edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Beyer Georgina: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Beyer Georgina: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17842. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
GEORGINA BEYER (Labour—Wairarapa) 
: 
 I take a short call in the debate on the second reading on the Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill. The bill is designed to strengthen the public service make it more transparent and flexible allow a more integrated response to complex social problems involving a number of State agencies and invigorate the culture of the State sector. It stems from the 2001 Review of the Centre and represents the first major change to State sector governance in a decade. There are a number of main points and I will name just a few of them now for the benefit of members. It integrates the Fiscal Responsibility Act into the Public Finance Act and it broadens appropriations in order to allow Ministers more flexibility while retaining levels of reporting and accountability to Parliament. It also enhances departmental reporting to ensure that a broader range of information about intended and actual performance is disclosed. It also makes the Auditor-General’s controller function become more effective and requires Ministers to report to Parliament on serious breaches. 
I hope the House will debate this bill fully as it goes through its stages and I reiterate my support for it.
Wilson Margaret: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Deferment 
Wilson Margaret: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Deferment 
[Volume:625;Page:20523] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I note that we are getting into a debate on the movements of the Minister of Police under the guise of a point of order. I think the member has made his point so perhaps he would now like to proceed to ask his question.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:621;Page:16607] 
11.  
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: What has a married couple receiving New Zealand Superannuation been receiving as a percentage of the net average ordinary time weekly wage on a quarterly basis since and including September 2003 and is this consistent with the Government’s policy? 
Hon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 I am advised that as of September 2003 the average quarterly rate of New Zealand superannuation for a married couple as a percentage of the average ordinary time weekly wage was 65.09 percent. This is consistent with the Government’s policy. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked that Minister as to what has happened since and including September 2003. He deliberately left out the “since” part and that is the key part of my question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is perfectly correct. The member has answered the question relating to September 2003 but the question stated “since and including” so there need to be more statistics there. 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: I can give the member a couple more figures if he wishes. As of 1 March 2004 the quarterly rate was 64.88 percent and at June 2004 the rate was 64.83 percent but the average was 65 percent. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I thank the Minister for getting to the point he did not want to disclose but can I ask him why he is being so mean and outside the law in respect of the elderly people of this country who in comparison with the promise Labour made are getting well in excess of $30 less per week now than they were getting before? 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: The claim that superannuitants are getting $30 a week less than they should be is pure nonsense—absolute arrant nonsense. When one sets a figure in a simple way as a relative percentage it is to be expected that over time it may erode. The next time it comes up for inspection it will be adjusted back to its level—that member and all superannuitants can be assured of that. 
Georgina Beyer 
: What is the Government doing to meet the concerns and the welfare needs of our senior citizens? 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: When this Government came into office the previous administration had reduced the fall of superannuation from 65 percent down to 60 percent. That was the legacy of the National Party in Government. This Government reversed that and has now lifted the fall back. This means superannuitants as a married couple are at least $21 per week better off. In addition to that we have made changes in local driver licensing reduced primary health organisation charges brought down the cost of prescriptions put money into knee and hip operation costs and have maintained income-related rents. We have done an enormous amount for our senior citizens and will continue to do so.
Hunt Jonathan: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
Hunt Jonathan: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:613;Page:10001] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the member. Perhaps I was not clear enough when I said it. Leave can be sought but if leave is denied then the original motion stands. I declare the House in Committee again.
Urgent Debates Declined — Dioxin Contamination Paritutu—Government Response 
Urgent Debates Declined — Dioxin Contamination Paritutu—Government Response 
[Volume:620;Page:15591] 
Urgent Debates Declined 
Dioxin Contamination Paritutu—Government Response 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from Sue Kedgley seeking to debate under Standing Order 373 the finding of above average dioxin levels in 24 Paritutu residents. The full details of this finding were made available after the House met on Thursday so it is a particular case of recent occurrence involving the administrative responsibility of the Government. However the results were anticipated before the House sat last Thursday to the extent that two oral questions on this matter were lodged and answered that day. In those circumstances I am not persuaded that there should be a special debate on it today. The application is declined.
