edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Vote: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:16365] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 99 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 20; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 2; United Future 2; Progressive 2. 
Noes 17 
New Zealand National 4; ACT New Zealand 6; United Future 6; Maori Party 1. 
Clause 1 agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendments in the name of the Hon David Benson-Pope to clause 2(1) be agreed to: 
to omit the expression “section 64(a) and (b)(i)” and substitute the words “section 64 (other than subsection (2)(c)(ia) to (iv))”; and 
to omit the expression “80” and substitute the expression “80A”.
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:610;Page:7993] 
12.  
MOANA MACKEY (NZ Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Customs 
: What impact is the increasing abuse of pure methamphetamine commonly known as “P” having at the New Zealand border? 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister of Customs) 
: 
 The New Zealand Customs Service has reported a dramatic increase in seizures of crystal methamphetamine and massive increases in quantities of precursor substances suspected to be used for the manufacture of methamphetamine. In 7 months of this year over 530000 tablets or the powdered equivalent of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine have been seized by the Customs Service at the border. This compares with just 250000 for the whole of 2002. 
Moana Mackey 
: Is the New Zealand Customs Service working in conjunction with the police on this problem? 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: Most certainly. The New Zealand Customs Service regularly reports to the police on its interceptions of precursor substances and both agencies follow up on its inquiries in a joint capacity. This process is consistent with the principles outlined in the Government’s Methamphetamine Action Plan. It is absolutely necessary as the effective police campaign is drying up local supplies of precursors. So together Customs and the police are making a sizeable dent in both the local and imported supplies of the precursor substances.
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17544] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 46 
Adams(P) 
Eckhoff  
Peters J (P) 
Tisch  
Alexander  
English(P) 
Peters W (P) 
Turner(P) 
Baldock (P) 
Franks  
Power  
Wang  
Brash(P) 
Gudgeon(P) 
Prebble  
Williamson(P) 
Brown  
Heatley(P) 
Roy  
Woolerton  
Carter D (P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Ryall(P) 
Worth(P) 
Carter J (P) 
Jones(P) 
Scott(P) 
Catchpole(P) 
Key(P) 
Shirley(P) 
Coddington  
Mapp(P) 
Smith L (P) 
Collins(P) 
Newman(P) 
Smith M 
Connell  
Ogilvy(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Copeland(P) 
Paraone(P) 
Stewart(P) 
Teller: 
Dunne(P) 
Perry(P) 
te Heuheu(P) 
McNair  
Noes 74 
Anderton(P) 
Duynhoven  
King(P) 
Simich(P) 
Ardern(P) 
Dyson  
Laban(P) 
Sowry(P) 
Barker  
Ewen-Street(P) 
Locke(P) 
Sutton(P) 
Barnett  
Fairbrother  
Mackey J (P) 
Swain(P) 
Benson-Pope  
Field(P) 
Mackey M (P) 
Tamihere(P) 
Beyer(P) 
Fitzsimons(P) 
Maharey(P) 
Tanczos(P) 
Bradford(P) 
Gallagher(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Tizard(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Goff (P) 
Mallard(P) 
Turei(P) 
Burton(P) 
Gosche(P) 
Mark(P) 
Turia  
Carter C (P) 
Goudie(P) 
McCully(P) 
Ward(P) 
Chadwick  
Hartley(P) 
O'Connor(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Choudhary(P) 
Hawkins(P) 
Okeroa(P) 
Wong(P) 
Clark(P) 
Hereora  
Parker(P) 
Yates (P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Hide  
Peck(P) 
Cullen(P) 
Hobbs  
Pillay 
Cunliffe(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Rich(P) 
Dalziel(P) 
Horomia(P) 
Ririnui(P) 
Donald  
Hughes  
Robertson(P) 
Donnelly  
Hunt(P) 
Robson(P) 
Teller: 
Duncan  
Kedgley(P) 
Samuels(P) 
Pettis  
Amendment not agreed to 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 314 in the name of Richard Worth to clause 8 be agreed to.
Mahuta Nanaia: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mahuta Nanaia: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:616;Page:11995] 
5.  
NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Tainui) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: Has he received any reports on the compulsory national testing of primary school-aged children? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Yes I have seen reports that England will drop compulsory testing for 7-year-olds because it is too stressful for young children and teachers. Research shows that the introduction of national testing leads to a dumbing down of education and puts young children through unnecessary stress. It can result in teachers preparing pupils just to pass tests rather than giving them a good understanding of what they are learning. 
Nanaia Mahuta 
: What are the effects on children of compulsory testing and what is the better alternative? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: A survey of parents in England found that two-thirds of 11-year-olds showed signs of stress in preparing for the tests. Students were reduced to tears and lost sleep. A much better alternative is the world-leading literacy and numeracy test AsTTle introduced by this Government. AsTTle assesses students’ knowledge and gives parents and teachers rich information about how students are doing against national standards. AsTTle also enables teachers to then properly target their teaching to address any weaknesses. 
Hon Brian Donnelly 
: Is the prime purpose of assessment to enable parents to make simplistic comparisons between schools—as some would have it—or is it to provide insight into how well children are progressing relative to their peer group and to suggest the most appropriate learning activities in order to facilitate further progress? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Certainly the latter. I think the key is to think of it as assessment for learning rather than assessment of knowledge.
Vote: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5420] 
A party vote was called for on the question T 
hat the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 46 
Noes 66 
Amendment not agreed to. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6. 
Labour 52; Green Party 5; United Future 7; Progressive 2.
Brownlee Gerry: Motions — New Zealand Cricket—Tour of Zimbabwe 
Brownlee Gerry: Motions — New Zealand Cricket—Tour of Zimbabwe 
[Volume:627;Page:21948] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 The National Party supports this motion moved by the Government today. We are a party that very much values freedom and choice for individual New Zealanders. This motion calls on the New Zealand Cricket administration to exercise its choice in support of the many citizens of Zimbabwe who have no choice and it would seem very little freedom. 
No one could fail to be moved by the punitive and oppressive actions of Zimbabwe’s current leader Robert Mugabe. The allegation as outlined by the Prime Minister that he bulldozed some 65000 homes simply because they were occupied by people who had opposed him in last April’s elections is abhorrent to all New Zealanders. Human rights groups have estimated that hundreds of thousands of Zimbabweans have been displaced by his actions. Such actions surely call into question the legitimacy of the Mugabe regime. 
In supporting this motion we do not hold out much hope that the International Cricket Council will remove Zimbabwe from the international touring programme. The problem is that too many of the countries that sit on the International Cricket Council are without the experience of freedom and choice that New Zealanders take for granted. But in supporting this motion the National Party demonstrates that we are not complacent about the ideals of freedom and choice for New Zealanders. In supporting this motion we affirm those values. For that reason we will not support legislation to ban this tour. 
Should New Zealand Cricket choose to progress from Namibia to play the test series in Zimbabwe then it would be our fervent hope that the New Zealand team remained safe throughout its stay in that country. We appreciate that the team has considered various protest actions that it might take when in Zimbabwe but we recognise that Mr Mugabe has imposed laws carrying a 20-year prison term for anyone who criticises him. It is our hope then that in the days ahead New Zealand Cricket will reconsider the merit of it putting its players in such difficult circumstances. 
We will be supporting this motion.
Visitors — Representatives of Sami Parliament Norway 
Visitors — Representatives of Sami Parliament Norway 
[Volume:607;Page:4485] 
Thursday 27 March 2003 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Representatives of Sami Parliament Norway 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that representatives of the Sami Parliament of Norway led by the Vice-PresidentMs Ragnhild Lydia Nystad are present in the gallery. I am sure we would wish that they be welcomed.
Sowry Roger: Points of Order —  
Sowry Roger: Points of Order —  
[Volume:620;Page:16082] 
Hon ROGER SOWRY (National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I raise the issue because I was in the House last night when it was reported that Mr Ross Wilson was in the room with Department of Labour officials. When you look at this case I ask you to consider how he had gained access to the room given that we have parliamentary messengers and security people who watch the access. In thinking about it and in noticing that when Mr Wilson walks around the building he has a parliamentary ID card the same as that worn by staff members it appears that that card—which I understand has to be issued on your authority—may well have confused people outside the room who have effectively allowed a stranger to come in because he was wearing a parliamentary ID card. I ask that you examine that issue. It may be opportune for you to look either at the issuing of those cards or at the rules regarding access for people who have them.
