edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Bennett David: Remuneration Authority Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Bennett David: Remuneration Authority Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:657;Page:6900] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 Tonight we are discussing the Remuneration Authority Amendment Bill. The bill is an amendment to the Remuneration Authority Act 1977 and basically requires the Remuneration Authority to take into account adverse economic conditions based on evidence from an authoritative source in determining the salary or remuneration of persons or groups of persons covered by the Act. The bill also makes a number of technical changes which are quite minor.  
The heart of what we are looking at tonight is a bill that seeks to take into account the economic conditions of our time. In recent years there has been a major impact on the world economy of the financial crisis that has predominantly occurred in North America but has gone round Europe and the rest of the world. That has led to a situation where many New Zealanders face uncertainty in their lives especially financial uncertainty. It is a time when Governments have had to take on board an approach that delivers a strong economic base so that a country can survive and prosper in the long term.  
Part of that process for the Government was to take into account any costs that may be incurred by it. The Government is therefore looking at the Remuneration Authority which has the ability to set for example the wages of members of Parliament. It is giving it the authority to take into account the economic conditions of the time in making such a determination. The bill is a result of the economic situation we have found ourselves in through the international crisis. It is an attempt to make sure that the Remuneration Authority takes into account such conditions when setting the salaries of members of Parliament.  
Hon Member 
: It’s the right thing to do. 
DAVID BENNETT 
: It is the right thing to do as my colleague on my right says. We look forward to the bill progressing through the House.
Hughes Darren: Road User Charges Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Hughes Darren: Road User Charges Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:655;Page:4790] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to speak to the Road User Charges Amendment Bill moved by the Minister of Transport who also subtly made reference to the fact that he intends to move an instruction to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee that it report the bill back by 27 July. That date is not too far from today but we heard no explanation or justification from the Minister as to why the bill has to be dealt with as quickly as he intends. That is a constant theme of this Government. The few bills that are sent to a select committee are sent with a cut-off time for referrals. We are not seeing the proper scrutiny of legislation that one would expect to see from our Parliament because we are constantly being told that bills have to be reported back faster than would ordinarily be the case. However that is how the Minister wants to run it. 
In the one minute that remains before the House rises for the night I say it concerns me enormously that we have had no explanation from the Minister about how the system he is proposing will be administered. We are now told that when an increase is announced people who buy road-user charges will be able to apply for a refund after the point has come for that increase to take place. One can only imagine the bureaucracy involved in giving those refunds. Moving staff from the front line to the pump line seems to be the National Government’s new theory when it comes to this bill. I look forward to addressing more issues of substance. 
Debate interrupted.
Adams Amy: Motor Vehicle Sales Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Adams Amy: Motor Vehicle Sales Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:655;Page:4768] 
AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) 
: 
 I also rise to support the Motor Vehicle Sales Amendment Bill. As we have heard already in this debate this bill amends the Motor Vehicle Sales Act 2003 the principal Act. When that Act was brought into force it was designed to focus on consumers: to ensure that their interests were protected that they could operate with some confidence and that they could make informed choices. The principal Act recognised that often we are dealing with consumers who are naive and who are not experienced business people and that particular safeguards needed to be in place. 
The Minister of Consumer Affairs the Hon Heather Roy talked in her speech at the opening of this first reading debate about the necessity for proactive assessment of the relevance and effectiveness of legislation and that is where this amendment bill has come from. I certainly commend her for saying that because I agree with her that it is important that we review our compliance regimes on a regular basis and ensure that they continue to meet our needs. From the 2006 review of the principal Act we now have this amendment bill which does three things. Firstly it reduces compliance where the Act has been shown to be causing unnecessary time and cost to business; secondly it removes loopholes that were found to have put weakness into the consumer protection regime; and thirdly it enhances the power and jurisdiction of the Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal ensuring that consumers have efficient and effective low-cost remedies available to them in the instances of disputes. In all three regards I think the bill is to be commended. It has shown up useful ways that we can improve the operation of the law and I commend the Minister for bringing it to the House. 
I just want to talk in a little detail about the reduction of compliance; this is something I have spoken about in the House on many occasions. [ 
Interruption 
] Thank you for that I say to my dear friend. The National-led Government is always focused on removing compliance. Where we can get the cost of doing business down without decreasing the protections for consumers we will support that. This bill has identified a number of key areas in which that can be done. It can be done through getting rid of some double-up in the annual certification and it can be done by getting rid of the consumer information notices in situations that they were never meant to apply to and that they have proved to be of no use in. This bill does those things and I commend it to the House. 