Pillay Lynne: Budget Debate 
Pillay Lynne: Budget Debate 
[Volume:608;Page:5916] 
LYNNE PILLAY (NZ Labour—Waitakere) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I wish to clarify a matter. The previous speaker said that I said there were a number of schools in Waitakere— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I ask the member whether she is saying that a previous speaker misquoted her. Is she saying it was a mistake? 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: Yes. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: She can correct it then on a point of order. 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: The previous speaker said that I said there were seven schools in Waitakere yet I was speaking last night about the number of schools that would be taking part in the Gateway programme.
Robertson H V Ross: Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11259] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the honourable member for that. The member is right and I am wrong. The previous Chairperson did pull up Wayne Mapp for debating that amendment in the way that he did. The ruling stands from the previous Chairperson and Keith Locke should not have debated that clause. He was out of order in doing so. I accept responsibility for that.
Peters Jim: Prostitution Reform Bill — In Committee 
Peters Jim: Prostitution Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5233] 
JIM PETERS (NZ First) 
: 
 Speaking to clause 3 and following the last speaker I say that earlier this evening I looked up the issue of occupation. I looked carefully at clause 3 and the sanctimonious language used. It states: “The purpose of this Act is to decriminalise prostitution”. That is quite clear. We can disregard the stuff about: “(while not endorsing or morally sanctioning …)”. It states that it creates a framework that safeguards the worker protects the worker has care for the welfare and occupational health and safety of the worker and so on. Is that not an occupation? To follow the last speaker I say that one of the issues that would greatly concern me and anyone who has been in education is that we have a shift here and we have already heard a possible example of a massage parlour worker who was placed in the position of working in the industry at the suggestion of Work and Income New Zealand—of making sex-work another occupation. 
 For anyone who has been in the teaching profession I say again that what we have here is a not-too-subtle shift to a life-choice for career and guidance—believe you me that is what it means. That is the first thing. 
Secondly I have heard some learned and lengthy discussion about certain clauses but I want to bring an example to the Committee of something that was my lot just a fortnight ago. Unlike other members of this House members of the Local Government and Environment Committee were meeting in Auckland. I stayed at the Sheraton hotel on the Sunday evening. I was awakened in the morning at half-past 2 by a commotion outside. I went to the window to see a very demonstrative sex worker trying to get her fee out of the driver of a car she was in. Three other workers then appeared out of the bushes just along from City Road to give some help to that worker. 
We have heard in this Chamber quite clear comments about health and safety requirements signage protections and prohibitions but as has already been mentioned by the honourable member Dr Hutchison not one of those issues affects or will change that worker’s role at all. The workers on Karangahape Road Hunter’s Corner and City Road will not be influenced one whit or have a changed lifestyle in any way because of any of the issues that are supposedly here for their protection. 
They do not know about the issue as to what a brothel is. They are not aware what the business of prostitution may mean. They are independently and privately soliciting on the street which by the way is their right at the present time. 
I want to come back to the issue. Despite all the fine language we have heard around this Chamber tonight and on other nights the purpose clause very clearly states that this occupation is one that is a work-style. On behalf of New Zealand First I say again that we utterly reject that contention.
Barker Rick: Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee Third Reading 
Barker Rick: Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21651] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I rise to take a brief call to answer some of the questions raised. Firstly David Carter asked how organisations get on the list. They are designated to be put on the list by the Prime Minister as stated in clause 22 of the principal Act. Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith was correct in identifying that 318 organisations were on the schedule at the beginning. That list has been updated and the number for New Zealand currently stands at 420. As he correctly identified extra organisations have been designated by the UN. Those are under active consideration by New Zealand. We do not simply accept them for what they are; we have to make our own assessment of them and that process is going on. 
