edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Katene Rahui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Katene Rahui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:674;Page:20040] 
11. 
RAHUI KATENE (Maori Party—Te Tai Tonga) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: Does he agree with the statement in  
Ko Aotearoa Tenei 
 that “direct infusion of indigenous values into mainstream environmental regulation may well be unique in the world”; if so how will he advance the opportunities for Maori to take more positive and proactive roles in environmental decision-making? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 The Government has not yet considered this Waitangi Tribunal report so it is premature to give a definitive answer. A group of Ministers led by the Attorney-General with advice from officials has been convened to give careful consideration to this 1000-page report. Current Government policy does recognise that Maori and local iwi do have— 
Hon Shane Jones 
: Don’t be lazy. Read it. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: —“lazy” from the guy who was late for his TV programme on work—a special perspective on environmental issues. We support specific mechanisms to ensure that the Maori voice is heard consistent with the Treaty of Waitangi on environmental decision-making but we do not support a veto. 
Rahui Katene 
: Does the Minister agree with the Waitangi Tribunal that “Nearly 20 years after the RMA was enacted it is fair to say that the legislation has delivered Maori scarcely a shadow of its original promise.” and what current initiatives does he have in train to ensure central government plays a key leadership role in encouraging local authorities to have particular regard to both the Treaty and the concept of kaitiakitanga? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: My initial view is that the report is overstated. The performance of the councils in meeting their responsibilities to consult and engage with local iwi is a mixed bag. Some councils are doing very well; some are not. This issue has been strongly advocated by the Minister of Maori Affairs Dr Pita Sharples. We are exploring policy options to improve the performance of the councils and officials are due to report back to Cabinet by May 2012. 
Rahui Katene 
: What explanation can the Minister suggest for why between 1991 and 2010 not a single section 33 delegation of powers and functions to iwi has occurred—a measure that was introduced into the Resource Management Act to enable local iwi to participate in environmental decision-making and management? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I think the reason is that there is real nervousness about delegating decision making completely to an iwi authority. There is a big difference between iwi participating in decision making and iwi actually making the decisions. As I said in answer to the primary question it is the Government’s view that Maori and iwi have an important voice in environmental decision-making but this does not amount to a veto.
Lees-Galloway Iain: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Lees-Galloway Iain: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:674;Page:20054] 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North) 
: 
 In 1 minute what can I achieve? Last night I was talking about clause 4 of the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill and about the fact that Labour has some concerns about clause 4. We will seek to have that clause removed from the bill when we get to the Committee stage. The guts of our concern is that it does nothing to reduce harm. In fact the submissions we heard on the Health Committee said that by broadening out the definition of utensils and including the components of drug utensils we will actually increase the amount of harm as people seek alternatives to those utensils or in fact do not use utensils at all given that the purpose of those utensils is to assist in reducing harm. In summary although the Labour Party supports this bill we think the time for tinkering with the Misuse of Drugs Act is over. We would like to see real change and new legislation on the control of drugs in New Zealand.
Vote: Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:674;Page:20088] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 8; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; Independent: Carter C. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment in the name of Iain Lees-Galloway to the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 256 in his name to clause 9 be agreed to: 
to omit “Mata” in each place where it appears and to substitute in each case “mate”.
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:674;Page:20037] 
9. 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN (Leader—ACT) 
 to the  
Minister of Maori Affairs 
: Does he stand by all of his recent statements? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES (Minister of Maori Affairs) 
: 
 Ae. 
Hon John Boscawen 
: Does he stand by his statement on Monday of this week made during his TV debate with ACT leader Don Brash that “We want to change the situation where one lot is under-achieving within a system where we have plenty for all in this country.” and that is why we have special measures; if so what concrete examples can he give of special measures addressing Maori underachievement? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: Ae. 