Bill read a first time.  
Bill referred to the Commerce Committee.
Power Simon: Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Bill — First Reading 
Power Simon: Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:655;Page:4789] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I move  
That the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee consider the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Bill 
 that the committee report finally to the House on or before 15 September 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). 
Motion agreed to.
Smith Nick: Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading Forestry Sector) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Smith Nick: Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading Forestry Sector) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:655;Page:4742] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Climate Change Issues) 
: 
 I seek leave of the House for the first and second parts and the title of the bill to be taken as one question. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? There is no opposition. Leave is granted.
King Annette: Urgent Debates Declined — Ministry of Social Development—Job Cuts 
King Annette: Urgent Debates Declined — Ministry of Social Development—Job Cuts 
[Volume:655;Page:4723] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
: 
 The announcement has subsequently been made. I seek leave for the debate to be held forthwith. Bearing in mind that the Prime Minister has said how important child abuse is in New Zealand I would like this House to address the matter forthwith. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection to that? There is objection.
Key John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Key John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4712] 
Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a briefing note from the Inland Revenue Department that shows that the Leader of the Opposition’s claims that 3.2 percent of taxpayers are receiving one-third of all benefit is in fact quite incorrect; 3.2 percent of taxpayers are in fact getting 16.6 percent of the benefit. 
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.
Upston Louise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Upston Louise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4716] 
7. 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What recent decisions have been made about funding for early childhood services? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Yesterday Cabinet agreed to increased funding rates for early childhood education services using funding set aside in a tagged contingency at Budget 2009. The funding will provide an inflation increase of 1.95 percent to funding rates and maintain the value of existing subsidies in line with pre-election commitments. The additional funding over 4 years is $27 million. 
Louise Upston 
: What other changes has the Government made to increase the access to early childhood education services? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: Yesterday Cabinet also agreed to the policy changes necessary to include 5-year-olds kohanga reo and playcentres in the 20 hours’ early childhood education scheme from July 2010 and to remove the 6-hour daily limit from 2011. These changes give parents more flexibility about how to use their 20 hours and acknowledge the quality care and education that whanau-led and parent-led early childhood education services provide. 
Sue Moroney 
: Has the Minister forgotten about her other recent decisions about funding early childhood education services where she axed planned improved staff-child ratios put a stop to centres of innovation and canned the ECE Advisory Training/Education Fund and other professional development programmes all aimed at ensuring the quality of our early childhood education services? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: At a time of economic recession which that party seems to have forgotten about tough decisions have to be made and expenditure redirected into priority areas. In early childhood education actually this Government’s priority is increased participation amongst the target groups. I know that that is anathema to the party opposite which while in Government had millions of dollars to spray around but this Government believes that increasing participation amongst Maori Pasifika and children from low socio-economic areas who are the least likely to get it now is a top priority. That is where we are directing our funds.
Smith Lockwood: By-Election — Mt Albert 
Smith Lockwood: By-Election — Mt Albert 
[Volume:655;Page:4707] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have been advised by the Chief Electoral Officer pursuant to section 185 of the Electoral Act 1993 that the name of the member elected to the House of Representatives for the Mt Albert Electoral District is David James Shearer.
Garrett David: Misuse of Drugs (Medicinal Cannabis) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Garrett David: Misuse of Drugs (Medicinal Cannabis) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:655;Page:4858] 
DAVID GARRETT (ACT) 
: 
 I was not going to speak on the Misuse of Drugs (Medicinal Cannabis) Amendment Bill and I was going to save my vote as a surprise at the end but I have found myself unable to resist the temptation to rise to speak to it after hearing the contribution from Metiria Turei and after what has occurred over the last couple of days. 
Like other members I am sure my BlackBerry has been buzzing since last Monday with exhortations from various people dozens and dozens of them about the anti-smacking bill—the child discipline bill. But I have received just as many from the thousands and thousands of amputees cancer victims end-stage HIV sufferers and others who exhort me to support this bill. I find that rather amusing. 
