edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Roy Heather: Obituaries — Sir Howard Morrison OBE 
Roy Heather: Obituaries — Sir Howard Morrison OBE 
[Volume:657;Page:6835] 
Hon HEATHER ROY (Deputy Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I stand today on behalf of the ACT Party to join with all members of this Parliament in paying tribute to one of the greatest and most loved entertainers this country has seen. From his early days as a member of the Aotearoa Maori Concert Party to the enormously popular Howard Morrison Quartet and throughout his illustrious solo career Sir Howard Morrison took New Zealand and Maori culture to the world. Sir Howard was no ordinary entertainer. As well as using music to cross national and cultural boundaries he devoted much of his life to his people and made enormous contributions as we have just heard from the previous speaker to Maori youth programmes around the country. He was an entertainer a statesman and a true New Zealand icon who led by example. In his lifetime Sir Howard touched the hearts of people throughout the world and with his passing New Zealand as a nation has lost one of its beloved sons. The ACT Party mourns the loss of this great man. Our hearts and thoughts go out to his wife Lady Kuia his children his whanau his loved ones. Sir Howard will live on in our hearts. May he rest in peace.
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Obituaries — Sir Howard Morrison OBE 
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Obituaries — Sir Howard Morrison OBE 
[Volume:657;Page:6834] 
JEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party joins with others in the House to celebrate the life of Sir Howard Morrison to express our sadness at his death and to offer our condolence to his whanau and to Ngati Whakaue of Te Arawa.  
For half a century Sir Howard entertained and inspired New Zealanders and made us laugh. That is a great gift and it is one for which he was greatly loved. As long ago as 1956 he formed the Howard Morrison Quartet which was the start of a brilliant musical career. I can still remember hearing as a child around that time the Howard Morrison Quartet on an old valve radio. He received many awards as a musician—the HMV Entertainer of the Year in 1986 the Entertainer of the Decade in 1989 and the Feltex Award for Best Television Entertainer in 1983—and he was presented in 2007 with Creative New Zealand’s premier award for Maori artists Te Tohu Tiketike a Te Waka Toi. It is awarded to Maori artists who have demonstrated a lifetime commitment to their art and who are leaders in their field.  
Sir Howard was always proud to be Maori; his quartet recorded “My Old Man’s an All Black” in protest against the Maori players being barred from the tour to South Africa. As he grew older his commitment to Maori Maori youth and the education of Maori youth came to the fore. He established programmes for at-risk youth set up the Sir Howard Morrison Education Foundation for Te Arawa rangatahi and was a trustee of the Manaakitanga Aotearoa Trust and the Tu Tangata business studies programme for young Maori. His was a life of service in so many ways. He will be greatly missed. Kia ora.
Jones Shane: Obituaries — Sir Howard Morrison OBE 
Jones Shane: Obituaries — Sir Howard Morrison OBE 
[Volume:657;Page:6834] 
Hon SHANE JONES (Labour) 
: 
 Tenei ano te amiomio o te whakaaro. Tenei ano te raruraru o te wairua e kara mohou e Ta Hauata ka ngaro nei. Me ahu to wairua ki te tahuhu o te rangi. To tinana ki te kopu a Papatuanuku. E kara nahau te ao i whakatopatopa nahau nga taonga mai i o matua a-Rehia a-Nuku i hari ki nga topito o te ao. Nahau te iti me te rahi i whakaahuareka otira i tenei ra aue taukuri e ko to reo ka wahangu. Nga marae kua morehurehutia nga whare e tu kau ana. E kara e moe e moe moe oti atu e. 
[ 
Oh friend Sir Howard the mind is in a whirl the spirit is troubled as well for you we have lost. Your spirit soars to Sky Father above while your body is committed to Mother Earth. Oh friend you soared over the world you took the entertainment arts of your parents Rehia and Nuku to the very extremities of the planet. The meek and the mighty were entertained by you and today there is utter devastation because your voice has been silenced. The marae are left without the buildings stand empty. Oh friend rest there slumber there and sleep on for ever. 
