edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Dalziel Lianne: Financial Markets (Regulators and KiwiSaver) Bill — In Committee 
Dalziel Lianne: Financial Markets (Regulators and KiwiSaver) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17705] 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour—Christchurch East) 
: 
 I will take just a brief call on Part 7 to state for the record our support for the provisions for extending the arrangements for supervision in respect of KiwiSaver schemes. We think it is extremely important that we are doing this to ensure for those who are making their investments in KiwiSaver as so many New Zealanders are today that the legislation is expanded to make the same requirements for managers of KiwiSaver schemes as it has done for the rest of the financial sector that will be covered by the Financial Markets Authority. I think that that again will provide the reassurance that people who are investing in KiwiSaver are looking for in this field. I just wanted to place that on the record. I do not want to hold up the passage of the legislation. I think we have had the debate on most of the important parts of it. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 222 in the name of the Hon Simon Power to Part 7 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Part 7 as amended agreed to.
Visitors — Israel—Speaker Knesset 
Visitors — Israel—Speaker Knesset 
[Volume:671;Page:17659] 
Tuesday 5 April 2011 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Israel—Speaker Knesset 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that Mr Reuven Rivlin Speaker of the Knesset of Israel is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed and accorded a seat on the left of the Chair. 
Mr Reuven Rivlin accompanied by the Deputy Speaker entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I would also welcome his delegation which is in the Speaker’s gallery. I am sure members would wish that they too be welcomed.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17587] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 4A be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 58 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Clause 4A agreed to.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17603] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: The next amendment in the name of Grant Robertson is an amendment to clause 6 to insert a new section 229AB regarding a mandated referendum as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 191. This amendment is ruled out of order as being inconsistent with the principles of the bill. I refer the member to Standing Order 292. Grant Robertson’s amendment to insert a new section 229AB regarding a student-initiated referendum as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 191 is ruled out of order as being inconsistent with the principles of the bill and I again refer the member to Standing Order 292. Gareth Hughes’ amendment to insert a new section 229AB regarding a student referendum as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 205 is ruled out of order as being inconsistent with the principles of the bill according to Standing Order 292. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Darren Hughes to clause 6 be agreed to: 
to omit section 229B and substitute the following section: 
229BUndue influence 
(1)A person must not exert undue influence on any student or prospective student with intent to make that student or prospective student— 
(a)become or remain a member of a students association; or 
(b)cease to be a member of a students association; or 
(c)not become a member of a students association. 
(2)Undue influence does not include advertising or promotional offers.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17607] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 6 be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Clause 6 agreed to. 
House resumed. 
The Chairperson reported progress on the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill and no progress on the Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill. 
Report adopted.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17607] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17607] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendments not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Rahui Katene to clause 6 be agreed to: 
to add the following section: 
229CCRepresentation 
(1)The tertiary institution must provide for representation and advocacy of students in an autonomous manner. 
(2)No person including any tertiary institution may act in any way that conflicts with the spirit and intent of this section.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17606] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: The typescript amendment in the name of Grant Robertson to add a new subsection (9) to new section 229CA is out of order as being the same in substance as the amendment that has been considered by the Committee on Supplementary Order Paper 191. Grant Robertson’s amendment to add new section 229CB as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 190 is out of order as a financial veto has been lodged. The amendment is out of order and no question can be put. The amendment in the name of Gareth Hughes to insert a new section 229CB regarding membership fees as set out on Supplementary Order Paper 205 is out of order as well as a financial veto certificate has been lodged. The question on this amendment therefore cannot be put. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 191 in the name of Grant Robertson to add new sections 229CB and 229CC to clause 6 be agreed to.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17605] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 192 in the name of David Clendon to clause 6 be agreed to.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17606] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 191 in the name of Grant Robertson to add new section 229CA(9) and (10) to clause 6 be agreed to.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17606] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 191 in the name of Grant Robertson to section 229CA(4) in clause 6 be agreed to.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17605] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 205 in the name of Gareth Hughes to section 229CA in clause 6 be agreed to.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17605] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 191 in the name of Grant Robertson to new section 229CA(2) and (3) in clause 6 be agreed to.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17604] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 191 in the name of Grant Robertson to sections 229B and 229C in clause 6 be agreed to.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17606] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 191 in the name of Grant Robertson to add new section 229CA(9) to clause 6 be agreed to.
