edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Bridges Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Bridges Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12309] 
7. 
SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: What reports has he received in response to the range of initiatives for victims of crime that he launched yesterday? 
Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I have seen a number of positive reports on the initiatives that the Government launched yesterday. The police have said that the new on-the-spot safety orders will save lives. Survivors’ advocate Louise Nicholas stated: “New assistance for victims for sexual violence will help improve victims’ path through the criminal justice system.” Families of homicide victims have also welcomed yesterday’s announcements stating that the new entitlements will help to ease the financial burden placed on victims’ families. I am proud of the support that this Government has given and will continue to give to victims. 
Simon Bridges 
: What other reports has he seen? 
Hon SIMON POWER 
: I have seen one report from the Opposition law and order spokesperson that described the Government’s new victims’ compensation scheme as magical. There is nothing magical about this Government delivering on its promise to set up a victims’ compensation scheme within a year. What is magical or perhaps mythical is the last Government’s promise to set up a victims’ compensation scheme. It was promised in 1994 1996 2005 and 2008; incidentally it was never delivered. 
Lynne Pillay 
: Has the Minister seen reports from the thousands of sexual abuse survivors and victims and experts in the field who are questioning whether justice is blind and uninterested when it comes to counselling for victims and survivors of sexual abuse? 
Hon SIMON POWER 
: I see a range of reports from a range of groups who have a range of views on all of these matters. 
Lynne Pillay 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked a specific question. I asked whether the Minister had seen reports. He talked about a range of reports. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have listened to Lynne Pillay’s supplementary questions over this last week and my advice to the member is to think carefully about the supplementary questions she asks. I have allowed questions to go through that are outside the Standing Orders. If the member wants a Minister to give a precise answer she has to make her questions more precise. In asking the Minister whether he has seen reports goodness knows what kind of answer she is expecting from him. I cannot help her to get a particular answer when she asks that kind of question.
Brownlee Gerry: Business of the House 
Brownlee Gerry: Business of the House 
[Volume:664;Page:11939] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Further to a Business Committee decision today I seek leave for the bills divided from the Statutes Amendment Bill at the Committee of the whole House to be set down for third reading forthwith. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — First Reading 
Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:11881] 
Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill 
First Reading 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Imprest Supply (First for 2010/11) Bill be now read a first time. 
Bill read a first time.
Dunne Peter: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
Dunne Peter: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
[Volume:664;Page:11865] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 This last midwinter week in New Zealand must be the most extraordinary in our sporting history. It began with us daring to hope for a good result against Slovakia and we were blown away when the All Whites unheralded and unfancied came away with a draw in that match. Then our attention turned to the match with Italy. Could that feat possibly be repeated? It was repeated with honour and credit all around. Now we look to the third leg of the treble: Paraguay on Friday. 
This country is absorbed and transfixed at the moment by the success of the All Whites. It is great to see. It is a huge uplift in our national spirit. But those of us who have watched the All Whites over the last year—from the occasion at Westpac Stadium when the team qualified against Bahrain and its contributing team the Wellington Phoenix playing here throughout last season—knew a couple of things. The first was that something big was building and the second was that success is not achieved without hard effort hard work and a massive level of support from those people who back the team. That is what we have seen with the Wellington Phoenix we have seen with the All Whites in their qualifying matches and now—the vuvuzelas notwithstanding—we are seeing in South Africa. It is a huge tribute to the team that it has inspired this level of support. It is a massive lift of confidence for our country; it is a wonderful carnival atmosphere. Let us hope that we can ride it all the way through the Paraguay match on Friday and on into the next round. 
When New Zealanders get to that point when our backs are against the wall when we are obsessed with being derided as part-time amateurs they are our greatest moments of success and I believe that this team has only started down that road. Good luck to the team on Friday and for what lies beyond.
Vote: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Vote: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12348] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be amended by adding after “Committee” “and that the committee be instructed to report specifically on whether the provisions in clause 11 could be amended to resolve the outstanding issue relating to the funding of the Performing Arts Centre at King's High School Dunedin”. 