] 
It is a privilege and an honour to stand in this House and offer testimony to Sir Howard Morrison. He is a revered figure who was beyond colour and beyond prejudice and he brought us together with a brilliant sense of humour often at his own expense. He joins the legions of other Maori entertainers not the least of which are Tui Teka and Billy T James who enabled our country and its Maori personality to mature. As I said in Maori Sir Howard’s singing made us as Kiwis feel proud when we went overseas and heard his voice and become far more familiar with hymns and tunes that we actually did not want to hear.  
We think fondly of his whanau up in Te Arawa and his iwi Te Arawa but also of the entirety of the country because when he stood before the Queen and sang with those other kauri trees of the Maori and Pakeha entertainment world all of our spirits were uplifted. His is a great example and as I said in Maori Sir Howard will not wholly die. His more cherished qualities will find sweet repose in our ngakau our hearts; our hinengaro our minds; and our wairua our spirits. The bird may be quiet and the tree may have fallen but his finer sentiments will live on in our personality as New Zealanders. I farewell Sir Howard.
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:657;Page:6840] 
2.  
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What were the highlights of her international travel this year as Minister? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Education 
: Representing New Zealand overseas is a privilege and highlights for the Minister included opening a New Zealand export education fair in Bangkok in June and representing key Government initiatives like trades academies national standards and the Youth Guarantee at a recent OECD conference in Canada.  
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Why did she while at the Conference of Commonwealth Education Ministers decline an offer made through a UK Minister to host the equivalent meeting here early in 2011? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: If the member chooses to set down a written question to the Minister then he will get a very full reply to that question. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Was the Minister aware when she rejected the offer to host the Conference of Commonwealth Education Ministers in 2011 that the Indian Minister of education generally travels with a large group of academics and educators and that India is a key target market for many New Zealand tertiary institutions? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I am sure that is something the Minister is aware of. But might I say that although the previous Labour Government had a view that it could raise national standards and that it could introduce things that give the benefits of something like the Youth Guarantee by having massive international talkfests this Government does not believe that. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Does this Government value postgraduate international students more or less than primary age international students? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: This Government values all international students for the experience they bring to this country. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Why then did the Minister reject the biggest opportunity offered to New Zealand in years to promote international education in the same year that she is promulgating the opening up of New Zealand schools to international primary school students? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: If the member would like to set that down as a written question to the Minister he will get a very full answer.
Voting — Correction—Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill 
Voting — Correction—Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill 
[Volume:657;Page:6881] 
Voting 
Correction—Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill 
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.
Business of Select Committees — Motion to Establish Select Committee—Discharge 
Business of Select Committees — Motion to Establish Select Committee—Discharge 
[Volume:657;Page:6853] 
Business of Select Committees 
Motion to Establish Select Committee—Discharge 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That Government order of the day No. 1 be discharged. 
Motion agreed to.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:657;Page:6837] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 The member asked a large number of questions. [ 
Interruption 
]  
Mr SPEAKER 
: This is a point of order. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I will give several answers in a row. Firstly it is the Government’s intention to make progress on bills in the urgency motion that will be moved shortly after question time. The order of the day will then become abundantly clear to the member. The member will also be aware that when it comes to the lodging of bills bills are not normally made available on the Table until they are introduced. At this point the emissions trading scheme bill has not been introduced. When the bill is introduced it will be on the Table.  
The other point the member raised related to urgency. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: And report back. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The report-back date will also be made very clear by the Minister for Climate Change Issues when he gives his first reading speech—[ 
Interruption 
]  
Mr SPEAKER 
: This is a point of order. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: —and that is quite appropriate. I comment though that the concern expressed by the Opposition is somewhat surprising given that the contents of this bill are rather well known and have been considered publicly to quite an extent.  
