edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Vote: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:667;Page:14181] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the report be adopted. 
Ayes 68 
New Zealand National 58; Maori Party 5 ACT New Zealand 4; United Future 1. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Report adopted.
Vote: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:667;Page:14131] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 3 be agreed to. 
Ayes 68 
New Zealand National 58; Maori Party 5; ACT New Zealand 4; United Future 1. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Clause 3 agreed to.
Vote: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:667;Page:14138] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 68 
New Zealand National 58; Maori Party 5; ACT New Zealand 4; United Future 1. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:667;Page:14137] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 68 
New Zealand National 58; Maori Party 5; ACT New Zealand 4; United Future 1. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Amendment agreed to.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — David Garrett—Status of Relationship with National 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — David Garrett—Status of Relationship with National 
[Volume:667;Page:14129] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Hon Phil Goff seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the recent announcements from the Prime Minister relating to parliamentary support arrangements for his Government. Standing Order 380 requires that the matter for debate be a particular case of recent occurrence and involve the administrative or ministerial responsibility of the Government. The application relates to a report of a statement made by the Prime Minister that National would not be looking to form any kind of relationship with David Garrett if he stays on as an Independent. The absence of action on the part of the Government is not a particular case of recent occurrence that can be raised for debate under the Standing Order. For there to be a case of recent occurrence an event must have occurred when the application was lodged and that event must be a new situation of importance. The application is therefore declined.
Barker Rick: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
Barker Rick: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:667;Page:14135] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Before I call the next speaker I remind members that although a range of bills have gone through on wide-ranging debates this bill is not one of them. We have had two speeches from either side and I think that is fair enough to set the scene. We have had one excellent example of how one focuses on the material and introduces other points but we are on Part 1 which consists of technical aspects of the bill. I expect the speakers from now on to stay within the Speaker’s rulings and Standing Orders for the Committee stage of a debate.
Dyson Ruth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Dyson Ruth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:667;Page:14123] 
9. 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: What assurances can he give the public that no one will be left unsafe in their own home due to “changes” in health policy? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) 
: 
 I can pass on the assurances given to me by relevant chairs of district health boards that no one will be left unsafe in their homes as a result of any changes to the way boards allocate their home support. In any year about 75000 people receive home support 15000 come on to the scheme and 15000 come off as circumstances change. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Can he guarantee that not one of the thousands of older people in the Wellington region who are about to have their home help cut will be unsafe; if so how does having a community services card make them more at risk? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The member is referring to an announcement by Capital and Coast District Health Board that it will means test its home cleaning services and this actually brings the board into line with the rest of the country and returns it to the approach it had before 2005. I can tell the member that we spent more money on home support last year and we are spending more money this year. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: How does the Minister respond to this editorial comment in the  
Nelson Mail 
 of 15 September with regard to the plight of the 14 residents of the Joan Whiting Rest Home all of whom are frail and some of whom are in very poor health: “The prospect of uprooting and transplanting them to a foreign environment because in essence the health bureaucracy can’t get its act together is scandalous. If ever there was an unjust problem with a straightforward solution simply begging for some sensible leadership this is it. … We look forward to Mr Ryall filling the vacuum.”; or is the problem that he is the vacuum? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The local member of Parliament Mr Auchinvole has come to me with a solution which is more than that member has ever come to the Government with. That solution I am sure will see very positive progress made in that area. The important thing that I would underline is that if members of Parliament come to me with solutions there can be progress; if a member opposite comes to me with a complaint there will not be. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: Will he guarantee that residents of the Joan Whiting Rest Home will not be thrown out from their home without any option of care in their community; if not what does he suggest they do? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The local member of Parliament Mr Chris Auchinvole has come to me with a proposal that we are working through very closely and I am certain it will result in a very positive outcome for the people affected. There has been a lot of talk in that community about a new integrated health centre. We have not had a time line on that and I know that the Ministry of Health is working closely with the local people on it.
Shanks Katrina: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Shanks Katrina: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:667;Page:14123] 
8. 