Robertson Grant: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Robertson Grant: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17603] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. This amendment was lodged and has been on the Table for some time. It does not do anything to the fundamental purpose of the bill. It simply adds to the clause. I find it incomprehensible that my amendment could be ruled out of order. It was accepted by the Clerk some time ago and has sat on the Table for some time within the Supplementary Order Paper. I simply do not understand at all how a ruling like that could be made. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Can I say to the member that firstly just because his amendment has been tabled it does not mean to say it has been accepted. As to the fact that the amendment has sat on the Table all this time and the member has not had any report back on it there is no requirement for that. The process of the Committee is that amendments are put on the Table and when they are put before the Committee the Chairperson makes the decision to accept them or reject them. So let us deal with the process—there is no process other than that and there never has been and I doubt that we will ever see a change in the process. 
The second element is that it is the judgment of the Chair on the advice of the Clerk that the amendment is inconsistent with the principles of the bill. That is the ruling and I regret to advise the member that there is no appeal authority on this. There is no other jurisdiction and correspondence will not be entered into. That is the end of the matter. The amendment is ruled out of order.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17602] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Motion agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: The amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 191 in the name of Grant Robertson to new section 229A regarding a nationwide referendum in 2011 is out of order as being inconsistent with the principles of the bill. I refer the member to Standing Order 292.
Macindoe Tim: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Macindoe Tim: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17600] 
TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Peachey Allan: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Peachey Allan: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17599] 
ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tamaki) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17587] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 58 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17587] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 58 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 191 in the name of Grant Robertson to clause 4A be agreed to.
Peachey Allan: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Peachey Allan: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17587] 
ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tamaki) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Upston Louise: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Upston Louise: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17586] 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Goodhew Jo: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Goodhew Jo: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17585] 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Roy Heather: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Roy Heather: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:671;Page:17574] 
Hon HEATHER ROY (ACT) 
: 
 Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. 
Chris Hipkins 
: We’re looking forward to this. 
Hon HEATHER ROY 
: Yes I am sure the member is. I rise to speak on the second reading of the Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill on behalf of the ACT Party. I will be taking just a brief call because there are other equally important bills on the Order Paper tonight. 
Like all other parties in the House the ACT Party will be supporting this bill. It is a very good bill very timely and at the Education and Science Committee the submissions that we heard persuaded us greatly that this bill was needed. There are two main points that I took from it one of a very practical nature and the other at a much higher level. The higher level perspective is that the humanities will now be incorporated into the Royal Society’s proceedings. I think that is long overdue. One of the submitters—I just cannot quite remember which one now—who was a physical scientist said that when he was researching or looking into any topic in his particular field he could not in this day and age overlook the effect that the humanities had on even his very specific area of physical science. 
The second point which is of a very practical nature is that the Royal Society has already effectively been including many of the humanities issues into its current work and proceedings. So the practical reason that it wanted us to address in this bill was to formalise the practice that was already occurring. 
There were a variety of submissions. Something that has not been raised in the House this evening but I am sure will be discussed more at Committee stage was that some of the branches felt that consultation had not been adequate on this particular issue. The Royal Society did not agree to this point but it is something that I think the Royal Society does need to be and will be in future very mindful of. 