In regard to future urgency this Government has difficulty in getting its extensive work programme through in the 13 hours available to it each week under the normal legislative calendar. I think it would be fair for all members of this House to expect that as hard-working New Zealanders doing what we can to lift productivity in the economy we might in this House end up doing a few extra hours in the— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: That’s why we finished early yesterday then. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: This is a point of order. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: You see how upset they get about this sort of thing Mr Speaker. They asked the question; I am giving the answer.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:657;Page:6837] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 At the close of business today the House will adjourn for 2 weeks. When we resume on Tuesday 13 October it is the Government’s intention to make progress on the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Bill the Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill the Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill and other bills on the Order Paper.
Smith Lockwood: Business Statement 
Smith Lockwood: Business Statement 
[Volume:657;Page:6838] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I ask the Leader of the House when speaking to a point of order not to be provocative. It is impossible to ask the Opposition not to interject if the Leader of the House is being provocative. Has he finished his response? Very well.
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 motion be agreed to. 
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. 
Motion agreed to.
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
[Volume:657;Page:6853] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the introduction and first reading of the Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill the second reading of the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Bill and the first reading of the Remuneration Authority Amendment Bill. 
 These are all bills that need the urgent attention of the House. In the case of the first bill it has been the subject of a considerable amount of angst not only for this Parliament and for many in the business sector but for households throughout New Zealand. It is designed to get a degree of certainty and Government policy in this area has been well articulated in recent days. As for the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Bill we have some international obligations that mean we need to at least by the middle of October have reached a conclusion. It is a great sadness to this Government that the legislation languished on the Order Paper for so many years under the previous Government. That has got us to the point where we have to take extra time of the House to deal with it in a timely fashion. Everyone knows that the Remuneration Authority Amendment Bill is designed to give greater flexibility to the Remuneration Authority in order that it may in fact recommend zero pay rises for people in the sorts of offices about which it makes its determinations.
Urgency 
Urgency 
[Volume:657;Page:6853] 
Urgency 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the introduction and first reading of the Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill the second reading of the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Bill and the first reading of the Remuneration Authority Amendment Bill. 
 These are all bills that need the urgent attention of the House. In the case of the first bill it has been the subject of a considerable amount of angst not only for this Parliament and for many in the business sector but for households throughout New Zealand. It is designed to get a degree of certainty and Government policy in this area has been well articulated in recent days. As for the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Bill we have some international obligations that mean we need to at least by the middle of October have reached a conclusion. It is a great sadness to this Government that the legislation languished on the Order Paper for so many years under the previous Government. That has got us to the point where we have to take extra time of the House to deal with it in a timely fashion. Everyone knows that the Remuneration Authority Amendment Bill is designed to give greater flexibility to the Remuneration Authority in order that it may in fact recommend zero pay rises for people in the sorts of offices about which it makes its determinations. 
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: Personal Explanations — Acting Ministers—Prime Minister's Prerogative 
Brownlee Gerry: Personal Explanations — Acting Ministers—Prime Minister's Prerogative 
[Volume:657;Page:6838] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Acting Minister responsible for Ministerial Services) 
: 
 I seek leave to make a personal explanation to correct a comment I made in the House yesterday in response to a point of order at that time relating to the position of Acting Minister responsible for Ministerial Services. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to make a personal explanation on that matter. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Yesterday in the House I said that Cabinet agreed last week that I would be the Acting Minister responsible for Ministerial Services. I should have said that the Prime Minister decided on 21 September that it would be appropriate for me to be the Minister responsible for Ministerial Services and his staff conveyed that decision to the Cabinet Office on that day. The Cabinet Office amended the list of Ministers acting in portfolios accordingly. The question of Acting Ministers is an administrative matter and the final decision rests with the Prime Minister.