KATRINA SHANKS (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: What compensation to superannuitants will be available from 1 October? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 GST compensation will be made available to those receiving New Zealand superannuation and veterans pensions. Tax cuts will also see these payments increase. A typical single superannuitant living alone will receive an extra $31.26 a fortnight in GST compensation and tax cuts. Couples receiving superannuation will get an increase of about $42 a fortnight between them. 
Katrina Shanks 
: Who else will be eligible for GST compensation? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: Benefits will be going up to compensate for the rise in GST. These benefits include the unemployment benefit the sickness benefit the domestic purposes benefit the widows benefit and the invalids benefit. We are also compensating in terms of student allowances the disability allowance the child disability allowance childcare subsidies and Working for Families payments. 
Katrina Shanks 
: Is the Minister aware of any precedent where there has been compensation for a GST increase? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: I am aware that when GST was last raised in 1989 by the then Labour Government from 10 percent to 12.5 percent there was no compensation whatsoever for these groups of people.
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:667;Page:14281] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a document prepared by the Accident Compensation Corporation last year that states that neither Victoria nor South Australia has a threshold for hearing aids for work-related hearing loss. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Vote: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:667;Page:14157] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Noes 68 
New Zealand National 58; Maori Party 5; ACT New Zealand 4; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 163 in the name of the Hon Nanaia Mahuta to clause 35 be agreed to.
Cosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Cosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:667;Page:14120] 
5. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: Does he stand by his statement in relation to the Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010: “I am very relaxed about where it ended up. I was involved in the negotiation of the policy right up to the end.”? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Acting Minister of Justice) 
: 
 Yes. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Were the offences of common assault perjury and the stealing of a dead baby’s identity in order to obtain a false passport ever considered as possible strike offences during those negotiations; if not why not? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: No. The question would have been a generic question; particular offences would not have been addressed in the course of negotiations or discussions. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Did either the Hon Rodney Hide or David Garrett ever reveal during negotiations on the Sentencing and Parole Reform Act that Mr Garrett had previous criminal offences and charges that could call into question the credibility of this Act which he had promoted? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: To the best of my knowledge no. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Does he agree with the Hon Rodney Hide’s statement that “The focus of our police and court system should be keeping law-abiding citizens safe from thugs and bullies. That means a zero tolerance approach to crime” or does he agree with the Hon Rodney Hide’s statements in more recent days in relation to David Garrett’s crimes: “Anyone can turn their life around” and “a person should get a second chance”? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: We are getting away from the primary question but I am happy to say that I agree with both propositions.
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:667;Page:14119] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Minister of Local Government) 
: 
 Absolutely and categorically no. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There is nothing much more I can do about that. 
Sue Moroney 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I was the subject of that abuse and I take offence. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: We are not going to have this sort of carry-on in the House. I have asked the honourable member whether he uttered words that could have been construed as swear words. He has said no. As Speaker that is the end of the matter because only that member can know what he said. Others might think they might have heard something but only that member can know what he said and I must take the member’s word.
Hughes Darren: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Hughes Darren: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:667;Page:14119] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sorry to raise a point of order that takes us back to question No. 3 but I have been advised during the course of that last question that when one of my colleagues interjected during question No. 3 she was sworn at by the Hon Rodney Hide during the course of that interchange. What I have been told is a serious direction of words towards her and if that is the case then the member should be forced to withdraw and apologise to her for it. I am certainly not going to repeat it; I am happy to tell you privately. I think the member— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I can do no more than ask the member whether he uttered any words that could have been construed as swear words towards another member. If the member denies it—
Speaker’s Statements — David Garrett—Change of Parliamentary Membership 
Speaker’s Statements — David Garrett—Change of Parliamentary Membership 
[Volume:667;Page:14105] 
Tuesday 21 September 2010 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Speaker’s Statements 
David Garrett—Change of Parliamentary Membership 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Under Standing Order 35(1)(c) I have been advised by the ACT Party that its parliamentary membership has changed and that David Garrett is no longer a member of the ACT Party for parliamentary purposes. Accordingly under Standing Order 34(4) David Garrett is from 17 September 2010 regarded as an Independent member for parliamentary purposes. Allocations of speaking slots and oral questions will be adjusted. Allocations of funding to the ACT Party and to David Garrett will also be adjusted.
