edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Barker Rick: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading 
Barker Rick: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading 
[Volume:619;Page:15001] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister for Courts) 
: 
 I am really interested to follow on from that member. I was told that he was supposed to be the person to chair the Primary Production Committee but he was overtaken by Mr David Carter. I am not surprised now because when a member boasts that his electorate of Taranaki has a longer coastline than Switzerland one has to wonder about the intellectual rigour of his argument. 
The second thing the member made reference to was migratory species and he talked about fish off Bangladesh fish in Fiji and so on as though fish recognise national boundaries. They simply do not and that is the point I make to the member. If we are going to preserve our fish stocks in the ocean then we have to look at the fish as part of that great entity the ocean. It will not be possible to have a quota management system that looks after some and simply says that some people can take some here somebody can take some there and other countries can take some somewhere else etc. New Zealand has to play a part in that. Simply to ignore the issue— 
Hon Member 
: So are you voting against the bill as well? 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: That is why this issue is going to be in the bill and in the Supplementary Order Paper. Members over there apparently cannot get their heads around 17 pages of Supplementary Order Paper. The member preceding me Mr Ardern claimed that no one understands it and I think I can take from that that he means he cannot understand it. I think he should get his researchers to give him some better speaking notes. This is a good piece of legislation that has been well managed through the House by an excellent Minister and I look forward to supporting it all the way.
Hunt Jonathan: Naming and Suspension of Member 
Hunt Jonathan: Naming and Suspension of Member 
[Volume:620;Page:15466] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I name the member for grossly disorderly conduct and ask that he be suspended from the House.
Vote: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10616] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Bill read a first time.
Tisch Lindsay: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15938] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 We voted a split vote at the first reading and this House allowed a split vote to be taken at that time. That has continued today during the Committee stage. The House gave approval for a split vote and that is why we— 
Peter Brown 
: I am not opposing it. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Please be silent while Mr Tisch is speaking. 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: I know the member is not opposing it. The procedure is as we are conducting it. I do not believe when the House has given approval for a split vote that an individual’s vote has to be divulged. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member is quite correct. That is exactly the situation. There is nothing in the Standing Orders that— 
Peter Brown 
: Madam Chair— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Please be seated. I am just affirming Mr Tisch’s analysis.
Swain Paul: Land Transport (Unauthorised Street and Drag Racing) Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Swain Paul: Land Transport (Unauthorised Street and Drag Racing) Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4567] 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Minister of Transport) 
: 
 I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Land Transport (Unauthorised Street and Drag Racing) Amendment Bill that it take the bill part by part and consider any schedules as one question 
. 
Motion agreed to.
Worth Richard: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Discharge In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Worth Richard: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Discharge In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8818] 
RICHARD WORTH (NZ National—Epsom) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I raised a point of order a moment ago and you acknowledged that it was a fair point of order. I got a response from the senior Government whip across the way thrown across to this side of the Chamber. The line was: “What a waste of space.” That was what he said to me—that is what he said to the Committee. That is surely unacceptable. I am seeking that that member withdraw and apologise. We are burdened by his constant interjections and foolish comments and it is time someone took a stand on his throw-away remarks which do nothing for the order of the House or the Committee.
Vote: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:619;Page:14746] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Electricity and Gas Industries Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Bill read a second time.
Peters Winston: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Peters Winston: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14316] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. It is not up to you to determine that at all. That is why we have had a procedure for hundreds of years whereby members vote by a series of mechanisms but they must do something to have their vote recorded. They cannot do nothing and be assumed to be on either side of the debate or the argument. With respect it is up to you regardless of the voices to determine where the majority lies. With the greatest respect you are assuming a dictatorial role that is not allowed for by the rules that guide your office and how you should behave. I am saying to you that if only one person intimated his or her vote therein lies the majority and it is not up to you to decide otherwise.
