edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Vote: Appropriation (2012/13 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Appropriation (2012/13 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
[Sitting date: 21 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4592. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Appropriation (2012/13 Estimates) Bill be now read a third time and the Imprest Supply (Second for 2012/13) Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 63 
New Zealand National 59; Maori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Mana 1. 
Appropriation (2012/13 Estimates) Bill read a third time and Imprest Supply (Second for 2012/13) Bill read a second time.
Vote: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4615. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Mana 1. 
Amendments agreed to.
Dean Jacqui: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dean Jacqui: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4609. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4594. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Mana 1. 
Amendments agreed to.
Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 21 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4537. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Question No. 3 cannot now be asked because under Standing Order 86(1) no other member may ask a question of a member ordered from the House. So we move on to question No. 4. I call Dr Russel Norman.
Vote: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4614. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 49 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Mana 1. 
Noes 71 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Amendments not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 103 in the name of Moana Mackey to clauses 27 32 47 and 49 be agreed to.
Imprest Supply (Second for 2012/13) Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Imprest Supply (Second for 2012/13) Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4550. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Imprest Supply (Second for 2012/13) Bill 
First Reading 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Associate Minister of Finance) 
 on behalf of the Minister of Finance: I move  
That the Imprest Supply (Second for 2012/13) Bill be now read a first time. 
Bill read a first time.
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 21 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4543. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
: 
 Does he stand by the export pamphlet released last week which mentioned competitive— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I beg your pardon. Is this a supplementary question to question No. 6 or is it the primary question No. 7? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I apologise to the House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Question No. 7 the Hon David Cunliffe.
Tisch Lindsay: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tisch Lindsay: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4613. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: We move to the vote on Part 2. We have Eugenie Sage’s amendments to clauses 33 and 59 as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 89. These are ruled out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the Committee. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 90 in the name of Eugenie Sage to clause 33A be agreed to.
Tisch Lindsay: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tisch Lindsay: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4615. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The debate on this part includes the schedule.
Hughes Gareth: Fair Trading (Soliciting on Behalf of Charities) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hughes Gareth: Fair Trading (Soliciting on Behalf of Charities) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1225. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
GARETH HUGHES (Green) 
: 
 Kia ora Mr Deputy Speaker. I would like to take a very quick call on the Fair Trading (Soliciting on Behalf of Charities) Amendment Bill. I would like to acknowledge all the wonderful work that charities do in this country and also the fund-raisers because it is not the most popular job. I take issue with Louise Upston calling them charity muggers or “chuggers”. I think they do a hard job in trying conditions. I did it for Greenpeace for years. It is good training for politics but it is a very hard job. 
We support the bill. We support the intent of the bill which is increased transparency. We note there have been out and out abuses and deception by these third-party fund-raisers. However it is not going to stop the pen example we heard about earlier on—those out and out fund-raisers masquerading as acting on behalf of a charity. We would like to thank all the submitters who submitted to the Commerce Committee. We note that a few large reputable charities did submit against the bill. We hope their issues have been addressed. 
We think there are continuing issues around the threshold the 20 to 50 percent; those charities the third-party fund-raisers who face large upfront costs; and those charities that depend on an ongoing income be it monthly automatic payment or direct debit that basically do not recoup the initial fund-raising costs for months or in some cases years afterwards. We want to raise the question of those one-off charity events. How can you say what proportion is being kept by the fund-raiser the third-party fund-raiser if you do not know what it is because it is a one-off event? You are going to find that out only once you do the round-up at the end of the evening. 
But in the end what the Green Party wants to see is a well-regulated transparent thriving fund-raising and charity sector so we are very happy to be voting in support of this bill tonight.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Fair Trading (Soliciting on Behalf of Charities) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Fair Trading (Soliciting on Behalf of Charities) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1225. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) 
: 
 I stand in support of the Fair Trading (Soliciting on Behalf of Charities) Amendment Bill. One makes donations to charities in the hope that money donated will go to helping those in need whether those requiring help are in New Zealand or elsewhere in the world. 
Over the years the number of charities collecting money has increased. The Charities Commission indicated that New Zealand has got more than 25000 registered charities. For a small nation State like New Zealand that is a lot of charitable organisations. Either we have a lot of people who want to work towards the betterment of New Zealanders and people at large or there are many people fishing out the money. In recent times one hears concerns. 
Debate interrupted.