Hon John Boscawen 
: What concrete examples if any can he give of special measures reducing the number of Maori youth who leave school functionally illiterate reducing the rate of obesity diabetes and other obesity-related diseases among Maori or reducing the rate of Maori youth unemployment? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: I do not have any responsibility for obesity amongst people. I think that the questions the member asks should be asked of the community—of society and its organisations. 
Hon John Boscawen 
: I will go with that. Can he explain how despite having separate representation on the Auckland Maori Statutory Board separate electorates separate seats on district health boards separate consultation rights on the Resource Management Act Maori are still tragically overrepresented in adverse unemployment welfare crime health and education statistics and is it not time to realise that the special measures he supports have failed his Maori constituents that he claims to represent? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: The special measures are very small compared with the battle ahead to get Maori achievement to the level of everybody else. I think that that is the sort of question the member should be asking himself.
Hutchison Paul: Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Hutchison Paul: Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:674;Page:20087] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Hutchison Paul: Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Hutchison Paul: Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:674;Page:20073] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) 
: 
 I want to take a very brief call on Part 1 of the Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill. Part 1 outlines the fact that we want to get tobacco right out of sight. Clause 4 talks through the purposes of this part and the general prohibition of displays and it is absolutely great that there is multiparty agreement with the thrust of this bill. 
One of the submissions to the Health Committee was from Action on Smoking and Health and it related to forming a register of outlets. One such register has been formed in Scotland but it has been going for only about 18 months. Yes it is low cost but we really do not know whether it is working. It may be that with time such a register could prove its worth but the Government does not want to have extra bureaucracy. We feel that there has been great consensus on this bill and that is one of the huge strengths of it. So that is the explanation. We do not want extra bureaucracy particularly when there is no proof that it will work in the form of a register but we are absolutely delighted that otherwise there is multi-party agreement on the Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill. Thank you.
Calder Cam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Calder Cam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:674;Page:20030] 
4. 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Corrections 
: Has she received any reports on the rate of escape from New Zealand prisons? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 I am pleased to advise the House that the number of escapes from New Zealand prisons has fallen to an all-time low. In the last financial year there were four escapes from corrections custody but only two from jails. This compares with nine escapes in the previous financial year and 23 in 2007-08. This great result is due to more sophisticated perimeter fencing new detection and surveillance systems improved intelligence and single points of entry into our prisons. The Department of Corrections is firmly focused on public safety and it is doing a great job. 
Dr Cam Calder 
: What other information has she received in relation to escapes over the past year? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: I am pleased to report that for the first time there have been no walk-away escapes at all. Instances in which low-security prisoners walk away from work parties or other areas of supervision have been the most common method of escape from New Zealand prisons. This is a fantastic achievement and is testament to the new security classification system implemented by the Department of Corrections in 2010. The new system focuses much more heavily on escape prevention and tightens the criteria that a prisoner must meet to be considered for employment in a work party outside the perimeter. This is more excellent work from the Department of Corrections.
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Singapore—Speaker Parliament 
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Singapore—Speaker Parliament 
[Volume:674;Page:20025] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that Mr Abdullah Tarmugi Speaker of the Parliament of Singapore is present within the precincts of the Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be accorded a seat on the left of the Chair and that his delegation in the gallery also be welcomed. 
Abdullah Tarmugi accompanied by the Deputy Speaker entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
Vote: Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:674;Page:20088] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 68 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 8; Progressive 1; Independent: Carter C. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 257 in the name of Rahui Katene to clause 5A and to insert new clause 6A be agreed to.
Visitors — Singapore—Speaker Parliament 
Visitors — Singapore—Speaker Parliament 
[Volume:674;Page:20025] 
Wednesday 13 July 2011 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Singapore—Speaker Parliament 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that Mr Abdullah Tarmugi Speaker of the Parliament of Singapore is present within the precincts of the Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be accorded a seat on the left of the Chair and that his delegation in the gallery also be welcomed. 