For those reasons I have great pleasure in joining with the other parties in this House in supporting the member’s bill. Thank you.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17605] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendments not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Rahui Katene to clause 6 be agreed to: 
to add to section 229CA(3)(b) “including the provision of academic-related services or activities that are available to all students”.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17604] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independents: Carter C Harawira. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendments not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Grant Robertson to clause 6 be agreed to: 
to add to section 229C the following subsections: 
(8)The Council must either hold a complaint hearing or reject the complaint within 2 weeks of a complaint having been received. 
(9)The Council must uphold reject or otherwise decide on the complaint within 2 weeks of holding the complaints hearing.
Peachey Allan: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Peachey Allan: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:671;Page:17572] 
ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tamaki) 
: 
 In the spirit of the rebuttal of debate and not unmindful of the Deputy Speaker’s recent ruling I will take a moment to remind the member who has just resumed his seat David Shearer of an Education and Science Committee hearing I attended as a regular member in the previous Parliament at which the then Minister of Research Science and Technology Mr Maharey was most defensive about the spend on research in New Zealand. It would behove David Shearer to acknowledge that the party he now represents in Parliament and that he speaks for on science matters had every opportunity over 9 years to do what this Government has done in less than 3 years. 
I had the privilege of chairing the Education and Science Committee that held hearings on the Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill. They were constructive hearings. There was broad agreement across the committee and across the House that the bill should proceed. The bill has been introduced at the request of the Royal Society of New Zealand. There really is little more to be said without wasting the time of the House other than to reiterate that the bill has wide support. I support the bill and I urge its speedy passage through its second reading.
McClay Todd: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — In Committee 
McClay Todd: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17566] 
TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
Motion agreed to. 
Clause 10 agreed to. 
Bill reported without amendment. 
Report adopted.
Bennett David: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — In Committee 
Bennett David: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17562] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I seek leave to table first of all the email from Alex Kay Leeanne O’Brien and Kemble Pudney from the Hamilton City Council regarding the definition and also the entry in the computer freehold register under the Land Transfer Act 1952 which shows both the computer-generated version and the older version. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Documents by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Bennett David: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — In Committee 
Bennett David: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17562] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I will take a short call to resolve some of the issues that have vexed the Committee over the last few days in regard to the Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill. But first of all I thank everyone for their great interest in Parana Park Hamilton. I take great offence to all those comments about Hamilton not being a growing city and I reiterate the strength of our city and the beautiful place that Parana Park is. I challenge all parliamentarians to go and be part of Parana Park at some point. 
I think Kelvin Davis explained very well both the history of what we are dealing with and the issue that was raised by David Shearer. He hit the nail on the head in his explanation of what could have happened. Essentially in preparing this bill we sought advice from the Hamilton City Council about what the correct title would be. The council sent an email describing in three bullet points the total quantum that Mr Shearer so diligently worked out as he was the one spending most of the time in this Chamber 2 weeks ago looking at the information. 
However that description is an old description based on the original title and the legislation has been amended as members will see in clause 3 in the inserted text to reflect the computer-generated title which is the most accurate title that is available and the title that readers would see generated if they went into the computer freehold register under the Land Transfer Act 1952. Effectively there is a change in land area under that entry and it was wrongly described in the first instance through the original certificate of title. The more modern title which is computer-generated in the register reflects what is now in the bill. So the bill represents what we have as the best record for that title. 
SUE MORONEY (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I thank the member for his explanation but I wonder whether he could table the documentation that supports that information so that other members of Parliament may have access to it.
Davis Kelvin: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — In Committee 
Davis Kelvin: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17561] 
KELVIN DAVIS (Labour) 
: 
 I will take a quick call on clause 9 of the Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill. Although we have treated with jocularity this whole issue of where the 0.4 of a hectare disappeared to there have been such incidences. There was a very recent incident up north where a faulty survey was done on a parcel of land—on land that was meant to be a reserve—similar to Parana Park. Surveyors did not locate the correct peg and as a result quite a bit of land was shaved off the reserve. Since then houses have been built on that land so where a peg should have indicated a boundary of this reserve up north at Otito Bay in Matapouri in Northland there is now someone’s lounge sitting right where that survey peg should be. 
