edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Tisch Lindsay: Border Security Bill — In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Border Security Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:13382] 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 I want to reiterate the points I made yesterday concerning the Border Security Bill and the nonsense that this Government is leading our export sector into with an imposed tax of $20 million. It has generously said that it will give a 20 percent discount so that tax will come down to $16 million. That cost will be imposed on our importers and exporters yet there is clear evidence that this bill benefits all New Zealanders not just the export sector. All of New Zealand benefits so it is a public good not a private good. During the earlier Committee stage I made it very plain that this is the position National has adopted and that is why we are not supporting this legislation. 
I guess the question has to be asked of what is driving that response. What is driving the international response to make changes to our security arrangements? After 11 September 2001 there was strong international support for comprehensive collective action against terrorism. We know what happened during that period. On 28 September 2001 the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1373 which binds all member States and provides a framework for international response to the terrorist attacks. That is what is driving this legislation. 
We have sympathy for what it is trying to achieve. We would have supported this bill and we voted in support of Part 2 but we were not prepared—and the Minister in the chair Rick Barker might like to take a call on this—to support Part 1 which imposes costs on the wealth creators of New Zealand. That is what it does. This bill provides for a public good not a private good. The Minister has not taken a call so here is an opportunity for him to respond to that. 
The other point I made last night was very clear. In the bill as originally tabled there was absolutely no mechanism for cost recovery. Those submitters came to the Government Administration Committee in good faith. This Government talks about good faith. Those people came along in good faith and made their submissions without knowing about those clauses. 
Last night I tabled an amendment to have clauses 7B and 8C deleted. Had this Government accepted that it would have had universal support for the bill. Every party in this Parliament would have supported it but no the Government voted down my amendments. 
Hon David Benson-Pope 
: Those members should take a call. 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: Why has that member not taken a call? Why does he not defend the legislation? He cannot speak. The bill would have had unanimous support from all parties had those two clauses been deleted but this Government voted that down. 
That is one of the reasons why the wealth creators of New Zealand are so upset and uptight with the Government. It has sneakily moved in this tax. It is another tax in the back door like all the other taxes we have. That is why there has not been support for this legislation.
Dyson Ruth: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Dyson Ruth: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:17101] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for ACC) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4785] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 96 
Noes 21 
Amendments agreed to. 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Part 4 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Transitional Provisions and Controls) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee  
Vote: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Transitional Provisions and Controls) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee  
[Volume:616;Page:11766] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 92 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 28 
New Zealand National 27; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Motion agreed to. 
Part 2 agreed to. 
Schedule agreed to.
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8098] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Noes 108 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 111 in the name of Heather Roy to clause 47(4A) be agreed to.
Jones Dail: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Jones Dail: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:12881] 
DAIL JONES (Junior Whip—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I assume this means that Mrs Tariana Turia has given a proxy to the Labour Party for this bill. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I am not aware of what the situation is regarding that. 
DAIL JONES 
: I think we are entitled to know because she is supposed to be an Independent now. 
Darren Hughes 
: The situation is the same as last Tuesday. The Labour Party has 52 votes. 
DAIL JONES 
: I am on a point of order Mr Chairperson. I have not finished yet. I was asking you to perhaps consider getting a formal statement from the Labour Party that it has the proxy of Mrs Turia.
Collins Judith: Families Commission Bill — Third Reading 
Collins Judith: Families Commission Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10568] 
JUDITH COLLINS (National—Clevedon) 
: 
 It is great to hear from the Hon Steve Maharey that he is now listening to us and is starting to agree with us. I say to that member over there Jill Pettis and her colleague Judith Tizard—who all the way through the last debate on this bill screamed across the House at my colleague Mrs Katherine Rich: “Go home to your kids!”— “Thank you so much the voice of feminism.” 
Debate interrupted.
Vote: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16041] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 17 
ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 102 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendments not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Peter Brown to insert the following new clause be agreed to: 
7ANotwithstanding anything in section 51 or any other section of the principal Act nothing shall preclude an employer and an employee (or their respective representatives) from negotiating an employment contract based on an annual salary which includes a provision for working none some or all public holidays without any further remuneration.