Ayes 58 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Brownlee Gerry: Sittings of the House 
Brownlee Gerry: Sittings of the House 
[Volume:664;Page:11939] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Following discussion at the Business Committee earlier today I seek leave for the House to sit on the ringing of the bell on Tuesday 29 June 2010. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Williamson Maurice: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Williamson Maurice: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12348] 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister for Building and Construction) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Education 
: I move  
That the Education and Science Committee consider the Education Amendment Bill (No 2) 
 that the committee report finally to the House on or before 1 November 2010 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time during a sitting of the House (except during oral questions) and during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 187 and 190(1)(b) and (c).
Boscawen John: General Debate 
Boscawen John: General Debate 
[Volume:664;Page:12317] 
JOHN BOSCAWEN (ACT) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to table a copy of the letter from the Hon John Key to superannuitants that Annette King has just referred to which fails to tell people the cost of the emissions trading scheme and fails to tell people the cost of power price increases. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
[Volume:664;Page:11940] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the second reading and remaining stages of the Financial Service Providers (Pre-Implementation Adjustments) Bill and any bills into which that bill may be divided; the passing through all stages of the Civil Aviation (Cape Town Convention and Other Matters) Amendment Bill and the Policing (Involvement in Local Authority Elections) Amendment Bill; the second reading and remaining stages of the Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims (Expiry and Application Dates) Amendment Bill; the interrupted first reading of the Tariff (New Zealand-Hong Kong China Closer Economic Partnership Agreement) Amendment Bill; the second reading and remaining stages of the Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill; the second readings of the Motor Vehicle Sales Amendment Bill and the Taxation (Annual Rates Trans-Tasman Savings Portability KiwiSaver and Remedial Matters) Bill; the Committee stage and third reading of the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill; and the second reading of the Insurance (Prudential Supervision) Bill.  
Some weeks ago I advised the Business Committee that in this week we would be likely to put the House into urgency to consider a number of bills that were on the Order Paper and that needed to make progress in order to meet a 1 July implementation date. The list that I have just read out was circulated to all parties earlier in the week and I understand that although parties will not necessarily support the Government taking urgency there is considerable support for most of the bills that are in this urgency motion. One of the problems that the House faces is the limited hours that we have to deal with legislation and successive Government have wrestled with this. I have put a motion on the Order Paper that may or may not be considered by the House at some time to create some extra space. But in the meantime it has been my hope that the Business Committee itself may be able to take a stronger role in deciding which bills might progress through urgency motions of this nature. So without prejudice to the Government’s right to take urgency for any matter that sees fit I think that having a greater discussion about some of these things and better notification will allow for the proper debate that the House should have.
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:11876] 
7. 
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie) 
 to the  
Minister of Energy and Resources 
: What steps is the Government taking to encourage businesses to be more energy-efficient? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Energy and Resources) 
: 
 Research by the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority has identified about $2 billion per annum of achievable energy savings in the business sector. The authority provides energy audits to help businesses identify those opportunities. With over 600 audits completed so far we can see that for every dollar invested in an energy audit about $7.50 in savings opportunities is identified. 
Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga 
: What are the economic benefits of the business energy audit scheme? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: In the last 5 years the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority has invested $3.9 million in the scheme and accumulated annual energy savings of around 500 gigawatt hours which equates to around $65 million in bottom-line cost to business. This equates to a cost of about 1c per kilowatt hour of electricity saved which compares very favourably with the cost of new electricity generation of over 8c per kilowatt hour. What is more savings made in business become part of the baseline for the years ahead.
Mallard Trevor: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
Mallard Trevor: Motions — All Whites—Draw with Italy at Football World Cup 
[Volume:664;Page:11866] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 There is also a tradition that if people want—
Tremain Chris: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
Tremain Chris: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12349] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I seek leave for the Committee stage of the Courts (Remote Participation) Bill to be debated as one question with multiple calls. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is anyone opposed to that course of action? 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: By multiple calls does the senior Government whip means unlimited calls? 
Chris Tremain 
: Yes. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Is everybody clear? No one is opposed to the leave? Leave is granted.