Rich Katherine: Families Commission Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Procedure 
Rich Katherine: Families Commission Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:614;Page:10297] 
KATHERINE RICH (National) 
: 
 Mr Chairman I have to say— 
Peter Brown 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I know that Katherine Rich will make a valuable contribution to this bill—I have no doubt about that whatsoever—but I do point out that my colleague Barbara Stewart has been seeking the call for some time. She did not get a call on the title. You have now given two calls to National members on this part and you have ignored Barbara Stewart again. I want another call but I have been refraining from taking a call so that my colleague can get the call.
Vote: Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Parole (Extended Supervision) and Sentencing Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14184] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 97 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 22 
New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20063] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 46 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6. 
Noes 71 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: The next amendment is to clause 7 and it is in the name of Marc Alexander. The amendment which is set out on Supplementary Order Paper 299 is to insert new section 134B. This amendment is out of order as it is the same in substance as a previous amendment. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 7 be agreed to: 
to omit from section 138 wherever it occurs the expression “10 years” and substitute the expression “15 years”.
Parker David: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Parker David: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4309] 
DAVID PARKER (NZ Labour—Otago) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is a speech. The member is entitled to say whatever he likes.
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13033] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Catchpole Brent: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Catchpole Brent: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:619;Page:14867] 
BRENT CATCHPOLE (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I wonder whether you have missed some amendments. Other amendments in the Minister’s name were on the Table. Have they been withdrawn? I refer to amendments to clauses 356D and 356E.
Gosche Mark: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Gosche Mark: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13507] 
Hon MARK GOSCHE (Labour—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Appropriation (2005/06 Estimates) Bill — First Reading 
Appropriation (2005/06 Estimates) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20737] 
Thursday 19 May 2005 
Madam Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Appropriation (2005/06 Estimates) Bill 
First Reading 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Appropriation (2005/06 Estimates) Bill be now read a first time. 
Bill read a first time.
Cosgrove Clayton: Hop Industry Restructuring Bill — Third Reading 
Cosgrove Clayton: Hop Industry Restructuring Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4847] 
CLAYTON COSGROVE (NZ Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 I rise to support this bill. I just want to make one comment about the speeches made by Dr Smith and Mr Carter. Mr Smith knows the facts. The pipfruit industry asked for a cooperative commercial model and it was Mr Luxton who then ignored it. He did not listen to it and gave the industry a strict corporate model which meant that that industry lost ownership of the whole sector. To prove that point I can recall when thousands of pipfruit growers marched against Dr Smith and Mrs Shipley down Trafalgar Street to vent their spleen. 
As for this bill the hop growers came to this Government to ask for a cooperative model. We listened and we gave it to them. They have their mandate they came to us and requested that model and we listened to them. Pipfruit growers requested a different model Mr Luxton and the then National Government did not listen and as a result the pipfruit growers lost complete control of their own industry. The Guinness Peat Group did that and then the growers marched against that member and his then leader to express their angst. This is a good bill. It preserves the ownership structure. It does what the hop industry itself wants and we support the bill.
Hartley Ann: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Hartley Ann: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9002] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: I as Chair have ruled on that. 
Hon MATT ROBSON 
: I respect your ruling Madam Chairperson. I take it that a member has taken offence at a term in this debate so I withdraw and apologise. At a later time we could possibly rule on whether the use of the terms “right” and “left” is offensive. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member has withdrawn and apologised. Please continue. 
Hon MATT ROBSON 
: The humour I found was that certain parties have spoken in terms of justice and fairness. In all my political life I have never associated many of the people in those parties with a great concern for human rights. For instance recently I read a press statement of the Rt Hon Winston Peters where it seemed to me that he was advocating we give justice in this country only to people who may be of the Christian faith. If one is Muslim agnostic atheist or Buddhist one can whistle that justice goodbye. That was my reading of that— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. With respect you could say that this is a debating matter but it is not now—when a member says something so offensive to a lot of people who are members of New Zealand First whose beliefs are not as he has just outlined. I do not want to be categorised in that way. He knows full well that what I did say was that terrorists costing us hundreds of thousands of dollars should never have got here in the first place.