Katene Rahui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Katene Rahui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:667;Page:14107] 
2. 
RAHUI KATENE (Maori Party—Te Tai Tonga) 
 to the  
Attorney-General 
: What requirements must the Crown meet in relation to the burden of proof in the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill and how different is this to former legislation in respect of how the full burden of proof falls on hapu and iwi? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 Under clause 105 of the bill if the Crown does not accept that customary title exists in an area then the Crown has to prove customary title has been extinguished. This requirement is consistent with what the Court of Appeal said in the Ngati Apa case. Under the current legislation applicant groups have to prove the negative—namely that extinguishment has not occurred. The requirement is contrary to what the Court of Appeal said in Ngati Apa and goes against the usual rules about the burden of proof. 
Rahui Katene 
: What did the Court of Appeal say in the Ngati Apa case which has led to the development of a shared burden of proof; and can he name any other precedents in which indigenous peoples have called for a shared burden of proof and the law has responded? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: The Court of Appeal said: “the onus of proving extinguishment lies on the Crown and the … purpose must be clear and plain”. I cannot immediately recall any other precedents involving indigenous peoples but I refer the member to a general affirmative defence—for example a limitation argument under the Limitation Act 2010. Anyone wanting to argue that a claim is time barred has the burden of proving that that is the case. 
Rahui Katene 
: Does he agree that the tests applied in the takutai moana bill reflect New Zealand’s experience better than overseas case law by incorporating tikanga and how will this be achieved in a practical sense? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: Yes I do. I think the tests better reflect New Zealand’s experience because they do draw on both the common law and tikanga. In a practical sense clause 97 of the bill will allow the High Court to refer questions of tikanga to the Maori Appellate Court or to obtain the opinion of a court expert on the question.
Cosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Cosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:667;Page:14128] 
1. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
 to the  
Member in charge of the Electoral (Disqualification of Convicted Prisoners) Amendment Bill 
: What is the purpose of the Electoral (Disqualification of Convicted Prisoners) Amendment Bill? 
PAUL QUINN (Member in charge of the Electoral (Disqualification of Convicted Prisoners) Amendment Bill) 
: 
 The purpose of the bill is to remove the right of persons serving time in jail to be able to vote. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Is he satisfied with the fact that the bill as reported back from the Law and Order Committee will give our worst and longest-serving prisoners such as William Bell Graeme Burton and Clayton Weatherston the right to vote a right they do not have under current law? 
PAUL QUINN 
: Notwithstanding the fact that that member was serving on the select committee that reported back on that bill I am currently— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked a very straight question. It did not receive a straight answer. We voted against the bill and the member knows that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I believe that the member did not prevaricate long; he just happened in passing to mention that the honourable member was on the select committee. I think he was going to answer the substance of the question. 
PAUL QUINN 
: I am advised that there is conflicting advice on the matter and I am still awaiting official word.
Cosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Cosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:667;Page:14128] 
2. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
 to the  
Member in charge of the Electoral (Disqualification of Convicted Prisoners) Amendment Bill 
: Does he intend proposing any changes to the Electoral (Disqualification of Convicted Prisoners) Amendment Bill as reported back from the select committee; if so what? 
PAUL QUINN (Member in charge of the Electoral (Disqualification of Convicted Prisoners) Amendment Bill) 
: 
 Whether I propose any changes to the bill will depend on whether any changes are required to achieve the purpose. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Does the member agree that had the chair of the Law and Order Committee Sandra Goudie not blocked the Ministry of Justice from advising on this bill when requested to by Opposition members of the select committee the mistakes in this reported-back bill could have been avoided? 
