edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Kaye Nikki: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Kaye Nikki: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:675;Page:20733] 
NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) 
: 
 Mr Speaker— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have called Nikki Kaye and I want to hear the member at the back of the House.
Boscawen John: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Boscawen John: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20806] 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 The ACT Party will be supporting the Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill.
Dunne Peter: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Dunne Peter: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20735] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue) 
: 
 I do not want to deter the Committee unduly but I am comfortable answering very quick questions if we are to proceed in this manner. In response to the member’s question the short answer is that from the time that the excess payment has been identified the Inland Revenue Department has a 6-month period within which to negotiate with the borrower about whether the money is to be offset or repaid. 
As to the point that is behind the question which is whether that means that the Inland Revenue Department’s determination to seek payment is matched by an equal determination to make payment I can simply advise the member that it is a “best endeavours” situation from the point that a settlement is reached. 
Part 3 agreed to.
Robertson H V Ross: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Robertson H V Ross: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20735] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I wish to advise members that debate is on clauses 181 to 218 and also includes debate on schedules 5 to 9.
Dunne Peter: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Dunne Peter: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20734] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue) 
: 
 I was not expecting there to be such a short call on this part. Can I simply respond very quickly to the points the member has made. I simply answer yes in respect of both clauses. The position with regard to the changes introduced in clause 48 is that if within that period borrowers are above the $367 threshold then the member’s interpretation is absolutely correct but with the proviso that of course they do not breach the $19084 threshold. The provisions that follow from clause 76 merely give effect to that. So the short answer to his question on both counts is yes. 
Part 2 agreed to.
Kaye Nikki: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Kaye Nikki: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:675;Page:20733] 
12. 
NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) 
 to the  
Minister of Customs 
: What reports has he received into the integration of SmartGate between New Zealand and Australia? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister of Customs) 
: 
 Just another wonderful milestone in the ongoing saga of the roll-out of SmartGate. 
Hon Simon Power 
: More good news. 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: More good news indeed. Last month in cooperation with the Australian Government we began trialling the use of SmartGate between one city pair—that is between Auckland and the Gold Coast airport at Coolangatta. For the first time eligible passengers will be able to bypass SmartGate kiosks at the Gold Coast and go straight to the gate if they use SmartGate in New Zealand and vice versa. It will cut out one whole piece of the process. The trial will run for while and then it is our intention to implement it right across all of the gates. 
Nikki Kaye 
: What are the benefits of the SmartGate trial? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: They come under the “better cheaper faster” heading that Tony Ryall is always—[ 
Interruption 
]—“better sooner more convenient” heading that Tony Ryall wants. So far 1.5 million people have used SmartGate. After Budget 2011 gave us six additional gates—and they are being rolled out over the Rugby World Cup period—we will have 22 gates operational in New Zealand which is spectacular. The passenger response we are getting from emails is that it could not get any better. The processing time— 
Hon Simon Power 
: What does the  
Mapp Report 
 say? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: The  
Mapp Report  
is very complimentary as well. It always is.
Douglas Roger: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Douglas Roger: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:675;Page:20730] 
Hon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS (ACT) 
: 
 My question is to the Minister for Social Development and Employment— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I want to be able to hear the honourable member asking a question.
Key John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Key John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:675;Page:20730] 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 I want to correct an answer I gave earlier to clear up any potential misunderstanding. I seek leave to do that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to make a personal explanation to correct an answer. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: In question No. 1 Phil Goff asked me whether I stood by my claim that 60 percent of young people not in education employment or training are actually in school or university. I have never made that claim and I did not make that claim yesterday. I interpreted his question as relating to the number I gave yesterday in respect of unemployed young people whom we were talking about yesterday. So of course it is the case that young people not in education employment or training are not in education by definition. I have never made that claim. What I said and what is correct and true is that 60 percent of unemployed people in the household labour force survey aged 15 to 19 are at school or at university.