Once on the list organisations stay there for 3 years. What happens after that? Lockwood Smith made mention of the review of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee to look at all those issues and to come up with some suggestions about how we might improve the process. So it is the intention of the Government in the light of that review the committee’s experience and our experience to come back with legislation that will be more enduring than what we had. That legislation was an instant reaction to a situation that had occurred. The world had to take some action and we did so. 
We want now to make sure we are compliant with UN resolutions—which we are—and that we have legislation consistent with the New Zealand framework and with our attitudes and lifestyle whilst at the same time ensure we are compliant with UN resolutions. All those things are under consideration and I am sure that the New Zealand Parliament will pass legislation on this matter again and that it will be very sensible legislation.
Tisch Lindsay: Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Tisch Lindsay: Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:16213] 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I want to know very clearly now what we are voting on. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I will read it for you. The Minister Paul Swain moved that the Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill be considered by the Education and Science Committee. That is the extent of the motion that members are voting on.
Appropriation (2003/04 Financial Review) Bill — First Reading 
Appropriation (2003/04 Financial Review) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:622;Page:17436] 
Appropriation (2003/04 Financial Review) Bill 
First Reading 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Appropriation (2003/04 Financial Review) Bill be now read a first time. 
Bill read a first time.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:609;Page:6133] 
4.  
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: Are those who break the law and are imprisoned whilst on temporary visas automatically required to leave the country after their sentence; if not why not? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 No. A temporary permit would have to be revoked or would have to expire before the individual could be removed. In all cases covered by section 7 of the Immigration Act such permits would be automatically revoked. However the revocation would trigger an appeal right to the Removal Review Authority. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Why is the Minister not prepared to give us an assurance that criminals such as Ding Yan Zhao an unlicensed Chinese student who took the life of an innocent 4-year-old girl while driving recklessly Jun Ying a Hamilton student facing two murder charges and also kidnapping and burglary charges Da Wan a Chinese student sentenced to 8 years’ jail for kidnapping a fellow student and demanding a $1.25 million ransom from his parents in China plus the Japanese Columbus Academy students who are being charged with kidnap assault and murder are to be deported at the end of their sentence and if not why not—or can anybody do what he or she likes in this darned country? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: As was the case when that member was the Deputy Prime Minister the temporary permit has to be revoked or expire first. Of course in the case of a serious criminal offence section 7 of the Immigration Act would apply. Those permits would be revoked or they would expire during the term and people would be removed at the end of their sentence. 
Luamanuvao Winnie Laban 
: Is the Minister satisfied with the provision in the Immigration Act that allows the right of appeal when a person on a temporary permit has offended in New Zealand while on that temporary permit? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: No I am quite concerned about the fact that that is the law that I inherited which is why I am reviewing the right of appeal for temporary-permit holders. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: After 4 years in the job how many people have been deported—because the law is unsatisfactory—how many have been convicted of serious offences and upon completing their sentences have been deported from this country; how many has she caused to be deported? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I do not have the number of deportation orders that I have signed since I have been Minister but I will certainly provide that information to the member. I should point out that in 1996-97 there were 329 total permit revocations and 456 in 1997-98. We have revoked more permits in the 10 months to date than were revoked in the 2 years that that member was involved in a Government.
Tisch Lindsay: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15862] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairman. I want some clarification. There were two lots of amendments from the Minister. There was one set of amendments on Supplementary Order Paper 243 and other amendments on the sheet I have in front of me. I am looking for clarification as to whether we were voting on both lots of amendments or just on the ones that you read out as being the amendments that we were voting on. I seek your guidance and clarification on this matter.
Parker David: Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third Reading 
Parker David: Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:6912] 
DAVID PARKER (NZ Labour—Otago) 
: It is with great pleasure that I rise to speak in support of the third reading of the Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3). I recommend it to the House.
Vote: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Approvals and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Approvals and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:623;Page:18787] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the words “Education and Science Committee” be omitted and the words “Local Government and Environment Committee” be substituted. 