Dalziel Lianne: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
Dalziel Lianne: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12374] 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour—Christchurch East) 
: 
 I will take a very brief call to thank the Minister in the chair the Minister of Justice for listening to the debate and for responding in the way that he has. I think it has been a very good debate over the last couple of days and the result reflects that. I indicate for the record that we will be withdrawing Supplementary Order Paper 149 in the name of David Parker in order to support the Government’s amendment to this bill. As I think I said in my comments in my second reading speech yesterday that one small amendment to clause 9 would mean unanimity in the House and I think we have achieved that. I think that the Minister should be congratulated.
Harawira Hone: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Harawira Hone: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12379] 
HONE HARAWIRA (Maori Party—Te Tai Tokerau) 
: 
 Kia ora Mr Assistant Speaker. 
David Garrett 
: This will be good. 
HONE HARAWIRA 
: No this will not be good; this is just a short call on the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill. The Maori Party supports legislation that encourages a stable market for people renting houses that will help landlords manage their properties better and that will help balance the rights of both tenants and landlords. But I would like to raise a few points here like the difference in rental tenancy levels for Maori at 67 percent and for non-Maori at 44 percent and the fact that of all New Zealanders who own their own homes only 7 percent are Maori. A report entitled  
Maori Housing Experiences: Emerging Trends and Issues 
 by Charles Waldegrave Peter King Tangihaere Walker and Eljon Fitzgerald tells us to no one’s great surprise that Maori face greater challenges in getting rental accommodation including supply quality pricing and variation in landlord practices. They also pointed out that Maori often accept sub-standard housing and even rogue landlords if it means they can stay closer to whanau. So knowing all these things—high rental levels low ownership rates challenges in getting decent accommodation and rogue landlords—to be true this bill is important for Maori. 
We take on board some of the comments raised by in particular my colleague from Labour Su’a William Sio about issues of people being evicted for events. We also note concerns raised by the Coalition to End Homelessness who said that although they liked the idea that the bill promotes the improvement in the standard of boarding houses unless support was available to help upgrade some of those boarding houses many of them would simply close thus bringing about an unintended housing crisis. That raised concerns about the fact that this bill should perhaps have been extended to cover caravan parks given that these days they are often used for long-term accommodation as well. We also thought that the termination of boarding-house tenancies because of just 1-week’s arrears was a bit tough given that it is usually 3 weeks everywhere else but overall we were comfortable enough with the general thrust of the bill to give it our support. Kia ora tatou.
Bridges Simon: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — Third Reading 
Bridges Simon: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12419] 
SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga) 
: 
 I will not speak for very long because we are in a position of consensus on this bill the Courts (Remote Participation) Bill. It is very clear that with this bill we are taking advantage of a technology that is available to us as a society. I think we can all agree that there are safety benefits in relation to prisoners and their transfer and the like there are efficiencies to be gained and through that there are of course cost savings. That is not the be-all and end-all in justice matters by any stretch but it is a matter worth noting—there will be cost savings. 
I think it was David Parker who said in the second reading debate that Labour members agreed with 99 percent of the bill and that it was with regret that they were holding out on one point. I will not relitigate that but I agree with David Parker that what we have is a situation where the Minister of Justice listened carefully. It is to his credit that he in weighing up those arguments was persuaded by—I think we can say—strong speeches from the Labour Opposition and Kennedy Graham of the Greens. 
I suggest that we have seen a Parliament that is working—sometimes pretty robustly but working well. I certainly do not want to say to the House that this debate is somehow all for our own edification and that we do all this to be educated but I think that David Parker would agree with me that this has been to some extent educational. We have all learnt something. We have picked up some different perspectives and perhaps a number of members in this House who have followed the debate closely—as I have and as David Parker Kennedy Graham and David Garrett have—will come away better more educated and with a finer sense of the mood of the House on issues like this. I think the process has been very good and very robust. Now we have a bill that as I understand it will have unanimous support. I think that is very good.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — Third Reading 
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12429] 
KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) 
: 
 I agree with all the previous speakers that the amendments to the Courts (Remote Participation) Bill is a very good sign of democracy. New Zealand is a democratic country and good government always listens and makes changes to its policies for logical reasons. This is another very high standard set by this Government. The Hon Simon Power made up his mind to make the necessary changes that were demanded in this House. Clause 9 states: “AVL must not be used in any criminal substantive matter for the appearance of a participant unless a judicial officer determines to allow its use for the appearance of that participant …” and the defendant consents to that use. 