Personal Explanations — Acting Ministers—Prime Minister's Prerogative 
Personal Explanations — Acting Ministers—Prime Minister's Prerogative 
[Volume:657;Page:6838] 
Personal Explanations 
Acting Ministers—Prime Minister's Prerogative 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Acting Minister responsible for Ministerial Services) 
: 
 I seek leave to make a personal explanation to correct a comment I made in the House yesterday in response to a point of order at that time relating to the position of Acting Minister responsible for Ministerial Services. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to make a personal explanation on that matter. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Yesterday in the House I said that Cabinet agreed last week that I would be the Acting Minister responsible for Ministerial Services. I should have said that the Prime Minister decided on 21 September that it would be appropriate for me to be the Minister responsible for Ministerial Services and his staff conveyed that decision to the Cabinet Office on that day. The Cabinet Office amended the list of Ministers acting in portfolios accordingly. The question of Acting Ministers is an administrative matter and the final decision rests with the Prime Minister.
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:657;Page:6847] 
8.  
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
 to the  
Minister of Fisheries 
: Has he received any recent reports of compliance operations within the Ministry of Fisheries? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY (Minister of Fisheries) 
: 
 Yes. Last week Ministry of Fisheries staff intercepted over 100 kilograms of paua meat destined for the black market. This illegal activity is believed to be linked to a previous bust that resulted in the lead perpetrator receiving 18 months in jail. Additionally a commercial fisher in Whangarei was recently convicted of using a dragnet. His boat was seized and forfeited to the Crown. I fully support the Ministry of Fisheries in its activities to clamp down on those who choose to ignore the law. 
Colin King 
: What steps has the new Government taken to improve support for the compliance teams within the ministry? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: In Budget 2009 $4.2 million over 4 years was obtained to improve the number of fisheries officers and honorary fisheries officers. We will see 104 fisheries officers on the beach—104 in total—and approximately 250 honorary fisheries officers across New Zealand. We are lining up the police force on the beach. We are clamping down on illegal fishing activities. We are proud to fulfil this election promise.
Smith Nick: Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Smith Nick: Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:657;Page:6879] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Climate Change Issues) 
: 
 I move  
That the Finance and Expenditure Committee 
 consider the Climate Change (Moderated Emissions Trading) 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 and outside the Wellington area during a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 187 189 and 190(1)(b) and (c) 
.
Goodhew Jo: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Goodhew Jo: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:669;Page:15986] 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
King Colin: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
King Colin: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:669;Page:15989] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:669;Page:15989] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Grant Robertson to clause 1 be agreed to: 
to omit “Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Act 2009” and substitute “Education (Removal of Student Choice) Amendment Act 2010”.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:669;Page:15989] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: There are seven other amendments in the name of Grant Robertson. In accordance with Speaker’s Ruling 112/4 they are ruled out of order as not being an objective description of the bill.
Calder Cam: Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Calder Cam: Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:669;Page:15971] 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
: 
 The right to cast a free vote is a fundamental building block of a democracy. As playwright Tom Stoppard dryly observed it is not the voting that is democracy; it is the counting. The right to live in a democracy and vote is a huge privilege and the sanction of withdrawing the right of a man or woman to cast a vote at an election is a serious loss to a citizen. 
A prison and a custodial sentence served therein have a number of functions. The prospect of a custodial sentence should ideally deter a potential miscreant from committing a crime. The period in custody serves to protect the community from further depredations from the guilty party. The sentence should offer an opportunity for rehabilitation and this Government has recently doubled to 1000 the number of prisoners who are receiving drug and alcohol rehabilitation and also help in numeracy and literacy. We would hope to further increase that number. Finally the custodial sentence and deprivation of liberty is a punishment of the criminal. I have mentioned before in the House the philosopher Isaiah Berlin. Berlin wrote of the positive conception of liberty: not “freedom from” but “freedom to”. In prison one loses many “freedoms to”. The freedom to vote is a fundamental part of an individual’s liberty—an individual’s “freedom to”. Its loss upon starting a term of imprisonment is consistent with the loss of other freedoms at that time. 
From early days in New Zealand a prisoner was unable to register as an elector and therefore was unable to vote. When the Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill is enacted the law will revert back to what it was prior to the implementation of the Electoral Act 1993—that is a convicted prisoner will have no right to vote. This right is restored upon a prisoner’s release. Thank you.