Ayes 41 
New Zealand National 26; ACT New Zealand 5; Green Party 9; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 73 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; United Future 7; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The time has come—
Hughes Darren: Holidays Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Hughes Darren: Holidays Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:614;Page:10523] 
DARREN HUGHES (Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17760. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 36 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 9. 
Amendments agreed to.
Ward Mike: Motions — Academy Awards—Achievement of New Zealanders 
Ward Mike: Motions — Academy Awards—Achievement of New Zealanders 
[Volume:615;Page:11417] 
MIKE WARD (Green) 
: 
 The Greens add their congratulations. The arts are very often the thing we do when the kids have gone to bed and the dishes are done—we push a button. Last night I think we all felt good about our place because we saw it there. When we see other people feeling good about our place maybe it makes us a little more likely to look after it. If ever anybody had any doubt about the value of spending on the arts last night was an example that the arts do indeed have value—not just a monetary value but a value in terms of making us feel proud about ourselves making us care about ourselves and having us take pride in the achievements of other New Zealanders. The Greens add their congratulations on this remarkable achievement.
Robertson H V Ross: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:17098] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Mr Brownlee has made his point. The Chairperson is the sole judge as to whether the closure will be taken as per Speakers’ ruling 58/8.
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:20973] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 55 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 12 be agreed to: 
to omit this clause and substitute the following clause: 
12No compensation to be awarded 
No court or tribunal may in proceedings commenced and not determined at first instance by the Court or Tribunal before the commencement of this Act award any compensation sought by a specified claim.
Carter John: Points of Order — Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate Parliament Building—Media Access Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate 
Carter John: Points of Order — Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate Parliament Building—Media Access Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate 
[Volume:624;Page:19712] 
JOHN CARTER (National—Northland) 
: 
 I seek leave of the House to table Standing Order 2 “Interpretation”. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table Standing Order 2 “Interpretation”. Is there any objection? There is.
Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — Procedure 
Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:627;Page:21915] 
Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill 
Procedure 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Following agreement between the whips I seek leave for the House to proceed directly to the third reading of the Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill upon the completion of the Committee stage. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Brownlee Gerry: Tabling of Documents — Allegation by JohnTamihere 
Brownlee Gerry: Tabling of Documents — Allegation by JohnTamihere 
[Volume:624;Page:19033] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 John Tamihere the member for a northern Maori seat laid an allegation against me in this morning’s paper that I think is somewhat scurrilous and untrue. Rather than bother you with a privilege procedure I simply wish to take this opportunity to table for the House my identification tag for the Hui Taumata presented to me by the organisers when I arrived and worn by me for all the time that I was there. The fact that Mr Tamihere has no recollection of my being there will be of no surprise to this House. He is the man of course whose recollection of the past is so poor that he now has the Serious Fraud Office helping him to remember it. 
I seek leave to table the identification that proves my presence at the Hui Taumata.
Brash Don: Motions — Tsunami Boxing Day—Expression of Condolence 
Brash Don: Motions — Tsunami Boxing Day—Expression of Condolence 
[Volume:623;Page:18149] 
Dr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 The National Party certainly supports the Prime Minister’s motion. The Boxing Day tsunami was the kind of natural disaster that none of us would ever want to be involved in. Nine on the Richter scale indicates an earthquake of absolutely awesome destructive power. Some of us felt the small earthquake this morning at 5.4 on the Richter scale; an earthquake of 9 on the Richter scale is some 200000 times more powerful. As the Nevada Seismological Laboratory has calculated an earthquake of 5.4 on the Richter scale has the power of 80000 tonnes of TNT; an earthquake of 9 on the Richter scale has the power of some 32 billion tonnes of TNT and the effects were devastating as we all know. 
Miraculously only a few New Zealanders lost their lives although there are still some who are missing but the total loss of life ranks this as amongst the most serious natural disasters in the last 100 years. The generosity of so many New Zealanders to help the victims of this disaster and the efforts of our armed services personnel police and civilians make us all proud to be New Zealanders. 