This bill will improve efficiency safety and security for the accused and for those working in the courts and improve access to justice. It will improve the quality of evidence heard in courtrooms. It is estimated that the reforms we are proposing in this bill have the potential to save thousands of court events and court sitting hours. 
This bill sets out the criteria under which audiovisual links can be used. The criteria will protect the rights of all participants including the defendants and the witnesses. They will allow judicial officers or the registrar to require any participant to appear by a video link in a criminal procedure matter where evidence is not being presented. 
Lastly I would like to thank the Labour members of the Justice and Electoral Committee for their support. As a first-time member of Parliament I have the great advantage of gaining experience from the committee’s members like the Hon David Parker and the chair Chester Borrows. I commend this bill to the House. 
Bill read a third time.
Delahunty Catherine: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Delahunty Catherine: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12383] 
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green) 
: 
 I seek leave to table two tables from Statistics New Zealand’s March 2010 quarterly employment survey which together show that the gender pay gap at 12 percent is unchanged since the Government took office. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table those documents. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Documents by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Power Simon: Business Statement 
Power Simon: Business Statement 
[Volume:664;Page:12383] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 Well we do what we have learnt from the previous Government of course. I wish that member well for his first visit to Otaki during the adjournment.
Sittings of the House 
Sittings of the House 
[Volume:664;Page:12429] 
Sittings of the House 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Minister of Civil Defence) 
: 
 The House seems to have made good progress today and it would seem an appropriate time for the Assistant Speaker to leave the Chair. I seek leave for that to happen. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought for the House to lift. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? There appears to be none. Leave is granted.
Calder Cam: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Calder Cam: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12415] 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
: 
 As the 18th century jurist and philosopher Jeremy Bentham said about animals “the question is not Can they reason? nor Can they talk? but [rather] Can they suffer?”. Curbing cruelty to animals is a priority for National. 
The relationship between mankind and animals has probably been extant longer than that between man and the oldest profession. The emotional symbioses and synergies the confrontations and territorial disputes between mankind and animals have exercised the poet the author the philosopher and the statesman over the years. All have had their thoughts. 
Mahatma Gandhi observed: “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” This Government is concerned that the people who are cruel to animals are also often violent to their families and others. Immanuel Kant wrote: “We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals.” 
How will this bill work? Among the things that this bill explores is the expansion of the threshold for the wilful ill-treatment of an animal—the most serious category of offending—to include the serious injury or impairment of an animal. The bill increases the maximum penalty for wilful ill-treatment to 5 years’ imprisonment. 
The deep relationship between animals and humankind has occasioned a raft of comments verging on the metaphysical. Theophile Gautier for instance said: “Who can believe that there is no soul behind those luminous eyes!”. An anonymous person observed: “Thousands of years ago cats were worshipped as gods. Cats have never forgotten this.” Warren Eckstein wrote: “In the beginning God created man but seeing him so feeble He gave him the cat.” Anatole France wrote: “Until one has loved an animal a part of one’s soul remains unawakened.” As a medical doctor I was well aware of the therapeutic benefit that many of my patients derived from their daily interaction with their family pets. 
The vast majority of New Zealanders—whether urban dwellers with their cat dog turtle or parrot or the “horny-handed sons of toil” in the rural sector with hundreds of dairy cows or flocks of thousands of sheep—nurture and care for their animals in an exemplary fashion. This bill sends the clear message to the very very small number of offenders that cruelty to animals is completely unacceptable and it will be dealt with severely. I commend this bill to the House. 
Bill read a third time.
Goudie Sandra: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Goudie Sandra: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12414] 
SANDRA GOUDIE (National—Coromandel) 
: 
 I am delighted to be speaking on the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill. I thought I would break from the tenor of the contributions to the debate and actually talk about the bill—gosh imagine! The bill itself and what it does have not been talked about very much. 