Foss Craig: Westpac New Zealand Bill — First Reading 
Foss Craig: Westpac New Zealand Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:669;Page:15950] 
CRAIG FOSS (National—Tukituki) 
: 
 I take just a few moments to acknowledge those who have spoken on the Westpac New Zealand Bill. As far as I understand there is general support for it around the House. I acknowledge various party leaders and finance spokespeople who have been engaged in discussions about this bill prior to its formally coming to the House. We have ensured a pretty smooth take-off I think for the bill. I expect a pretty good process at the Finance and Expenditure Committee. Members will examine whatever issues need to be examined. I also acknowledge the Hon Marian Hobbs who actually introduced the first Westpac bill in 2006. 
I could get quite used to this actually. This is the first bill in my name that I have introduced to the House so I appreciate the kind comments from colleagues around and across the House. When eminently sensible matters like this come before the House—they are not political; they are just regulatory and make for better banking practice in New Zealand—it is good to see Parliament getting together like this. Thank you. 
Bill read a first time.
Goudie Sandra: Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Goudie Sandra: Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:669;Page:15965] 
SANDRA GOUDIE (National—Coromandel) 
: 
 I am delighted to rise and speak on the Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Bill. I applaud my colleague Paul Quinn for bringing this bill to the House. I will just set a few matters on the record. The fact of the matter is that any prisoner convicted for 3 years or more is disqualified from voting. That situation has not changed for a number of years including the 9 long years of Government by the Labour Party. Labour members were quite happy when they were last in Government for prisoners who had been convicted for 3 years or more to be disqualified from voting. They were happy enough with that situation so I just wonder what all their arguments are about in respect of making sure that all prisoners who have been convicted are disqualified. Why should we discriminate on the basis of the term of the conviction? I think this bill levels out the playing field. Yes the majority of submitters opposed the bill but they wanted to give all prisoners the vote. They wanted to do away with the existing prohibition of those who were convicted for 3 years or more. They wanted to give all prisoners the vote. They were not just opposed to this particular bill; they took it a step further in the main. Essentially we now have prisoners who are convicted for 3 years or more denied the vote. My colleague Paul Quinn quite rightly said that that is a bit unfair. Anyone who is convicted should be deprived of the vote not only those who have a conviction of 3 years or more and that is pretty sensible. The rationale for having that prohibition in the first place still stands. I am proud to stand beside my colleague Paul Quinn and support this bill through the House. I also say that the legislation on seizure of boy-racer vehicles is working because cars are not being crushed. If those young fellas and “fellesses” were transgressing the law their cars would go under. I will make one other point: the Law and Order Committee is run in accordance with the Standing Orders and if a decision is made it is made by the majority. Unfortunately Mr Cosgrove cannot handle that.
Turei Metiria: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Turei Metiria: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:669;Page:15924] 
METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I just seek your clarification about an intervention that occurred earlier in question time around the process when a member takes offence. Earlier in question time Mr Phil Goff took offence at a statement that the Speaker himself had made. In normal circumstances the member who made the offending comment would be asked to withdraw that comment without qualification before the House moved on to other business. I am aware that this was an engagement between Mr Goff and the Speaker but I would ask for your clarification of whether that same requirement for an unreserved unqualified withdrawal applies to the Chair as it does to other members.
Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:669;Page:15924] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It definitely does not. If members wish to raise questions about the Speaker they do so by a notice of motion. That is the proper way to do that. The member may have noted though that the Speaker did apologise to the member for having caused him offence. Speakers have not always done that in the past in my experience. I am always prepared to apologise especially where I get things wrong. Speakers are not beyond getting things wrong; I fully accept that. My concern at the time was simply in relation to the tabling of documents which has improved enormously during the rest of the period of this question time so some good did come out of it. But I do apologise for the offence that I caused at the time.
Blue Jackie: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Blue Jackie: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:669;Page:15916] 
7. 
