Carter John: Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Carter John: Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:637;Page:7990] 
JOHN CARTER (National—Northland) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I listened carefully to your comments relating to the title and I understand the point you are making. However I think it is appropriate for two or three points to be made at this stage prior to the discussion. As I am sure every member of the Committee is aware this is a significant bill and it is controversial to say the least. It is also a conscience issue and it is not whipped in the strict manner of whipping. Although there may well be some split votes and some votes cast on behalf of parties it is accepted that it is a conscience issue. It seems to me that there are two or three things that you might also want to reflect on Madam Chairperson and I intend to seek leave on one matter following your comments. 
Given that it is a conscience issue and it is controversial—and I am sure there will be significant interest in it from a good number of members—it is not unusual on conscience issues that are controversial for the Chair to be more tolerant about the number of speakers allowed. There is some precedent for that and I just wanted to comment on that at the beginning rather than have fights as we go part-way through when you accept the closure etc. Perhaps the promoter may make a comment on this I do not know but I think it would be fair and reasonable to allow some reasonable discussion rather than to have the normal limit to the time allowed. 
The second point I make is that normally these speeches are restricted to 5 minutes each. I just wonder whether the Committee might consider both the promoter and the member with the amendment of significance Chester Borrows being allowed to speak for more than just 5 minutes. Although the promoter can get a second call I wonder whether it might be appropriate to seek leave to allow the promoter to have two 5-minute speeches on end if she wishes then also for Chester Borrows to be allowed 10 minutes in response to put his amendment as we go through. 
I intend to seek leave for that to happen and following your comments on the title Madam Chairperson I also intend to seek leave in relation to the title the debate on which as you say is limited. Under the way in which the bill is structured that is true. It would seem more appropriate to consider a wider-ranging debate than normal under this clause otherwise the debate on the title is quite honestly very limited in what it allows. I wonder whether the Committee might think it appropriate to allow a reasonable debate to take place at the beginning rather than have what is set down under the Standing Orders which is that the debate is limited to what the clauses state. 
It seems to me that it might be more appropriate for a more fulsome debate to be had upfront because that is normally how we now structure debates in Committee. It makes more sense. We changed the Standing Orders to allow that to happen. I am sorry I have not had a chance to talk to anyone else about this but it seems to me to make good sense for the promoter and others to have a more wide-ranging debate at the beginning rather than narrow it down. 
So I want to seek leave on two matters and of course any member can object. First I want to seek leave that both the promoter and Mr Chester Borrows—the promoter first of course—get two 5-minute slots on end if they wish to take it. Chester Borrows would then be allowed leave for two 5-minute slots as well— 
Anne Tolley 
: What’s happening? 
JOHN CARTER 
: It is a conscience issue. 
Anne Tolley 
: It’s not a conscience issue. 
JOHN CARTER 
: I beg your pardon Madam Chairperson I am mistaken then. I apologise to the Committee and I retract everything I have said. I am sorry I thought it was a conscience issue. I had understood that this— 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: Can the member repeat his statement? 
JOHN CARTER 
: No thank you. I apologise Madam Chairperson and I apologise for taking up the time of the Committee. I thought it was a conscience issue. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: I thank the member for his comments. I assure the member that there is wide-ranging debate on clauses 3 and 4. It is quite clear what the other clauses are such as the title. But there is plenty of opportunity for a wide-ranging debate on clauses 3 and 4. The member can still seek leave for anything he wants. 
John Carter 
: No no thank you.