I reiterate that the bill clarifies ownership. I am quite taken by clause 7 which amends section 169 of the Animal Welfare Act which states: “A court may … disqualify a person for any period that it thinks fit from being the owner of or exercising authority in respect of an animal or animals of a particular kind or description where the court convicts that person of an offence …” prescribed in the bill. I think that is really great. 
A person who has been convicted of the wilful ill-treatment of an animal does not deserve to own or have authority for an animal and the court may decide the period of time for which this applies. The bill states: “In making an order under subsection (1) the court may also specify a minimum disqualification period.” I think that if it is easier for the court to make that determination with a conviction then that is great. Those people do not deserve to own an animal if they cannot look after it. If they have had a couple of tries and they have been found wanting then I think that minimum disqualification period—it will be assessed in accordance with the actual offence—should be quite lengthy. If a person cannot look after an animal in the first instance any future behaviours or further ownership or exercising of authority will probably be found to be wanting. 
I would like to make a comment in reference to the amount of complaints made. A number of complaints made about the ill-treatment of animals are found to be not qualified—that is people not necessarily understanding what they are seeing. I will give members an example. Horses can be kept in a couple of paddocks where the grass is pretty short but in actual fact those horses are in really good condition because they are being fed all sorts of other types of matter not just pasture. When people see a horse in a fairly empty paddock they do not necessarily know that that horse is being fed a lot of other different types of feed and is in really good first-rate condition. I had that concern so I went and spoke to the owners and had a look at the animals. The owners told me what was happening. They said they had had a lot of complaints but they were pretty spurious. 
I just make that short comment. I would like to commend Simon Bridges for his excellent contribution in bringing this bill before the House the Minister of Agriculture for his foresight in acknowledging the importance of this bill and the Government for taking it up and for contributing of $8 million - plus to furthering the care of animals in New Zealand. It is a great bill. Well done everybody.
Hughes Darren: Business Statement 
Hughes Darren: Business Statement 
[Volume:664;Page:12383] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I thank the Deputy Leader of the House for that update and I wish him well as he calls into Timaru on his skiing holiday over the adjournment. I am sure that he will be warmly welcomed in that town. We are looking forward to progressing the bills that he mentioned. The only point that we would make this afternoon—in a genuine way; these things do happen from time to time—is that we notice that a number of senior Ministers are not available today to answer parliamentary questions in the House. That does happen from time to time but it would be useful for the Opposition if when the Government is giving leave to its Ministers it could try to make sure that there were still a reasonable number of Ministers here on a Thursday so that we could ask them some questions.
Ardern Jacinda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Ardern Jacinda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12398] 
11. 
JACINDA ARDERN (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: Does she stand by her statement in the House last week that “some of our preliminary results show that around 7000 of …16 and 17-year-olds are not touching any sort of programme or training”? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment: 
 Yes. That number includes about 3300 young people who are receiving a benefit of some sort. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: Why did she limit her answer to 16 and 17-year-olds? Is it because the figure for 15 to 19-year-olds not in employment education training or any form of benefit is much larger at 34900? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The reason she gave that number is that she has a priority concern for that group of people to ensure that they are able to be provided for by the system. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: If this is an area of priority concern can the Minister name the initiatives—excluding Job Ops and Community Max which focus on young people who are on a benefit—she is implementing to assist the tens of thousands of young people who are not on a benefit not in a job and not in education or training? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: I can tell that member that many programmes and services are available for those young people. I can name the work that the Minister for Social Development and Employment is doing to have a stronger economy in New Zealand through lower personal taxes less regulation and a commitment to a growing economy. 
Carmel Sepuloni 
: Does she have any preliminary results showing which of her policies has been the most effective in tackling Pacific youth unemployment? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I apologise to the member but I ask both Chris Tremain and the Hon Annette King to desist the interjecting across the front of the House. We cannot hear Carmel Sepuloni. I ask her to please repeat her question. 
Carmel Sepuloni 
: Does she have any preliminary results showing which of her policies has been the most effective in tackling Pacific youth unemployment? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: I do not have that information with me. 