Abdullah Tarmugi accompanied by the Deputy Speaker entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:674;Page:20035] 
7. 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
 to the  
Minister of Transport 
: What progress has been made on the Christchurch Southern Motorway Road of National Significance following the earthquakes in the city? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport) 
: 
 Good news! Very good news in fact. I was visiting Christchurch yesterday and saw firsthand the very good progress being made despite the earthquakes resulting in workers being temporarily transferred to other sites for emergency repairs and the design also requiring tweaks to reflect changes to the land. The Christchurch Southern Motorway extension is still on track for its original completion date of early 2013. I take this opportunity to congratulate the workers and contractors on keeping going in what are really quite exceptional circumstances as they work to complete this very important project for Christchurch’s economic and social future. 
Colin King 
: Have the earthquakes changed the need for the Christchurch Southern Motorway project? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: The earthquakes have probably made the project more important now than before. Traffic patterns have changed in Christchurch following the earthquakes and the main southern arterials in the city are congested at peak times. This has caused frustrating delays for motorists travelling to the city to the port of Lyttelton and to the industrial areas in the south and east of the city. In addition it is likely that growth in the western areas of the city will accelerate as people and businesses relocate out of harder-hit areas. The Government is determined to continue with the $600 million Christchurch road of national significance programme which will create hundreds of jobs and help move goods and services as the city’s economy recovers.
Blue Jackie: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Blue Jackie: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:674;Page:20066] 
Dr JACKIE BLUE (National) 
: 
 I am pleased to speak on the second reading of the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill. This bill complements the measures the Government has already undertaken in its strategy to combat the impact of P in our community. The bill amends the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 and reclassifies ephedrine and pseudoephedrine as class B2 controlled drugs which means they are available only on prescription. Up until now they have been available over the counter and are often used for simple colds and flus. They will no longer be available over the counter and therefore will no longer be a source for those seeking to use them as precursors to make methamphetamine. Of course suitable alternatives are available already for consumers such as phenylephrine. 
The Government is really serious about the fight against the impact of P and we released a strategy a year or two ago. In particular new powers have been given to break the drug supply chain of gangs and criminal organisations. Efforts have been made to ensure that P addicts get the treatment they need that we improve the treatment capacity that we have better routes into treatment and of course that we support families and communities so that people do not become addicts in the first place. 
There is a number of other measures in this bill such as reclassifying thalidomide as a class A controlled drug so that it now comes under the Medicines Act which is entirely appropriate. The bill also broadens the definition of amphetamine analogues and allows greater control over paraphernalia. 
The Government is serious about minimising harm from P and this bill is part of that suite of measures. I commend the bill to the House.
Wagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Wagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:674;Page:20041] 
12. 
NICKY WAGNER (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: What reports has she seen on the Canterbury unemployment figures? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 There are currently 6342 people on unemployment benefits in Canterbury. I can advise that although there are 962 more people on the unemployment benefit than the week before February’s earthquake I am encouraged that businesses are open and hiring. It is likely that we are yet to see the full impact of all the earthquakes; however it is a positive sign that there are more than 500 job vacancies in Canterbury through Work and Income. 
Nicky Wagner 
: What other reports has she seen on the increase of people on benefits as a result of the Canterbury earthquakes? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: I heard reports of 24000 extra people going on to benefits. Those figures were put forward by Clayton Cosgrove via the media and I think it was scaremongering. It made people very uneasy and upset. We quite simply have not reached the sort of level of unemployment of more than 20000 people as was quite often said. In fact since the February earthquake the total number of people on benefits has decreased by 670 as we have seen people going off the invalids benefit and the domestic purposes benefit.
