edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Bennett David: Holidays Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Bennett David: Holidays Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13335] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I rise to take a call on the Holidays Amendment Bill and to note the fairness and equity that the Minister of Labour is employing in her portfolio. The way in which the legislation has been proposed the manner in which the public is aware of the detail of it and the simplicity of the nature of the changes mean that many New Zealanders and especially working New Zealanders find a lot of comfort from this Minister and the way in which she is dealing with these issues. We congratulate her. 
Contrary to the rhetoric from members opposite we have had two labour relations bills before the House this afternoon and Labour members have not talked about the actual bill in either case. They have talked about lower wages and things like that which have nothing to do with the bills. The New Zealand public needs to know that the reality of this bill is not about reducing wages or any of the other rhetoric that Labour members have talked about. This bill is about giving choice and personal direction in regard to holidays. It is a bill that will assist workers and be to their benefit. 
We see this bill going through the House being successful and being in the best interests of New Zealand workers so that they have choice in the future. Thank you.
Blue Jackie: Holidays Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Blue Jackie: Holidays Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13338] 
Dr JACKIE BLUE (National) 
: 
 I am grateful for the opportunity to speak to the first reading of the Holidays Amendment Bill. It is an excellent bill and I congratulate the Minister of Labour on it. It is part of a suite of employment laws that the Minister is bringing to the House. We had the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) this afternoon and the Holidays Amendment Bill is the second bill that we will debate today in this area. The bill is all about finding practical solutions to the issues facing both employees and employers which is all being done in the backdrop of the Government’s objective to grow the economy create more jobs and increase growth for the country. 
The bill amends the Holidays Act 2003 so that the Act is easier to understand and to apply; the comment has been made that the Act has been complex and confusing. The bill will decrease compliance costs for employers making it easier for businesses to grow and get on with their core business which is all about carrying out their business and opening up jobs. This bill is all about choice and flexibility. I commend it to the House. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Point of order— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: The time has come for the House to rise so we will not deal with a point of order. 
Debate interrupted.
Locke Keith: Holidays Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Locke Keith: Holidays Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13338] 
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think that Mr Mallard should have been able to get to the particular clause— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: What is the member’s point of order? I ask whether some member is seeking the call.
Mallard Trevor: Holidays Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Mallard Trevor: Holidays Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13338] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I will just get out my gear and see whether I can find the appropriate Standing Order. I think that we are getting to the point in the debate where it is making a nonsense of trying to— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Order! 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I am sorry but I am trying to find the particular page as we go. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: The member must raise his point of order; we do not need a dissertation on the debate. That is not a point of order. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: No I think you are right Mr Assistant Speaker but I am sure that one of my colleagues— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: I ask whether some member is seeking the call. The member does not have a point of order.
Wilkinson Kate: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Wilkinson Kate: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13323] 
Hon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee consider the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) 
 that the committee report to the House on or before 5 November 2010 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) and during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House and outside the Wellington area despite Standing Orders 187 189(a) and 190(1)(b) and (c).
Woodhouse Michael: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Woodhouse Michael: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13319] 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) 
: 
 Members have been playing a little bit of “my statistic is bigger than your statistic” over this debate and I am very happy to play that game as well particularly in relation to the Department of Labour report on how effective this measure has been for the last 18 months in respect of firms with fewer than 20 employees. We have heard from Sir Roger Douglas and others that 40 percent of those people who were offered jobs would not have got them had there not been a trial period but I ask how many employers actually took advantage of the 90-day probation period at all. We have heard great statements from members opposite— 
Sue Moroney 
: Was the job there already or was it not there? Did they make up a new job for them? 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE 
: There is another statement. We are hearing that everyone will use the provision and that when we extend it out to firms with more than 20 people absolutely all employers will use it. But I say that that is absolutely not the case. Fewer than half of the firms eligible to use this provision did so—fewer than half—and only about half of the people employed by that half of employers were taken on under the probation period. So of all the people who could have been employed under a probation period by my maths probably only about a quarter of them were. 
But what is really interesting is why those people were taken on. Nearly a quarter of employers said that they were not sure whether work was available for employees or that they had given a job to someone who might not otherwise have got it; they were not sure whether the person could do the job. To be opposed to that sort of thing and to prevent even one job from being created in the face of uncertainty is to have no understanding of how to run a business during a recovery from a recession a recovery that is uncertain and fragile. If one has a small business—if one is a landscape gardener or a plumber with five or six staff—taking on an extra staff member is a huge risk an absolutely huge risk in the face of that uncertainty. To give a little bit more flexibility— 
Sue Moroney 
: The Prime Minister won’t like you calling it fragile. 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE 
: It is a fragile recovery and it is uncertain particularly from the point of view of employers. That is what the surveys are showing and they show that because people cannot see into the future. 