Carmel Sepuloni 
: How does she reconcile any of the actions she has done with Bill English’s statement that the reason the $4.8 million for the Pacific Economic Development Agency was necessary was because nothing was happening in this area in relation to Pacific youth unemployment? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: I am sure those comments were made with reference to the neglect of the previous Labour Government.
Woodhouse Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Woodhouse Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12397] 
10. 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: What progress has been made on expanding the role of enrolled nursing in New Zealand? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) 
: 
 Over the past few years the role and status of enrolled nursing have been marginalised in New Zealand with many hospitals no longer willing to employ them. With enrolled nurse numbers dwindling to just over 3000 practising today one of the first actions taken by the new Government was to work with the Nursing Council and the New Zealand Nurses Organisation to restore and expand the scope of enrolled nurses in the public health service. The Nursing Council has now issued a wider scope of practice and this has been welcomed by the health service. 
Michael Woodhouse 
: What areas of the health service will enrolled nurses now be able to work in again? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: A new curriculum will be put in place next year as will a new 18-month diploma for enrolled nursing. By completing competence assessments over the next year the new scope of practice will allow enrolled nurses to again work in surgical theatres acute services and mental health. This is an example of how the New Zealand public health service can be innovative and flexible in better meeting the needs of New Zealanders after the 9 years of failure under members opposite. 
Hon Annette King 
: Does it surprise the Minister of Health to learn that it was a National Government that stopped funding and training enrolled nurses in the 1990s and it was a Labour Government that brought back second-tier nurses and started training them again so that some are now available to take up a greater role? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: We have debates about how responsible Ministers are for stuff that went on in the 1990s but I guess the question was whether the Minister was surprised so an opinion is being sought. 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: It surprises me that that member opposite fails to realise that she was in a Government that told enrolled nurses that they are not entitled to be called that that they are to be called nurse assistants and that they cannot work in hospitals. This Government has changed that. 
Hon Annette King 
: I seek leave to table a document from the Nursing Council which decided what enrolled nurses would be called. The decision was not made by the Minister— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will not debate the matter. Leave has been sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. [ 
Interruption 
] I beg your pardon; there is objection. I misheard. I guess on this occasion it is the Hon Tony Ryall who should use a bigger voice. This place was built to carry human voices without the use of microphones and I should be able to hear a member if he or she uses a loud enough voice.
Dean Jacqui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Dean Jacqui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12398] 
12. 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) 
 to the  
Minister for Biosecurity 
: What recent steps has the Government taken to improve pest management in New Zealand? 
Hon DAVID CARTER (Minister for Biosecurity) 
: 
 The Government has just released for public consultation the  
Pest Management Proposed National Plan of Action: 2010-2035 
. This document suggests key improvements needed for New Zealand to provide the best pest management system possible for the next 25 years. A key change will be the requirement for the Crown to be bound by regional pest management strategies ensuring it meets its good neighbour obligation. This plan delivers on yet another election promise from National. 
Jacqui Dean 
: What has been stakeholder reaction to the release of the plan? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: It has been hugely positive. It has included Local Government New Zealand saying: “Landowners are the winners.” the Greater Wellington Regional Council saying: “The active engagement of the Crown will make our efforts significantly more effective.” Environment Waikato congratulating the Government on progress and Federated Farmers saying: “When it comes to regional pest management strategies it’s a very promising step …”. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: Tena koe Mr Speaker. Ka pehea te whakatinana i te ngakaunui o te National Plan of Action “ki te whakauru i nga mohiotanga me nga whakaritenga o te tangata whenua ki nga mahi hopu kararehe porearea”? 
[ 
How will the national plan of action’s commitment to “incorporating tangata whenua knowledge and practices in pest management” be implemented? 
] 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: The plan of action proposes the establishment of a Maori advisory committee to support engagement with Maori on all pest management issues. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: Ko wai ka uru atu ki te mahi whakatinana i te ngakaunui i roto i te mahere ki te whakarahi ake i te kahapupuri e rua nei ona ahua ara; te whakapakari i nga pukenga o te tangata whenua ki te hopu kararehe porearea; te whakapakari hoki i nga pukenga o nga pokapu kawanatanga e pa ana ki te tikanga a tua atu hoki me pehea te whakatu mangai mo te tangata whenua e whakangawari? 