Hipkins Chris: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hipkins Chris: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1215. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) 
: 
 The big hand is on the nine and the little hand is on the nine so I think that probably means it is time for Jacqui Dean to sit down. Can I congratulate Mr Bakshi on this the defining moment of his political career where he has managed to take a line item out of a Statutes Amendment Bill and turn it into a member’s bill thus taking up a huge amount of time of the House. If this is the new efficiency of the Public Service the National Party is promoting I am sure the bureaucracy will be rubbing their hands together very warmly.
Dean Jacqui: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dean Jacqui: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1214. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) 
: 
 This Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill is an excellent bill and I want to commend my colleague Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi for having the foresight to research fully this bill and then to bring it to the House. 
This is the “Sunlight Bill”. This is the bill that casts sunlight on some of New Zealand’s old legislation and brings it into the view of the Parliament so it can be fully discussed fully considered by the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee before it is brought back to the House. I want to commend my colleague Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi for that approach. You are absolutely right. Maybe this bill could have been dealt with in another way but this is the Government that believes in full and frank discussion of our legislation. If there is a piece of legislation that is to be wiped from the statute book then it should be done in this arena with full discussion with full opportunity for members from around the House to have their view on this piece of legislation. 
This is a small bill. This is a bill of some one page— 
Hon Member 
: Wonderfully brief. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: It is a wonderfully brief bill. In that bill I think it speaks a lot for New Zealand’s proud history through several world wars and the fact that at the time the Governor-General was empowered to take over land that might be required for military manoeuvres. That is a piece of history that we should not just wipe from the statute book. I reckon that is a piece of history that should see the sunlight of a bit of discussion in this debating chamber. So I want to support this bill. I think it is a good bill because it tidies up— 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: An elegant bill. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: It is an elegant bill as my colleague says. I want to commend it to the House.
Hughes Gareth: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hughes Gareth: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1214. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
GARETH HUGHES (Green) 
: 
 Kia ora Mr Deputy Speaker. Nga mihi nui ki a koutou. Kia ora. It is a real privilege tonight to be taking a call on the Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill. What I think is the most interesting aspect of this bill is not so much the military manoeuvres but the political manoeuvres that probably led to this bill. At a time when this country is full of low-flow shower heads local government waste like public transport and community development which this Government is so focused on and all the letters that could be written on ACC letterhead we get the Government focusing Mr Bakshi’s sincere political talent on the political manoeuvres to get the Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill through the House. 
This bill is an embarrassing waste of time. This bill epitomises the problems we are seeing in this country. At a time when we have children in poverty when we have an economy in crisis and when we have a whole bunch of Kiwis embarking on their own manoeuvres across the ditch to Australia this Government is focusing on this bill. I imagine Mr Bakshi going through the tomes in the Parliamentary Library—those dusty alcoves—trying to find those 100 obscure bills he referred to in his first reading speech. But I want to ask how he got the bill through his caucus. How did he get it past his ambitious colleagues? Because we know that the National Party is a dog-eat-dog party where members try to step on top of each other. I cannot believe that Mr Mapp or Mr Coleman let this bill through. I cannot believe that they did not let this become a Government bill. I am really surprised we saw this in the members’ ballot. 
We have these other 100 obscure bills that we are talking about. I want to ask what those bills are. Are we going to see subsequent members’ bills by Mr Bakshi or the enhanced caucus of the National Party? Really what this is all about is clogging up the members’ ballot so that we cannot get good members’ bills through like my Energy Efficiency and Conservation (Warm Healthy Rentals) Amendment Bill that would make a significant difference to this country. 
As a final parting note I just want to point out that although we are getting rid of this obscure 1915 rule allowing the military to take over people’s farms for military manoeuvres we are still seeing the Government take over Kiwis’ houses and their farms at the moment under the Public Works Act and then there is the Kapiti Expressway and the other $19 billion monstrosities this Government is borrowing to build even though they have a poor business case. We are also seeing land taken under the Crown Minerals Act for mining for fracking and for drilling. We are seeing our water resources tapped under similar manoeuvres and I think at a time when we have so many crises facing us I would rather see the Government focus its political manoeuvres on more important things.
Hutchison Paul: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hutchison Paul: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1213. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) 
: 
 It gives me great pleasure to support this Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill and I too want to congratulate my excellent colleague Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi. 