Copeland Gordon: Points of Order — Parliament Buildings—Media Access 
Copeland Gordon: Points of Order — Parliament Buildings—Media Access 
[Volume:625;Page:19733] 
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Unfortunately I am continuing a point of order that has been brought to your attention on a couple of other occasions recently. On my way to the House today trying to get through the media scrum on the bridge between the Beehive and this building while walking dead in the middle of that bridge I was physically jostled by a camera operator to quite an extent. I know that the media want to get their shots but I as a member of this Parliament want to get to the House. I ask you again to look into the situation because I believe that it has got to the stage where someone will eventually end up in quite a tangle and maybe on the floor.
Laban Luamanuvao Winnie: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Laban Luamanuvao Winnie: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:623;Page:18880] 
12.  
LUAMANUVAO WINNIE LABAN (Labour—Mana) 
 to the  
Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control 
: What role is New Zealand playing internationally to advance the Government’s policy for nuclear disarmament? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control) 
: 
 Members may not realise that it was 20 years ago today New Zealand time when former Prime Minister David Lange won the 1985 Oxford Union debate. New Zealanders watched with pride as David articulated our nation’s attitude to nuclear weapons arguing: “Rejecting nuclear weapons is to assert what is human over the evil nature of the weapon; it is to restore to humanity the power of the decision; it is to allow a moral force to reign supreme.” Since then New Zealand has played a leading role to advance the notion of a world without nuclear weapons. 
Luamanuvao Winnie Laban 
: What has been achieved in recent progress towards nuclear disarmament? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: For the first time last year in the United Nations General Assembly the new agenda resolution on nuclear disarmament was supported not only by the majority of non-aligned member States but also for the first time by five NATO States as well as by Japan and Korea. New Zealand’s work alongside our friends on the new agenda contributed to this notable change of position. In the last 6 months New Zealand has contributed strongly to the preparation for a successful review conference in May of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Final supplementary question and I might say the 26281st that I have heard. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I wanted to ask the last formal one sir. If David Lange has done such a marvellous job and if he is probably the last orator of the left the Labour Party ever had why has the Labour Party treated him so miserably and abysmally in terms of appointments in other things or did he just plain fall out with the sisterhood? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: The future of David Lange is really nothing to do with New Zealand’s disarmament but we honour him today with the memory of that magnificent debate.
Peck Mark: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — First Reading 
Peck Mark: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:4039] 
MARK PECK (NZ Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I apologise to the member who was about to speak. I have made a mistake in the committee that I wish to refer the bill to. I want to refer it to the Commerce Committee and I will move the motion at the appropriate time. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Is the member seeking leave to do that? 
MARK PECK 
: As I understand it it is a matter of a motion to the House. I am certainly not seeking leave because I do not think it will be granted.
Mahuta Nanaia: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mahuta Nanaia: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:615;Page:11585] 
3.  
NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Tainui) 
 to the  
Convenor Ministerial Group on Climate Change 
: Is the Government making any progress with climate change policies designed to encourage businesses to reduce greenhouse gas emissions? 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Convenor Ministerial Group on Climate Change) 
: 
 Yes. Business has responded very positively to a tender for projects to reduce emissions which can be rewarded with carbon credits. The Government is now working through contracts with businesses for 15 cleaner energy projects including wind farms hydroelectricity schemes and industrial heat plants. 
Nanaia Mahuta 
: Can the Minister explain what benefits businesses get from adopting these technologies? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Businesses that adopt cleaner and more efficient energy technologies can cut costs reduce waste and get more control over their energy needs. The Projects to Reduce Emissions programme offers them the extra benefit of tradable carbon credits in return for their investment. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: Why is the Government so intent on imposing a carbon tax that will cost all New Zealanders particularly our vulnerable export sector when Government policy is based on the dubious rationale found in its preferred policy package of 2002 which states: “The area of climate change is uncertain. We know the world has a problem. But it is unclear exactly what will happen with the climate to whom and over what time frame.”; why put our export sector at risk with policy based on this uncertain waffle? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That question was too long but I will allow the Minister to comment. 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: I thought there were only four or five people in this country who clearly held the view that climate change was a fake idea. I am surprised to learn that we now have an addition to that and I would say to the member that the fact that the science is uncertain does not alter the fact that the direction of the science is very clear indeed. We have a problem in front of us.