Metiria Turei managed to get through her speech—10 minutes I think—with a completely straight face. She had this House believe that this bill is all about the medicinal use of cannabis. In dozens of other arguments since I have been here the Greens have given us dire warnings about the thin end of the wedge and measures that were supported by both major sides of the House found obstacles over there because they were the “thin edge of the wedge”. Not on this one though. 
Let us take Tasers as an example. Members on both sides with various degrees of caution see the use of Tasers as a good alternative to being shot but the Greens see it as the police going around terrorising everyone and extracting confessions from people on the ground. But apparently the provisions in this bill will not go any further than cancer victims end-stage HIV sufferers and amputees. 
Todd McClay 
: And people without appetites. 
DAVID GARRETT 
: Yes indeed. 
But having said all of that on a matter of principle I intend to support the bill because I think that bills should always go to a select committee. Ms Dyson probably will not appreciate my support but the arguments she made a second ago make plenty of sense. The select committee process is valid things come out of it and I have confidence that if the bill was to get to a select committee the idea that cannabis is a treatment for psychiatric illness would very quickly emerge as a ludicrous one. 
I have a close friend in Taranaki who is a psychiatric nurse and she has talked to me about the young people in the psychiatric ward of Taranaki Base Hospital. She told me every single one who has acute psychosis has problems with cannabis use. In respect of asthma well cannabis was used for that in the 1920s. I was not around in the 1920s but Indian hemp as it was then called was a recognised treatment for asthma. We now have much better things. My young boy has asthma and he has a puffer rather than a joint. 
But having said all of that I think that on principle as I have said bills especially members’ bills should have the courtesy of being sent to select committee for examination. For that reason alone I intend for myself to support the bill at this stage.
Urgent Debates Declined — Ministry of Social Development—Job Cuts 
Urgent Debates Declined — Ministry of Social Development—Job Cuts 
[Volume:655;Page:4723] 
Urgent Debates Declined 
Ministry of Social Development—Job Cuts 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Hon Annette King seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the Government announcement today that the Ministry of Social Development is cutting up to 200 jobs including a team of social workers dedicated to child abuse education. 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. For there to be a particular case of recent occurrence the event upon which an urgent debate is sought must be an event that has occurred when the application is lodged. The member’s application indicates that a proposal was revealed in May and that the media have indicated that the Government is set to make an announcement today. An urgent debate cannot be granted on the basis of media speculation. An event occurs at the point in time when a decision is publicly announced. The member has provided no authentication of an actual announcement by the Government today. Every statement in a letter seeking to debate a matter of urgent public importance must be authenticated. Therefore in accordance with Speaker’s ruling 170/5 the application is declined on that ground. 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
: 
 The announcement has subsequently been made. I seek leave for the debate to be held forthwith. Bearing in mind that the Prime Minister has said how important child abuse is in New Zealand I would like this House to address the matter forthwith. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection to that? There is objection.
By-Election — Mt Albert 
By-Election — Mt Albert 
[Volume:655;Page:4707] 
Tuesday 30 June 2009 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
By-Election 
Mt Albert 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have been advised by the Chief Electoral Officer pursuant to section 185 of the Electoral Act 1993 that the name of the member elected to the House of Representatives for the Mt Albert Electoral District is David James Shearer.
Turei Metiria: Sittings of the House 
Turei Metiria: Sittings of the House 
[Volume:655;Page:4873] 
METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 The House has made excellent progress this evening. I seek leave for the House to rise a few minutes before it normally would. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Vote: Climate Change (Transport Funding) Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Climate Change (Transport Funding) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:655;Page:4850] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Climate Change (Transport Funding) Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Motion not agreed to.
Vote: Liquor Advertising (Television and Radio) Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Liquor Advertising (Television and Radio) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:655;Page:4872] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the Liquor Advertising (Television and Radio) Bill be now read a first time.  