I was initially critical of the slowness of the Government to help in this disaster but let me say clearly that I commend the Government for the aid package it has put in place for the victims of this disaster.
Pillay Lynne: Resource Management (Energy and Climate Change) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Pillay Lynne: Resource Management (Energy and Climate Change) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11321] 
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour—Waitakere) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Roy Heather: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Roy Heather: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:614;Page:10375] 
6.  
HEATHER ROY (ACT) 
 to  
Steve Chadwick (Member in charge of Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill) 
: Under the Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill will enforcement officers have the power to enter marae? 
STEVE CHADWICK (Member in charge of Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill) 
: 
 This bill is not about power. However smoke-protection officers will be able to go to marae if those marae have a liquor licence or are employing employees for the purpose of that event. 
Heather Roy 
: Is it not political correctness gone mad when the “smoke police” can enter any bar and club but not a marae except under those circumstances? 
STEVE CHADWICK 
: As I answered in the original question smoke-protection officers—and I am offended by the term “smoke police”—certainly can go on to a marae when a marae has a liquor licence for the purpose of an event. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: How does she suggest these “attitude cops” will go on to the Ngati Whakaue Marae for example in Rotorua to enforce the law without the greatest degree of racial disruption? 
STEVE CHADWICK 
: I am sure the member knows all too well about auahi kore who are smoke-protection officers who go around marae now—and Ngati Whakaue is one of them as the member well knows because he smokes outside—to educate people on the marae about how to be compliant with the smoke-free provisions of this bill.
Prebble Richard: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Prebble Richard: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:619;Page:15243] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (ACT) 
: 
 I seek leave to table the Electoral Amendment Act where we decided to change the law. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that. Is there any objection? There is.
Gallagher Martin: Land Transport (Unauthorised Street and Drag Racing) Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Gallagher Martin: Land Transport (Unauthorised Street and Drag Racing) Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4577] 
MARTIN GALLAGHER (NZ Labour—Hamilton West) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Sowry Roger: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — Procedure 
Sowry Roger: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:620;Page:15844] 
Hon ROGER SOWRY (National) 
: 
 I want to back up Mr Prebble because I think he is exactly right. What United Future members are trying to do today is vote against the bill but facilitate its passing so they want to vote against it but help the Government and pass it through any procedural issues. So they want to be seen as voting against it but as helping the Government pass it through any procedural issue. It is a godly way. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I ask the honourable member Judy Turner whether Mr Prebble is correct in what he stated.
Business of Select Committees — Membership 
Business of Select Committees — Membership 
[Volume:611;Page:8740] 
Business of Select Committees 
Membership 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for Sue Kedgley to be a member of the Government Administration Committee for the purposes of its consideration of the Building Bill but without the right to vote on any question before the committee. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none.
Donnelly Brian: Obituaries — Sir William Pickering 
Donnelly Brian: Obituaries — Sir William Pickering 
[Volume:616;Page:11701] 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY (NZ First) 
: 
 New Zealand First supports those words of tribute to one of New Zealand’s most distinguished sons. William Pickering was probably better known internationally than in his home country although it is fitting that in the past few years his outstanding exploits have been more publicised. Therefore it is fitting that this House pay tribute to his outstanding achievements. We in New Zealand First pass on our sympathy to his family.
Alexander Marc: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
Alexander Marc: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:20976] 
MARC ALEXANDER (United Future) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I seek your guidance. Is it not the common practice that when you ask for those in favour and those against the members stating the votes actually desist from making comments until such time as you call for the votes to be heard? The chief Labour whip has been flapping her jaw at the wrong moment. I ask for your guidance. That practice is incredibly irritating and distracts from the process of the vote. It holds things up and that is unacceptable in terms of the process in the Committee.
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:621;Page:16441] 
6.  
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour—Waitakere) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What action is the Government taking to identify and share best practice in schools? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 From 2006 the Extending High Standards in Schools initiative will invest an extra $5.3 million annually to promote excellence in schools. 