PAUL QUINN 
: Not being a member of the Law and Order Committee I am not in a position to comment on that accusation.
Smith Lockwood: Speaker’s Statements — David Garrett—Change of Parliamentary Membership 
Smith Lockwood: Speaker’s Statements — David Garrett—Change of Parliamentary Membership 
[Volume:667;Page:14105] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Under Standing Order 35(1)(c) I have been advised by the ACT Party that its parliamentary membership has changed and that David Garrett is no longer a member of the ACT Party for parliamentary purposes. Accordingly under Standing Order 34(4) David Garrett is from 17 September 2010 regarded as an Independent member for parliamentary purposes. Allocations of speaking slots and oral questions will be adjusted. Allocations of funding to the ACT Party and to David Garrett will also be adjusted.
Vote: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:667;Page:14172] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 67 
New Zealand National 58; Maori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 4; United Future 1. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Amendments agreed to.
Urgent Debates Declined — David Garrett—Status of Relationship with National 
Urgent Debates Declined — David Garrett—Status of Relationship with National 
[Volume:667;Page:14129] 
Urgent Debates Declined 
David Garrett—Status of Relationship with National 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Hon Phil Goff seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the recent announcements from the Prime Minister relating to parliamentary support arrangements for his Government. Standing Order 380 requires that the matter for debate be a particular case of recent occurrence and involve the administrative or ministerial responsibility of the Government. The application relates to a report of a statement made by the Prime Minister that National would not be looking to form any kind of relationship with David Garrett if he stays on as an Independent. The absence of action on the part of the Government is not a particular case of recent occurrence that can be raised for debate under the Standing Order. For there to be a case of recent occurrence an event must have occurred when the application was lodged and that event must be a new situation of importance. The application is therefore declined.
Vote: Financial Markets (Regulators and KiwiSaver) Bill Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Financial Markets (Regulators and KiwiSaver) Bill Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14311] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 65 
New Zealand National 58; Maori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 3; United Future 1. 
Noes 51 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to. 
Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill read a first time.  
Bill referred to the Commerce Committee.
Shanks Katrina: Financial Markets (Regulators and KiwiSaver) Bill Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill — First Reading 
Shanks Katrina: Financial Markets (Regulators and KiwiSaver) Bill Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14305] 
KATRINA SHANKS (National) 
: 
 It is my pleasure to take a call on the Financial Markets (Regulators and KiwiSaver) Bill and the Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill this afternoon. I cannot wait until this legislation comes to the Commerce Committee because I sit on it as does Sam Lotu-Iiga the deputy chairperson who I would like acknowledge had a baby girl this morning. He is now the father of a beautiful little girl called Hope Elizabeth. Hopefully he will be back in time for this legislation to come into the select committee as we kick off the deliberations. 
I am particularly interested in this legislation coming to the select committee for the reason that I am a chartered accountant. A lot of the things that this legislation deals with are in relation to improving auditor regulation. I first started off in accountancy as an auditor in Wellington so for me it is really relevant to see where this discussion goes. I know that the Institute of Chartered Accountants or NZICA is a supporter of this change. That is good to see because it put the regulation of auditors who audit public accounts underneath another regulator and takes it out of the family of the institute. 
So I take just a small call this afternoon to say that I look forward to seeing this legislation come into our select committee and to hearing what the submitters have to say. Thank you very much.
Lee Melissa: Financial Markets (Regulators and KiwiSaver) Bill Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill — First Reading 
Lee Melissa: Financial Markets (Regulators and KiwiSaver) Bill Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14310] 
MELISSA LEE (National) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to rise to make a very short contribution to the Financial Markets (Regulators and KiwiSaver) Bill together with the Auditor Regulation and External Reporting Bill which are obviously being read together. 
I will take a moment to talk about the Financial Markets Authority. This authority will consolidate functions that are currently fragmented across several departments such as the Securities Commission which is the current market conduct regulator; the Government Actuary which is the current market regulator of superannuation and KiwiSaver schemes; certain functions of the Ministry of Economic Development; and also some functions currently undertaken by the Minister of Commerce. The Financial Markets Authority will be the one authority that will look after all of those. 