Ayes 36 
Anderton 
Delahunty 
Hodgson 
Sio 
Ardern J 
Dyson 
Kedgley 
Street 
Barker 
Fenton 
King A 
Turei 
Beaumont 
Fitzsimons (P) 
Locke (P) 
Turia 
Bradford (P) 
Flavell 
Mackey 
Twyford 
Burns 
Graham 
Mahuta 
Chauvel 
Hague (P) 
Moroney 
Choudhary 
Harawira 
Norman (P) 
Dalziel 
Hawkins 
Pillay 
Teller: 
Davis 
Hipkins 
Sharples 
Robertson G 
Noes 80 
Adams 
Dean 
Key (P) 
Roy H (P) 
Ardern S (P) 
Dunne (P) 
King C (P) 
Ryall (P) 
Auchinvole 
English (P) 
Laban (P) 
Sepuloni (P) 
Bakshi (P) 
Finlayson (P) 
Lee (P) 
Shanks (P) 
Bennett D (P) 
Foss (P) 
Lees-Galloway  
Smith L (P) 
Bennett P (P) 
Garrett (P) 
Lotu-Iiga (P) 
Smith N 
Blue 
Gilmore 
Macindoe 
te Heuheu (P) 
Borrows 
Goff (P) 
Mallard (P) 
Tisch (P) 
Boscawen (P) 
Goudie (P) 
Mapp (P) 
Tolley (P) 
Bridges (P) 
Groser (P) 
McClay  
Tremain 
Brownlee (P) 
Guy (P) 
McCully (P) 
Upston 
Calder 
Hayes (P) 
Nash 
Wagner (P) 
Carter D  
Heatley 
O’Connor (P) 
Wilkinson (P) 
Carter J (P) 
Henare (P) 
Parata 
Williamson (P) 
Chadwick 
Hide (P) 
Peachey (P) 
Wong (P) 
Coleman (P) 
Horomia (P) 
Power 
Woodhouse (P) 
Collins (P) 
Hughes (P) 
Prasad 
Young (P) 
Cosgrove (P) 
Huo 
Quinn 
Cunliffe (P) 
Hutchison (P) 
Ririnui (P) 
Curran (P) 
Joyce (P) 
Robertson H (P) 
Teller: 
Kaye 
Roy E 
Goodhew  
Motion not agreed to.
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:655;Page:4797] 
RAHUI KATENE (Maori Party—Te Tai Tonga) 
: 
 My question is to the Attorney-General the Hon Chris Finlayson—
Dunne Peter: Points of Order — Parliamentary Press Gallery—Access to Parliamentary Complex 
Dunne Peter: Points of Order — Parliamentary Press Gallery—Access to Parliamentary Complex 
[Volume:655;Page:4793] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This matter has been raised from time to time and I hesitate to raise it again. The daily journey from Bowen House to the parliamentary Chamber is becoming more and more impeded by the throng of journalists in the main foyer. Surely they can be corralled to one side or even behind a barrier to enable members to make their way freely and not have to scoot around the side or try and force their way through the ruck. It is a public thoroughfare; it is not a place for journalists to conduct their daily business. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I appreciate the point raised by the honourable member. I will look into it to make sure that members’ progress is not impeded.
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4797] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is just the matter of the method of asking the question including the name of the Minister which we do not do. It is a practice that I hope we would not get into. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is a fair point the member has made. The honourable member might note we do not normally name the Minister. The question is to the Attorney-General. I ask her to direct her question to the Attorney-General.
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Boscawen John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4810] 
12. 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN (ACT) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: Has he received any reports on the proportion of successful complaints to the Banking Ombudsman regarding ING Managed Funds DYF and RIF; if so does he consider this to be an acceptable level for a Government-appointed default KiwiSaver provider? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 The Banking Ombudsman’s office is continuing to investigate complaints made by members of the public who believe they were ill advised about these investments. I understand that some of the investors who were advised to make inappropriate investment decisions have been compensated and that a number of claims are still being processed. In addition the Commerce Commission is investigating the sale promotion and marketing of various funds under the Fair Trading Act. It should be noted that the funds in question are not KiwiSaver funds and I have received no reports of similar complaints about any KiwiSaver fund. 
John Boscawen 
: How can the Minister conclude anything other than that investors in ING have been ripped off when the Banking Ombudsman has upheld two-thirds of the complaints processed? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The fact that the Banking Ombudsman has upheld that proportion of complaints is a matter for people to draw their own judgment on. In respect of a KiwiSaver provider’s role that matter is subject to the terms of the 7-year—I think—contract signed by the previous Government and I would have to investigate that arrangement to see whether any kind of change could be made on the basis of the behaviour of a provider. That may be a bit difficult; all KiwiSaver funds as far as we are aware have been properly supervised and looked after. I certainly have not had any advice that the arrangements for KiwiSaver could be questioned on the basis of other things that those institutions do. 