But what I was a little bit concerned about was that I had always thought that Maryan Street was a woman who really appreciated aestheticism because here is a slim bill here is a sleek bill and here is a bill that is a melody of brevity. In fact as she herself pointed out—[ 
Interruption 
] I think it is a page and a half long. But it was in the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee which worked so well together so ably led by John Hayes that it was deduced that it was right and proper to remove two of the clauses of this bill. So 40 percent was removed and hence it was made even a slimmer sleeker and more melodically magnificent bill. 
But really this is indeed a great indictment in many respects on those long 9 years of the Labour Government when it accumulated bureaucracy like public servants from 26000 to 39000. This bill represents at least someone my good colleague Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi starting on the difficult progress of cutting down the bureaucracy. So I indeed am very very delighted to support this most excellent and timely bill.
Graham Kennedy: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Graham Kennedy: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1210. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green) 
: 
 It is a privilege to follow John Hayes in this debate. I too wish to pay tribute to Mr Bakshi for his remarkable insight in producing a member’s bill the Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill to repeal this statute. It is presumably automatically updated when it is repealed. This bill should have been an omnibus bill and we have had 18 months to reflect on that recommendation from Opposition members at the time but we have not devoted sufficient attention to the matter to act upon that. Should the Military Manoeuvres Act 1915 be repealed? Perhaps but perhaps if it were I would need to give thought to whether I would introduce a member’s bill to bring it back in although on reflection I probably would not. 
As was pointed out the Act has sat on the statute book for nearly a century for no real purpose. So the Act should be repealed but ironically for reasons that are essentially lost on the Government. At the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee we were told: “As far as the New Zealand Defence Force has been able to ascertain the Act has not been used for the last 30 years. We understand that no proclamations are in force and there are no outstanding claims relating to past proclamations or military manoeuvres. Given these facts we believe that the repeal of the bill would not disadvantage the New Zealand Defence Force.” 
In fact the main reason the Green Party sees for requiring the repeal of the Military Manoeuvres Act 1915 is the fact that the Defence Force cannot ascertain whether the Act has or has not been used for the last 30 years. No disrespect is intended to the member or to the personnel of the armed forces particularly those serving overseas by saying that the repeal of the Act would simply be saving the Defence Force from itself.
Hayes John: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hayes John: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1210. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JOHN HAYES (National—Wairarapa) 
: 
 Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this bill and to support my very competent colleague Kanwaljit Bakshi from the Auckland area. I particularly want to commend him in the wake of that onslaught representing the New Zealand unions. Maryan Street said that this bill the Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill was absolutely nothing to do with Parliament it is a waste of time but that Labour is voting for it. Why are we voting for it? Because it is a very sensible thing to do. Certainly the legislation has not been used for 50 years and what is it doing? It is clogging our statute book. This Government came to the community in New Zealand and said: “We want you to trust us to do the right thing.” This Government said: “We are going to get rid of legislation that is irrelevant.” and that is what this process is about. I commend my colleague for his wonderful initiative in bringing this bill to Parliament. 
I have some difficulty putting up with that member Maryan Street who did not in the course of the select committee raise the slightest reservation. She only uttered words of support; that is my recollection. She comes into the House tonight and spends 10 minutes of our time unnecessarily explaining why this is all irrelevant but why she will vote for it—well can I just say that is nonsense. 
I absolutely agree with this bill. It will reduce the legislation that applies in this country. It is a redundant piece of legislation. We need to do much more of it and I absolutely support you and commend you for your actions. Thank you.
Moroney Sue: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Moroney Sue: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1216. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
SUE MORONEY (Labour) 
: 
 In concluding this debate can I say: what an embarrassment! What an embarrassing day for the National Government! It culminates in every single member of the member’s caucus who has brought this bill before the House getting up firmly tongue in cheek and actually being quite offensive about his contribution to this Parliament. I think that is the nature now of the sadness of the— 
Todd McClay 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I take offence at being called offensive. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: No I think the comment was made as a more general term. It was not directed at anybody. The debate has been in good spirit and I just ask members to maintain that for the final speech. Thank you. 
SUE MORONEY 
: I think it is a very very sad day for National when this is their piece that they have brought forward at this time of the evening when they cannot even get up with a straight face and really wholeheartedly support a member’s bill that one of their own colleagues has brought forward. Firmly with tongue in cheek have they got up one after the other to actually pour scorn on a member of their own caucus and I think that is the sorry state that the National Party caucus is in today. They all know as we all know on this side of the House that the real reason that this bill has been brought forward is to stop other very good pieces of legislation of real merit from being debated—pieces like the member’s bill that I have in the ballot to extend paid parental leave. That is something that would make a real difference to New Zealand families but instead National has dug up a piece of legislation that does not do anything anyway and is wasting the time of this House debating this type of legislation. 