Bennett David: Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill — Second Reading 
Bennett David: Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:674;Page:20103] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I want to take just a short call on the Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill which we are dealing with tonight. There are two main aspects to it—gift duty and the information-sharing and secrecy provisions. Gift duty is an old tax that has had its time and for the compliance costs involved it does not generate much revenue for New Zealand’s taxpayers. It is another compliance cost on the productive sector of the New Zealand economy. So this bill is another example of the Government delivering a more efficient system in which people can get on with doing business and making the most money for this country to go forward. The information-sharing and secrecy provisions are very important provisions that I think all parties in the House will support in the sense that they will help the Inland Revenue Department in its relationship with other departments and also it is in the best interests of the New Zealand taxpayer that the department be able to access the information that is needed to make sure taxpayers are paying their fair due. National supports this bill and I recommend it to the House.
Blue Jackie: Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Blue Jackie: Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:674;Page:20090] 
Dr JACKIE BLUE (National) 
: 
 I am pleased to speak on Part 2 of the Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill. Part 2 refers to penalties regulations and the infringement notice scheme. 
The Health Committee made a number of amendments to the penalties regime. They include raising the maximum fine which is quite significant and there are details about an expanded infringement notice scheme. The interesting thing is that currently if cigarettes or tobacco are sold to a minor the fine is about $2000 but the reality was quite revealing. The average fine was usually about only $300 which is really quite a small amount when one considers what had happened. 
As the previous speaker Iain Lees-Galloway mentioned we had a number of submissions on the range of where we should pitch the fine. We settled on a fairly high amount. It is quite a significant fine. The fine we decided should be up to $5000 for an employee while a body corporate would be fined up to $10000. These are not insignificant amounts of money. I think they send a very strong message to people who think they might want to sell to a minor that that will cost them—and cost them dearly—in the pocket. There is also an amended infringement notice scheme. If there is a failure to display health warnings at the point of sale or one sells over the internet without the appropriate warnings or information about the purchase age an infringement notice will be given. There are also regulation-making powers provided so that regulations can be made from time to time as seen fit on the display of notices and about health information. 
In the debate on Part 1 I mentioned that prisons have gone smoke-free. Today is day 13 and it has gone very well. I also spoke about the fact that the increase in tobacco excise had made a huge difference in the number of people accessing Quitline and taking nicotine-replacement therapies. That is making a huge improvement. 
It is important to have a strong and robust penalty scheme. There is no point in having a law that says that one cannot sell to minors but not follow that up with a fairly strong message. Part 2 certainly provides a very strong message. I commend this bill to the Committee.
Woodhouse Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Woodhouse Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:674;Page:20027] 
2. 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What progress has the Government made in making the tax system fairer? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 In Budget 2010 we recognised there were parts of the community who over the past decade have simply not paid their fair share of tax. The Government raised the effective tax rate on property by a number of different measures including denying depreciation on long-life assets tightened the eligibility for Working for Families so that those with high economic incomes could not use paper losses to qualify and allocated $120 million to the Inland Revenue Department to better enforce the rules. These measures have been successful and we have achieved a more balanced and fair tax system that supports growth and provides good incentives in the economy. 
Michael Woodhouse 
: How does the tax system interact with income support which the Government provides? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: Income support and the tax system need to be seen together. We tax those who earn income at progressive rates although 75 percent of taxpayers pay no more than 17.5c in the dollar now. We also support those on low and median incomes with dependent children. A single-income family with two children pays no net tax until their income reaches $50000 a year. This year Treasury projects we will collect $26 billion of income tax. Net of tax we will pay about $12 billion in income support and another $8 billion for superannuation. 
Michael Woodhouse 
: Which groups now pay most of the tax collected by the Government? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: Our tax and transfer system is highly redistributive and the number of people paying income tax is surprisingly small. The lowest-income 43 percent of households currently receive more in income support than they pay in income tax. The 1.3 million households with incomes under $110000 a year collectively pay no net tax—that is their total income support payments match their combined income tax. The top 10 percent of households contribute over 70 percent of income tax net of transfers—over 70 percent of income tax net of transfers. This system is highly redistributive and we believe it is fair. 
