health Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16830] 
STEVE CHADWICK (Labour—Rotorua) 
: 
 I will make a quick call on this misuse of drugs bill. I think it has been very valuable to have this debate today. It may be a reflection of the frustration that every party has felt about the process of getting both the bill and the subsequent Supplementary Order Paper before the House and what comes first. I was on the Health Committee when we considered the Misuse of Drugs Bill which brought in the affirmative resolution procedure. I remind the House that it was the Hon Wyatt Creech who had great concerns in relation to that bill about our needing a smarter and more responsive approach to scheduling drugs because the market moves so quickly. It is a procedure that we are all slightly nervous about but as the chair of the select committee I can assure the House and those listening that we will call for submissions and we will have a very robust process of hearing them and considering the advice of the expert advisory committee. The membership of that committee was altered by the original Misuse of Drugs Bill and I think that was a very good action of the Health Committee at the time. We knew that it had to be wider—that we needed customs experts police and consumer advisers on the expert advisory committee. I can assure the House that this matter will be dealt with robustly through due process.
Burton Mark: Business Statement 
Burton Mark: Business Statement 
[Volume:617;Page:12911] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I expect the bill to be tabled within the next few weeks.
Wilson Margaret: Urgent Debates Declined — Associate Minister of Education—Allegations 
Wilson Margaret: Urgent Debates Declined — Associate Minister of Education—Allegations 
[Volume:625;Page:20589] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from Rodney Hide seeking to debate under Standing Order 373 the announcement that the Associate Minister of Education is to stand aside from his portfolios while an investigation is conducted into allegations against him. The standing aside is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. 
On 4 May 2004 the Speaker gave a ruling relating to the dismissal of a Minister from the Government in which he gave the results of his research into ministerial resignations and dismissal and their treatment in urgent debate terms. During the period 1990-99 three applications to debate dismissals or resignations were accepted and three were declined. In the period since 1999 four applications have been accepted and three have been declined. Clearly as the Speaker said not every ministerial resignation let alone merely stepping aside will justify an urgent debate. 
In this case the Minister has stood aside while an inquiry is held into allegations that do not relate to official actions taken by the Minister. The matter is obviously not concluded. When an inquiry reports members have an opportunity to raise the conclusions of that inquiry if this is warranted. Until that point as the matter still has a way to run I do not consider that it requires the immediate attention of the House by way of an urgent debate today. That does not preclude an urgent debate in the future depending upon the outcome of events. I therefore dismiss the application.
Vote: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Hours) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Hours) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:624;Page:19722] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Employment Relations (Flexible Working Hours) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8; Maori Party 1. 
Motion agreed to. 
Bill read a first time.
Pettis Jill: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Pettis Jill: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4655] 
JILL PETTIS (NZ Labour—Whanganui) 
: 
 Like my Labour colleagues before me I too rise to speak in support of this bill. It is a good bill that addresses issues that have needed attention for some time. Indeed the bill does meet a commitment made by the Labour-led Government in 1999 and I am pleased to support its hopefully rapid passage through Parliament.
Voting — Point of Order—Green Party Change of Vote 
Voting — Point of Order—Green Party Change of Vote 
[Volume:610;Page:7399] 
Voting 
Point of Order—Green Party Change of Vote 
IAN EWEN-STREET (Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I refer to the procedural motion we took a vote on a few moments ago and seek the leave of the House to change the vote of the Green Party. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is objection. I am sorry the honourable member cannot change the vote.
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:3933] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 68 
Labour 52; Green Party 8; United Future 8. 
Noes 46 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6. 
Bill read a second time.
Copeland Gordon: Visiting Forces Bill — First Reading 
Copeland Gordon: Visiting Forces Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:613;Page:10262] 
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
: 
 I rise to speak briefly to this bill. It is a companion to other recent legislation which deals with New Zealand forces who are going overseas which in this case is the flipside of visiting forces coming into this country. It will enable the status of forces agreements that have been negotiated with other jurisdictions to come into effect and be given effect within this country and it is a largely non-controversial measure. 
I pick up on one point that the Hon Ken Shirley mentioned in relation to the number of foreign military personnel coming to New Zealand. He is quite right in saying that that no longer happens with regard to the United States but there are still about 3500 members of foreign military establishments who come to New Zealand every year from a whole variety of countries. Obviously we need therefore to have in place proper legal arrangements covering the visits of those personnel. United Future is happy to see this bill go to the select committee for its consideration. 
Bill read a first time and referred to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee. referred to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee
Peck Mark: Meat Board Restructuring Bill — First Reading 
Peck Mark: Meat Board Restructuring Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:615;Page:11039] 
MARK PECK (Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I thank the member for his contribution and for acknowledging that there is a very strong level of support amongst farming communities for this bill—a matter that was ignored by the National speaker previous to him who seemed to be unaware of that. I also say to the member that it is a real pity he is not the Opposition spokesperson on agriculture. I had the privilege of sitting on the Primary Production Committee in the last Parliament. That member contributed very very well indeed to the workings of that select committee. At the very least he should be the associate spokesperson. One would think they would have a good north/south split but to put Katherine Rich a list member from Dunedin on the list as associate spokesperson I think is an insult. 
Clayton Cosgrove 
: He should be on the committee. 
MARK PECK 
: Indeed he should be on the committee because he did contribute and contributed quite well. 
I do not want to take up a heck of a lot more time except to congratulate those who have been involved in putting the bill together. I mention just in passing the work of Jeff Grant. He is someone who is well known to this House. The Minister remembers him well. He was a junior whip for the National Party some years ago and has worked very very closely with the Government as this particular legislation has been put together. 
It might come as an enormous shock to many on the opposite side of the fence that I spend a lot of my own time on farms and spent time on Taranaki farms in my younger days. Shane knows about my Manaia days and I tell him that I am still a member of the Manaia Golf Club by the way. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member must use the member’s full name. 
MARK PECK 
: Yes indeed—Mr Ardern. Can I also say that having two brothers-in-law who farm in Southland I spend quite an enormous amount of time in and around the Southland farming community even to the point of going to a drought meeting in Lumsden which the member for Clutha-Southland did not even bother to turn up to. We know there are some issues for those farms as a result of the drought and so on so this particular bill is all part of assisting farmers in their marketing efforts as they look at how they are going to move away from the pure commodity thing to the value-added etc. 
This is a very good bill and I am sure that if Shane Ardern were on the Primary Production Committee the National Party would scrutinise it with great relish. 
Bill read a first time.
Vote: Immigration Amendment Bill — Instructions to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Immigration Amendment Bill — Instructions to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8294] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 60 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; Green Party 9. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dail Jones to clause 7(1)(a) be agreed to: 
to add after the word “policy” the following words: “ provided that the policy will ensure that no more than a total of 10000 residence visas or residence permits in total are issued per annum.”
Mallard Trevor: Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Mallard Trevor: Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17821. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Simich Clem: General Debates 
Simich Clem: General Debates 
[Volume:611;Page:8765] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Quiet during a point of order; otherwise members will be out.
Carter Chris: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
Carter Chris: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:14563] 
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.