Cullen Michael: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Cullen Michael: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:624;Page:19491] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I notice the increasing tendency of members to carry on talking after the bell has been rung. Mr Ryall had the call and he had the courtesy perhaps to hold back but he had the right to start his speech at that point. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Would the member please take note that when the bell goes he is to sit down.
Cullen Michael: Rodney District Council (PENLINK Toll Road) Empowering Bill — Procedure 
Cullen Michael: Rodney District Council (PENLINK Toll Road) Empowering Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:614;Page:10391] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move 
 That local order of the day No. 1 for the second reading of the Rodney District Council (PENLINK Toll Road) Empowering Bill be postponed until after members’ order of the day No. 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Vote: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6896] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 35 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Noes 81 
Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 8; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Tisch Lindsay: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Tisch Lindsay: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13494] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I note that you have ruled out of order the amendment by New Zealand First to clause 4(3). I also note that the Minister has put in an amendment on that same clause. Are you suggesting that New Zealand First’s amendments are out of order because of the veto yet you are prepared to accept the Minister’s amendment that came in just about 20 minutes ago which covers exactly the same subclause that New Zealand First was trying to amend? I do not see how you can throw New Zealand First’s amendment out and accept the Minister’s one on the same subject. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: It is my understanding that the Government has vetoed these particular amendments because of the consequential effects they would have on the Budget. 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. The Minister’s amendment is to clause 4 and states: “to omit from subclause (3) the expression ‘1 December 2004’ and substitute the expression ‘1 July 2004’ ”. New Zealand First’s amendment has exactly the same intent so how can you rule out New Zealand First’s amendment on that subject because of a veto when the Minister’s one will be accepted?
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:608;Page:5606] 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I am trying to get it out but they are overtalking me. He states: “I suggest they come to Auckland and patrol on a Thursday Friday and Saturday night or ask any frontline cop in the Auckland CBD about what goes on with these unsupervised individuals who should be here on their best behaviour.” and what is her response to those facts? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Unfortunately no ethnic group in our country is immune from crime. People in all ethnic groups commit crimes. However I can say that for Asian New Zealanders the rate of crime is actually rather low. 
Ron Mark 
: How can the Prime Minister possibly have confidence in the Minister of Justice when on top of the flaws in his Sentencing Act and Parole Act that have seen rapists put on home detention and armed robbers being set free having been sentenced to prison I now find that under that legislation it is more advantageous for a criminal to be sentenced to 27 months in prison than to be sentenced for 21 months and how does that work—are we promoting more serious crime? She should look at her book. 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I cannot follow the thread of that question. I suggest he puts it down to the Minister of Justice. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Every day we have questions in the House. We expect Ministers and the Prime Minister to come here conscious of what is going on. We have had three explanations from her today where she does not know is not conscious or is unaware of matters within her responsibility. She is after all the Prime Minister. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Right. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Let me finish what I am going to say. She owes this House a better answer than “I’m not conscious.” or “I’m unaware.” She is after all the Prime Minister and most Prime Ministers in most democracies carry the can for their colleagues—or in this case does the buck stop with the cleaning lady? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I just want to say that this is not questions without notice. This is a question without notice. The member cannot expect a detailed answer to a detailed supplementary question when no notice has been given. 
Stephen Franks 
: I seek leave to table a letter of 6 May to the Prime Minister asking her to intervene and secure the release of the 2001 victimisation survey. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Ron Mark 
: I seek leave to table Government figures that I have received that show that violent crime amongst Chinese for one ethnic group of immigrants has risen by 300 percent in 4 years. 
Document not tabled.
Wilson Margaret: Visitors — Kenya—Public Accounts Committee of the National Assembly of Kenya 
Wilson Margaret: Visitors — Kenya—Public Accounts Committee of the National Assembly of Kenya 
[Volume:625;Page:20655] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that members of the Public Accounts Committee of the National Assembly of Kenya led by the Hon Joseph KipchumbaLagat are present in the gallery. I am sure that members would wish that the delegation be welcomed.