Michael Woodhouse 
: What steps has the Government taken to prevent the erosion of the tax base? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: When we became the Government we found a pretty chaotic tax system where a lot of wealthier people were simply not paying their fair share of tax so we set out to tighten the taxation of property beef up enforcement by the Inland Revenue Department and reduce widespread income-sheltering through trusts. The Inland Revenue Department did an exercise where it tabulated New Zealand’s 100 richest people and found that over half of them were not paying the top personal tax rate. That is how badly the tax system was operating.
Locke Keith: Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Locke Keith: Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1124] 
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
: 
 I agree with the last speaker that the report of the Attorney-General Chris Finlayson is a very strong critique of the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill. It states that the bill is inconsistent with the right against reasonable search and seizure as affirmed in section 21 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. The Minister also refers to the intrusive nature of DNA samples quoting from the European Court of Human Rights: “Unlike a fingerprint it is capable of revealing the most intimate details of a person’s biological make up. … The taking and retention of a DNA sample is not a trivial matter and absent a compelling public interest would inherently constitute a grave intrusion on the subject’s right to personal and informational privacy.” I will be interested to hear the Maori Party’s contribution on this bill because I think the forcible extraction of blood from a person who is not even charged with an offence will be seen as offensive by many in the community. From what I understand about tikanga to many Maori it is offensive and we should not support it. 
The controls in the system are very weak. As the Attorney-General says they are weaker than in any country but the United Kingdom. In the United Kingdom— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the member but the time has come for me to leave the Chair. 
Debate interrupted.
Vote: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1117] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Gangs and Organised Crime Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 108 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 14 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 5. 
Bill read a first time. 
Bill referred to the Law and Order Committee.
Barker Rick: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
Barker Rick: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1109] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: The member’s point of order is well made and I am sure all members will acknowledge it. I think that it is a general reminder to members that we should pay our respects not only to the English language but certainly to the Maori language as well and all do our best to pronounce the words as best we can. Kia ora.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1109] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Tena koe. Kia ora tatau e te Whare. I te tau kua hipa i puta i a matou o te Pati Maori he inoi ki te Whare kia tika ra ano te whakahua i nga ingoa Maori me nga kupu Maori i roto i tenei Whare. Ae he mema hou te mema e korerohia ake nei kare au i pirangi ki te whawhati i tana korero engari ko taku he inoi ano ra ki te Whare kia tika ra ano te whakahua i nga kupu Maori kia tika kia Maori mai. Kaore au i te pirangi ki te whawhati i te korero a tenei kao engari i te timatanga o te tau me whakaputa enei korero kia matua mohio mai te katoa. 
[An interpretation in English was given to the House.] 
[ 
Greetings. Greetings to us the House. We the Maori Party made a plea to the House last year for Maori names and words to be pronounced correctly when used in the House. Yes the member referred to here is new and while I did not wish to interrupt his address it is timely to make that plea once again at this point that the House make an effort to ensure that Maori words are pronounced correctly and made to sound like Maori.  
I do not wish to interrupt this one’s address no indeed but it is the beginning of the year and these statements should be made to ensure that everyone is aware of the matter 
.]
Goudie Sandra: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
Goudie Sandra: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1105] 
SANDRA GOUDIE (National—Coromandel) 
: 
 I am pleased to stand and speak on the Gangs and Organised Crime Bill and to support my most excellent colleagues the Hon Simon Power and Chester Borrows. I am totally supportive of our Government’s policy on gangs which includes tougher penalties for membership of a criminal gang expanding police surveillance powers in respect of gang communications and providing greater powers to remove gang fortifications. 
As chairperson of the Law and Order Committee I am delighted to hear that the Opposition is supporting the bill and is supportive of the content of the bill. We are looking forward to sharing those members’ expertise and knowledge in this respect and to progressing this bill to its final conclusion: to become very worthy legislation totally supporting the police and the very important work they do. 
In providing the police with these extra powers we can see them being able to take a greater stance against gangs. An example is their success in terms of their surveillance of the Killer Bees. The police have practically decimated that gang. I look forward to seeing this legislation being implemented so that they can do the same with the remaining gangs in this country. I look forward to the bill having the Opposition’s support in that regard.