John Boscawen 
: Does the Minister think it is acceptable behaviour for KiwiSaver provider ING to require that an 84-year-old frail investor who wishes to accept ING’s paltry offer resubmit the claim to the Banking Ombudsman as a statutory declaration if the investor is to benefit from her finding; and does the Minister not see this as ING simply making it harder for the elderly who have lost their life-savings? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: In these cases my sympathy—particularly in my role as a constituent MP—is with those investors who have lost what is often their life-savings. However it is a matter of legal interpretation as to whether the way in which ING is conducting business in respect to those depositors would affect its status as a KiwiSaver provider. It is unlikely but I am happy to pursue the matter in the way that the member has raised it.
Hipkins Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Hipkins Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4809] 
11. 
CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) 
 to the  
Minister of Internal Affairs 
: Will he honour all of the commitments made by the previous Minister of Internal Affairs? 
Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister of Internal Affairs) 
: 
 I am currently considering my priorities for the internal affairs portfolio having had just 15 days in my new role. 
Chris Hipkins 
: Has he reviewed all of the appointments to boards and committees and other similar roles made by the previous Minister of Internal Affairs; if not why not? 
Hon NATHAN GUY 
: That member needs to know that these appointments went through a very through process. There was a nomination process they went to the Cabinet appointments and honours committee and they have been through the Cabinet process and the caucus process as well. 
Chris Hipkins 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think you will find that the Minister did not address the question. I asked him whether— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There is a point of order on the floor and members will respect that. 
Chris Hipkins 
: My question was very specific. It asked whether he would review the appointments and he did not address that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister pointed out that they had been through a process involving Cabinet and a range of mechanisms. Clearly from what the Minister said as they have been through that process they are not about to go through that process again. I think that by implication that answers the question. 
Chris Hipkins 
: Can he assure the House that all of the appointments made by the previous Minister of Internal Affairs followed the proper process and were made in accordance with the highest ethical standards—yes or no? 
Hon NATHAN GUY 
: Yes.
Peachey Allan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Peachey Allan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4804] 
6. 
ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tamaki) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What reports if any has she received on proposals to change the way schools provide information to their communities? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I have received legislation from the Labour Party education spokesperson that proposes a new Labour Party policy to amend the Official Information Act so that “school-level assessment information must not be publicly released.” This legislation if passed would ban schools from releasing information about how they as a whole or some of their classes were doing at raising achievement amongst their pupils. Schools could be prohibited from voluntarily providing any of this information to their own school community. That is how much the Labour Party respects school communities. 
Allan Peachey 
: What reports has the Minister received on the effect this would have on schools’ day-to-day business? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: The initial advice I have received is that the legislation drafted by the Labour Party education spokesman would mean the following bans placed on schools: firstly schools would be banned from putting information about students’ achievement levels in their school newsletter because this would be publishing information to the public and secondly school reports would no longer be able to have class averages in them which means that parents would have no idea how their child was doing against the rest of the class. That is how Draconian and secretive the Labour Party wants to be. It wants to stop schools engaging with their local communities— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: This answer is going on for a long time. 
Allan Peachey 
: What reports has the Minister received on how the proposal will alter the ability of schools to engage with their school communities? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: I have received initial advice that the legislation drafted by the Labour Party would mean that schools would be prohibited from providing information to their communities on how they achieved against their student achievement targets just as many schools currently do. Parents around the country are crying out for more information from schools and the Labour Party education spokesman has drafted legislation that not only slams the door in parents’ faces but also muzzles schools from voluntarily engaging with their communities. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Is the Minister prepared to work with the Labour Party to improve the draft in order to achieve her wish of a trouble-free implementation of a national standards approach? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: I have said to the member before that if he puts something sensible in front of me I am prepared to talk to him. I will not pre-empt the consultation process that finishes on Friday. I will not pre-empt that process and I will not be drawn on hypotheticals. I will not support any mechanism or legislation that muzzles schools from having ongoing dialogue with their communities and with parents.
Vote: Misuse of Drugs (Medicinal Cannabis) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Misuse of Drugs (Medicinal Cannabis) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:655;Page:4864] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the Misuse of Drugs (Medicinal Cannabis) Amendment Bill be read a first time. 