Cullen Michael: Sittings of the House 
Cullen Michael: Sittings of the House 
[Volume:621;Page:16701] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
:  
I seek leave for the sitting hours on Thursday 11 November to be from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. and for the House to proceed to a motion relating to the Unknown Warrior immediately after the announcement of the presentation of petitions papers and reports of select committees and the introduction of bills. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none.
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:612;Page:8964] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Part of the operation of the Standing Orders is that you are able on behalf of the House to exercise judgment about whether information is correctly produced in the House and whether things that are said by MPs are regarded as in order or out of order. In that context I am interested in your view on whether we have now set a new precedent in the House in that it will be regarded as parliamentary to introduce into the public arena under the privilege of Parliament personal and identified medical information about a New Zealand citizen. I would regard that as not fit practice for Parliament and in my long experience whenever it has occurred it has been a matter of some public distress and real debate in the House. I suggest that you take some time to review the way in which the Prime Minister made those statements and make a ruling as to whether it is parliamentary behaviour because it is not only a longstanding tradition for politicians but actually a requirement of the law that private and identifiable medical information is kept confidential and not brought into the public arena without the express waiver of the person who owns the information.
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:616;Page:11780] 
5.  
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour—Waitakere) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Education (Tertiary Education) 
: What progress is being made against the Government’s target of having 150000 New Zealanders in industry training in 2005? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Minister of Corrections) 
 on behalf of the Associate Minister of Education (Tertiary Education): The House will be delighted to learn that this week the Prime Minister announced that the total numbers in industry training during 2003 reached 126870 trainees. That is a 19 percent increase on the number participating during 2002 and a whopping 56 percent increase since 2000. It is a tribute both to the Government’s 70 percent increase in the Industry Training Fund over the last 5 years and to a growing industry contribution both in cash and kind. 
Lynne Pillay 
: Is this growth in industry training numbers sustainable? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: Yes we are confident it is sustainable. The best indication of that kind is the continued broadening in the employer base for industry training. I am sure the House will enthusiastically welcome the news that 29206 firms were on board in 2003—a 19 percent increase on 2002 and a 31 percent increase since 2000. That is because business is increasingly aware that industry training is good for the workplace and good for New Zealand. The Skill New Zealand partnership we have with the Council of Trade Unions and Business New Zealand is out there selling that message. 
Hon Brian Donnelly 
: Will the Minister guarantee that the present strategy will achieve the ultimate target of 250000 industry trainees by 2007 or will he have to revert to singalong courses to achieve that goal? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: The target is certainly on track and the answer to the second part of the question is no.
Wang Kenneth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Wang Kenneth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:622;Page:17685] 
1.  
KENNETH WANG (ACT) 
 to the  
Chairperson of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee 
: Has the committee met to consider the petition of Kenneth Wang and 7296 others requesting a review of the new English language immigration test which was presented on 17 December 2002; if not why not? 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Chairperson of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee) 
: 
 Although the committee has had a couple of informal discussions about the petition it has not yet formally met to consider it simply because of pressure of other business. 
Kenneth Wang 
: Given that over 7000 people have signed this petition and it has been with the committee for 2 years does he consider it to be a low priority; if not will he commit to considering it in the next 3 months? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: The committee adopted the procedure of dealing with the petitions before it in the chronological order in which they had been received. As some of the petitions before us dated back to 1999 we accorded those greater priority. Whether the committee wishes to give this petition priority within the next 3 months is a matter for the committee to decide. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Why would the committee give this petition greater priority just because 7296 people had signed it when by the Government’s own admission there are now 300000 people in New Zealand who cannot speak English? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: As I said in response to the earlier question we give our priority according to the chronological date on which the petitions were received not the number of people who signed them.
Vote: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16149] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 63 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 273 in the name of Dr Wayne Mapp to section 59B(2) to (6) in clause 19 be agreed to.