Borrows Chester: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
Borrows Chester: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1102] 
CHESTER BORROWS (National—Whanganui) 
: 
 I appreciate the opportunity to take a call in support of the Gangs and Organised Crime Bill. It is interesting to hear the member who has just resumed his seat Clayton Cosgrove talk about this legislation’s being “dropped” upon the House. He has a very short memory if he can not think back to the emissions trading scheme legislation—that hallmark legislation from the last Parliament—and the 750 amendments that were dropped on the Finance and Expenditure Committee 2 days before the bill was due back before the House. One thousand amendments were dropped on the Committee of the whole House and by that night the bill was law. That was not due process and that was not giving people time to consider legislation before it was debated in the House so that comment was pretty rich coming from him. 
I want to focus the mind of the House on a couple of other things. One of them is that next Friday on 20 February is the sentencing of the offenders convicted of the murder of Jhia Te Tua. Next Friday the murderers of Jhia Te Tua will be sentenced in the court just across the road here—the High Court in Wellington. The legacy of that tragedy—and thank goodness there is one—is that it dragged the Labour Government kicking and screaming into a position where it was prepared to deal with gangs. In 2004 the police national gang strategy lapsed and was not replaced until the horrific death of Jhia Te Tua. 
Out of that tragedy came legislation that we debated in the House last year that made a number of proposals. Some of them are replicated within the bill now before the House. So the House has actually previously debated this issue. We were on opposite sides of the House but we were generally in accord. We debated for instance the prospect of amending section 98A of the Crimes Act and how that would affect surveillance on gangs. We covered some of the points and we indicated to the House the National Party’s position; this legislation was on its way when we became the Government. 
This legislation is crucial to allowing the police to move and take proactive steps in respect of combating gangs as is the legislative change proposed to the Sentencing Act. If a person commits a crime as a gang member no matter what it is that person will get more of a penalty than if that person commits it as “Joe Citizen”. We need some real disincentives for people belonging to gangs as well as offending as part of gangs. 
The third piece of legislation that will be amended is the Local Government Act. The amendments will make it easier for the police to storm fortifications and rip them down. Sunlight is a fantastic disinfectant as is the ability to look inside those gang headquarters to see and listen to what they are up to. Police will be able to prosecute gang members for those offences and get more severe penalties when they are eventually convicted. That ability is paramount in the mind of this Government and I am pleased and proud to be part of this bill.
Locke Keith: Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Locke Keith: Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1124] 
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is the first day back at Parliament and I think MPs are just getting into the swing of things. There is a very early start— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: What is your point of order? 
KEITH LOCKE 
: I seek leave for the House to rise just a minute early rather starting into my speech. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought for the House to rise at this point. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? Yes there is.
Dunne Peter: Taxation (Business Tax Measures) Bill — First Reading 
Dunne Peter: Taxation (Business Tax Measures) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1097] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue) 
: 
 I move  
That the Taxation (Business Tax Measures) Bill be referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee 
that the committee report finally to the House on or before 23 March 2009 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting except during oral questions and during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 187 and 190(1)(b) and (c).
Foss Craig: Taxation (Business Tax Measures) Bill — First Reading 
Foss Craig: Taxation (Business Tax Measures) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1090] 
CRAIG FOSS (National—Tukituki) 
: 
 I rise in support of the Taxation (Business Tax Measures) Bill. I join every previous speaker from every party in the House who has now indicated support for this bill which is urgently required given the current economic situation around the globe and particularly the way in which that is affecting New Zealand businesses. I acknowledge the expediency with which all members are trying to get this bill through its first reading and I look forward to working with members if and when this bill arrives at the Finance and Expenditure Committee. I hope we will continue that expediency because it is urgently required that New Zealand businesses have some certainty and some clarity around the current situation and all things to do with taxation. 