Can I say to the member who has brought forward the bill that it is not his fault. It is not his fault. It is the fault of the National Party caucus who have decided that they would put him in this position. They put him in this embarrassing position of bringing forward a bill that has no effect and of demeaning him in that way. I think it is a great shame that his colleagues have put him in that position. They have not only put him in that position by bringing forward that bill but also they have got up one after another and denigrated that member’s contribution to this House and have made fun of him. I think that that tells us a lot about the spirit of the National Party caucus today in this House. 
I am not going to take up any more time because I want to get on to the sorts of bills that absolutely should be debated in this House. Bring them on. 
Bill read a second time.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1208. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) 
: 
 I move  
That the Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill be now read a second time 
. I would like to start my contribution on the second reading of the Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill by giving tribute to those New Zealanders who have laid down their lives in lands far away from their homeland. Our forces are working hard to build peace and are reaffirming our commitment to create a world free from the fear of war and terrorism. 
My bill repeals the Military Manoeuvres Act 1915 an Act that has not been used in many years and has clogged the statute book for too long. As I told the House in my first reading speech the 1915 Act was enacted in the second year of the First World War and provides that the Governor-General may by proclamation declare that any land for a period specified is to be made available for military manoeuvres. After the manoeuvres are completed the officer commanding the forces engaged in them must as far as possible restore the land to its former condition. To the best of the knowledge of the New Zealand Defence Force the Act has not been used for the last 30 years. Largely it was enacted specifically to deal with the extraordinary circumstances of mobilisation of the First World War. 
I want to mention at this time that we are coming to the 100th anniversary of the beginning of World War I. The year 2015 will mark the anniversary of the Act but more important of battles such as Passchendaele and it will be great to have a reminder of the war off the statute book by that time. 
I thank the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee chaired by my colleague John Hayes for its careful consideration of my bill and the minor changes it has recommended. 
I think my bill is a model for good legislation. It is short to the point and has a clear purpose. No member of the public reading my bill could fail to understand what it does. It is all very well for Labour members to stand and criticise my bill as they did in its first reading. They are incapable of engaging constructively. When Labour was in Government it did not remove one piece of useless legislation from the statute book. It only added to the piles of useless legislation with its social engineering and incomprehensible regulatory regime. I look forward to the passage of this bill and commend it to the House.
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1208. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments to the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 59 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 2; Mana 1. 
Amendments to the amendment agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment as amended set out on Supplementary Order Paper 195 in the name of the Hon Tau Henare to insert new clause 9 be agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1207. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 8 be agreed to. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 59 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 2; Mana 1. 
Clause 8 agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1207. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 49 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Mana 1. 
Noes 71 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: We move to Darien Fenton’s typescript amendment to omit clause 7. This is out of order as the bill is considered clause by clause and members can vote that clause 7 will not stand part.
Henare Tau: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Henare Tau: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1195. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
: 
 I seek leave of the Committee to reconsider clause 2 to replace the reference in subclause (1AA) to section 6A with a reference to section 4A. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? There appears not.
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1202. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 6 be agreed to. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 59 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 2; Mana 1. 
Clause 6 agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1201. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 49 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Mana 1. 
Noes 71 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
New clause 5A not agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1207. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 7 be agreed to. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 59 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 2; Mana 1. 
Clause 7 agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1206. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 49 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Mana 1. 
Noes 71 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Darien Fenton to clause 7 be agreed to: 
to add the following new sections: 
82DRequirement for shareholders to hold secret ballot before lockout 
(1)Before a lockout as defined in section 82E related to collective bargaining may proceed under this Act— 
(a)the question must be submitted to a secret ballot of the owners of the legal entity that is the employer party to the lockout; and 
(b)the result of the secret ballot must be in favour of the lockout. 
(2)For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) the result of a secret ballot is determined by a simple majority of the shareholders who are entitled to vote and who do vote. 
(3)As soon as is reasonably practicable after the conclusion of the secret ballot under subsection (1) all shareholders who were entitled to vote must be notified of the result of the ballot. 
82ETerms of question for secret ballot of shareholders 
The question to be voted on in a secret ballot for the purposes of section 82D is whether the shareholder of the legal entity that is the employer party to the lockout is in favour of the lockout.