Lynne Pillay 
: How many schools are likely to benefit from this initiative? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Between 250 and 270. 
Hon Bill English 
: Has the Minister seen a review of teacher training done by the Teachers Council that shows very serious problems in a number of teacher training courses and why did he instruct the Teachers Council to keep that report secret? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I do not recall seeing it. 
Bernie Ogilvy 
: By what means can he identify best practice and excellence in schools when there is no uniform test before year 11 to discern students’ abilities? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I am quite willing to get the member briefed on the multitude of tests that are available to discern student ability. They start with the school entry assessment test. A lot of progress is being made in good testing but of course good teaching practice is something quite different and the member can have a briefing on that too if he wants. 
Judy Turner 
: Can the Minister confirm that references to harm minimisation as the goal of drug education have been removed from the Government’s best practice handbook for schools released recently including the statement that harm minimisation might “stigmatise experimentation with drugs as deviant behaviour”; if so why? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: No I cannot confirm that.
Vote: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:611;Page:8599] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the New Organisms and Other Matters Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 107 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8. 
Noes 10 
Green Party 9; Other: Awatere Huata. 
Bill read a second time.
Heatley Phil: Families Commission Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Procedure 
Heatley Phil: Families Commission Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:614;Page:10308] 
PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. During that point of order about seeking leave Jill Pettis was yelling across the Chamber: “He was only joking.” My understanding is that there is supposed to be silence in the Chamber as there is now when a member raises a point of order. If you are going to allow a member to shout across the House and put words in the mouth of the person taking the point of order that is unacceptable and I just raise that matter with you. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: There were actually about three people speaking during that seeking of leave. I give members an overall warning that there is no discussion at all during points of order. They will be heard in silence. Everyone knows that.
Shirley Ken: Personal Explanations — Civil Aviation Authority—Allegations 
Shirley Ken: Personal Explanations — Civil Aviation Authority—Allegations 
[Volume:619;Page:14593] 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Whip—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In light of the fact that the request for leave was denied on a misunderstanding perhaps it would be reasonable for leave to be sought again. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am prepared to have leave sought again. There has been a request from that party—
Wilson Margaret: Privilege — Allegations—David Benson-Pope MP 
Wilson Margaret: Privilege — Allegations—David Benson-Pope MP 
[Volume:626;Page:21039] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: As I said to the member this is not a matter for debate. If he wishes to have further discussion on it this is not the appropriate place to do it. I am very happy to talk to him about it. As I said in my letter if anyone lays a privileges complaint to the Speaker—even if a determination has been made on the matter—of course the Speaker must consider it on the basis of the evidence that is available.
Vote: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15930] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 103 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 22; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 6; Progressive 2. 
Noes 17 
New Zealand National 5; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 2; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Amendment agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 267 in the name of the Hon David Benson-Pope to insert new clause 25A be agreed to.
Vote: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21576] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 15 
Green Party 7; United Future 8. 
Noes 96 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 25; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Rod Donald to clause 19 be agreed to: 
to add to subclause (1) the following new paragraphs: 
(e)the relevant overseas person or (if that person is not an individual) all the individuals with control of the relevant overseas person are New Zealand citizens ordinarily resident in New Zealand or intending to reside in New Zealand indefinitely; and 
(f)the overseas investment will or is likely to benefit New Zealand (or any part of it) or group of New Zealanders as determined by the relevant Ministers under section 18; and 
(g)if the relevant investment involves aquaculture the relevant Ministers determine that that benefit will be or is likely to be identifiable and substantial.
Robertson H V Ross: Voting — Correction 
Robertson H V Ross: Voting — Correction 
[Volume:616;Page:12215] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Just before I put the question that the motion be agreed to I wish to announce to the House that the result of the vote on the third reading of the State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3) was incorrectly announced. The correct result is Ayes 75 Noes 44. It has made no difference to the overall result.