Barker Rick: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 8 to Minister 
Barker Rick: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 8 to Minister 
[Volume:616;Page:12416] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 I seek leave under Standing Order 343 to make a personal explanation concerning the answer I gave to question No. 8 today in the House. I need to make a correction. In answer to the question I said that the number of people under the age of 24 who were in receipt of an unemployment benefit was 22949. I overstated the case considerably. There are only 20146 such people and I am sure that members are delighted at that improvement.
Benson-Pope David: Families Commission Bill — Second Reading 
Benson-Pope David: Families Commission Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:613;Page:10245] 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (Labour—Dunedin South) 
: 
 I am pleased to follow my learned colleague and I find it extraordinary that on an issue like this New Zealand First is so incapable of giving any even slightly reasoned argument. That party comes in here day after day rants on about prejudice talks about immigration and tries to scratch any sore it can find and is even now having its leadership referred to as the blowfly of New Zealand politics. For that party to follow those arguments illustrates what an absolute paucity it brings to the Chamber. I am happy to support this legislation.
Tamihere John: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Tamihere John: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:15202] 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE (Minister of Youth Affairs) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Brownlee Gerry: Financial Review Debate — Procedure In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Brownlee Gerry: Financial Review Debate — Procedure In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:616;Page:11855] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 After the Prime Minister’s little comment in that contribution to the Committee suggesting that she was all for a debate on this particular issue perhaps now for the sixth time I could seek leave for there to be a debate on the seabed and foreshore issue in the House tomorrow immediately after question time. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member knows that he cannot seek leave during the Committee of the whole House.
Brash Don: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brash Don: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:610;Page:7347] 
4.  
Dr DON BRASH (NZ National) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Commerce 
: Does he agree that the costs which Government regulations impose on the business sector have increased since 1999 and are hindering growth in the economy; if not why not? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE (Associate Minister of Commerce) 
: 
 No because this Government is showing greater dedication to reducing compliance costs than its predecessors did. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Why then does the 
 Economic Freedom of the World: 2003 
Annual Report 
 show that New Zealand’s rating for administrative obstacles for new businesses fell from 7.5 points out of 10 in 2000 to 3.5 points out of 10 in 2001? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: If the member cared to read on he would find the  
2003 
 I 
ndex of Economic Freedom 
 published by the Heritage Foundation and the  
Wall Street Journal 
 ranks New Zealand third in the world in terms of economic freedom—third. New Zealand’s score has improved from 1.85 points in 1998 to 1.7 points in 2002. I say the lower the better. Australia ranks ninth with a score of 1.85 points. 
Russell Fairbrother 
: What steps is the Government taking to further reduce compliance costs? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: The Government is committed to reducing compliance costs to the extent that it is implementing 80 percent of the recommendations of the business compliance cost panel which represent at least 95 percent of the potential benefits from compliance cost reductions. That panel was chosen from business people not policy boffins out of the Business Roundtable. We have released a discussion document on tax simplification for small businesses and rolled out the BIZinfo portal—a one-stop shop for business information on Government regulations that has been very well received by Kiwi businesses. The key to our programme of reducing compliance costs is to actively listen to businesses not to presume to know best and not to assume that the big end of town represents the heartland of Kiwi businesses. 
Dr Don Brash 
: If the Government has been as successful in reducing business compliance costs as the Minister suggests why does the National Bank’s small business monitor survey always find that regulation is the most important problem facing small business? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: We are grateful to the National Bank and others for informing our policy development process. The member can be commended for identifying and adding to that and I say we can be trusted in resolving those issues for small business.
Vote: Care of Children Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Care of Children Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:16686] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 3 as amended be agreed to 
. 
Ayes 60 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9. 
Noes 54 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 8; Maori Party 1. 
Part 3 as amended agreed to.
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Electricity—State of Industry Power Station—Huntly 
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Electricity—State of Industry Power Station—Huntly 
[Volume:619;Page:14944] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have also received a letter from the Hon Ken Shirley seeking to debate under Standing Order 373 the Government’s commitment to underwriting part of the power station to be built at Huntly. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. However I do not consider that the announcement requires to be considered by way of an urgent debate. There will be many parliamentary opportunities to consider a long-term commitment of that nature—not least the 3-hour imprest supply debate today. This application is also declined.