Tamihere John: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — First Reading 
Tamihere John: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:618;Page:13985] 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE (Minister of Youth Affairs) 
: 
 I stand to commend the bill to the House on its first reading so that it may be referred to a select committee for no other reason than that rates of social security payments are sometimes higher and the ability to engage in beneficial tax arrangements is sometimes greater for non-married couples. There are over 300000 Kiwis in de facto relationships. The Human Rights Amendment Act 2001 requires Government activities to comply with the anti-discrimination standards set out in section 19 of that legislation. This bill has nothing to do with the range of matters raised by the member who has just resumed his seat. 
I commend the bill to the Justice and Electoral Committee where we can have a meaningful and fruitful conversation.
Vote: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8844] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 39 
New Zealand National 20; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6. 
Noes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 111(1) be agreed to: 
to insert the following new paragraph: 
(a)prescribing any fee or commission charged by a broker and known by the creditor:.
Vote: Identity (Citizenship and Travel Documents) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Identity (Citizenship and Travel Documents) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20107] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Identity (Citizenship and Travel Documents) Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 104 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 25; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; United Future 8; Progressive 1. 
Noes 10 
Green Party 8; Maori Party 1; Other: Robson. 
Bill read a second time.
Jones Dail: Wellington City Empowering and Amendment Bill — Second Reading Procedure Third Reading 
Jones Dail: Wellington City Empowering and Amendment Bill — Second Reading Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:615;Page:11112] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 New Zealand First supports this legislation. I listened to the speech made by the Labour Party member from Hamilton. It was such a vigorous speech in support of Wellington. He made so many points with regard to this legislation that one wonders with the way things are going at the moment whether he will be looking for a job in Wellington after his demise at the forthcoming election. He gave very very good support for Wellington and I commend him wholeheartedly for that. He is obviously an electorate constituent member of this House and I know what it is like to be a constituency member. He gave this legislation everything it was worth and he is to be commended for his support and the trouble he has taken to understand it.
Mark Ron: General Debate 
Mark Ron: General Debate 
[Volume:620;Page:15480] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I seek some clarification on the ruling you just gave. I point out that in the last 2 weeks the McNee case—for which a conviction has already been given with only deliberation on the sentence to be made—has been discussed on and off throughout the House quite extensively. The Rt Hon Jonathan Hunt has not ruled out questions on that case. We have just had discussions on that to confirm it. Yesterday Mr Hunt did not rule out questions from Mr Peters about Mr McNee having known Mr Edwards for 3 years. He did not rule out the question about the fact that Mr McNee’s car had been stolen by Mr Edwards some 3 years prior to the offence. What that suggests is that my speech was curtailed shortened and truncated deliberately. I would like to see from the Chair if I may the exact ruling of Mr Speaker Hunt today—his exact words—because what I have been subjected to does not reflect what has been happening in the House for the last 2 weeks as far as I can see. Do we have one standard for Ron Mark and another standard for other members of Parliament? Am I to be treated as a lesser MP by the Chair itself? Or is it just another case of an attempt to cover up this case because the Government has made such a hash of it?
Vote: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
Vote: 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:10011] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the report be adopted. 
Ayes 65 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 3; New Zealand First 1; Green Party 9. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand National 24; New Zealand First 12; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Report adopted.
McCully Murray: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Deferment 
McCully Murray: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Deferment 
[Volume:625;Page:20523] 
Hon MURRAY McCULLY (National—East Coast Bays) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I want to make it clear that I am not disputing your ruling. I am not disputing the point made by the Minister of Education in relation to the previous point either. But I invite you to consider going a step further in your advice to the House either formally in the Chamber or perhaps informally through the various channels available to you. I draw on Standing Order 80 which makes it clear that you are responsible for the order and decorum of the Chamber. Notwithstanding the point made by Mr Mallard that Governments are able to pass the parcel to any Minister to handle a particular issue I think that if you followed that to its literal conclusion you could for example have all Ministers bar say Judith Tizard absent from the House on a particular day leaving her to answer all the questions from Opposition members. I submit that that would be not only disorderly but also likely to detract from the decorum of the Chamber. 