Dr JACKIE BLUE (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: What progress has been made regarding the 4-year $24 million bowel cancer screening pilot announced in this year’s budget? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) 
: 
 After years of no progress yesterday this Government announced that the Waitemata District Health Board has been selected to run the 4-year bowel cancer screening pilot. It is international best practice to foolproof new screening programmes with a pilot. The Waitemata board was chosen because of its strong focus on screening and its commitment to working closely with its neighbouring district health boards primary care and the Northern Cancer Network to ensure that as many people as possible participate in the pilot. Up to 130000 people aged 50 to 74 who live in the Waitemata District Health Board area will be invited to participate. 
Dr Jackie Blue 
: What is being done to support the health sector to deliver the services that support detection and treatment of bowel cancer? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The member is quite right to identify the need to support the services that underpin a screening programme. That is why I can advise the House that in the last year nearly 38000 New Zealanders had colonoscopies to investigate for bowel cancer and other serious bowel issues. This was an increase of almost 2500 colonoscopies over the previous year. These record numbers build on earlier increases and show that the sector is growing capacity for this important cancer test. The Government is fixing public health services with a concerted effort to make colonoscopies more freely and fairly available to New Zealanders who need them.
Locke Keith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Locke Keith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:669;Page:15917] 
8. 
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Why is he not supporting public hearings for submissions on the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service Amendment Bill? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Up until yesterday the advice I had received was that such hearings were properly done in private. However last night I received advice that led me to ask the director of the SIS to reassess the issue and provide me with new advice on what the situation should be. I will discuss that advice with the Intelligence and Security Committee in due course. 
Keith Locke 
: When the Prime Minister is considering that advice will he take into account that in February 1999 Prime Minister Shipley chaired 2 days of public submissions on a New Zealand Security Intelligence Service Amendment Bill that even included a public submission by the former head of the British spy agency MI5 Stella Rimmington? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Yes and I will also take into account that Helen Clark in 2001 chaired the GCSB committee in private. 
Keith Locke 
: Will the Prime Minister also take into account that most committees in this Parliament have open hearings but if there is sensitive information it can be heard in private or secret as has happened with the Intelligence and Security Committee in the past? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Yes but I am also aware of the advice I have received in the past which is that open hearings on this matter in relation to this part of the SIS could lead to truncated and sterile debate which would not necessarily lead to a robust process that we would all want to see. 
Keith Locke 
: I seek leave to table a couple of documents. I take your ruling Mr Speaker that news media reports are generally not tabled but in this case it is not so much the content of the reports that matter— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: What is the source of the document? 
Keith Locke 
: It is an article by Guyon Espiner from the  
Evening Post 
 of 9 February 1999 reporting on a hearing of the Intelligence and Security Committee.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. It is over a decade old. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
Keith Locke 
: I seek leave to table an article dated 11 February 1999 from the  
New Zealand Herald 
 showing that the Green Party submission by Rod Donald and Keith Locke was presented in public session to the Intelligence and Security Committee. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:669;Page:15909] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek some guidance as to when Mr Mallard can return. I would seek that he be able to return at the end of question time. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No he is out for the day. 
Hon Annette King 
: That’s pretty tough. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No one will comment on a Speaker’s ruling. Members know that I do not throw many members out of this Chamber but they are out for the day when I do ask them to leave.
Smith Lockwood: By-Election — Mana 
Smith Lockwood: By-Election — Mana 
[Volume:669;Page:15905] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have been advised by the Electoral Commissioner that pursuant to section 185 of the Electoral Act 1993 the name of the member elected to the House of Representatives for the Mana electoral district is Kristopher John Faafoi.
Goff Phil: Motions — Death of New Zealand Soldier in Afghanistan—Private John (Jack) Howard British Army 
Goff Phil: Motions — Death of New Zealand Soldier in Afghanistan—Private John (Jack) Howard British Army 
[Volume:669;Page:15905] 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 I apologise to the House that I have not had a chance to talk to my colleagues about this but I seek leave to move without debate and without notice acknowledgment of and condolences for the death of a New Zealand soldier John Howard in Afghanistan while serving with the British Parachute Regiment. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action? There is none. 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I move  
That this House note with sadness the loss of New Zealander Private John Howard serving with the British Parachute Regiment in Afghanistan and offer its condolences to his parents Roger Howard and Anne Scott family and friends. 