 Many aspects of the international credit crunch cannot be avoided by whichever parties the New Zealand Government comprises but the New Zealand Government can do many things to help knock off the sharp edges of the current economic credit crunch recession or whatever one likes to call it. It is pretty tough out there and it is imperative that the Government is able to put these measures into place as soon as possible. 
There is a cost to this package of about $480 million but what has not been talked about is the benefit in time for small and medium sized enterprises in New Zealand. There is a benefit in time and gain in productivity for them 98 percent of them as they virtually halve the time they will need to spend on PAYE GST and fringe benefit tax in some instances. Those are simple productivity gains. 
I fully acknowledge that many measures in this bill originated with the Minister in the previous Government and many measures in this bill relating to small and medium sized businesses came from the Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill. I acknowledge that across the House. Yes we have talked about how things should be bigger longer or wider but we have all acknowledged and earlier speakers have shown that passing this legislation is urgent. 
As my colleague the Minister of Finance the Hon Bill English noted earlier there are many more measures to come; this is but one. I am very grateful to the House that this “but one” crucial measure seems to have cross-party support and total member support so far in this House. I look forward to working with this bill in the Finance and Expenditure Committee. It will be a tight report back but the indications are that we will get there.
Bridges Simon: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
Bridges Simon: Gangs and Organised Crime Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1116] 
SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to rise in support of the Gangs and Organised Crime Bill which will provide a greater range of tools to combat and punish gangs in the future. I say that anything along the road towards a tougher response to gangs has to be commended. I agree with the Hon Shane Jones who said that this bill provides the hard solid fist on law and order that is required. I say with respect as a young new inexperienced member that his speech had some touches of brilliance and it clearly marks him out as a leader of his party in the future. 
I will briefly make a couple of points on specific matters in this bill. I have some familiarity with section 98A of the Crimes Act having been involved in prosecutions based on it on a number of occasions. One such occasion involved the prosecution of a multiple number of accused persons in a trial in the Bay of Plenty. It was a case involving a shoot-out between several members of two rival gangs who were charged with offences under section 98A. None of those gang members were convicted. It was clear to me at that time that the provision was too hard to get convictions under—too complex too hard to prove and not worth pursuing—and I suspect this has been the experience of many a prosecutor in this nation. This bill goes towards addressing that issue and I welcome that. The amendment to section 9 of the Sentencing Act in relation to aggravating factors that makes being a gang member an aggravating factor at sentencing is also all to the good. 
I agree with the Hon Shane Jones that gangs peddle misery. We need to have the hard solid fist of law and order here and I believe that this bill will make very positive steps indeed towards doing that.
Vote: Taxation (Business Tax Measures) Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Taxation (Business Tax Measures) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1098] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 78 
New Zealand National 58; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 44 
New Zealand Labour 43; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Finlayson Christopher: Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill — New Zealand Bill of Rights Act Compliance 
Finlayson Christopher: Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill — New Zealand Bill of Rights Act Compliance 
[Volume:652;Page:1076] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 I hereby present a report under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 on the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill. This report is made pursuant to section 7 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 and Standing Order 261.
Vote: Urgency 
Vote: Urgency 
[Volume:652;Page:1076] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That urgency be accorded. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
[Volume:652;Page:1075] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the introduction and first reading of the Taxation (Business Tax Measures) Bill the Gangs and Organised Crime Bill the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill and the Sentencing (Offender Levy) Amendment Bill. 
 These bills are all part of the Government’s 100-day programme. These matters were of prominence for members of this Government during the election campaign so it is a matter of ensuring that we honour the commitments made to New Zealanders that these bills would be introduced and sent to select committees within the first 100-day period. I appreciate that this means that some parties will not have the 3 days that are normally available to them to scrutinise the bills. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: Three minutes would be nice. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Well we will do something about that. A number of the bills have been made available to spokespeople so that they can peruse what is in them. I think the measures that are in the bills have most certainly been very well signalled.