It seems to me that somewhere there must be a line where you indicate that the decorum and the order of the House are suffering as a consequence of Ministers failing to be available when it is reasonable to expect them to be so. The Deputy Prime Minister has already let it be known—and has acted accordingly—that it is legitimate to withdraw Ministers from the House to obstruct the Opposition in pursuing the Government. I think that in those circumstances the House could only benefit if you were to give this matter some further reflection and either formally or informally to give us some guidance as to how you expect Standing Order 80 to be managed.
Rich Katherine: Children’s Commissioner Bill — In Committee 
Rich Katherine: Children’s Commissioner Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:613;Page:9898] 
KATHERINE RICH (National) 
: 
 Part 3 “Transitional and miscellaneous provisions” contains a range of clauses that basically need to be tidied up as a result of imposing new legislation on to an organisation that is already in existence. So of course one needs to restate a whole lot of things that we already know to be correct. For example the first clause in Part 3 just restates that the Office of the Commissioner for Children is the same as Children’s Commissioner. We know that with this Government language is everything but of course in terms of the day-to-day work being carried out by the Children’s Commissioner very little will change. Dr Cindy Kiro whom I met today will still be in the same position of being a very strong advocate for children. Although I thought this bill was designed to strengthen her role I am now concerned having studied the Minister’s Supplementary Order Paper in detail that much of the increased strength that we thought this bill was designed to give the commissioner has been withdrawn in one fell swoop by the Minister. Perhaps he became concerned about some of her more outspoken statements about children—in particular the Government’s performance when it comes to implementing things like the Agenda for Children over the last couple of years. 
In looking at the way the Office of Children’s Commissioner has been set up one wonders why the model was not used for another commission that is currently being established—that of the Families Commission. Here we have an office that is able to be a very strong advocate for children yet we have seen for the Families Commission a much more neutered version of an organisation that is unlikely to be able to advocate for much at all—given the scope of the Families Commission. Clause 30 deals with the application of the legislation to matters commenced under the Children Young Persons and Their Families Act. That piece of legislation basically underpins everything to do with children in this country and of course the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The convention is set out in schedule 2 of this bill. There is not much to Part 3. It is quite small but it deserves some comment and my colleague Judith Collins will be taking a very enthusiastic call on this part.
Vote: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:21700] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 67 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 8; United Future 6; Progressive 2. 
Noes 39 
New Zealand National 22; New Zealand First 12; ACT New Zealand 5. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to an amendment to clause 7 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 370 in the name of the Hon Rick Barker be agreed to: 
to insert in subsection (1) of proposed new section 280F of the Customs and Excise Act the following new paragraph: 
(da)the person’s nationality:.
Turner Judy: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — Procedure 
Turner Judy: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:620;Page:15844] 
JUDY TURNER (United Future) 
: 
 Yes I am.
Vote: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
Vote: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
[Volume:624;Page:19204] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a third time. 