We make jocular remarks about this issue but that is a case where land just as with Parana Park has been lost for good. I suspect that was also what happened at Parana Park—that there had been some sort of surveying error and as a result the boundary changed. Some of the land that George Parr gifted in its totality back in the 1920s was shaved off and quite possibly although I do not know the area myself someone else’s lounge is sitting where a survey peg should be and those people are watching TV right where the boundary is. 
That is quite serious because the incident up north has involved millions of dollars the case has gone to the High Court and it is being appealed. There are issues with the land that was inadvertently taken. There has been quite a legal and bureaucratic process to get the whole issue sorted out. It still has not been sorted out and we will probably see people at the Court of Appeal before the year is out trying to sort out this whole issue. It is a shame and we would hate this to happen to Parana Park as well. 
The point is that shonky surveys happen. They then get registered under the powers of the Registrar-General of Land. Those people are not infallible; they do make mistakes. Unfortunately a loss of land is the result. As I have said it appears that that was the case with Parana Park. As has been said George Parr decided back in the 1920s to gift this land in its totality. I must say that Putikitiki is its real name; we must get that in. Putikitiki was gifted but unfortunately not all of it has been enjoyed by the good people of Hamilton at this stage. 
That was my short contribution but I think it is a serious issue. We do not want to see other parcels of land accidentally having bits cut off particularly in this case where there is a reserve and people are not able to enjoy it to its fullest extent. Kia ora.
Upston Louise: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — In Committee 
Upston Louise: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17561] 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:671;Page:17533] 
8. 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Labour 
: What impact if any will the Christchurch earthquake have on the Government’s employment law changes due to be implemented on 1 April? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 I do not envisage further changes to employment law as a result of the Christchurch earthquake. The legislation should be flexible enough to cope with a range of circumstances. 
Darien Fenton 
: Will the Government as part of its response to the 22 February earthquake include an exemption to the 90-day fire-at-will law to give workers in Christchurch job security at a time of great uncertainty? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: The trial period has already proved to be successful. One report said it was responsible for approximately 13000 new jobs. I cannot understand why a Government would want to repeal such good positive legislation. 
Darien Fenton 
: Will she consider exempting from the 90-day trial period workers who relocate to Christchurch as part of the rebuilding effort in order to attract the skilled workers that will be needed? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: I have already said I do not envisage changes to employment law as a result of the Christchurch earthquake. That should be sufficient to answer the member’s query. 
Darien Fenton 
: Will an employer’s consent to access need to be sought by union representatives in Christchurch seeking to establish whether union members are safe in their workplaces or will she amend or suspend that requirement under her amended Act? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: As I have said I do not envisage further changes to employment law as a result of the Christchurch earthquake. Can I extend an invitation to the member to visit Christchurch. I am sure she will be pleased to see that on the ground there has been wonderful cooperation between Cantabrians including between employers employees and unions. Disaster has struck Canterbury and Cantabrians have pulled together. 
Darien Fenton 
: What steps have been taken to ensure the Employment Relations Authority can resume its operations given that a number of hearings have been postponed due to the effects of the earthquake and a backlog is building up? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: The member is correct that some hearings have indeed been postponed but the reasons for that can be varied. Some are because of disruption to employees and some because of disruption to employers. The Department of Labour is working very hard to minimise that disruption but I am sure the member will appreciate the enormous task ahead in Canterbury and in Christchurch.