Robertson H V Ross: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Robertson H V Ross: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20734] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I wish to advise members that this is a debate on clauses 25 to 109 and it also includes debate on schedules 2 through to 4.
Henare Tau: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Henare Tau: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:675;Page:20727] 
7. 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Corrections 
: What reports has she received on the implementation of the smoking ban in New Zealand prisons? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 I am very pleased to advise that all New Zealand prisons have successfully been smoke-free for 6 weeks. This is the result of careful planning and 12 months’ hard work by corrections staff supported by the Ministry of Health and Quitline. There has been a noticeable improvement in air quality within prison units. There has also been a 77 percent reduction in the number of fires and arson-related incidents. There were only four such incidents in July compared with 18 in the month prior to the ban. I would like to congratulate the Department of Corrections on the successful implementation of the new policy which is making our prisons a much safer and healthier place in which to work. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: What other results has her department seen from the introduction of smoke-free prisons? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: In working closely with prisoners to prepare them for the change staff have noticed an overall improvement in prisoner attitude and conduct. There have also been reports of prisoners actively encouraging their family and friends in the community to quit smoking. The successful implementation of the ban has attracted significant interest from overseas jurisdictions particularly from Australian states that are keen to learn from our experience.
Upston Louise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Upston Louise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:675;Page:20725] 
5. 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: How have district health boards improved support for their communities through the preventative health target ‘Better Help for Smokers to Quit’? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) 
: 
 In less than 2 years we have gone from zero to 90 percent of hospital patients in nine district health boards offered help to stop smoking. Smoking kills an estimated 5000 people in New Zealand every year and affects the quality of life of thousands more. The Lakes District Health Board is the first district health board in the country to achieve 100 percent for one of the Government’s three preventive health targets. In the last 3 months every smoker admitted to its hospitals in Rotorua and Taupo was offered advice to help quit which adds an estimated 433 years of life to the district. They achieved this fantastic result by engaging with staff and creating competition between the wards each month. Red was bad; in this quarter every ward turned the traffic lights green. 
Louise Upston 
: What other progress has been made towards better health for smokers? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: Progress is being made across all the district health boards on the Better Help for Smokers to Quit national preventive health target. In Nelson which I visited earlier today they have reached the 90 percent target which is an incredible increase from just 14 percent 2 years ago. The Government has also passed an unprecedented 30 percent increase in tobacco tax and Quitline is reporting record numbers of calls and quit attempts—up 50 percent since the tobacco tax was introduced. We have backed up this effort with massively improved access to smoking cessation treatments—up 82 percent in 18 months. This Government is taking practical and effective steps to prevent and discourage smoking. 
Rahui Katene 
: Does he agree with Patrick Basham who during his visit sponsored by tobacco corporate Philip Morris criticised New Zealand’s support of plain packaging; if so will the Government give in to the cancer conspirators who seek to slow down the remarkable progress achieved in this term in making New Zealand smoke-free particularly through the leadership of Maori Party Minister Tariana Turia? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: No I do not agree with those comments from Mr Basham but I do agree with the information outlined in a recent  
New Zealand Medical Journal 
 article that demonstrates that plain packaging has two main benefits for public health: it removes or minimises brand elements that promote the product and it facilitates more effective dissuasive packaging.
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:675;Page:20720] 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I seek leave of the House to ask a question of the honourable Leader of the Opposition. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I guess it is possible for members to ask questions of members. Leave of the House is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? No. I trust it is in order but let me just check with the Clerk to make sure there is no Standing Order against that. Normally a question to a member is to do with the member’s responsibilities but leave has been granted to the member. 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN (Leader—ACT) 
 to the  
Leader of the Opposition 
: 
Given that he is so concerned about youth unemployment what responsibility do he and his colleagues take for the dramatic rise in youth unemployment after youth rates were cancelled making it illegal for a young person to take a job at less than $13 an hour?