Tizard Judith: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
Tizard Judith: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6897] 
Hon JUDITH TIZARD (Minister of Consumer Affairs) 
: I am a little surprised that the member is saying that Opposition members have tabled information about the figures quoted in the Chamber because having looked at the two documents I cannot see any reference to the figure they mention. However I do have information from the officials that the $400 million mentioned is the cost over time to all local authorities to provide infrastructure to meet the proposed Health (Drinking Water) Amendment Bill over the 5-year lead-in period. So the cost of this legislation could be nothing—because it could be that local authorities are all moving towards their legal responsibility to provide residents with good quality water—or it could be quite large. But we cannot say because this is about trying to make sure that the responsibility for the standard and service provision falls where it is most sensible for it to fall—with the authority with the organisation or with the trader who can actually made a difference to the quality and can make sure that the quality of the service or good is of an appropriate standard. 
Anyone can make any legislation sound mad if one chooses to read it in a completely disjointed way as though members know no more about amendment bills than to read them entirely separately from the substantive Act. The Commerce Committee has looked at this legislation in a great deal of detail. Its members have had excellent advice from the very good public servants who provide it with support the submissions have been heard and we need to get on with this legislation. As many Opposition members have noticed it has been sitting around for a while. It is a wonderful opportunity to give better protection to consumers.
Gallagher Martin: Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
Gallagher Martin: Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16583] 
MARTIN GALLAGHER (Labour—Hamilton West) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17881. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 71 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9. 
Part 2 agreed to.
Robertson H V Ross: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Robertson H V Ross: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17596] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I call the honourable member Richard Worth.
Vote: Aquaculture Reform Bill — Second Reading Instructions to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Aquaculture Reform Bill — Second Reading Instructions to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17730] 
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.
Hobbs Marian: Wellington Regional Council (Water Board Functions) Bill — Third Reading 
Hobbs Marian: Wellington Regional Council (Water Board Functions) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:624;Page:19270] 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 I move  
That the Wellington Regional Council (Water Board Functions) Bill be now read a third time 
. I thank the House for its consideration of this local bill. The bill adds a third purpose to the two previously legislated purposes of land held under the Wellington Regional Water Board Act. The original two purposes related to the bulk collection of water from that land catchment and to forestry. They were the only two purposes for which the land could be used. This bill adds a third: the production of renewable energy—in all likelihood wind energy. The Wellington Regional Council does not see that such a purpose would threaten the quality of the water collected. With the enactment of this bill the council will be free to utilise the lands vested in it and to contribute to the region’s energy security and the nation’s sustainability and climate change goals. The council is investigating a small number of sites to determine their feasibility for wind generation. The purpose of the council’s study is to determine whether those sites are feasible from an economic environmental and social perspective. 
Changes to the bill make it clear that the bill provides for the construction of electrical installations and works for renewable energy. Also changes have been made to the bill so that it is to be read subject to any other enactment thereby ensuring that the protections that exist in other legislation such as in the Resource Management Act and the Local Government Act 2002 continue to apply in respect of the council’s lands. In other words the community will be able to have its say if wind energy developments go ahead. 
During the debate on this bill the issue was brought up that maybe this bill was a sneaky way through Parliament of making a rates charge. That is not so. 
Darren Hughes 
: It was only silly old Roger Sowry. 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: Yes but the bill is very clear that a third party can build operate and maintain a renewable energy facility; it does not state that the council must build operate and maintain such a facility itself. Accordingly it leaves those choices open to the council. 
This is a useful bill for the region as a whole and for the council which supports the changes made during the legislative process. I make the comment that the more we can spend raise and generate energy closer to the cities concerned the fewer the transmission issues we will have to follow. I thank the Local Government and Environment Committee once again for its consideration of this bill which I commend to this House.
Vote: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:6777] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put.  
Ayes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 46 
New Zealand National 25; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Motion agreed to.