Ayes 34 
Ardern J 
Fenton (P) 
Kedgley 
Robertson G  
Beaumont 
Fitzsimons 
King A (P) 
Roy H (P) 
Boscawen 
Garrett 
Lees-Galloway 
Sepuloni 
Bradford 
Graham 
Locke (P) 
Street 
Burns 
Hague (P) 
Mackey 
Turei 
Chauvel (P) 
Harawira 
Moroney (P) 
Twyford (P) 
Cunliffe (P) 
Hide (P) 
Norman (P) 
Delahunty 
Hipkins 
Pillay (P) 
Teller: 
Dyson 
Hodgson 
Prasad 
Chadwick 
Noes 84 
Adams 
Dean 
Key (P) 
Shanks (P) 
Anderton (P) 
Dunne (P) 
King C (P) 
Sharples (P) 
Ardern S (P) 
English (P) 
Laban (P) 
Sio 
Auchinvole (P) 
Finlayson  
Lee (P) 
Smith L (P) 
Bakshi (P) 
Flavell (P) 
Lotu-Iiga 
Smith N 
Barker (P) 
Foss (P) 
Macindoe 
te Heuheu (P) 
Bennett D (P) 
Gilmore 
Mahuta 
Tisch (P) 
Bennett P (P) 
Goff (P) 
Mallard (P) 
Tolley (P) 
Blue 
Goudie 
Mapp (P) 
Tremain 
Borrows 
Groser (P) 
McClay 
Turia (P) 
Bridges (P) 
Guy (P) 
McCully (P) 
Upston 
Brownlee (P) 
Hawkins (P) 
Nash 
Wagner 
Calder (P) 
Hayes (P) 
O’Connor (P) 
Wilkinson 
Carter D 
Heatley (P) 
Parata 
Williamson (P) 
Carter J 
Henare (P) 
Parker (P) 
Wong (P) 
Choudhary (P) 
Horomia (P) 
Peachey 
Woodhouse (P) 
Coleman 
Hughes 
Power 
Young (P) 
Collins (P) 
Huo (P) 
Quinn 
Cosgrove (P) 
Hutchison 
Ririnui (P) 
Curran (P) 
Joyce (P) 
Robertson H (P) 
Dalziel (P) 
Katene (P) 
Roy E 
Teller: 
Davis 
Kaye 
Ryall (P) 
Goodhew 
Motion not agreed to. 
The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 34 Noes 86.
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Australia—President of the Senate Commonwealth Parliament 
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Australia—President of the Senate Commonwealth Parliament 
[Volume:655;Page:4793] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that Senator Hon John Hogg President of the Senate of the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed and accorded a seat on the left of the Chair. 
Senator Hon John Hogg accompanied by the Deputy Speaker entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4723] 
1. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee 
: Will the Finance and Expenditure Committee give consideration to the proposed banking inquiry at its meeting this week? 
CRAIG FOSS (Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee): 
 The committee is scheduled to spend time this week considering whether to initiate an inquiry into the relationship between the official cash rate and short-term interest rates. This matter is scheduled to be considered from 10.50 a.m. to 11.45 a.m. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Does the chair anticipate that this will provide sufficient time to consider whether to proceed with an inquiry during the meeting this week? 
CRAIG FOSS 
: I am sure that depends on all the other business before the committee but we will try to give it our due consideration.
Points of Order — Parliamentary Press Gallery—Access to Parliamentary Complex 
Points of Order — Parliamentary Press Gallery—Access to Parliamentary Complex 
[Volume:655;Page:4793] 
Points of Order 
Parliamentary Press Gallery—Access to Parliamentary Complex 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This matter has been raised from time to time and I hesitate to raise it again. The daily journey from Bowen House to the parliamentary Chamber is becoming more and more impeded by the throng of journalists in the main foyer. Surely they can be corralled to one side or even behind a barrier to enable members to make their way freely and not have to scoot around the side or try and force their way through the ruck. It is a public thoroughfare; it is not a place for journalists to conduct their daily business. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I appreciate the point raised by the honourable member. I will look into it to make sure that members’ progress is not impeded.
Visitors — Australia—President of the Senate Commonwealth Parliament 
Visitors — Australia—President of the Senate Commonwealth Parliament 
[Volume:655;Page:4793] 
Wednesday 1 July 2009 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Australia—President of the Senate Commonwealth Parliament 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that Senator Hon John Hogg President of the Senate of the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed and accorded a seat on the left of the Chair. 