Hughes Gareth: Student Loan Scheme Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Hughes Gareth: Student Loan Scheme Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:20716] 
GARETH HUGHES (Green) 
: 
 Kia ora Mr Chairman. He mihi nui ki a koutou. Kia ora. It is great to take a call in the Committee stage of the Student Loan Scheme Bill. I will not harp on about the use of urgency to pass this law but I just want to note that a wide discussion is happening online by people asking why Parliament is under urgency to pass this law and other laws on the Order Paper. People are baffled because they do not see the urgency in this. What it does is reduce the public’s perception of the use of urgency in Parliament. I just wanted to note that before I start. 
I will take a look at three parts of Part 1 of this bill: clauses 10D 4(1)(a) and 21. But first I acknowledge the debate of Chris Hipkins who is no longer in the Chamber. Chris Hipkins was the student president when I first studied as an undergraduate at Victoria University. We have had a robust discussion with Labour members about what they did and did not do when they had the opportunity when Labour was in Government. I quite rightly remember the member Chris Hipkins when he was the student president vocally opposing the Labour Government for not acting fast enough on student loans. But I will not harp on about that point either. I acknowledge that the Labour Government did take interest off student loans— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. The time has come for me to leave the Chair for the State farewell for His Excellency the Governor-General. In accordance with that decision of the House yesterday the Committee is temporarily suspended. The Speaker will resume the Chair at the ringing of the bells. 
Debate suspended. 
Sitting suspended from 11.45 a.m. to 2.20 p.m. 
House resumed.
Vote: Student Loan Scheme Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Vote: Student Loan Scheme Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:20711] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Student Loan Scheme Bill be agreed to. 
Ayes 110 
New Zealand National 57; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 10 
Green Party 9; Independent: Carter C. 
Bill read a second time.
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Student Loan Scheme Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Student Loan Scheme Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:20704] 
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 Malo le soifua. I rise to support the Student Loan Scheme Bill. All of the arguments—all of the logical arguments anyway from members on this side of the House—have been put forward for this bill. It is about reforming the tax system to bring it up to modern times. It is about delivering certainty for taxpayers so that they have the relevant information before them. It is about allowing them to interact directly with the Inland Revenue Department at any time with speed of access and that interaction is primarily online. It is about providing good value for money for our taxpayers in terms of how we go about receiving student loan payments. In doing so it is about building trust and integrity in our tax system allowing us to get higher levels of compliance and higher levels of repayments particularly when loans are interest-free. It is about bringing about change that is beneficial to all New Zealanders. It is about bringing down the costs of administration. It is about speeding up our loan repayments. 
My personal experience having spent a number of years overseas when I had a student loan was that I found it difficult to communicate with the Inland Revenue Department whether I was communicating from England Australia or the United States. The changes we are about to put in place will bring about easier access for those who actually want to pay back the moneys but who find it very difficult to communicate with the Government departments. There is a simple message: the bill is about simplicity for our users making it easier for them to comply with their requirements under their student loan contracts and easier for our bureaucrats to administer such a system. 
Before I conclude I raise one point about student loans. There seems to be some uncertainty from the benches across the other side of House about why student loan recipients are an asset. They are debtors. Student loan recipients are people who owe money to the State. That is why they are an asset and that is why in order to facilitate the repayment of debts it is important for us as a Government as it is for any prudent organisation to put in place systems that will facilitate repayments in a more effective and a more efficient way. That is why we are bringing about these changes. 
It was a pleasure to sit on the Finance and Expenditure Committee. I thank those officials and submitters who participated in the process and I thank fellow committee members. Finally I salute the Minister of Revenue for the changes he has put in place in this area. These changes are long overdue. They certainly did not happen under the Labour Government but they are happening under this hard-working National Government.