Motion agreed to.
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:669;Page:15989] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Clause 1 agreed to.
Event: Members Sworn 
Event: Members Sworn 
[Volume:669;Page:15905] 
Members Sworn 
Mr Speaker 
 administered the Oath of Allegiance to Kris Faafoi who then took his seat in the House.
Motions — Death of New Zealand Soldier in Afghanistan—Private John (Jack) Howard British Army 
Motions — Death of New Zealand Soldier in Afghanistan—Private John (Jack) Howard British Army 
[Volume:669;Page:15905] 
Motions 
Death of New Zealand Soldier in Afghanistan—Private John (Jack) Howard British Army 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 I apologise to the House that I have not had a chance to talk to my colleagues about this but I seek leave to move without debate and without notice acknowledgment of and condolences for the death of a New Zealand soldier John Howard in Afghanistan while serving with the British Parachute Regiment. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action? There is none. 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I move  
That this House note with sadness the loss of New Zealander Private John Howard serving with the British Parachute Regiment in Afghanistan and offer its condolences to his parents Roger Howard and Anne Scott family and friends. 
Motion agreed to.
Members Sworn 
Members Sworn 
[Volume:669;Page:15905] 
Members Sworn 
Mr Speaker 
 administered the Oath of Allegiance to Kris Faafoi who then took his seat in the House.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — First Reading 
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9525] 
KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) 
: 
 I stand to support the Courts (Remote Participation) Bill 2009. The purpose of the bill is to introduce the criteria aimed at using audiovisual links in court. It covers the link of a person to a courtroom or a conference room from a remote location for the purpose of giving evidence or attending a hearing or conference. This bill’s intention is to provide a presumption in favour of audiovisual links for use in criminal procedural matters primarily to use in the reform of the criminal process. The audiovisual system will be installed in court and used to its full capacity. It will be applied in civil matters where the parties consent or where there is disagreement on that. 
There is a real need to enhance the efficiency of the court system. There has been a 10 percent increase in the number of crimes that our courts have to deal with. Although our police force has undoubtedly made a marked improvement in bringing offenders to justice and increasing the number of prosecutions that increase has also been a real burden on the courts to deal with. With our ever-advancing technology the audiovisual system will be seen as a real advantage in streamlining the efficiency of the justice system. 
Debate interrupted.
Parker David: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
Parker David: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9520] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 There is remaining just the other issue that Kennedy Graham referred to which is the drafting issue in respect of new subclause 16A(2) which inserts new subparagraph (1A)(a)(i) with the wording “is or was not …”. I would like to have an assurance from the Attorney-General that he has checked the wording with officials and that they are happy with it. Thank you. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: We will just get clarification on that point.
Bridges Simon: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — First Reading 
Bridges Simon: Courts (Remote Participation) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9524] 
SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga) 
: 
 It is good to speak on the Courts (Remote Participation) Bill. It will result in greater efficiencies cost savings and safety in our court system. I know that it is something a lot of people are interested in. I know that the Eaves family in Tauranga for example are watching and will be interested in what I am about to say. 
The process for this video link started some time ago. In my time as a lawyer I was involved in a couple of cases. In one a police officer had moved overseas and was from memory in the outback of Australia and we had him give evidence by video link for a voir dire. In the second case an attempted murder one of the witnesses to a gang brawl in Opotiki had cancer and only a matter of weeks to live so her evidence was taken by this method. But the process was far from certain. There certainly were not any presumptions and it was hard work and fraught to get evidence—and it still is I imagine—into court by video link. 