Business of Select Committees 
Business of Select Committees 
[Volume:608;Page:5163] 
Business of Select Committees 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the time by which the Justice and Electoral Committee must finally report the Clean Slate Bill to be extended to 25 July 2003 and for the time by which the Education and Science Committee must finally report the financial review of the New Zealand Qualifications Authority to be extended to 21 May 2003. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for Sue Kedgley to be a member of the Regulations Review Committee for the purposes of its consideration of the Animal Welfare Codes and for Mike Ward to be a member of the Government Administration Committee for the purposes of its consideration of the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill but in each case 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. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the Primary Production Committee to meet outside the Wellington area during the sitting of the House on Thursday 8 May 2003. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none.
Vote: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5375] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 68 
Noes 46 
Bill read a first time. 
Labour 52; Green Party 7; United Future 7; Progressive 2 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6.
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17615] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 58 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9; United Future 8; Maori Party 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Chadwick Steve: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Chadwick Steve: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:17119] 
STEVE CHADWICK (Labour—Rotorua) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Worth Richard: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Worth Richard: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9021] 
RICHARD WORTH (NZ National—Epsom) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I do not plan to waste the time of the Committee on this. I seek that the Speaker be recalled. Whatever the practice may be I argue that it is contrary to the clear words of the Standing Order and unless the Standing Orders are suspended that is the way it must be. I seek that the Speaker be recalled.
Benson-Pope David: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
Benson-Pope David: 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:10002] 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. There are two points that I would like to raise. First of all my recollection of the events is exactly as you have just recalled. But I would also like to add the fact that the Speaker in ruling on this matter on his recall made it quite clear how this process was to proceed. In my view the previous speakers have been trifling with the Chair. We have had five requests for leave declined. I move  
That the Speaker be further recalled to clarify this matter 
. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The closure was actually accepted which means I do have to carry on and take the vote.
Burton Mark: Immigration Amendment Bill — Instructions to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Burton Mark: Immigration Amendment Bill — Instructions to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8299] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Maori Television Service Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Maori Television Service Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5113] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the schedules as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 61 
Noes 54 
Schedules as amended agreed to. 
Labour 52; Green Party 9. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; United Future 8. 
Bill reported with amendment.
Smith Murray: Voting — Correction 
Smith Murray: Voting — Correction 
[Volume:613;Page:10127] 
MURRAY SMITH (United Future) 
: 
 On the third reading of the Children’s Commissioner Bill United Future voted 8 in favour. I seek the leave of the House to correct that vote to 7 in favour. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Leave has been sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. The vote is so amended.
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:619;Page:14530] 
11.  
DAVID PARKER (Labour—Otago) 
 to the  
Minister for Trade Negotiations 
: What benefits for New Zealand have resulted because of our attendance at the World Trade Organization meeting in Geneva which ended Sunday our time? 
Hon JIM SUTTON (Minister for Trade Negotiations) 
: 
 We got to first base at Doha in 2002 and to second base in Geneva last week. There will need to be a lot of negotiation before we get to third base which is the so-called modalities phase and fourth base which should be a treaty capable of enforcement in law. I believe we could get there by 2006. Implementation is likely to be phased in over several years after that. 
David Parker 
: When will the benefits flow if these negotiations succeed? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: The World Trade Organization’s membership has approved the framework for negotiations of a multilateral deal that includes the end of export subsidies which are the most pernicious mechanisms distorting the international trade in agricultural goods. Initial estimates are that this aspect alone provided it goes on to be implemented could be worth $1 billion a year or more to New Zealand. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Would the Minister be prepared to pay tribute in the House today to the outstanding work done by New Zealand’s ambassador to the World Trade Organization Tim Groser who so skilfully chaired the committee on agriculture to achieve this vitally important breakthrough for New Zealand? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: I do pay tribute to Ambassador Groser and indeed to the entire New Zealand team which is world class at Geneva. I note that the member who asked the question has paid tribute to Tim Groser. He was reported as claiming him as an old friend but then misspelt his name. 
Rod Donald 
: What impact does the Minister expect the end of export subsidies—which the Greens support—and the higher export prices New Zealand farmers hope to earn as a result to have on the cost to New Zealanders of a pint of milk a block of cheese and the family roast in the future? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: I do not think it is possible to give a sensible answer to that question. All I can say is that the large view is looking much more promising than before. Myself though I have trouble in thinking quite as small as the member.