Douglas Roger: Student Loan Scheme Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Douglas Roger: Student Loan Scheme Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:20703] 
Hon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS (ACT) 
: 
 It was interesting to listen to the Green Party representative Gareth Hughes. Essentially he was saying that the $1 billion of subsidies that goes to students is not enough and that it should be more. He was saying that the people I used to represent in Otara Papatoetoe and Manurewa are not paying enough tax to subsidise the rich students who come from Karori and places like that. Let us be very clear what he was saying. He was saying that the Government has already taken $1 billion from taxpayers but that it is not enough. He was saying that he wants to make it $1.1 billion. Guess who is going to pay it? The poor families in Otara Papatoetoe and Manurewa—the people the Green Party guys claim to represent. 
In book-keeping there are two sides of the coin: we cannot spend what we do not take from someone else. The Green Party wants to take money from average hard-working New Zealand families and give it to students so $1 billion is not enough. I have never heard one of the Green Party members saying to that young boy that 18 or 19-year-old who wants to buy a truck and set himself up in the business of carting goods that they will give him a subsidy. No damn way! They will tax him and give it to the affluent. That is what it is all about. 
The Student Loan Scheme Bill is a simple bill. ACT supports it.
Williamson Maurice: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Williamson Maurice: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20826] 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister of Statistics) 
: 
 I move  
That the Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill be now read a third time 
. Although the Leader of the House has been insisting that I take the full 10 minutes I will not do the full 10 minutes. All I will say—and this is offered by way of a bit of advice to Labour and I genuinely mean it—is that I understand why it digs in on some things; I think it is right for an Opposition to dig in. But this bill tonight does one thing: it changes the date of the census from 2011 to 2013. It does not change the scope of it it does not change the questions that will be asked it does not change the mechanisms or functions and it does not change anything else. 
But Labour dug in tonight to say this legislation should have gone to a select committee. Can members imagine the questions? “Twenty-one-three—is that how you spell 2013? Ah yes. What else could I ask? ” The select committee would be struggling for anything else. I know they got it wrong on the voluntary student unionism bill and the media gave them a smack for it but I advise the members on the other side of the House to pick their fights. This was not one to have a fight on because this is simply about putting a new date on to the statute book because we were committed under the current law to hold a census in 2011. 
I thank my colleagues for the support in getting this bill through the House tonight. I think it is a very good step forward. It will mean that the electoral boundaries can be redone in time for the 2014 election. It means that the Maori electoral option can be conducted. It means that absolutely everything that we were ever planning to do in 2011 will happen 2 years later. Thank you very much.
Calder Cam: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Calder Cam: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20686] 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
: 
 I start with the underlying premise that the default position of the Freedom Camping Bill is that freedom camping on public land is allowed subject to the legislation. I thank the Hon Rick Barker for his colourful contribution. I think he brought in allusions to Arlo Guthrie’s “Alice’s Restaurant Massacree” in a previous contribution. The Hon Damien O’Connor made a number of contributions some of them more considered than others but I do not feel he along with Mr Phil Twyford understands the full problem that indiscriminate defecation in our areas of outstanding natural beauty is posing to local residents local authorities the Department of Conservation and of course the unwary traveller. Who wants to step out of their van or off their motorcycle into a pile of steaming human waste or ordure? I do not mean to make light of this issue. It is a significant problem to a large number of communities around our beautiful country. 
Phil Twyford 
: Cam you know you don’t support it. 
Dr CAM CALDER 
: I have as Mr Twyford has signalled many times driven through the night and parked at an appropriate spot ready to get an early start on a tramp hunting trip or fishing trip and I would expect to still be able to do that. This is basically a tool. It is a tool that we have given councils which told us they were desperate. The Hon Maryan Street and the Hon Steve Chadwick admitted in their speeches yesterday that there is a huge problem here. They knew about the problem. The mayoral forum told them about the problem but what did they do about the problem? 
Hon Members 
: Nothing. 
Dr CAM CALDER 
: Nothing. What did they do about the problem for many many years? 
Hon Members 
: Nothing. 
Dr CAM CALDER 
: Nothing. We are doing something to address a major concern to communities and local authorities the length of our country. 