Calder Cam: General Debate 
Calder Cam: General Debate 
[Volume:671;Page:17548] 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
: 
Ka karuerue te papa 
He pie aue 
Ka huki te whenua 
Ka hopo ka taki kau 
The land heaves 
A desperate call is heard 
the land thrusts 
a cry of sorrow resounds 
across the Canterbury Plains 
It was exquisitely painful to be there. Last Friday I attended the national Christchurch memorial service at Hagley Park. Those words by Charisma Rangipunga were written at the front of the memorial programme. Hagley Park was looking at its best: beautiful majestic trees blue sky and warm sun overhead framing the tens of thousands of people attending the event. They were there to honour those who had lost loved ones those who were grievously injured and those whose homes or businesses had been destroyed and indeed to acknowledge the fact that New Zealand itself has been indelibly scarred by this tragic event. It was exquisitely painful to be there; the universal sense of loss was palpable. All present whether prince policeman Prime Minister fireman victim support worker urban search and rescue team member diplomat Christchurch resident or one of the many who came from outside Christchurch or indeed from beyond our shores were united in their grief. Prince William so eloquently quoted his grandmother: “Grief is the price we pay for love.” 
As the ceremony progressed it reflected the enormous amount of shared resolve courage and hope among those present and indeed the ceremony itself was uplifting when one realised the enormity of those emotions. Representatives from Buddhist Hindu Jewish Baha’i and Christian religions offered prayers on behalf of many faiths of the world. Hayley Westenra looked angelic and gave a haunting and ethereally beautiful rendition of “Amazing Grace”. I wager there was not one dry eye in the tens of thousands of those present. Dave Dobbyn in his normal inimitable style sang the anthemic “Loyal”. The message was clear: New Zealand is standing alongside Christchurch and is committed to its future. We gathered there to mark the worst of times and whilst there we observed New Zealand and the actions of New Zealanders at their finest. 
There is unlikely to be anyone untouched in some way by the Christchurch earthquake. New Zealanders—most of us—have friends and some of us have family in Christchurch. Fortunately most of us have not lost loved ones but many know people who have had their homes destroyed or who have lost property. I personally found out only 2 days ago that a colleague I had worked with in the Auckland hospital service when a house surgeon had just opened a practice in the CTV building and he was lost in this tragedy. 
At this stage as many speakers at the memorial service acknowledged I acknowledge the tragedy in Japan: an earthquake of 9 on the Richter scale that was almost a thousand times more fierce than the earthquake that did such devastation to Christchurch the subsequent tsunami and the radiation from damaged nuclear reactors that is complicating rescue efforts. I salute the stoicism and courage of the Japanese and acknowledge their grief and loss.
Goodhew Jo: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Goodhew Jo: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:671;Page:17581] 
JO GOODHEW (National—Rangitata) 
: 
 I rise to speak very briefly on the Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill. I acknowledge the member Grant Robertson who brought it to the House. As we know the bill makes a fairly minor amendment but it is actually a very big deal for the people who are involved in the Royal Society. 
We have certainly heard that the consultation was far from perfect in the eyes of some of the members. However it seems that the changes made at the request of the Royal Society are mainly minor. The inclusion of the humanities is an important step to take and I believe that as this bill beds in we will find over time that the concerns of some of the members are allayed as they better understand how the change can benefit the Royal Society in the future. I commend this bill to the House.
McClay Todd: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
McClay Todd: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:671;Page:17538] 
12. 
TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: What counselling support is available for Cantabrians impacted by the earthquake? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 A key focus has been on providing counselling support. We have had up to 400 counsellors available on the ground by phone and many others around the country. Since February we have given over half a million dollars. I make the point that that counselling service is free so just shout out to Cantabrians that if they need it it is there it is available and there are resources there for them. 
Todd McClay 
: What impact has the earthquake had on the ability of non-governmental organisations to operate? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: This is a moving number but I understand that at the moment about 39 percent of non-governmental organisations have red-stickered premises. This is obviously of some concern in terms of their capacity to look after members of the public who need help. For those impacted though we have set up temporary rooms at the netball clubs and are looking at other measures for them.
Young Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Young Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:671;Page:17534] 
9. 
JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) 
 to the  
Minister of Corrections 
: What progress has been made towards the implementation of the smoking ban in New Zealand prisons? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 I am pleased to report that 3 months out from the smoking ban being implemented in prisons more than 1800 prisoners have started using patches and lozenges to help them to stop smoking. Five voluntary non-smoking units have been established at sites across the country allowing prisoners to quit their habit away from the proximity of smokers. Not only are prisoners giving up but the staff are joining them. Some staff are receiving nicotine replacement therapy directly through Quitline and 166 officers have received treatment through assessment clinics set up in prisons. The department is working very closely with the Quit Group and the Ministry of Health to prepare for the ban which takes effect on 1 July. 
Jonathan Young 
: What are the benefits to prisoners and staff of banning smoking in our prisons? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Many. Smoking in prisons represents a very real risk to both staff and prisoners particularly from passive smoking. The level of second-hand smoke and toxins is up to 12 times higher in prisons than in the homes of smokers. In the past prisoners have used lighters to melt items such as toothbrushes to make dangerous weapons. Prisoners also roll up balls of toilet paper light them and throw them at staff. The risk posed by lighters and matches was clearly illustrated last month when two corrections officers at Christchurch Women’s Prison received burns when rescuing a prisoner after she deliberately set fire to her mattress with a cigarette lighter. Over the past year there have been around 50 incidents of fire or arson in New Zealand prisons. Banning smoking will reduce all of these risks and improve the health and safety of our hard-working and excellent corrections staff.
Carter John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Carter John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:671;Page:17533] 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Minister of Civil Defence) 
: 
 I seek leave to table the heritage building demolition report to the controller relating to the building owned by Anthony Gough. I am sorry I had meant to seek leave to do so. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is not objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Harawira Hone: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Harawira Hone: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:671;Page:17532] 
7. 
HONE HARAWIRA (Independent—Te Tai Tokerau) 
 to the  
Attorney-General 
: Is he satisfied that he has the support required for the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill to pass into law? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 The bill has passed through all stages up to and including the Committee of the whole House last night. Ultimately whether the bill passes its third reading is up to the will of Parliament. 
Hone Harawira 
: Does he accept that the withdrawal of support from 95 percent of the Iwi Leaders Group the fact that only 1 percent of the submissions from Maori organisations actually supported the bill and the unmistakable message from the hikoi opposing the bill confirm the fact that Maori support for it is minimal and that by pushing ahead with it he may actually be jeopardising the future of National’s coalition partner the Maori Party? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: With the greatest of respect to the member I think he may be misrepresenting the level of support within Maoridom. Just today I have received a couple of messages from the iwi leaders telling me they support the legislation and they also support the Maori Party’s very principled position on the legislation. 
Hone Harawira 
: Does the Minister agree that if he were to change the name of the bill to the “Taku Tahae Moana Bill” or “My Stolen Seabed Bill” he might find that instead of 90 percent of Maoridom opposing this bill he might get 100 percent agreeing with the title at least? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: No I do not think that changing the name of the bill would do anything. This is a good bill. Most parties in this Parliament are agreed on the key aspects of it. Where the parties disagree is on the issue of codification of tests and whether one can negotiate agreements and that is where it stays. 
Hon John Boscawen 
: What concrete evidence can he show the House that the bill has “wide support” from the public—the key requirement set down by the Prime Minister? 
Hon Shane Jones 
: Concrete boots! 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: The concrete support I say to Mr Jones and Mr Boscawen of those who believe that the right of access to justice for Maori which was taken away in 2004 and which all parties now say should be restored is something that is extremely important. If they want me to provide actual numbers of that well that is an impossibility. 
Hon John Boscawen 
: Given that he has just acknowledged that he cannot provide concrete evidence of wide public support can he advise when the Prime Minister told him that he need no longer worry about securing wide public support? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: I disagree with the premise of the member’s question; it is mischievous and wrong.
Macindoe Tim: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — In Committee 
Macindoe Tim: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17557] 
TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
Motion agreed to. 