Obviously the Financial Markets Authority will be focused on promoting fair efficient and transparent financial markets. A key focus will be on a visible proactive surveillance and enforcement role in relation to those markets. Speakers who have spoken before me have talked about the huge financial trouble that New Zealand and the world has had. Investment literacy in New Zealand is very poor and we need to improve the situation. 
I am a member of the Commerce Committee and I look forward to the submissions that will come to it and the work that will be done on this legislation. This is great legislation and I commend it to the House. 
Financial Markets (Regulators and KiwiSaver) Bill read a first time.
Bridges Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Bridges Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:660;Page:15591] 
5. 
SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga) 
 to the  
Minister of Transport 
: What progress is being made on the Tauranga Eastern Link road of national significance? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport) 
: 
 I am pleased to report that we will be turning the first sod on this $455 million project tomorrow more than 6 months ahead of schedule. This is a very significant infrastructure project for New Zealand and an important building block in the Government’s plans for real export-led growth. All those involved in the project have worked hard to bring it forward. We will now have elements of five of the seven roads of national significance under construction those being the Victoria Park tunnel the western ring route the Christchurch motorways the Waikato Expressway and now the Tauranga Eastern Link. 
Simon Bridges 
: What economic benefits will this project bring to the Bay of Plenty? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: The Tauranga Eastern Link will dramatically reduce journey times across the Bay of Plenty leading to significant productivity and economic benefits. It will especially reduce journey times between the cities of Rotorua Whakatane the Bay of Plenty hinterland and New Zealand’s largest export port at Mount Maunganui. It is estimated that the new road will shave up to 24 minutes off travel time for a return journey between Paengaroa and Te Maunga. Construction of the project is expected to employ 200 to 250 people at any given time over the next 5 years with more jobs being created or sustained in support industries and in the wider regional economy. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: How can we have confidence in the figures that the Minister has given us about this road of national significance when the New Zealand Transport Agency website makes it clear that the volume of traffic on the Puhoi to Wellsford road of national significance is between 10000 and 16000 vehicles per day and yesterday during question time he tried to assert that it was 24000? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: The numbers are different depending on whether one uses Warkworth and Wellsford or Puhoi to Warkworth when looking at the numbers. As the member will also know I talked about the number of people travelling on those roads and that includes of course a multiplier for the number of people in each car because quite often there is more than one person per vehicle. Of course Mr Hughes may have trouble with that arithmetic.
Calvert Hilary Jane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Calvert Hilary Jane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:660;Page:15600] 
1. 
HILARY CALVERT (ACT) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Maori Affairs Committee 
: How many submissions have been received on the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill? 
Hon TAU HENARE (Chairperson of the Maori Affairs Committee): 
 As of today 1109 submissions have been received. 
Hilary Calvert 
: Is he aware that a number of people have been unable to send their submissions due to an apparent fault in the online submission process and will he extend the closing date to allow people to get their submissions in? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before the chair of the committee answers that the first part of the question can be asked but not the second part. The second part is a matter for the committee but the chair is welcome to answer the first part of the question. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: It is not my responsibility; it is actually the responsibility of the Office of the Clerk. I am aware that the problems it is having are being looked after as we speak.
Quinn Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Quinn Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:660;Page:15596] 
9. 
PAUL QUINN (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Customs 
: What information has he received on the success of SmartGate? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister of Customs) 
: 
 SmartGate’s success shows just how rapidly New Zealanders have taken to the new technology that the system offers. As a result they have benefited from far quicker processing times on arrival at Auckland Christchurch and Wellington airports. This week the success of SmartGate reached yet another milestone with the system reaching half a million users. That is an excellent result given the system started less than a year ago when the gates were first opened at Auckland Airport. SmartGate is now processing around about 17000 people a week. Yet there is even more good news: from 1 December SmartGate will start processing departures at Auckland Airport as well.