Vote: Address in Reply 
Vote: Address in Reply 
[Volume:652;Page:1075] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That this debate be now adjourned. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
English Bill: Address in Reply 
English Bill: Address in Reply 
[Volume:652;Page:1075] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Prime Minister) 
: 
 I move  
That this debate be now adjourned 
.
Locke Keith: Address in Reply 
Locke Keith: Address in Reply 
[Volume:652;Page:1073] 
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Could the Green Party split this call with me speaking first and Sue Kedgley speaking second? 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: That is agreed.
Borrows Chester: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Borrows Chester: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:652;Page:1056] 
9.  
CHESTER BORROWS (National—Whanganui) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: What steps is the Government taking before the next general election to improve the law governing campaign finance? 
Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 Later this week I will bring a bill to the House that seeks to repeal the Electoral Finance Act 2007. The Act will be replaced with an interim regime that largely reverts back to the previous law except for the rules surrounding donations and a penalties structure. The Government has committed to passing this legislation in its first 100 days. It is my intention to then embark on behalf of the Government on a wide-ranging consultative series of meetings and other consultation to form a more enduring reform of electoral finance law which will be in place for the 2011 general election. 
Chester Borrows 
: What consultation has he undertaken on these proposals? 
Hon SIMON POWER 
: The repeal of the Electoral Finance Act was clearly signalled to the public as a priority for the incoming Government and last week I wrote to the leaders or the representatives in the justice area of those parties who are not represented in the Government to offer to meet with them to discuss this legislation. I am pleased to say that to date very many of those parties have accepted that invitation. 
Chester Borrows 
: Has he received any feedback on the Government’s proposed approach to electoral finance reform? 
Hon SIMON POWER 
: Yes. I have taken the opportunity to speak with the Leader of the Opposition who has indicated that he is interested in engaging in the process. Incidentally I have also read a press release by the New Zealand Public Service Association which welcomes the Government’s decision to repeal the Electoral Finance Act. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: We come to question No. 10. I call the Hon Lianne Dalziel. [ 
Interruption 
] I beg the member’s pardon. I ask members if they are going to call to please do so promptly following the previous question. 
John Boscawen 
: Why does the Minister propose to carry through the donation provisions in the Electoral Finance Act when most of these were introduced after public submissions both written and oral had closed and the public had been denied a chance to comment on them? 
Hon SIMON POWER 
: Transparency is an important part of enduring electoral law.
Smith Lockwood: Speaker’s Statements — Speaker’s Procession—New Route 
Smith Lockwood: Speaker’s Statements — Speaker’s Procession—New Route 
[Volume:652;Page:1043] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: From the next sitting day I intend to make a change to the Speaker’s procession. In order that this longstanding parliamentary tradition may be more accessible to the public the procession at 2 p.m. each sitting day will move south along the Speaker’s corridor from the Speaker’s office into the Parliament House foyer turn right into the lobby through the double doors and enter the House through the visitors’ door past the Bar of the House. The Serjeant-at-Arms will take up a position at the end of the Table ready to lay the Mace on the Table and the Speaker will take the Chair via the Government side of the Table. 
The new route for the Speaker’s procession will take no longer than the previous one but it will be in view of the public. Members will be held back momentarily in the Parliament House foyer and at the visitors’ door entrance while the procession passes but will be able to join the tail of the procession to enter the Chamber after the Speaker before the doors are closed for prayers. The doors to the Ayes and Noes lobbies and the Ministers’ and Speaker’s doors will be closed at 2 p.m. when the Serjeant-at-Arms announces the Speaker’s arrival in the House as is the current practice. This will ensure that members do not impede the Speaker moving through the Chamber to the Chair. 
These new arrangements for the procession will apply only at 2 p.m. each sitting day. At all other times the presiding officers will enter and leave the Chamber through the Speaker’s door. For members’ information I will make a copy of this announcement available in members’ bill boxes.