I will close with a comment from Lawrence Yule who is President of Local Government New Zealand and who said: “Many communities are sick of having to bear the wasteful cost of cleaning up the mess left behind by irresponsible freedom campers”. He said that although many communities did not have a freedom camper problem the bill would be a country-wide tool giving all councils the option to identify areas where camping should be prohibited and enforcement options available. This bill is a fine tool giving the councils local authorities and the Department of Conservation the appropriate methods they need. I commend this bill to the House.
Vote: Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20775] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment to the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 66 
New Zealand National 57; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1; Independent: Carter C. 
Amendment to the amendments agreed to. 
The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 66 Noes 54. 
The question was put that the amendments as amended set out on Supplementary Order Paper 254 in the name of the Hon Peter Dunne to clause 2 be agreed to.
Vote: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20733] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 67 
New Zealand National 57; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1; Independent: Carter C. 
Part 1 agreed to.
Vote: Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20795] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 66 
New Zealand National 57; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1; Independent: Carter C. 
Bill read a third time.
Wagner Nicky: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Wagner Nicky: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20691] 
NICKY WAGNER (National) 
: 
 I rise to support the third reading of the Freedom Camping Bill. Listening to the speakers on the other side of the House one would think that we were talking about two different bills. The Freedom Camping Bill is all about keeping New Zealand clean and green so that all New Zealanders and visitors can enjoy our beautiful natural environment and it amazes me that parties such as Labour and the Greens which profess to want to improve our environmental standards and to give credibility to our “100% Pure New Zealand” brand will vote against it. That does not make any sense. They acknowledge that there is a problem but they have spent all their time trying to find reasons that legislation will not work rather than looking for a useful solution. 
This bill responds to a serious environmental problem and pollution issue—that of dirty and careless campers who are despoiling our natural environment. Nobody wants that. Nobody will go home to their country and say what a beautiful clean country New Zealand is if they have stepped into other people’s waste. New Zealanders do not want a small number of irresponsible campers spoiling our right to enjoy our beautiful country or giving us a bad reputation internationally. 
In debating this bill the Local Government and Environment Committee found a practical common-sense way to balance two great Kiwi traditions. The first is the right to go freedom camping and the second is our wish to look after our natural environment. I believe that we have got that balance right. The bill for the first time enshrines the right of New Zealanders to go freedom camping as a default setting. New Zealanders can camp as of right on public land and Department of Conservation land unless there is a good reason not to allow it. 
The restrictions are within limited geographical areas which the Opposition seems to have forgotten all about or does not understand. In creating these by-laws authorities need to prove that there is a real problem. This bill ensures that they can no longer impose blanket bans and it will give consistency across the country. The questions that the Opposition has been asking about the percentage are nonsense because authorities can impose those by-laws within only very limited geographical areas and the select committee tightened those up even more. 
It has long been illegal to camp in some specific areas and to deposit litter and human waste on the roadside and for very good reason but there has never been an effective or efficient way of enforcing the law. This bill provides for instant fines which are a common-sense way to ensure responsible freedom camping so that all of us—New Zealanders and visitors alike—can enjoy our beautiful natural environment. I commend this bill to the House.
Vote: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20682] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 8; Progressive 1; Independent: Carter C. 
Noes 66 
New Zealand National 57; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 272 in the name of Phil Twyford to clause 26 be agreed to.
Vote: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20682] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 51 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 8; Progressive 1. 
Noes 66 
New Zealand National 57; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 273 in the name of Phil Twyford to clauses 35 to 39 be agreed to.
Calder Cam: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Calder Cam: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20681] 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Barker Rick: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Barker Rick: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20681] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Labour) 
: 
 Mr Chairman I do wish to speak. 