Douglas Roger: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Douglas Roger: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15609] 
Hon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS (ACT) 
: 
 I will be relatively brief. The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill is in essence a relatively simple bill. If one reads the bill one finds it is clear that the Opposition—particularly the Greens but also the Labour Party—is making a mountain out of a molehill. 
The attitude of the Labour Party and the Greens to water is simply crazy or mad if you like. They have no interest in the question of the quality of water. Water quality is not at the heart of their opposition; at the heart of their opposition is the question of ownership. They say that it must be owned by the public. Public ownership is of the essence irrespective of water quality. The goal for the Greens and the Labour Party is for water to be provided only by public institutions when the goal should be to provide quality water at a reasonable price. Frankly provided that the goal is reached of having high-quality water at a reasonable price then we should not be too concerned about whether the water is provided under public ownership community ownership or private ownership. 
I end by saying that over the last weekend I spent some time reading Tony Blair’s book. I recommend it to the Labour members. In the first 100 pages he raises the trials and tribulations he had in bringing a lot of his party members into the 20th century. Some of the things he describes remind me of the New Zealand Labour Party today.
Calder Cam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Calder Cam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:660;Page:15593] 
7. 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Conservation 
: What is the Department of Conservation doing to provide renewable energy to remote areas of public conservation land? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 The Department of Conservation has recently completed a 60-kilowatt solar project to provide power to Motutapu island at a cost of $715000. This is only the first stage of an infrastructural upgrade of the island. Once we upgrade the grid and water reticulation system we estimate achieving annual operating savings of $188000. 
Dr Cam Calder 
: What other initiatives is the Department of Conservation doing as part of its sustainability programme? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: The department is installing renewable energy at a number of islands it administers with a focus on off-grid sites because of the high cost of supplying electricity via diesel generators. The Mana Island solar system for example will cost $100000 and save $567880 over 20 years. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: When was the Department of Conservation’s renewable energy retrofits programme established and under what Government? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: I am aware that the previous Government had many strategies and plans but it is actually the action that matters. We are making sure that we get action in the Department of Conservation. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The question was very specific. It was not about plans strategies or actions; it was about a very— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I hear the member. The question was very clear; I invite the Minister to answer it. First I invite the Hon Steve Chadwick to repeat her question. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: When was the Department of Conservation’s renewable energy retrofits programme established and under what Government? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: I must admit that I do not know the exact date. But it is a very good strategy and if it was established under the Labour Government then I certainly applaud Labour for it.
McClay Todd: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
McClay Todd: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:660;Page:15589] 
3. 
TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) 
 to the  
Minister for Biosecurity 
: What recent announcements has the Government made in relation to the kiwifruit disease Psa? 
Hon DAVID CARTER (Minister for Biosecurity) 
: 
 Today I have announced that the Government is committing $25 million to fund an urgent aggressive containment strategy to fight the kiwifruit disease  
Pseudomonas syringae 
 pv.  
Actinidiae 
 (Psa). This will be matched dollar for dollar by the industry resulting in a $50 million Government-industry plan to tackle the spread of Psa and minimise its impact on New Zealand’s $1.5 billion kiwifruit industry. The rapid response made by the Government to this issue is a great example of the industry and the Government working together and in the words of Zespri itself it demonstrates this Government’s commitment to the New Zealand kiwifruit industry. 
Todd McClay 
: What are the details of the response package announced today? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: The response package announced today reflects the compelling proposal put to the Government yesterday by the industry. If approved by growers it will see an aggressive programme of management action such as pruning back infected canes and vines awarding compensation to affected growers for loss of income and continuing research into the disease. Once the initial stages of response are complete and infection rates are minimised the industry will put together a long-term self-funded pest management strategy. The aim is not eradication but doing the utmost to minimise the impact of Psa on one of our brightest primary sector industries. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: How much would it cost to rehire the 54 front-line Biosecurity New Zealand job positions that he cut in 2009 and will this be part of the response package so that future disease incursions will have a greater chance of being stopped at the border? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: I cannot answer with accuracy on that figure but I am certainly aware that the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry faced a $4 million deficit associated with a dramatic fall in cargo volumes of 45 percent. 