So this measure is a real procedural step forward. I think it is excellent. As I said it will result in efficiencies cost reductions and increased safety. I agree with what Charles Chauvel said which was that any lawyer who has been involved in a criminal call-over in a District Court or a High Court will be aware of the hassle of getting prisoners particularly but also witnesses and so on into court. There will be many savings and efficiencies as a result of doing this not to mention as I said greater safety. Certainly a colleague of mine in the Tauranga District Court was—it made the news I recall—assaulted at a call-over by a prisoner who had decided that he did not want to be in custody any more. These things do happen and by going to video link we cut all of that down and hopefully should speed things up. 
I want to finish with what is perhaps a radical thought. We see in the bill that video links will be used by default for procedural hearings but not for substantive hearings. I personally question whether that will necessarily be the end of the story. I take Charles Chauvel’s point that we see the body language of witnesses and the whites of their eyes when they are at close quarters. However all the research tends to suggest that twitchy witnesses are often honest and dishonest witnesses often come across as far from twitchy. 
So I question whether there are any real advantages to having a witness in court physically rather than remotely by video link. It may be that in time—and I know it is a radical thought—video links could be extended to all witnesses whether in procedural or substantive hearings. But perhaps that is for another bill in another year.
Finlayson Christopher: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
Finlayson Christopher: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9520] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 I hear what the three members have said and I appreciate their comments. I think we are all at one as was said by Justice MacKenzie. But the constitutional importance of arrangements concerning judicial salaries is such that there must be a clear statutory basis for all amounts paid to judges by way of salaries and allowances. I acknowledge and I think I am on record as saying that the Judicature Act is a bit of a dog’s breakfast and needs a complete rewrite. I hear what members have said and I will be taking it further.
Finlayson Christopher: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
Finlayson Christopher: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9520] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 I can so advise. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 108 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to Part 2 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Graham Kennedy: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
Graham Kennedy: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9515] 
Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green) 
: 
 I have already expressed the Green Party’s support for the Judicial Matters Bill generally and in this intervention in the Committee I will address one matter only. It relates of course to Supplementary Order Paper 108 submitted by the Attorney-General. 
I recognise the apparent confusion in the earlier debate and I say at the outset that the Green Party had independently resolved to oppose Supplementary Order Paper 108 but in light of subsequent explanations we are certainly prepared to support it; I want to allay from the outset any concern on that matter. 
That said I want to explore some specific issues on the matter of Supplementary Order Paper 108 because I understood— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: We are not on Supplementary Order Paper 108 only the two clauses 15A and 15B. 
Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM 
: I think my comments probably pertain to 16— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: You are one step ahead. We are on clauses 15A and 15B. You will get the chance if you wish to discuss clause 16 and Supplementary Order Paper 108 in the debate on Part 2. I just bring your attention to that. 
New Part 1A agreed to.
Finlayson Christopher: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
Finlayson Christopher: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9515] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 I thank Charles Chauvel for those comments. I begin by expressing my concern on his behalf for the unfortunate flight he had. I must confess that my sympathies actually were with him; I was flying recently and I had some urchin kicking my seat but rather than turn round and upbraid him I was frightened that what happened to the honourable member would happen to me. So there we have it. 
But the point the member makes is a fair one. On the question of temporary judges of course one is not opposed to them on principle because the system could not operate unless they were there. The question is really the number. When one becomes utterly dependent on them then I think of the judgment of a Scottish court where the very issue arose and it was referred to as a very cheap and shabby form of justice. So what I am trying to do is address that as best I can. The other point that needs to be made is that there has been a growth in the work of the Environment Court. Because of the particular circumstances of the Employment Court—and the member is a respected practitioner in that area and knows about that area of the law—we have two temporary judges of the Employment Court and they also hold warrants as District Court judges. So there has been growth in work since the last time the number went up and it is a matter that is going to have to be addressed on a regular basis I imagine. 
The member did not raise it but one concern if the number gets too much bigger is that we will be dealing with the largest court in Australasia and that is something to be borne in mind before we increase it any further because the administration involved in running such a large court is an important question.