Ayes 76 
Anderton(P) 
Duynhoven (P) 
Locke (P) 
Samuels(P) 
Barker(P) 
Dyson(P) 
Mackey J (P) 
Shirley(P) 
Barnett (P) 
Ewen-Street   
Mackey M 
Simich(P) 
Benson-Pope (P) 
Fairbrother (P) 
Maharey(P) 
Sowry(P) 
Beyer   
Fitzsimons(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Sutton(P) 
Bradford(P) 
Gallagher(P) 
Mallard(P) 
Swain(P) 
Burton(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mapp(P) 
Tamihere(P) 
Carter C (P) 
Gosche(P) 
Mark(P) 
Tanczos(P) 
Chadwick(P) 
Hartley(P) 
McCully(P) 
Tizard   
Choudhary(P) 
Hawkins(P) 
O'Connor(P) 
Turei(P) 
Clark(P) 
Hereora(P) 
Okeroa(P) 
Ward(P) 
Coddington(P) 
Hide  (P) 
Parker(P) 
Williamson(P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Hobbs   
Peck(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Cullen(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Pettis (P) 
Wong(P) 
Cunliffe(P) 
Horomia(P) 
Pillay(P) 
Yates   
Dalziel(P) 
Hunt(P) 
Rich(P) 
Donald(P) 
Kedgley(P) 
Ririnui(P) 
Donnelly   
Key  
Robertson(P) 
Duncan(P) 
King(P) 
Robson(P) 
Teller: 
Dunne(P) 
Laban(P) 
Roy(P) 
Hughes   
Noes 44 
Adams (P) 
Copeland(P) 
Ogilvy(P) 
te Heuheu(P) 
Alexander(P) 
Eckhoff(P) 
Paraone(P) 
Tisch (P) 
Ardern(P) 
English(P) 
Perry(P) 
Turia(P) 
Baldock(P) 
Field   
Peters J (P) 
Turner   
Brash(P) 
Franks   
Peters W (P) 
Wang(P) 
Brown (P) 
Goudie(P) 
Power(P) 
Woolerton(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Gudgeon(P) 
Prebble(P) 
Worth(P) 
Carter D (P) 
Heatley(P) 
Ryall(P) 
Carter J (P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Smith L (P) 
Catchpole (P) 
Jones (P) 
Smith M (P) 
Collins(P) 
McNair(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Teller: 
Connell(P) 
Newman(P) 
Stewart(P) 
Scott   
Bill read a third time.
Hartley Ann: Business of the House 
Hartley Ann: Business of the House 
[Volume:625;Page:20495] 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: No. That is not a point of order. This motion is non-debatable.
Brownlee Gerry: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
Brownlee Gerry: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6876] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Will it be your practice to allow Ministers in the chair to use the microphone to make derogatory comments about members on their feet and to question their intention and their integrity in the Committee? 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the honourable member. I had my hand on the microphone button.
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3763] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 60 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; Green Party 9. 
Amendments agreed to.
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13049] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the report be adopted. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 8; ACT New Zealand 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; United Future 8. 
Report agreed to.
Hartley Ann: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Hartley Ann: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8231] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The remaining amendments to schedules set out on Supplementary Order Paper 111 are out of order in that they are inconsistent with previous decisions of the Committee. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 115 in the name of Pita Paraone to insert new regulation 41A in the Medicines Regulations 1984 be agreed to.
Vote: Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14242] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Motion agreed to.
Cullen Michael: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Cullen Michael: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:17010] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Deputy Prime Minister) 
: 
 I can help on that matter. The member will see that there is a Supplementary Order Paper 304 in my name. In Supplementary Order Paper 302 which is also in my name the draftsperson put in an amendment to insert a new heading Part 2A but did not provide the necessary other wording to actually have a separate part. It has been redrafted. The exact wording of the operative clauses is all the same in both Supplementary Order Papers except that two typos have been corrected so members can read either version in terms of the meaning. It is now all part of Part 2. It is a single debate so the last clause in Part 2 is clause 34G.
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:608;Page:5995] 
RODNEY HIDE (ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Given that there are two Associate Ministers of Maori Affairs could we have some indication as to who will be answering this question? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will find out when he asks the question.
Benson-Pope David: Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Benson-Pope David: Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:7006] 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (NZ Labour—Dunedin South) 
: I am pleased to rise however briefly in support of this legislation. I must say that it has been quite an interesting debate in the last little while. I am frankly bemused—as will be a lot of other members of this Chamber and listeners in the country—by the reluctance or the apparent reluctance of a party that states its support of this bill to actually take proper progressive steps to protect our citizens and our community from among other things in our international responsibilities the persistent organic pollutants that are referred to in the Stockholm convention. I thank the National Party and ACT for that statement because among other things it will ensure that they retain their present polling levels.
Jones Dail: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Jones Dail: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:608;Page:5837] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. New Zealand First supported an amendment to the Statutes Amendment Bill in question. The Minister has given a totally wrong impression. We support an amendment that makes sure that people stay in prison while a matter is being considered and are not released into the public which is what the Labour Party wants—a Labour Party that is soft on law and order. We support an amendment to the bill. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member knows he cannot say that; that last point is a comment. The member has asked for leave to table a document. Is there any objection?