Brown Peter: Urgent Debates Declined — Local Government—Election Results 
Brown Peter: Urgent Debates Declined — Local Government—Election Results 
[Volume:620;Page:16099] 
PETER BROWN (Senior Whip—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This situation is not sorted out now on Wednesday which makes it far worse than not being sorted out on Monday or Tuesday.
Vote: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7768] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 69 
Labour 50; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Abstentions 1 
Hunt. 
Clause 1 agreed to.
Vote: Industry New Zealand and Trade New Zealand Integration Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Industry New Zealand and Trade New Zealand Integration Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4360] 
A party vote was called for on the question that the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 47 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Noes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to and motion agreed to.
Tisch Lindsay: Racing Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Racing Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3971] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—NZ National) 
: 
 I seek leave to have the question on Part 3 put again because I cast an incorrect vote on it. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Which part? 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: You moved that Part 3 stand aside? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Part 3 has been approved as amended. 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: I am seeking leave that that vote be recorded because I voted against it and I should have voted for it. I am seeking leave that Part 3 be voted again. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member is seeking leave for that purpose is there any objection? There is no objection. The clerk will conduct the vote again. 
Rodney Hide 
: I agree the need. I just need some clarification as to what the vote is now for. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The vote is that Part 3 as amended be agreed to.
Points of Order — Broadcasting—Sound System 
Points of Order — Broadcasting—Sound System 
[Volume:615;Page:11314] 
Points of Order 
Broadcasting—Sound System 
Dr MURIEL NEWMAN (Whip—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I realise that significant resources have gone into improving the sound system in Parliament but I am not sure whether you are aware that there are still significant problems with the system. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Yes I am. In fact I have asked for this to be monitored every day. This is the first 4-week session and we will do some more testing in this area in the adjournment. If members have any thoughts or particular comments they could pop me a note about them. I would appreciate it and I do appreciate the member raising that point. 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The problem occurred only during the last two speeches. It was OK earlier on but when Dr Smith and Russell Fairbrother spoke it was really bad. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: One of the reasons is that people speak too close to the microphone. People with strong voices should not go too close to the microphone. We are going to do some testing and I will write a little memorandum for all members. I thank them for raising those points and particularly also to Mr Tisch.
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13046] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future . 
Noes 61 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 8; Progressive 2. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8 
Noes 61 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 8; Progressive 2. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Noes 61 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Amendment not agreed to.Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 206 be agreed to: 
to omit paragraph (a). 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 206 be agreed to: 
to omit paragraph (b). 
A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 206 be agreed to: 
to omit paragraph (c).
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates — Electricity Industry 
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates — Electricity Industry 
[Volume:608;Page:5837] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received applications from the Leader of the Opposition and the Hon Ken Shirley seeking to debate under Standing Order 376 the Government’s announced changes for the electricity industry. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility and notwithstanding that the Budget debate is still under way I consider that it does require the immediate attention of the House by way of an urgent debate. I therefore accept the application. As I received the application from the Leader of the Opposition first I call on him to move accordingly.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Minister of Maori Affairs—Answer to Question 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Minister of Maori Affairs—Answer to Question 
[Sitting date: 19 June 2003. Volume:609;Page:6415. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. So that we are absolutely clear are we now to accept that in question time when we have put down questions in writing some hours ahead of the House meeting it is perfectly acceptable for a Minister simply to stand and say: “I’ll let you know later.”? Are we to understand that that answer would stand and at some point the Minister could decide whether to provide an answer to that member? Surely the questions are asked by the whole House and it becomes an interest of the entire Parliament to have that answer?
Dunne Peter: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
Dunne Peter: 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:9968] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. You will recall that when this matter was last before the Committee I raised with you both formally and informally the fact that my colleague Mr Alexander had been seeking a call all evening. You had been retaining a very strict record of parties getting the call you had been punctilious in ensuring that every party got a number of calls in proportion to its strength and you acknowledged to me at that time that Mr Alexander was—if one likes—one call short and that he would get a call before Part 2 was put. Mr Chairperson I seek your indulgence to uphold the commitment you gave to me when we last considered this matter—that is that before you accept a closure motion whether it be now or later in the debate you will give Mr Alexander the opportunity to make a speech.
Carter John: Police Complaints Authority (Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
Carter John: Police Complaints Authority (Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:12863] 
John Carter 
: 
 Point of order—