Wilson Margaret: Points of Order — Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate Parliament Building—Media Access Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate 
Wilson Margaret: Points of Order — Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate Parliament Building—Media Access Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate 
[Volume:624;Page:19713] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Ruling on the point of order that has been raised I say that I merely reminded members that if they continue to work their way through the 370-odd Standing Orders then they will bring themselves and the House into disrepute. [ 
Interruption 
] I am not finished. On the other matter the member raised yes that matter was raised in an earlier point of order during the proceedings of the House today. That matter was fully discussed at some length. The ruling at that time was that if members are unhappy with that particular Standing Order then they should take it to the Standing Orders Committee. But the Standing Order was followed as written. That was my ruling.
Vote: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6307] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Noes 71 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 29 be agreed to: 
to omit subclause 3.
Carter Chris: Wool Industry Restructuring Bill — First Reading 
Carter Chris: Wool Industry Restructuring Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4256] 
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 I rise to support this bill for all the excellent reasons laid out by my colleague the Hon Michael Cullen.
Okeroa Mahara: Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Okeroa Mahara: Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18614] 
MAHARA OKEROA (Labour—Te Tai Tonga) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Discharge In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Vote: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Discharge In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8807] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 61 
Labour 52; Green Party 9. 
Noes 55 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 123 in the name of Peter Brown to clause 1A be agreed to.
Laban Luamanuvao Winnie: Land Transport Management Bill — Third Reading 
Laban Luamanuvao Winnie: Land Transport Management Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:613;Page:9815] 
LUAMANUVAO WINNIE LABAN (Labour—Mana) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to follow that member who has to travel 15 kilometres from his home to his electorate in Auckland. I am pleased to stand to support our Government and this wonderful legislation the Land Transport Management Bill. New Zealand will benefit economically socially and environmentally from this legislation. We are a Government that keeps its word.
Hunt Jonathan: Motions — Confidence Motion—Government 
Hunt Jonathan: Motions — Confidence Motion—Government 
[Volume:617;Page:12540] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It is a vote of no confidence in the Government. Is the vote for or against?
Sowry Roger: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Sowry Roger: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7782] 
Hon ROGER SOWRY (Deputy Leader—NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. It has been a convention that when a bill has not been to a select committee the debate in the Committee stage is wide ranging and more time is given. In respect of Part 1 you gave the standard amount of time we have become accustomed to for a part by part debate on a bill that has been to a select committee. We are about to debate Part 2 and I am wondering whether we will be tied into those sorts of timings or whether you will follow the tradition—certainly in my time in Parliament—of allowing extra time because the bill has not been to a select committee. That has been the convention for the very reason that members have not had a chance to scrutinise the bill in a select committee.
Beyer Georgina: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Beyer Georgina: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:619;Page:14727] 
7.  
GEORGINA BEYER (Labour—Wairarapa) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: Does he have concerns about mathematical skills in New Zealand; if so what are they? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Yes. Research shows that our 15-year-olds are fourth in the OECD for numeracy skills but I am concerned about the wide gaps between New Zealand’s best and our poorest performers. Mathematical skills are still a problem in some groups even beyond school. It seems that some people cannot tell the difference between three and 14 they sack someone for incompetence and give him a $21000 a year pay rise—and now we see what was wrong with the Reserve Bank. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister might like to indulge himself but I am not very happy with that outcome at all. That last part of the answer was not in order. 
Georgina Beyer 
: What groups in particular appear to be behind in maths skills and what is the Government doing to assist those groups? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: It is important that leaders of organisations have the skills to make additions and subtractions. In some cases the sums have been done so badly that there is nothing the Government can do to help them and when one ends up with health and finance on the second bench that is obvious. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister is now trying my patience and I do not think he is contributing to the good running of this House. That is the end of all comments about that particular matter.
Duncan Helen: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Duncan Helen: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:609;Page:6204] 
5.  