Pettis Jill: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
Pettis Jill: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
[Volume:614;Page:10564] 
JILL PETTIS (Labour—Whanganui) 
: 
 I am pleased to support the motion.
Vote: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15640] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 4 be agreed to. 
Ayes 101 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 12; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 17 
Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Schedule 4 agreed to.
Tamihere John: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Tamihere John: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8156] 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE (Minister of Youth Affairs) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Jones Dail: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
Jones Dail: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:613;Page:10000] 
DAIL JONES (Junior Whip—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. When the Chairman addressed you a moment ago he raised the question of relevancy. He said that a speaker had been not relevant. I have been here for the entire time during the debate on Part 3 and the only speaker who was not relevant was the speaker supporting the Government Ms Kedgley. The Chairman had to constantly call her in and we had about 20 minutes of points of order because Ms Kedgley was not being relevant. Are those members who are opposed to the bill to be punished by the very fact that a Government-supporting member was the one who was not relevant whereas all the speeches on the Opposition side of the House have been extremely relevant? Mr Lockwood Smith brought in a new concept as did Mr Williamson Mr Brown and Mr Mark. I believe that you have been misled by the Chairperson which is wrong.
Copeland Gordon: Prostitution Reform Bill — In Committee 
Copeland Gordon: Prostitution Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6175] 
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
: 
 I seek leave of the House to table a letter from the Catholic Women’s League contradicting the report in the  
Dominion Post  
of 24 May that quoted Tim Barnett as saying the league had declared its allegiance to this bill and making it very clear that the league does not support the bill. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:20990] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dail Jones to clause 50(3) be agreed to: 
to omit paragraph (c) and substitute the following paragraph: 
(c)must pay into the account for the benefit of the relevant victim claimants any interest payable by it on the account and that is not retained under paragraph (b).
Peters Jim: Maori Purposes Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Peters Jim: Maori Purposes Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4828] 
JIM PETERS (NZ First) 
: 
 We have come a long way since this morning with regard to the issues. Mr Cullen has expressed an opinion with regard to the subjectivity and a passing remark would be that wherever one is able to exercise that—wherever there was discretionary power—one would expect that the circumstances would be legally defined and strictly expressed in legal language. But we will not hold that part of the bill up at this stage. Therefore on behalf of New Zealand First I say that this is an improvement. It gets to what we were thinking about this morning. Again just in passing I say that it is very unfortunate that the exit from this tribunal which is a semi-judicial one is possibly different from that of any judicial body such as the High Court. It is just a wee bit unfortunate at this late stage that the alternative exit will more clearly define the exit pathway although reviewable and was not the original basis of this part of the bill. But we will support the intention and thrust of Dr Cullen’s suggestion.
Peck Mark: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peck Mark: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:610;Page:7985] 
4.  
MARK PECK (NZ Labour—Invercargill) 
 on behalf of  
DAVE HEREORA (NZ Labour) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Education (Tertiary Education) 
: What is the Government doing to improve the participation of low-income people in tertiary education and to retain these students in New Zealand once they have graduated? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Associate Minister of Education (Tertiary Education)) 
: 
 The Minister of Health and I have today announced that around 500 low-income students will be eligible next year for a new bonded scholarship scheme. Step-up scholarships are being piloted in 2004 for students studying for degrees in the subjects of human and animal health. Students who receive a scholarship will pay a flat fee of $2000 per year regardless of the tuition fee for the course they have chosen. The scholarship pays for the remainder. The Government has committed just under $16 million to this initiative. 
Mark Peck 
: What will this mean for students who receive the scholarship? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The individual value of the scholarship will depend on the course being undertaken. The scholarships are awarded for the full duration of the degree programme—subject to satisfactory academic progress. I give some examples: students studying medicine can expect to save around $43000; nursing students can expect to save around $5500; veterinary students about $20000; midwifery students around $5500; and dentistry students $36000. 