Benson-Pope David: Third Readings 
Benson-Pope David: Third Readings 
[Volume:607;Page:4837] 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (NZ Labour—Dunedin South) 
: 
 Now we have heard it all and I am very glad that those statements made not by the previous speaker but by her predecessor have been made. At election time this Parliament and this country were told by the party that had zero tolerance on crime that it was going to be tough—the party that a couple of days ago could not find support even for the boy racer bill. But now that party has stood up in this House and expressed reservations about appointment procedures. That party that did a rort did the expulsion deal—the non-expulsion deal—on one of its members so that it could hold on to $111000 of parliamentary funds. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not relevant to this debate. There are three bills. I will put the question in three parts as I promised.
Yates Dianne: Aquaculture Reform Bill — First Reading 
Yates Dianne: Aquaculture Reform Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:619;Page:15127] 
DIANNE YATES (Labour—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I wish to support the progress of the Aquaculture Reform Bill and note particularly that greater powers will be given to the regional councils. I also particularly note that there is one word that is very very important—that is the word “sustainability”—and that the regional councils will be the agencies responsible for environmental effects. I look forward to greater involvement of not only my own regional council but all regional councils around New Zealand in this regard. I remind people that elections for regional councils are coming up. In those regions that have considerable coastlines people might like to take into account whether those they are voting for have some knowledge in this area.
Peters Winston: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Peters Winston: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14315] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. The problem with your ruling is this. You put the votes and only one voice vote was heard in this Chamber. That was the Green member saying no. On that basis they must win that vote. 
Dail Jones 
: That is correct. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: That is what happened here. If no one said yes and one member said no then that vote being only one voice must surely win here. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: As the member knows it is not a matter of decibels of sound. It is a matter of me calling the vote as I heard it.
Vote: Judicial Matters Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Judicial Matters Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:611;Page:8405] 
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 8. 
Noes 61 
Labour 52; Green Party 9. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
Motion agreed to.
Dunne Peter: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Referral to Health Committee Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dunne Peter: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Referral to Health Committee Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 15 October 2003. Volume:612;Page:9211. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I want to canvass with you because I think it would be useful in terms of the discussion that has just gone on your sense of how you will interpret the ruling given to the House by the Speaker relating to the time and conduct of this debate. We have already had drawn to our attention by one member the fact that he has a number of amendments to move on behalf of a particular group of organisations and I know Mr Prebble has raised matters relating to the breadth of the debate. I seek your guidance as to how you will interpret the provisions in terms of speaking allocation given those matters and also the Speaker’s ruling that we have just had the benefit of.
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:615;Page:11365] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Question No. 1 in the name of Dr Brash was taken to the Clerk’s Office this morning and accepted as a question set down for answer by the Prime Minister. I appreciate that a Government can change the name of the Minister who will be answering a question but in this case the provisional question sheet had the question addressed to the Prime Minister. About an hour and a half later the Order Paper turned up and obviously there had been some kerfuffle because the question was addressed to the Minister of Immigration. We understand the embarrassment the Government would naturally feel about the report— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Would the member please come to the point of order? 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The point is that although a Government may choose to send a question to another Minister we ask whether it is reasonable to do that after a question has appeared on the provisional Order Paper. The real point behind this—and you will recall we had a incidence of this earlier in the week—is that the answers that are given today will not be given in the name of the Prime Minister whereas the answers given last Thursday by Dr Cullen were given in the name of the Prime Minister. These are matters that should rightly concern the Prime Minister. I would have thought it reasonable that although the Government may wish to have a stronger Minister answering these sorts of questions this particular question should still be set down to the Prime Minister. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I shall deal with the first matter very briefly. Right up until the question is asked the Government can determine whether there is to be a change. This question was originally lodged to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister transferred it to the Minister of Immigration. Questions to Ministers are addressed to portfolios not to individuals. It is true that no one holds the portfolio of Minister of Immigration at the moment and will not do so until later this afternoon. However there has been an Acting Minister of Immigration since the Minister resigned and the Acting Minister is currently the Hon Paul Swain. Authority to that effect has been given to me. I refer members to Speaker's ruling 143/5: “Where an Acting Minister has been appointed the Acting Minister is for all purposes the Minister and does not answer a question on behalf of anyone.” On that basis 37 written questions have been lodged to the Minister of Immigration during the course of this week.