HELEN DUNCAN (NZ Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What announcements has he made today to support innovative programmes in schools? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Two groups have received funding from the Government’s collaborative innovation fund. Our early childhood services primary and secondary schools in the Napier area have received just over $100000 and I am told that is supported by the Minister of Finance. This group is working together to ensure smooth transitions for students as they move through each stage of their education. The amount of $315000 has gone to three high schools in Invercargill. These schools are collaborating to provide an education and intervention programme for students at risk of suspension. 
Helen Duncan 
: What is the overall purpose of the fund? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The overall purpose of the fund is to support collaborative projects that aim to do new and innovative things especially regarding teaching and learning between schools. For too long schools and early childhood services have been encouraged to go it alone. 
Hon Brian Donnelly 
: Has the Minister told the Prime Minister that while he has been busily creating these new innovations he has not bothered to do anything about anachronistic regulations—such as the attendance regulations—which still refer to the principal as the “headmaster” and use terminology such as “his school” indicating that only males are worthy of the role; or is it the case that if women can be fathers then female principals can be headmasters? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I thank the member for pointing that out to me at the select committee yesterday. Yesterday the select committee provided quite a lot of interesting information and the issue of suspension was canvassed pretty substantially—unfortunately for poor old Dr Nick Smith. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Why in the select committee did the Minister take so much issue with my use of a particular word that he had used in this Parliament on three occasions; is he that precious? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I do not think that I am particularly precious. However I do not like being called a liar by someone who has no attachment to facts.
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13022] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Judith Collins to clause 25 be agreed to: 
to insert in paragraph (b) of subclause (1) after the word “out” the words “and breaches are quickly actioned”
Jones Dail: New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Jones Dail: New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12319] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 This is a disappointing day for the Opposition parties in Parliament because if it had not been for the National Party cuddling up to the Labour Party we would have had an amendment through to make sure that there is a player representative on the board of the orchestra. Why the National Party wants to cuddle up to the Labour Party is beyond me but we have seen a clear demonstration of that here today and it has prevented a player from having a position on the board. 
We had the Labour Party cold on this one. All the other Opposition parties the Greens ACT and New Zealand First plus United Future and the Progressive Party—and I must congratulate them on giving their vote to us—voted to have a player representative on the board of the orchestra but the National Party said it did not want that and it stymied the amendment. What a shame! What has got into this National Party? Is it part of its plan to sell off the orchestra because there is no need for it any more? That is the National Party policy is it not—to spend money on the basis of need? But here we have the National Party killing an initiative of all the other Opposition parties. What a shame! What a disgrace! 
As far as the amendment from Mr Hutchison is concerned I suggest he reads the bill—in particular clause 39(2) of Part 4 in Schedule 1 which makes it clear that the chief executive must not be a member of the board. He seems to want the chief executive to be a member of the board but it was a clear consideration of the legislation that the chief executive should not be a member of the board. I am looking forward to a ruling from the Chair at some stage indicating whether his amendment is in order because it is clearly inconsistent with the rest of the bill and does not take into account my reading of clause 39(2) in Part 4 of Schedule 1. Needless to say New Zealand First cannot support that amendment. 
New Zealand First has moved a couple of amendments to Part 2. We want to make it clear in clause 8(b) that the orchestra is not just an orchestra but a full-time professional orchestra so there can be no doubt in the mind of the public and the Government in dealing with the orchestra that that is the case. We have another amendment to clause 9(g). 
Dr Hutchison made some comments about why there are changes and suchlike. Clearly where public money is involved the bill provides as I have said already that the reporting requirements should be as per the Public Finance Act. That is one of the reasons for this legislation. 
I do not intend to take any more of the Committee’s time except to repeat how disappointed I am that the National Party should cuddle up to the Labour Party and prevent a player representative from being on the board of the orchestra.