Craig McNair 
: What does the Minister think of an education system that motivates businessman Scott Gilmour to establish a trust to support 36 pupils at Wesley Primary School through their education and eventually to pay their fees to attend a tertiary education course and an education system that has slipped so far that in this case education is not a right for our children but a charitable service provided by the wealthy to the less fortunate? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: We have an outstanding education system in this country but I certainly welcome the philanthropy demonstrated in that question. 
Nandor Tanczos 
: Will this scholarship be available for people wishing to study complementary medicines accepted by orthodox health professionals as effective treatments such as acupuncture and osteopathy; if not why not? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: It will not for the purposes of this pilot. 
Hon Annette King 
: Has the Minister seen any response to today’s announcement; if so what is that response? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The Nurses Organisation has welcomed the scholarships as “a step towards addressing the causes of our nursing shortage”. The New Zealand Medical Association has said: “This will do much to reduce the stress from the burden of debt for some medical students.” Massey University has welcomed this as “a strategic move to provide generous scholarships for bright students studying human and animal health”. Overall we are seen as a listening and responsive Government.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:610;Page:7517] 
10.  
Hon DAVID CARTER (NZ National) 
 to the  
Minister of Agriculture 
: Given that key factors dampening confidence in the agricultural sector this year including the exchange rate drought and Sars have all developed favourably over the last month does he accept that the Government’s proposed livestock greenhouse gas emissions research levy is responsible for the deterioration in farmer confidence as reported in the latest National Bank Business Outlook Survey? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Acting Minister of Agriculture) 
: No. Over the last few months recorded confidence in the agricultural sector has continued to fluctuate around very low levels due principally to exchange rate and commodity price factors. The July figure was worse than those of June and April but better than those of May and March. Of course we have to take account of the fact that they are relatively small samples and some of the variation may simply be sampling error. 
Hon David Carter 
: Is the Minister of Agriculture aware of the statement made in the House on 23 April 1981 by the current Minister of Finance Dr Cullen when he said: “I am proud of the fact that my secondary education was not paid for by the taxpayers of New Zealand but by the farmers of Canterbury and Hawke’s Bay. I ripped them off for 5 years then and I shall get stuck into them again in the next few years”; and is the Minister of Agriculture also keen to get stuck into New Zealand farmers whom he now calls “whingers”? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Yes the Minister of Agriculture is aware of that comment which has been rather frequently quoted over the last 22 years. I think that particular comment shows that greenhouse gas emissions are not confined to sheep and cattle. 
Janet Mackey 
: What does the National Bank business confidence survey say about profit expectations for the agricultural sector? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: While expectations are still for a fall in profits the figures improved from May through to June and through to July so there are some signs in the survey of recovery in that sector. 
R Doug Woolerton 
: Why does the Government through its Ministers feel it necessary to denigrate farmers? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The Government does not feel it necessary to denigrate farmers. The Government takes the view that a research levy of $8 million on a multibillion dollar industry is not an unfair contribution to solving more than 50 percent of New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions. 
Hon David Carter 
: Given the Minister’s response to Mr Woolerton will the Minister of Agriculture therefore attend the Federated Farmers meeting in his electorate in Timaru tomorrow; if not will any of his 51 parliamentary colleagues deputise for him? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I do not have the information to answer that. I do not think the Minister is able to attend the meeting in Timaru tomorrow. I do not know of any other member going to Timaru although the Minister of Finance is going to Timaru and Oamaru in the near future.
Coddington Deborah: Maori Television Service Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled 
Coddington Deborah: Maori Television Service Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled 
[Volume:607;Page:4999] 
DEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I have been told before in this Committee that there is to be silence during voting and I clearly heard a member when New Zealand First voted say: “I’ll remember that.” 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member is quite correct and I have drawn it to members’ attention. It is a final warning.
Power Simon: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
Power Simon: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9073] 
SIMON POWER (NZ National—Rangitikei) 
: 
 I am happy to yield my call to the Minister on the understanding that I am able to perhaps seek your indulgence to have the next call in order to respond to the Minister. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: I am sure that will be possible.