[ 
Who will be involved in actioning the commitment in the plan to two-way capability building—that is skill development in pest management for tangata whenua and skill development in tikanga for agencies—and how will the representation of tangata whenua be facilitated? 
] 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: All stakeholders will be involved but there will be particular emphasis on the work of the Maori advisory committee.
Ardern Jacinda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Ardern Jacinda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12398] 
JACINDA ARDERN (Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to hold my question over until such time as the Minister for Social Development and Employment or anyone other than Simon Power is available to answer. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Mahuta Nanaia: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mahuta Nanaia: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12395] 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato) 
: 
 I seek leave to hold this question over until the Minister of Energy and Resources is present and able to respond. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12390] 
6. 
KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage 
: What progress is the Government making in conjunction with Sir Peter Jackson with the review of the New Zealand Film Commission? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage) 
: 
 Oscar-winning director and producer Sir Peter Jackson has completed his review report which was publicly released earlier today. The New Zealand Film Commission Act was passed 30 years ago. Since then the face of the local film industry has changed dramatically. The Government instigated the review to ensure that the New Zealand Film Commission is best able to serve the needs of the local industry and community today and to move forward into the future. On behalf of the Government I express my thanks to Sir Peter for his work. We will now carefully consider his report and recommendations. 
Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi 
: What are some of the major recommendations in Sir Peter Jackson’s report? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: Sir Peter was emphatic that the industry needs the New Zealand Film Commission saying that making movies showcasing New Zealand culture and character would be virtually impossible without it. Other recommendations include a more strategic longer-term vision a larger development team within the commission and some work on preserving the New Zealand Film Archive. Some of this work is already under way and I now want to talk to the commission before making further recommendations. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: When can we expect a response from the Minister to this review? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: As I said in my earlier answer as soon as I have spoken to the chief executive and chair of the commission I hope to be in a position to make some public announcements on where we go. Having said that I tell the member that one of the original grounds of the review was the question of whether there needed to be statutory change. On the face of it I do not think there will need to be any amendment to the current Act.
Sio Su'a William: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Sio Su'a William: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12389] 
SU’A WILLIAM SIO (Labour—Mangere) 
: 
 I seek leave to hold my question over until such time as the Minister of Pacific Island Affairs is ready and available to answer it. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12386] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
: 
 I seek leave to defer this question until the Minister of Finance is back in the House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12386] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
: 
 To the acting Minister of Finance how much would someone earning the average wage of $50000 per annum— 
Hon Simon Power 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My understanding is that this question has been put down to the Minister of Finance not the acting Minister of Finance. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member is quite correct. The member should direct his question to the Minister of Finance. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: After the previous performance it— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the member wants to get to ask his question he will desist from that carry-on and just ask the question of the Minister of Finance.
Power Simon: Business Statement 
Power Simon: Business Statement 
[Volume:664;Page:12383] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 The House will lift today for a 2-week adjournment. When the House resumes on Tuesday 20 July for a 3-week sitting the House will go into Committee to consider the Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill as well as considering a range of bills including the Electricity Industry Bill and the Infrastructure Bill.
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Viet Nam—Delegation National Assembly 
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Viet Nam—Delegation National Assembly 
[Volume:664;Page:12383] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that a parliamentary delegation from the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam led by His Excellency Uong Chu Luu Vice-President of the National Assembly is present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish that the delegation be welcomed.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:664;Page:12383] 
Business Statement 
Hon SIMON POWER (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 The House will lift today for a 2-week adjournment. When the House resumes on Tuesday 20 July for a 3-week sitting the House will go into Committee to consider the Appropriation (2010/11 Estimates) Bill as well as considering a range of bills including the Electricity Industry Bill and the Infrastructure Bill. 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I thank the Deputy Leader of the House for that update and I wish him well as he calls into Timaru on his skiing holiday over the adjournment. I am sure that he will be warmly welcomed in that town. We are looking forward to progressing the bills that he mentioned. The only point that we would make this afternoon—in a genuine way; these things do happen from time to time—is that we notice that a number of senior Ministers are not available today to answer parliamentary questions in the House. That does happen from time to time but it would be useful for the Opposition if when the Government is giving leave to its Ministers it could try to make sure that there were still a reasonable number of Ministers here on a Thursday so that we could ask them some questions. 