Prebble Richard: Points of Order — Privileges of the House and Speaker’s Actions 
Prebble Richard: Points of Order — Privileges of the House and Speaker’s Actions 
[Volume:611;Page:8604] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 I was quite disturbed when I listened to the Leader of the Opposition’s comments because I am a member of this House and I was not even aware that you had made press statements about order to the press gallery and the public but not to us as members of Parliament. I would have thought that on a matter of order in this House if you thought it important enough as a minimum you would give those comments to us first. Even if you do not decide that MPs should get an account before the media—if that is how things now are—perhaps we could have an accounting from you afterwards. I am finding your conduct quite difficult to follow. 
In the case of Mr Harry Duynhoven we find that you knew about the matter and that you decided to refer it to the Privileges Committee. You tell us that no MP would like the Speaker to make an instant judgment about whether a matter ought to be referred to the Privileges Committee but when it comes to Mr Shane Ardern you are prepared to give an instant judgment to the media. Perhaps it was not instant because you gave it a number of times to the media. We need to have the Speaker reporting to us first not to the press gallery and the Speaker should certainly not be influencing others to come here. 
As this matter has been raised I remind you that I asked you a number of questions yesterday. I do not know whether you have got around to thinking about them but I would like to know whether the police did have your permission to come into this House and interview a member of Parliament. I am advised that the police are not allowed to come into the precincts of the Australian House of Representatives. So it is quite a serious matter. I would like to know whether they contacted you. If they did not will you make an instant ruling on that matter? When we go back to our rooms are we all to expect that police will be waiting at the permission of the Speaker to interview us?
Yates Dianne: Education (Export Education Levy) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Yates Dianne: Education (Export Education Levy) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:14766] 
DIANNE YATES (Labour—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:620;Page:15965] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to table the agreement transferring the lake bed of Lake Taupo to Tuwharetoa in 1992 which does not show any transfer of airspace. 
Document not tabled.
Peters Winston: General Debate 
Peters Winston: General Debate 
[Volume:621;Page:16334] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I did not interrupt Mr Cosgrove when he was speaking because he had already been interrupted once before but I do not think that Mr Mallard can get away with saying that “He is being paid from outside to be in here.” which is a very serious allegation to make. Mr Mallard made that comment. I say it should stop because I am beginning to understand the flavour of these debates every day in respect of Mr Tamihere and it is basically this: “You guys have been as bad as us.” and vice versa. We want to make sure that New Zealand First is not part of that little language. Therefore I want to say that the member should withdraw and apologise just in case one of us is implicated. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: What were the words the member said? 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: He said about Mr Hide that: “He is being paid from outside to be in here.” 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will think about that particular sentence because I want to know in what way it is out of order to make that particular comment. It might be perfectly legitimate. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: If I could just outline it it is the suggestion that someone is mildly or grossly under the influence of someone from outside the House—like the sort of Tory questions about money in the UK. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I want to ask one question: was the member making that sort of accusation of Mr Hide? 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: It depends on what you meant by “that sort”. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I meant the accusation that he was under the influence of people and that he was paid to come here and make certain statements in Parliament. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Do you mean that he was being paid by people to be a member of Parliament; not to make particular statements? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Well that is not out of order.
Barnett Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Barnett Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:611;Page:8322] 
5.  
TIM BARNETT (NZ Labour—Christchurch Central) 
 to the  
Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade 
: What reports has he received on progress being made by the Regional Assistance Mission in the Solomon Islands? 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade) 
: 
 Progress has been reported on a number of fronts. Weapons handed in now number 3580. The removal of corrupt and criminal elements from the Solomon Islands Police Force is currently under way with seven officers having been arrested over the last 10 days. Action is also being taken to remove corrupt personnel from other departments. Finally financial advisers in in-line positions have begun work with the Solomon Islands Government to establish a credible budgetary process. 