Clause 8 agreed to.
Upston Louise: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Upston Louise: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17602] 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Robertson Grant: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Robertson Grant: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17588] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. It is just a point of clarification. You have called for clause 6. Can you clarify whether new clause 6A will be debated as a separate clause? I just want to make sure that it is. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Yes that is correct. Is the member seeking the call?
Upston Louise: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Upston Louise: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:671;Page:17581] 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
: 
 I am very proud to speak in the second reading debate to support the Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill. Some people will be a bit puzzled as to which legislation we are discussing in this debate. It is not contentious legislation which some of those listening will be quite staggered to hear but it makes a quite a simple change. All it is doing is putting into law what the Royal Society has already been doing in practice for the last 12 months which is including the humanities in the work it does. 
If we look at the preamble to the bill we see that when the Royal Society was first set up one of its purposes was the advancement and promotion of science and technology in New Zealand. I am a proud member of the National Government which has a fine record in this area. Fantastic work has been done by the Minister of Science and Innovation Dr Wayne Mapp who is sitting behind me. I am very proud that this change to this legislation supports further work in science in this country. Thank you.
Bennett David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Bennett David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:671;Page:17528] 
3. 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What tax changes take effect on or around 1 April? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 A number of the tax changes that were announced in the last Budget come into effect from 1 April. The company tax rate will be cut to 28c in the dollar as will the tax rate faced by unit trusts life insurance policyholders and some other savings vehicles. A number of investment property - related tax changes will occur on 1 April including removing the ability of landlords to claim depreciation on most buildings. The definition of income for social assistance like Working for Families and the community services card will be tightened to stop people manipulating their circumstances in order to claim those forms of income support and there will also be higher tax rates on foreign owners of New Zealand assets to ensure they meet what we believe should be their full obligations in New Zealand. 
David Bennett 
: How will these changes help to rebalance the economy towards savings investment and exports and how will they make the taxation system fairer? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: They are important measures for rebalancing our economy—for instance the higher effective tax rate on housing will reduce the probability that the New Zealand economy will repeat the housing binge that we went on in the mid-2000s which used up a lot of capital for no particular productive output. The lower company tax rate will mean we have a lower company tax rate than Australia and along with the exchange rate against Australia it will make our companies much more competitive than they have been in the past and that will help to increase our exports. 
David Bennett 
: How much will the 1 April changes cost? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: Lowering the company tax rate will cost about $1.1 billion over the next 4 financial years. The reductions in tax on savings vehicles will cost about $170 million. These are more than offset by other measures which are expected to raise about $3 billion over the next 4 years. By 2013-14 the overall package of tax changes announced in the 2010 Budget will be just fiscally positive. 
David Bennett 
: Why was the tax package necessary? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The tax package was necessary because through the last decade this economy became very unbalanced when our ability to earn income actually shrank and our ability to spend grew quite significantly. There are not many levers that a Government can pull but one that it can pull is the tax lever and it is important because it has pervasive incentive effects through the economy. So the tax package was designed to increase tax rates on consumption and housing speculation and lower tax rates on savings investments and exports.
King Colin: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
King Colin: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:671;Page:17577] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to address the House during the second reading of the Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill. When one does so one does so with a level of confidence that there is universal support for the bill in the House. 
We had 13 submissions. Six submitters asked to be heard. One thing that was interesting to the Education and Science Committee was the disconnect between the various provincial organisations of the Royal Society and the Royal Society itself over the constitution. I think that there is a better understanding now if not an agreed position taken by the various provincial arms of the Royal Society. 
The Royal Society has been going since 1867. As has been borne out the amendment to clause 5 was the only substantive change that the committee recommended. In doing so it amends that clause by removing the words “English and other” and “and American studies” for obvious reasons which will no doubt be drawn out in the Committee stage. 
Other than that this is very tidy legislation coming before the House. I have the pleasure of supporting the bill.