Senator Hon John Hogg accompanied by the Deputy Speaker entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
Turei Metiria: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Turei Metiria: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4712] 
METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I seek leave of the House to table the  
Synthesis Report 
 referred to in question No. 1 today prepared by members of the scientific steering committee for the International Alliance of Research Universities congress and released on 19 June 2009. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is none. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates — Ministry of Social Development—Job Cuts 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates — Ministry of Social Development—Job Cuts 
[Volume:655;Page:4813] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Hon Annette King seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the Government announcement yesterday that the Ministry of Social Development is cutting up to 200 jobs including a team of social workers dedicated to child abuse education. This is a case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility and I consider that it does deserve the immediate attention of the House. I call on the member to move the motion.
King Annette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
King Annette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:655;Page:4812] 
2. 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Social Services Committee 
: Will the Children Young Persons and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill be reported back on 8 July 2009? 
KATRINA SHANKS (Chairperson of the Social Services Committee): 
 The report-back date for the bill is 18 August 2009. 
Hon Annette King 
: Has she as the chair of the committee been advised by the Minister for Social Development and Employment— 
Chris Tremain 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek your guidance Mr Speaker. The Hon Annette King in asking the substantive question said “8 July”. The question sheet I have here has the date 18 August so the Hon Annette King did not ask the question that is on the question sheet. 
Hon Annette King 
: Mr Speaker my apologies if I misread it; I will read it again. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If it assists the good order of the House let us go back to the start. Again I apologise for not picking that up. 
Hon Annette King 
: Will the Children Young Persons and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill be reported back on 8 August 2009? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I would ask the member to read the question that is on the Order Paper. 
Chris Tremain 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This side of the House is fed up with this question. There have been two chances to ask the question correctly and the former Minister has not asked it correctly. We think that is probably enough of this question. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There will be order in the House! I accept the point the member is making but I think that in the interests of democracy the member should be invited to get the question correct. The Hon Annette King. [ 
Interruption 
] I want to hear her! 
Hon Annette King 
: My question is to the chairperson of the Social Services Select Committee. Will the Children Young Persons and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill be reported back on 18 August 2009? 
KATRINA SHANKS 
: The report-back date for the bill is 18 August 2009. 
Hon Annette King 
: Has she as the chair of the committee been advised by the Minister for Social Development and Employment that the bill may be delayed; if so what are the reasons for the delay? 
KATRINA SHANKS 
: All discussions on this bill remain confidential to the committee until it makes its report back to the House. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I know that that question took a long time to come but in fact there was another mistake. The question should have been addressed to the chairperson of the Social Services Committee. I am sure the member will correct it when she gets her  
Hansard 
. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the honourable member.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Ministry of Social Development—Job Cuts 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Ministry of Social Development—Job Cuts 
[Volume:655;Page:4723] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Hon Annette King seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the Government announcement today that the Ministry of Social Development is cutting up to 200 jobs including a team of social workers dedicated to child abuse education. 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. For there to be a particular case of recent occurrence the event upon which an urgent debate is sought must be an event that has occurred when the application is lodged. The member’s application indicates that a proposal was revealed in May and that the media have indicated that the Government is set to make an announcement today. An urgent debate cannot be granted on the basis of media speculation. An event occurs at the point in time when a decision is publicly announced. The member has provided no authentication of an actual announcement by the Government today. Every statement in a letter seeking to debate a matter of urgent public importance must be authenticated. Therefore in accordance with Speaker’s ruling 170/5 the application is declined on that ground.
Sittings of the House 
Sittings of the House 
[Volume:655;Page:4873] 
Sittings of the House 
METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 The House has made excellent progress this evening. I seek leave for the House to rise a few minutes before it normally would. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Carter John: Remuneration Authority Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Carter John: Remuneration Authority Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:657;Page:6906] 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Minister of Civil Defence) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Labour 
: I move  
That the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee 
 consider the  
Remuneration Authority Amendment Bill that the committee report finally to the House on or before 16 November 2009 and that the committee have the 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). 
Motion agreed to.
Garrett David: Voting — Correction—Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill 
Garrett David: Voting — Correction—Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill 
[Volume:657;Page:6881] 
DAVID GARRETT (ACT) 
: 
 I seek leave to amend the ACT Party’s vote on the first reading of the Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill.  