Tim Barnett 
: What role are New Zealand personnel playing in this process? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: The New Zealand Police personnel have been active in four areas: the special response group community policing intelligence and investigations. I want to pay particular tribute to two officers: Acting Superintendent Tony McLeod who managed the successful arms amnesty and Acting Commissioner Tony Annandale who personally arrested the high-profile allegedly corrupt Solomon Islands Superintendent of Police James Kili. Military personnel continue to provide essential transport logistic and engineering support. The infantry company that arrived last week is currently settling in and in due course will assist police operations if and when required. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: Now that Harold Keke has been detained what steps has the mission been able to take in terms of breaking up the remnants of his supporters and also their influence on affairs in the Solomons? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: Not only was Harold Keke arrested but also a number of his lieutenants some of whom have been charged with murder. There are now policing stations placed on the Weathercoast. Work is continuing there but it is not yet considered sufficiently stable to return the approximately 1000 refugees who are in camps just outside Honiara.
Hobbs Marian: Civil Union Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Hobbs Marian: Civil Union Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17484] 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Benson-Pope David: Resource Management and Electricity Legislation Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Benson-Pope David: Resource Management and Electricity Legislation Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:627;Page:22320] 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Associate Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 I am advised also Mr Chairman that the very issue of the appropriateness or not of the inclusion of these two matters in the bill was determined by the house—I believe on 1 December—immediately after its tabling so the House has already made a decision I understand on the very matter that has been raised. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Thank you very much for that. Can I just say— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Just keep on cheating. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order. I am ready to rule but I will hear the Hon Mark Burton.
Carter John: Prostitution Reform Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Carter John: Prostitution Reform Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4452] 
JOHN CARTER (Senior Whip—NZ National) 
: 
 Perhaps I can help the Committee with that as well. I had thought of that. I have discussed it with the author of the bill. My suggestion is that if the Committee were of a mind to give leave to structure the debate as I have sought leave to do then we would seek leave for the member in charge of the bill to have two or three contributions on end to set out what the bill is and to set out a sequence of the debate so that members can follow the debate through in that order. Of course given now that we are seeking to debate the title the debate will range over that but it will be wide ranging. It seems to me that the member could give us a lead so that there is a sequence because I think it is essential that that happens as well. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: I ask Mr Franks whether that has addressed his point. Strictly speaking leave is not given for that but it certainly does help if the Committee agrees to a procedure or at least gives its tacit agreement to a procedure.
Robertson H V Ross: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15426] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the honourable member. I have made a mistake because I have not actually put Part 1. Of course under Speaker’s ruling 25/4 once I have called someone I cannot take the call away. But given that I did not put Part 1 because I took a point of order from Mr Brownlee I will do so now.
Cosgrove Clayton: Income Tax Bill — First Reading 
Cosgrove Clayton: Income Tax Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:3547] 
CLAYTON COSGROVE (NZ Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 I rise to support the Income Tax Bill and in doing so I want to acknowledge the constructive speeches I have heard especially from Mr McNair Dr Brash and Gordon Copeland. Each expressed in his own terms his view and philosophy with regard to tax whilst supporting the bill at least to the select committee stage. That is in contrast to the whining buffoonery we have just heard from the previous speaker Mr Hide who—and I give him some credit for it—has waged a campaign on tax reform has championed some taxpayers of dubious origin and has always talked of the need for simplicity in respect of tax systems. Tonight he offered us nothing but buffoonery. I know Mr Hide has a reputation for lecturing on tax from Fiji to Albania and I am told by Mr Carter and others—[ 
Interruption 
] on Waiheke Island recently—but I say to him in all seriousness that this bill will be a complex one before the select committee. We should consider the contributions of others as we go through the bill and work in a constructive way.  
The essence of a good tax system in my view is that it must have the confidence of the public of taxpayers and of the taxpaying community as a whole. To engender that confidence tax law must be transparent and it must be simple. Although it is very weighty I think this bill goes some way to meeting those objectives. Tax legislation as we heard from Mr Barker who introduced the bill goes back to 1891 and an advisory committee has been giving advice on it since 1995. I endorse the bill and finish by counselling Mr Hide to get away from the politics of buffoonery and take the example of Dr Brash and I suspect Dr Lockwood Smith and others— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Or Deborah Coddington. 
CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Or Deborah Coddington—who will be the future leader of ACT—and deal with this highly technical bill which I think will provide simplicity and transparency in a constructive way. All I will say in respect of Mr Hide’s comments about my electorate of Waimakariri is that I have always welcomed Mr Hide—who was born I think in Rangiora—back to my electorate because every time he arrives my majority goes up. I commend the bill to the House.
Vote: Identity (Citizenship and Travel Documents) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Identity (Citizenship and Travel Documents) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20122] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 73 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; United Future 8; Progressive 1; 
Noes 42 
New Zealand National 25; ACT New Zealand 7; Green Party 8; Maori Party 1; Other: Robson 
Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Franks Stephen: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Franks Stephen: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:608;Page:5911] 
8.  
STEPHEN FRANKS (ACT NZ) 
 to the  
Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations 
: Under what circumstances does she consider that the national interest should override rights under the Treaty of Waitangi and does she agree with the Prime Minister’s reported rejection of a treaty claim in respect of oil and gas on the grounds that: “The Crown considers it [nationalisation] still to be in the public interest”? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON (Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 I consider that the national interest by definition includes the interests of all members of our community including the treaty partners; and yes I agree with the Prime Minister’s reported statement. 
Stephen Franks 
: If there is a new principle of the treaty that claims are not valid if they are not in the public interest why not apply it immediately to claims for native plants and animals foreshore and riverbed radio spectrum taniwha under the motorway and partnership veto powers of elected local governments; and if the public interest is not the overriding new principle what treaty principle is the Prime Minister using? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: I was not aware that there was a new principle. The Prime Minister was in fact articulating that there is a national interest that overrides all other considerations. 
Dave Hereora 
: Do the Waitangi Tribunal’s recommendations in respect of petroleum mean that existing treaty settlements will need to be reopened? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: No. First while the Government does respect the role of the Waitangi Tribunal its recommendations are not binding on the Crown. Secondly the settlement of historical claims is final and comprehensive and this has been agreed to by iwi and is reflected in the settlement legislation. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister confirm or otherwise a statement she has just made that it is now Government policy that if the Government decides something is in the national interest or perhaps in its own political interest it will override the treaty? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: No the reference for this debate relates to the nationalisation of petroleum so all the comments have been made in that context.
Stewart Barbara: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Stewart Barbara: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:16349] 
BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak to Part 4 “Enforcement and miscellaneous provisions” of the Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill. New Zealand First will be supporting this part. 
One of the strengths of Part 4 is that enforcement is very clearly specified. There is no misunderstanding about what can or cannot happen. Clause 65 specifies the powers of the authorised persons. Clause 66 outlines what has to happen when a dwelling place is entered. Clause 68 lists the notice requirements when a place is entered. Clause 69 specifies what has to happen with the disposal of property seized. So the part very clearly outlines what enforcement there will be. There is no misunderstanding about what can or cannot happen. 
It is very pleasing to see that the fines for operating outside the law are quite considerable. Clause 72(1)(b) specifies that the fines must not exceed $20000. We know that the fertility clinics are operating professionally already and that this would be a considerable fine for them. A wide range of enforcement instruments are available within this bill so people who have concerns need not have them. As Dr Paul Hutchison pointed out we need to be aware that the fertility clinics all belong to one professional group the Australasian reproductive technology group and have done for the last 20 years. As he pointed out last week those clinics are audited very regularly to ensure that they are following the very strict standards and quality requirements that are set down and that are necessary to follow in order to be a member of this group. We must say that in the past operators have worked very ethically in this particular area. 
We were quite reassured to see that the Minister has included on Supplementary Order Paper 267 a new clause 69A concerning the detection of import and export offences to any gamete embryo etc. It is an additional safeguard for those concerned about this area. The procedure that has to be followed has been listed. We must admit that the existing situation has worked very well for the last 20 to 25 years without legislation of this nature. However it is pleasing to see that legislation has come up in this area which is one that is advancing quite rapidly. New Zealand First will be supporting this part.