Hon Simon Power 
: Of course he does. 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: I just want to take up this point. I am sure the Minister of Justice will be really intrigued to know that the bill as it is written says that in prosecuting an offence the prosecution does not have to prove that the defendant intentionally or recklessly committed an offence. It does not have to prove anything. All it has to do is prove that there was an intention to camp. This means a campervan can pull up pull on the handbrake and stop and the enforcement officer can say: “Well if you’ve stopped it means you’re not mobile and if you’re not mobile it means that you’ve got an intention to camp.” That is what it is—one intends to camp and they do not have to prove intent at all. 
But it gets worse—it gets worse. We now have as an offence something that “has caused or is likely to cause significant concern to the community and users of the area or land.” The word used is “concern”. There is no threshold or test for what this concern is. It does not have to be real. It can be simply imagined. A person says: “I have a concern.” and they do not have to prove the basis of the concern. Of course the person could go to court and say that they have remediated it—that is what the provision is—but how can one fix someone’s concern? If the person has a concern has an apprehension of concern all they have to do is say to the court: “I was concerned and the person could not take my concern away.” Bang—a $200 fine. 
But it gets better. When I read through this bill that old movie  
Alice’s Restaurant  
came back to me. We will have Officer Obie with his 27 eight-by-ten colour glossy photographs with circles and arrows on and a paragraph on the back and he will be asking questions of these freedom campers. This is what it is—Officer Obie is coming back. This has been brought back to us by the National Government and it is an assault on people’s freedom to camp as they go around the place. Blanket Man in Wellington a freedom camper is under threat. We will have Officer Obie everywhere with eight-by-ten colour glossy photographs with a paragraph on the back and circles and arrows and the prosecution of these people for intent.
Roy Eric: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Roy Eric: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20681] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: When the Committee lifted last evening Rick Barker had the call. He has just over 2 minutes remaining should he require it.
Vote: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Freedom Camping Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20682] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 66 
New Zealand National 57; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3; United Future 1. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 8; Progressive 1; Independent: Carter C. 
Amendments agreed to.
Vote: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20826] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the report be adopted. 
Ayes 75 
New Zealand National 57; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3; United Future 1. 
Noes 44 
New Zealand Labour 42; Progressive 1; Independent: Carter C. 
Report adopted.
Hayes John: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Hayes John: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20830] 
JOHN HAYES (National—Wairarapa) 
: 
 Thank you for the opportunity to speak in the third reading of the Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill. I have to refute those comments by the previous speaker Charles Chauvel. This bill is absolutely straightforward. It will do two things. It will shift the date of the next census to 2013 and as the last speaker just said it makes some very sensible recommendations around the Chief Parliamentary Counsel and delegations during a period of absence. 
There is nothing underhand about this bill. We have had to put up with 2 hours of nonsensical filibuster. If I have learnt one thing in this life it is that saying from Confucius: “When you’re in a hole stop digging.” With those words I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.
Robertson H V Ross: Student Loan Scheme Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Student Loan Scheme Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:20711] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The debate on clauses 3 to 24 includes schedule 1.
Mallard Trevor: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Mallard Trevor: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20739] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I do not want this debate to end prematurely. The question I have was stimulated by the Minister in the chair the Minister of Revenue. Some of the memories— 
Hon Rick Barker 
: Stimulated by the Minister? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: No it brings back memories some of which are pleasant and some of which are unpleasant. They relate to the period in 2000 when there was a look at the possibility of integrating the Work and Income computer system and the Inland Revenue Department computer systems in order to make sure that people were getting entitlements but also to make sure that they were not ending up with the sorts of bills that people were ending up with. I know that Working for Families has made some progress in that regard and there are better ways for people to avoid those bills. 
I do not think the Minister was Minister of Revenue at the time—I do not think he was in Government at the time—but there was quite a lot of discussion then about the benefits of having a system that worked together across student loans Working for Families the Liable-parent Contribution Scheme PAYE and things in that area—but not so much GST. There was discussion about getting a system that was integrated and worked well together. I think it fell down probably on the State Sector Act and in fact on Christine Rankin standing on her rights as the chief executive of the Department of Work and Income to have a separate system. I think it is fairly well on the record that a major breakdown occurred in the relationship around that discussion but it was too late because Work and Income was required to get a new system and the systems diverged. 