Todd McClay 
: Why did the Government decide to make such a large commitment to the kiwifruit industry? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: Today’s announcement of a major funding commitment was a decision not made lightly by the Government. It recognised the compelling case put forward by the kiwifruit industry to ensure its future viability and the major contribution that kiwifruit makes to the New Zealand economy. It also recognises this Government’s commitment to our biosecurity system and to New Zealand’s primary sector.
Auchinvole Chris: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Auchinvole Chris: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15586] 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National—West Coast - Tasman) 
: 
 I am a little saddened to hear the desultory speech from the previous speaker Phil Twyford who has been at least involved in the full process of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. I think he could have done better than he did. However it was comforting to hear Shane Jones speaking at an earlier stage. He is a loquacious speaker. 
Debate interrupted. 
Sitting suspended from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15582] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the report be adopted. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Report adopted.
Roy Eric: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Roy Eric: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15582] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: I move  
That the report be adopted.
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15582] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 3 be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Clause 3 agreed to. 
Bill reported with amendment.
Tisch Lindsay: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Tisch Lindsay: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15573] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I did not deduct any time from the member. He carried on and was actually talking about the provision of race— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Rates. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: —rates in terms of Maori land. I said he had 1 minute and 13 seconds remaining and in that 1 minute and 13 seconds he did not actually mention anything that he had said he intended to mention. I have judged that the scope of this debate is a very narrow one. Under Speakers’ ruling 65/3 I am the sole judge of relevance. I have ruled that I will accept the closure motion and that is where it stands.
Cosgrove Clayton: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Cosgrove Clayton: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15573] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I wish to raise a matter with you. You are right that you have ruled in respect of relevancy. I point out that in doing that in respect of Mr Jones you reversed your ruling. He was dealing with a very narrow point as I understand it in respect of the rating of Maori land. You called him out for that. You subsequently reversed that and the words you used were: “You are correct.” It is a very narrow point which has not been examined by other speakers but you denied him a second call.
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15581] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Clause 2 agreed to.
Tisch Lindsay: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Tisch Lindsay: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15573] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: No. I thank the member for his comments. I am the sole judge of the relevance of the debate. On many occasions as is well known I have asked members to come back to Part 2 and schedules 2 and 3. This debate has been going for nearly 50 minutes. It is a very narrow debate on a very small number of provisions. Determining the relevance of the debate is at my sole discretion and I have accepted the closure motion. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Mr Chairperson— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I do not intend to debate this matter further. I have accepted the closure motion and I will put it to the vote. That is where it stands.
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15581] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Clause 1 agreed to.
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15581] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 51 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Auchinvole Chris: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Auchinvole Chris: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15581] 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National—West Coast - Tasman) 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Calder Cam: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Calder Cam: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15578] 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15615] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Bill read a third time.
Macindoe Tim: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Macindoe Tim: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15577] 
TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading 
Vote: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15635] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments recommended by the Education and Science Committee by majority be agreed to. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 51 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Question agreed to.
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15574] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 3 be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Schedule 3 agreed to.
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15574] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Schedule 2 agreed to.
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15574] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Part 2 agreed to.
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15573] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Auchinvole Chris: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Auchinvole Chris: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15573] 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National—West Coast - Tasman) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The question is that the question be now put.
Calder Cam: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Calder Cam: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15571] 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Upston Louise: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Upston Louise: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15569] 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading 
Vote: Education Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15635] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Education Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a second time. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 51 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Bill read a second time.
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15563] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 as amended be agreed to.  
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15563] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to.  
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Amendments agreed to.
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:15562] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to.  
Ayes 56 
New Zealand Labour 41; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 175 in the name of the Hon Rodney Hide to clauses 16 25 26 and 32 and the following amendment in his name to clause 41 be agreed to: 
to omit “may” and substitute “must”.