Little Andrew: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Little Andrew: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1195. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
ANDREW LITTLE (Labour) 
: 
 As I was saying before I was interrupted this bill is unnecessary because it is— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Sorry—I am just processing what we have just done. Leave was sought to go back and consider another clause and we should do that now. Then when that is dealt with we will come back to the clause that we are currently on. We are returning to consideration of clause 2.
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1208. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 59 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 2; Mana 1. 
New clause 9 as amended agreed to. 
Bill reported with amendment. 
Report adopted.
Twyford Phil: Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Twyford Phil: Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1179. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatu) 
: 
 I am not going to praise Eric Roy. I am sick and tired of hearing people in this House praise Eric Roy. For goodness’ sake! The member for Invercargill is simply doing the job that he is paid to do for the good people of Southland and he is doing it very well and I do not intend to go along with all this mushy cross-party praise of Eric Roy. We have had quite enough of that—we have had quite enough of that. 
I believe that $5 if that is indeed what visitors to Stewart Island are going to be required to pay under the Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill is a small price to pay. I think that $5 is a small price to pay for what is a fantastic experience visiting Stewart Island. I have enjoyed the amber delights that are served at the South Sea Hotel. I have sampled the fish and chips at the fish and chip cart in Oban and many other delights in Stewart Island. The place is one of the jewels of our country and I think that this bill offers an excellent solution to the challenge faced by the community in Stewart Island of providing infrastructure like public loos that are of an acceptable standard for the 30000-odd people who visit the island every year. 
I am sorry only that Eric Roy did not take up my offer at the Local Government and Environment Committee to bring along samples of the Bluff oysters and the venison which would have perhaps speeded the bill’s progress through the select committee even more. Labour supports this bill.
Mallard Trevor: Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Mallard Trevor: Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1180. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I support the Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill and congratulate the member Eric Roy.
Vote: South Taranaki District Council (Cold Creek Rural Water Supply) Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: South Taranaki District Council (Cold Creek Rural Water Supply) Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1195. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the South Taranaki District Council (Cold Creek Rural Water Supply) Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 117 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 3 
Maori Party 2; Mana 1. 
Bill read a first time. 
Bill referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee.
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1195. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote  was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 59 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 2; Mana 1. 
Amendment agreed to. 
Clause 2 as further amended agreed to.
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1148. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
8. 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: What progress is being made in relation to the Government’s key result of increasing infant immunisation rates and reducing the incidence of rheumatic fever? 
Hon JO GOODHEW (Associate Minister of Health) 
 on behalf of the Minister of Health: Great progress. As you are aware 92 percent of all 2-year-olds are fully immunised—up from just over 70 percent back in 2007 and district health boards are on track to meet the 95 percent target in June this year. We are also investing $24 million to significantly reduce rheumatic fever rates in vulnerable communities. This Third World disease is serious and after years of promises and inaction by the previous Government we are determined to do something about it. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: What new action is the Government taking to further increase infant immunisation rates and reduce the incidence of rheumatic fever? 
Hon JO GOODHEW 
: Building on the target’s success we are introducing a new target from 1 July 2012—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I apologise to the Minister. Some interjection is OK especially if it is humorous but rheumatic fever among some parts of our community is important and I would quite like to hear the Minister’s answer. 
Hon JO GOODHEW 
: Building on the target’s success we are introducing a new target from 1 July 2012 that 95 percent of 8-month-olds complete their scheduled vaccinations by the end of 2014. Early immunisation protects vulnerable children against polio whooping cough hepatitis B and pneumococcal disease. The Minister is advised that as of 16 March this year 101 schools are signed up to the programme which covers more than 35000 children. More than 1000 kids have been swabbed so far to prevent them from having rheumatic fever.
Prasad Rajen: Points of Order — Leave for Introduction—Child Impact Reporting Bill 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Prasad Rajen: Points of Order — Leave for Introduction—Child Impact Reporting Bill 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1216. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave of the House to have the Child Impact Reporting Bill in my name on the ballot introduced. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: The member has sought leave. It is not a point of order. [ 
Interruption 
] He has sought leave to do something. It is not debatable so I now put the leave. If members are not happy it takes only one member to oppose it. Is there anyone opposed to that? There is. [ 
Interruption 
] The House is in a very very fractious mood and I am trying to assist it on members’ day. These are members’ bills.
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1202. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 49 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Mana 1. 
Noes 71 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand First 8; Maori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
New clause 5B not agreed to.
Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1143. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
4. 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Local Government 
: Will he take the same approach to compliance with the  
Cabinet Manual 
 as Minister for Local Government as he did as Minister for ACC? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
 on behalf of the Minister of Local Government: For a start I am not the Minister for ACC but I would simply answer yes. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The question is to the Minister of Local Government. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: That is true Mr Speaker. I am sorry I should have said that I have not been the Minister for ACC but my answer remains the same yes. 
Hon Annette King 
: As the acting Minister I presume can he confirm that it took two attempts before he got his Cabinet to accept his eight-point local government reform plan paper because one it was rushed and incomplete with an unrealistic timetable; two Cabinet was concerned at the need for more local government so soon after the last reform; and third many issues were still outstanding with no decisions made leaving confusion and questions to be answered? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: No. 
Hon Annette King 
: Does he agree with the Prime Minister who said yesterday that the test as to whether a council’s activities are a public good would be “extremely broad” and if so how does this match with his statement that councils should focus on things only councils are able to do? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: More often than not. 
Hon Annette King 
: If boat races bronze statues fireworks rugby games cycleways theatre stadium to name just a few are core local Government businesses can he tell the House what is not? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: We are going into a discussion at the moment with local government about what is appropriate.
Points of Order — Leave for Introduction—Child Impact Reporting Bill 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Points of Order — Leave for Introduction—Child Impact Reporting Bill 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1216. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Points of Order 
Leave for Introduction—Child Impact Reporting Bill 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave of the House to have the Child Impact Reporting Bill in my name on the ballot introduced. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: The member has sought leave. It is not a point of order. [ 
Interruption 
] He has sought leave to do something. It is not debatable so I now put the leave. If members are not happy it takes only one member to oppose it. Is there anyone opposed to that? There is. [ 
Interruption 
] The House is in a very very fractious mood and I am trying to assist it on members’ day. These are members’ bills.
Draft transcript - Thursday 27 September 2012 
Published as advance copy. 
Draft transcript - Thursday 27 September 2012
Draft transcript - Wednesday 26 September 2012 
Published as advance copy. 
Draft transcript - Wednesday 26 September 2012
Draft transcript - Tuesday 25 September 2012 
Published as advance copy. 
Draft transcript - Tuesday 25 September 2012
Draft transcript - Thursday 20 September 2012 
Published as advance copy. 
Draft transcript - Thursday 20 September 2012
Draft transcript - Wednesday 19 September 2012 
Published as advance copy. 
Draft transcript - Wednesday 19 September 2012
Draft transcript - Tuesday 18 September 2012 
Published as advance copy. 
Draft transcript - Tuesday 18 September 2012
Vote: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 16 August 2012. Volume:682;Page:4519. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 13; New Zealand First 8; Mana 1. 
Noes 63 
New Zealand National 59; Maori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 100 in the name of the Hon Amy Adams to Part 1 be agreed to.
Brownlee Gerry: Personal Explanations — Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Minister—Actions Incorrectly Attributed to Hon Lianne Dalziel 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Brownlee Gerry: Personal Explanations — Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Minister—Actions Incorrectly Attributed to Hon Lianne Dalziel 
[Sitting date: 16 August 2012. Volume:682;Page:4525. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery) 
: 
 I seek leave under Standing Order 354 to make a personal explanation about an impression that might have been garnered from an answer I gave to a question 5 months ago. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: On 22 March in answer to oral question No. 5 from the Hon Lianne Dalziel I gave an answer that relied heavily on statements previously made by the member concerning her personal circumstances. Although you have found no matter of privilege in the answer I none the less apologise for any unintended reputational damage to the member. The last 23 months have been difficult for all members of Parliament from Canterbury including me and I acknowledge that throughout that time all have sought first to represent the best interests of their constituents.
Roy Eric: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 16 August 2012. Volume:682;Page:4524. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the member. The time has come for me to report progress. 
House resumed. 
The Chairperson reported the Appropriation (2012/13 Estimates) Bill without amendment and progress on the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill. 
Report adopted.
Hughes Gareth: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hughes Gareth: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 16 August 2012. Volume:682;Page:4524. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
GARETH HUGHES (Green) 
: 
 It is good to hear that contribution from the Minister for the Environment that it is not circular and I agree with the recommendation by the member Moana Mackey that maybe it could be clarified a bit because what we do not want to see is a whole bunch of legal challenges—a feeding frenzy for lawyers—as we try and work out what these laws actually mean. But it would be good to get more clarity from the Minister around new clause 17A. What does it actually mean—