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought. Is anyone opposed to that course of action? There appears not to be. The member may state the amended position. 
DAVID GARRETT 
: I stated that there were five votes in favour when the vote should have been five votes opposed. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: That will not change the outcome of the result but the result will be amended. The Ayes are 63; the Noes are 58.
Vote: Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:657;Page:6879] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 63 
New Zealand National 58; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Noes 58 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1. 
Bill read a first time. 
Result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 68 Noes 53.
Vote: Urgency 
Vote: Urgency 
[Volume:657;Page:6854] 
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: Business of Select Committees — Motion to Establish Select Committee—Discharge 
Brownlee Gerry: Business of Select Committees — Motion to Establish Select Committee—Discharge 
[Volume:657;Page:6853] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That Government order of the day No. 1 be discharged. 
Motion agreed to.
Moroney Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Moroney Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:657;Page:6847] 
7.  
SUE MORONEY (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: Does she stand by her statement “Early childhood education and care is a top priority for this Government.”? 
Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) 
on behalf of the  
Minister of Education 
: Yes. 
Sue Moroney 
: How many new places has she funded for early childhood education services given that her ministry estimates that 19000 new places are required by 2011 just to maintain the increased participation rates achieved under Labour; can the Minister be careful not to include the additional places funded by the previous Labour Government when she answers? 
Hon SIMON POWER 
: Although I do not have those specific numbers with me today I can advise the House that Vote Early Childhood Education has seen a 7 percent increase from last year in funds made available. In fact $69.7 million of new money over the next 4 years was announced in the Budget this year starting with Budget 2009 and I am sure that the sector will prioritise the spending in the interests of our children. 
Sue Moroney 
: In the interests of our children then will she lift the cap on tertiary providers so that they can train more early childhood education teachers for this sector where there is high demand and which could be one of the few growth sectors for employment particularly for women; if not why not? 
Hon SIMON POWER 
: I am sure those ratios have been well thought through and the basis and logic for them well-thought-out. 
Sue Moroney 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister failed to answer the question. I did not ask anything about ratios. The question was about the cap of tertiary providers and whether it would be lifted in order to train more early childhood education teachers. The question was not about ratios. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the Minister is prepared to provide more information. 
Hon SIMON POWER 
: I am sure the logic for the cap was well-thought-out and the logic behind it will do the best in providing provision and services for our children. 
Sue Moroney 
: When will the Minister turn her attention to making progress on the early childhood education sector which she herself has said is a top priority for this Government? 
Hon SIMON POWER 
: The Minister’s attention has been firmly on this matter since 19 November and will continue to be so right through her tenure in this role. 
Sue Moroney 
: I seek leave to table two documents. The first is a document titled “Long wait for preschool places” dated 9 September 2009 published by the  
Timaru Herald 
. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table a press article from the  
Timaru Herald 
. Is there any objection? There is. 
Sue Moroney 
: I seek leave to table a document titled “Big queues to get into preschools” dated 8 September 2009 from the Christchurch  
Press 
. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table an article from the Christchurch  
Press 
. Is there any objection? There is.
Hughes Darren: Business Statement 
Hughes Darren: Business Statement 
[Volume:657;Page:6837] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I wonder whether the Leader of the House could update us on exactly what the plans are for the urgency motion this afternoon so members can be clear about precisely what we will be debating and whether the evening sitting is indeed required as he has planned for.  
I also want to get some information about the emissions trading legislation itself as I have raised with you Mr Speaker by point of order on 2 days already this week. There was a briefing for Opposition members last evening by the Hon Dr Nick Smith. He showed a draft version of the bill to Opposition members but was not able to give them a final copy of it. I understand that a final copy of the bill has been lodged but it is completely unavailable and has not been released to Opposition members. We are due to start debating it in a little over an hour. If the Leader of the House could facilitate the availability of that legislation to the country it would be quite helpful. Also I ask whether he could give us an indication as to what report-back time will be required on that bill so that Opposition members can begin to make adjustments to their adjournment programme for that.  
Finally we have had urgency three times in 3 weeks. I wonder whether the Leader of the House could indicate to us whether that will be a continued feature of sitting periods between now and—well that is a bit unfair. Could he just say whether we should anticipate urgency in the next sitting period.