I just ask the Minister—the Minister is doing good work in this area and we are debating the charge not the general process—whether he is looking at going further and having a system that is effectively a Government income-relationship computer system given the good work that he is doing with education and whether it can be spread to the area of a more major challenge. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: In short yes. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Good.
Bennett David: Student Loan Scheme Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Bennett David: Student Loan Scheme Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:20708] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I will take a short call on the Student Loan Scheme Bill. This bill will have the support of at least the two main parties in the House. It is part of the wider reform of the student loan scheme in which I think everybody sees merit to make it easier for students to be able to deliver their part of the bargain in repayment. It is changing some of the requirements of the student loan scheme but keeping intact the main element of the scheme the interest-free student loans which this Government has committed to retaining and has done so. Students around the country no doubt are very grateful for that in these very tough economic times. 
Aaron Gilmore 
: What about the students in Hamilton? 
DAVID BENNETT 
: Yes students in Hamilton are especially grateful for that. I think it has been a big sacrifice for this country to make sure that we can deliver that and I think it is a tribute to the Government that it has been able to deliver that in these most difficult of times. 
The student loan scheme is enhanced by this bill. We look forward to more students being able to take advantage of educational opportunities in the future through our reforms in the education sector so that we can lift our economic performance even higher. Thank you.
Vote: Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20761] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 110 
New Zealand National 57; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 10 
Green Party 9; Independent: Carter C. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Burns Brendon: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Burns Brendon: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20737] 
BRENDON BURNS (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 I propose to take just a shortish call on the Student Loan Scheme Bill and follow on from some of the comments and questions raised by my colleague Grant Robertson in respect of clause 181 and the issue of the new administration fee—the annual administration fee—of $40 which as we have noted comes on top of the $60 establishment fee. So obviously there is a $100 cost to students or former students for their loans in an environment where the Government was absolutely determined it seemed to not be seen to be putting interest charges on student loans. 
The question I wanted to ask the Minister in the chair the Minister of Revenue is this. Clause 181(1) says that “If a borrower has a loan balance of $20 or more on the close of 31 March in a tax year—(a) an annual administration fee of $40 (or any other amount prescribed by regulations) must be charged by the Commissioner …”. I am seeking from the Minister some assurance. It has been known for fees like this to come in at that kind of level and then increase. Obviously we have the situation as mentioned where students have effectively a $100 cost for their student loans as a result of the establishment fee and now the annual administration fee. And of course we are well aware of changes in the Budget for students over 55 years that preclude them from student loans. So a cumulative cost is what I am concerned about and I would like the Minister’s assurance that that fee—as opposed as we are to it at $40—will not be increased by executive fiat.
Kaye Nikki: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Kaye Nikki: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20828] 
NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) 
: 
 I am very pleased to speak on the third reading of the Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill. I acknowledge the support right across this House for this legislation including National the Greens the Maori Party Tau Henare Simon Bridges and Todd McClay. In conclusion basically everybody supports this bill except for Labour. This legislation is one of the briefest bills I have seen since I have been in Parliament. The purpose of it is to enable the 2013 census to actually happen. 
I just want to briefly traverse the arguments we have heard from the Opposition. Firstly Raymond Huo went slightly off the reservation when he opposed this bill because I saw members opposite in a slight state of shock. Secondly Lianne Dalziel and Pete Hodgson said that the reason they opposed this bill was that it was being passed during urgency. We have been very clear that this is in response to what has been the largest natural disaster that New Zealand has ever seen and that is one of the reasons why we need to defer the census and pass this legislation. Thirdly we heard from Lianne Dalziel that one of the big issues she had with this bill was that the regulatory impact statement was passed in April but the point we have made is that two other decisions had to happen as a result of that: whether to hold the census and the date on which to hold the census. Finally we heard a number of contradictory speeches from Labour. Lianne Dalziel was suggesting 10-year censuses and Trevor Mallard proposed holding the census in December not March. Then we heard the trifecta from Chris Hipkins. He totally disagreed with both Lianne Dalziel and Trevor Mallard. 