Vote: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16150] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 44 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 76 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 273 in the name of Dr Wayne Mapp to section 67 in clause 28 be agreed to.
Vote: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16149] 
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 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 63 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 273 in the name of Dr Wayne Mapp to omit words from the heading to section 59B in clause 19 be agreed to.
Tisch Lindsay: Wine Bill — Second Reading Procedure In Committee Third Reading 
Tisch Lindsay: Wine Bill — Second Reading Procedure In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9490] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I seek leave for the bill to be taken as one question in the Committee stage and that there be a single wide-ranging debate. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action? There is not. The bill will be taken as one question including the schedules.
Donald Rod: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Referral to Health Committee Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Donald Rod: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Referral to Health Committee Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 15 October 2003. Volume:612;Page:9240. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
ROD DONALD (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I call Heather Roy. 
Dianne Yates 
: She has already spoken hasn’t she?
Simich Clem: Speaker’s Statements — Questions for Written Answer—System Breakdown 
Simich Clem: Speaker’s Statements — Questions for Written Answer—System Breakdown 
[Volume:622;Page:18107] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: A point of order was raised earlier concerning the lodging of written questions. I undertook to look into the matter and to bring information to members. A problem occurred yesterday in the offices of two members in the lodging of questions. That was caused by the importing of formatting that was not compatible with the questions for written answer system. The problem was successfully resolved yesterday and the members were able to lodge their questions. The questions for written answer system received all written questions lodged today and those are now being processed. A message was sent this morning to the users of the questions for written answer system to inform them of the problem that occurred yesterday and to provide members with some information about how to avoid that problem in the future. Unfortunately the message did not clearly identify that the problem actually occurred yesterday and has been resolved.
Mallard Trevor: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
Mallard Trevor: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:14577] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Can we have some definition from you about what a wide-ranging debate is. Does the member mean that it is a debate across the clause and the schedule and not back across the bill? 
Lindsay Tisch 
: I am talking about a wide-ranging debate on schedule 2. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action? That will occur then. The question is that clause 69 stand part. The debate includes schedule 2 as agreed.
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Socialist Republic of Vietnam—President of the National Assembly United Kingdom—Parliamentary Delegation Commonwealth Parliamentary Association 
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Socialist Republic of Vietnam—President of the National Assembly United Kingdom—Parliamentary Delegation Commonwealth Parliamentary Association 
[Volume:618;Page:14293] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Honourable members first I have much pleasure in informing you that His Excellency Mr Nguyen Van An President of the National Assembly of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam is within the precincts of the Chamber. I am sure that members would wish he be welcomed and accorded a seat on the left of the Chair and that the House would also welcome the members of the delegation in the gallery. 
His Excellency Mr Nguyen Van An accompanied by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
Burton Mark: Maori Television Service Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled 
Burton Mark: Maori Television Service Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled 
[Volume:607;Page:5005] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I thank the chief Opposition whip for that. The matter as I observed it was one not only of repeated points of order but also of other interjections as well. So I think it was a combination of those. That is how I saw it. 
As to the other matter I think the member is correct. It is unfortunate that the usual process did not follow but I think that was entirely an accident of two things. 
The Chair not wanting to interrupt the debate further waited until the immediate contributions were over and then it was 6 o’clock. I think that had that accident of time not happened then normal procedures might have followed. 
In any event I go back to perhaps the most important point which is that the Standing Orders are very clear. The Chair has the prerogative to do what the Chair did with or without consultation with whips. We must uphold the authority of the Chair to do that. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I cannot interfere with the decision made by the previous Chairperson which was that the member be excluded from the Chamber until the rising of the House this evening. I cannot interfere with that. 