Hon SIMON POWER (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 Well we do what we have learnt from the previous Government of course. I wish that member well for his first visit to Otaki during the adjournment.
Visitors — Viet Nam—Delegation National Assembly 
Visitors — Viet Nam—Delegation National Assembly 
[Volume:664;Page:12383] 
Thursday 1 July 2010 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Viet Nam—Delegation National Assembly 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that a parliamentary delegation from the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam led by His Excellency Uong Chu Luu Vice-President of the National Assembly is present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish that the delegation be welcomed.
Carter John: Sittings of the House 
Carter John: Sittings of the House 
[Volume:664;Page:12429] 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Minister of Civil Defence) 
: 
 The House seems to have made good progress today and it would seem an appropriate time for the Assistant Speaker to leave the Chair. I seek leave for that to happen. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought for the House to lift. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? There appears to be none. Leave is granted.
Sio Su'a William: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Sio Su'a William: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12390] 
5. 
SU’A WILLIAM SIO (Labour—Mangere) 
 to the  
Minister of Pacific Island Affairs 
: Is she satisfied with her level of involvement in the processes prior to her announcement on 20 May 2010 that: “The Budget provides $4.8 million in operating funding over the next four years for the Pacific Economic Development Agency”? 
Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Pacific Island Affairs 
: Yes. 
Su’a William Sio 
: Is the purchase agreement between the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs and the private company the Pacific Economic Development Agency ready and finalised by today 1 July as she said it would be in her written answer 09338 dated 28 June; if not will that funding be open to other more established organisations with a much longer and more successful track record of delivering outcomes for Pacific peoples in Auckland? 
Hon SIMON POWER 
: The advice I have is that this money was provided for in the Budget. The Pacific Economic Development Agency has submitted a proposal which is now the subject of negotiations towards a formal purchase agreement which has yet to be signed. Until that happens no money will be transferred to the Pacific Economic Development Agency.
Goodhew Jo: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Goodhew Jo: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12213] 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I move  
That this debate be now adjourned 
. 
Motion agreed to.
Vote: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12207] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 50 
New Zealand Labour 40; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Noes 68 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Moana Mackey be agreed to: 
to insert the following clause after clause 31: 
31ANew section 51A inserted 
The following section is inserted after section 31: 
“51ATermination of tenancy for provision of short-term accommodation for major event not allowed 
“(1)It shall not be acceptable for a tenancy boarding house or other to be terminated for the purpose of providing short term accommodation for a major event as defined under section 7 of the Major Events Management Act 2007. 
“(2)A tenant who had their tenancy terminated may apply to the Tenancy Tribunal for a finding that it was terminated for the purpose outlined in subsection (1). 
“(3)Where the Tenancy Tribunal finds that a landlord is found to have terminated a tenancy for the purpose outlined in subsection (1) the landlord will be subject to a penalty to the value of the daily rent of that property charged under the tenancy agreement for each day it was rented out for the major event.”
Vote: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12207] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 50 
New Zealand Labour 40; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Noes 68 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Moana Mackey to clause 38 be agreed to: 
to add the following subclause after subclause (1): 
(2)Section 59 is amended by adding the following subsection: 
“(5)The tenant liability for damage to their rental premises is limited to 4 weeks’ rent if the Tenancy Tribunal is satisfied the tenant neither caused the damage intentionally or recklessly nor intentionally or recklessly encouraged or permitted another person to damage the premises.”
Vote: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12208] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 50 
New Zealand Labour 40; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Noes 68 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 110 in the name of the Hon Maurice Williamson and Supplementary Order Paper 120 in the name of the Hon Phil Heatley be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Parts 1 and 2 schedule and clauses 1 to 3 as amended agreed to. 
Bill reported with amendment. 
Report adopted.