Lynne Pillay 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Four times now we have seen Lianne Dalziel have the indignity of having her name mispronounced. I would ask the member to use it properly. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Points of orders are held in silence. Well the member is in the Chamber and if she felt offended by it—she is shaking her head. 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: I am offended! 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: It is up to the member to take offence. We will leave it at that. 
NIKKI KAYE 
: We have heard very contradictory speeches from Labour. That is not unusual. 
In conclusion we support this legislation because we believe it is very important to hold a census in 2013. It is very important so that we do not have over-representation or under-representation in our electorates. It is very important that the businesses and the community organisations of this country have accurate information. We support this very non-controversial legislation. I am shocked that Labour is not supporting it. I commend this bill to the House.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20801] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker Roy. Kia ora ano tatou katoa. This is just a short call from the Maori Party to say that we support the Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill. There are some requirements that we need to meet and the Maori Party is fully behind that. 
One of the concerns we had was around the possibility of the move of the Maori Option which has some links to the timing of the census. We were in discussions with the Minister of Statistics and he has assured us pretty much that that will not be affected. Therefore our concerns have been laid to rest. 
From that background I think it is fair to say that we are supportive of this bill all the way through every stage to make sure that that particular concern can be addressed and also that we meet the obligations required of us. Kia ora tatou.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20814] 
KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) 
: 
 Sat sri akaal Mr Assistant Speaker Robertson. I will start my contribution on the Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Bill by acknowledging my appreciation of my Opposition colleague Raymond Huo for providing a lot of information about the census and the importance of the census. Charles Chauvel also mentioned that the funding of district health boards and Government decisions are based on the census. So when two members of the Opposition are telling us that it is important to have a census I do not know why Labour is opposing the bill. I commend this bill to the House.
Robertson Grant: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Robertson Grant: Student Loan Scheme Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20734] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 I will raise some questions about exactly those clauses that you have helpfully outlined for the Committee which we are looking at now. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Is that Part 2? 
GRANT ROBERTSON 
: It is Part 2 I say to Ms Dyson; yes it is. I have a question for the Minister in the chair the Minister of Revenue and I hope he will answer this one because it is a genuine question. In the first reading and during the select committee process on the Student Loan Scheme Bill a number of concerns were raised about the change in assessment for people who earn money while they are on the student loan scheme in terms of what they have to pay back. I was not on the Finance and Expenditure Committee but my reading is that a number of those concerns have been dealt with in the changes that have been made to Part 2. 
In particular when we look at clause 48 we see that there is now a change to the definitions relating to the exemptions for full-time students. As I read the change in clause 48 essentially it is trying to say that if a student works intensively in a holiday period and at that point earns more than the repayment threshold which currently would be $367 per week then returns to being a student they will be assessed on their whole year’s income rather than the period in which they earned that money. 
That change would resolve a significant concern raised by a number of people in the process of this bill coming to the House which was that there would effectively be a penalty on people who were trying to earn some money during their holiday period rather than having to work extensively through term time. Of course as many members of the Committee will know people’s studies are potentially put at risk if they have to work too many part-time hours. As I think I noted in an earlier intervention the commentary on the bill also talks about the fact that it may lead to people unnecessarily borrowing money. That is a different way of looking at the same concern so I am just seeking the Minister’s guidance on that point. 
Related to that issue I ask whether the changes that have been made in clause 76 and which go on from there address the concerns that were raised about whether moving from a full-year assessment to a pay-period assessment will penalise people who earn small amounts of money but then perhaps in blocks earn larger amounts of money. I ask whether they will then end up having to pay money back when in fact their total income will not reach the $19000 figure. That is the specific question that I have.