I understand where Mr Carter is coming from and I appreciate the points of view he has made but the matter of the interpretation has of course been dealt with. The interpretation is on the Table and it is available for members to look at. As for the exclusion I have already ruled on that and that is where the matter rests. I now wish to call some honourable member.
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17579] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 2B be agreed to 
. 
Ayes 66 
Anderton(P) 
Dyson(P) 
Laban(P) 
Shirley(P) 
Barker 
Ewen-Street  
Locke(P) 
Simich (P) 
Barnett 
Fairbrother(P) 
Mackey J(P) 
Sutton(P) 
Benson-Pope  
Fitzsimons(P) 
Maharey(P) 
Swain(P) 
Beyer(P) 
Gallagher(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Tanczos(P) 
Bradford(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mallard(P) 
Tizard(P) 
Burton  
Gosche (P) 
Mark(P) 
Turei(P) 
Carter C (P) 
Hartley(P) 
Okeroa 
Ward(P) 
Chadwick(P) 
Hawkins 
Parker(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Choudhary(P) 
Hereora 
Peck(P) 
Wong(P) 
Clark(P) 
Hide(P) 
Pettis 
Yates (P) 
Coddington  
Hobbs(P) 
Pillay(P) 
Cullen(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Prebble  
Cunliffe(P) 
Horomia(P) 
Rich(P) 
Dalziel(P) 
Hughes  
Ririnui  
Donald(P) 
Hunt(P) 
Robson(P) 
Donnelly(P) 
Kedgley(P) 
Roy(P) 
Teller: 
Duncan(P) 
King(P) 
Samuels(P) 
Mackey M 
Noes 54 
Adams(P) 
Duynhoven(P) 
Ogilvy(P) 
te Heuheu(P) 
Alexander(P) 
Eckhoff(P) 
Paraone(P) 
Tisch(P) 
Ardern(P) 
English(P) 
Perry(P) 
Turia(P) 
Baldock(P) 
Field(P) 
Peters J (P) 
Turner(P) 
Brash(P) 
Franks  
Peters W (P) 
Wang(P) 
Brown(P) 
Goudie(P) 
Power  
Williamson(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Gudgeon(P) 
Robertson(P) 
Woolerton(P) 
Carter D (P) 
Heatley(P) 
Ryall(P) 
Worth 
Carter J (P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Scott(P) 
Catchpole(P) 
Key(P) 
Smith L (P) 
Collins(P) 
Mapp(P) 
Smith M (P) 
Connell(P) 
McCully(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Copeland  
McNair  
Sowry(P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Newman(P) 
Stewart (P) 
Teller: 
Dunne(P) 
O'Connor (P) 
Tamihere(P) 
Jones  
Schedule 2B agreed to.
Speaker’s Rulings — Point of Order—Dr Cullen  
Speaker’s Rulings — Point of Order—Dr Cullen  
[Volume:612;Page:9034] 
Speaker’s Rulings 
Point of Order—Dr Cullen  
Mr SPEAKER 
: When I was ruling earlier tonight I called Dr Cullen for a point of order thinking that he had raised one. When Mr Brownlee protested. I said that Dr Cullen had raised a point of order and explained expressly. I thought he had done so. I am now aware he did not say “point of order”. I was in error in my assumption that he had said so and I apologise to Mr Brownlee for not calling him at that time.
Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer 
Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer 
[Volume:607;Page:4140] 
Points of Order 
Questions for Written Answer 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Deputy Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have 16 written questions addressed to the Minister of Defence which were due yesterday and 5 minutes ago they were still not in my office. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That will be investigated immediately. I will report to the member.
Vote: Budget Debate 
Vote: Budget Debate 
[Volume:626;Page:21115] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment to the amendment be amended by omitting all the words after the words “Labour Minority Government” and inserting the following words: “that has provided no vision or ambition for New Zealand no 10-year plan for making New Zealand a freer more prosperous and proud nation and no policy for dropping the excessive tax burden on hardworking New Zealanders.” 
Ayes 47 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Noes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment to the amendment to the amendment not agreed to.
Tamihere John: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Tamihere John: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8139] 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE (Minister of Youth Affairs) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Legal Services Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Vote: Legal Services Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20647] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9; United Future 8. 
Motion agreed to.