I take up the point made by Mr Harawira about this measure being bad for young people. But 43 percent of the people taken on under these provisions were aged under 25. Nearly half of the people given a chance under this measure were young people so I think this is good legislation. It is fair it is flexible and I support it.
Locke Keith: Holidays Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Locke Keith: Holidays Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13338] 
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
: 
 I seek leave for the House to rise at this point. I think that people are dashing off— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought for the House to now rise. Is there any objection to that course of action? Yes there is.
Vote: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13331] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Finlayson Christopher: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
Finlayson Christopher: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13330] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Revenue 
: I move  
That the Finance and Expenditure Committee consider the Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill 
 that the committee report to the House on or before 15 November 2010 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) and during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 187 and 190(1)(b) and (c).
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13330] 
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 I rise to support the Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill. It is a bill that is part of the most comprehensive reforms in the tax area for 25 years. It is a centrepiece of this year’s Budget. It is a package that makes the system fairer and more sustainable and it delivers better incentives for economic growth. It is a package that will deliver prosperity to this country. 
When I talk to the people in Maungakiekie whom I represent I hear that they are certainly looking forward to their tax cuts and the increases in their benefits— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: And GST. 
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA 
:—as well as a GST increase to be fair. But they are looking forward to this package and to the Government continuing in this way. I support this bill. 
Bill read a first time.
Gilmore Aaron: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
Gilmore Aaron: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13328] 
AARON GILMORE (National) 
: 
 It gives me the utmost pleasure to stand and follow the previous speaker Raymond Huo. I want to talk a bit about what the Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill is about which is GST. New Zealand has one of the most wonderful simplified GST systems in the world and the good thing about this bill is that it makes our system even simpler. There is a really neat little thing in the bill. It is not necessarily about the phoenix schemes but it means that those nasty people called tax accountants will have a little less work to do. People will not have to talk to them and worry about the test of what constitutes a going concern as much as they used to. I happen to own a commercial building and I had to pay my tax accountant a couple of thousand bucks. She is a good lady. But the good thing about the changes in this bill is that other people who go out and buy commercial buildings in the months and years to come will save themselves a little money. That is what our Government is all about—saving a little money by reducing regulation. I think that is a good thing. Thank you very much.
Harawira Hone: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
Harawira Hone: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13326] 
HONE HARAWIRA (Maori Party—Te Tai Tokerau) 
: 
 Hoi no he tu poto tenei kia mohio ai te Whare e tautoko kaha ana te Pati Maori i te pire a Rahui Katene kia tangohia te take i te kai. Kia ora tatou. 
[ 
This is just a short call to inform the House that the Maori Party strongly supports Rahui Katene’s bill to remove the tax on food. Greetings to us 
.]
Garrett David: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
Garrett David: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13326] 
DAVID GARRETT (ACT) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of the ACT Party to indicate our support for the Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill. I mention in passing that it was the great Sir Roger Douglas who came up with the concept of GST. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: It’s no good greasing up to him now. 
DAVID GARRETT 
: I do not need to grease up to him now. We are friends. We are good friends. I learn a great deal from Sir Roger. Every day in fact Sir Roger and I—well not every day but most days—share dinner together. We break bread together as friends do. I find his advice extremely helpful on many political matters. 
I will tell a wee story because I think it is a very good one. In a greasy spoon cafe in Auckland which I frequent now and again when I wish to return to my class roots I go in and have a feed of eggs and bacon with all the trimmings. I never wear a suit of course but I am the only person there who wears a suit in daily life; it is frequented by truck drivers and digger operators and those sorts of chaps. I was in there about a year ago and a group of people were having lunch and talking about the insulation scheme. One of them said the scheme sounded all right but someone had to pay for it. My ears pricked up and I thought that was a bit unusual. Then the man said: “You know that [bleep] Sir Roger Douglas? He had it right. That [bleeping] GST even the rich [bleeps] have to pay that mate. That is a [bleeping] good idea.” I thought that was marvellous. A man who makes his living driving a digger is able to recognise what a brilliant thing GST is. 
It is good that we are here in 2010 a bit over 20 years later making a few tweaks and adjustments to make sure that the wide boys whom Mr Boscawen despises so much have it just a bit harder to defraud the good honest workers like those chaps whom I met in that cafe that day and with whom I had a good talk and whom that horrible shouter over there supposedly represents. ACT is very happy to support this bill.
Bennett David: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
Bennett David: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13325] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I will take a short call in regard to the Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill sponsored by the Minister of Revenue Peter Dunne. The previous speaker Trevor Mallard finally got to the heart of the bill in the last few moments of his speech. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I had to find my place in the notes. 
DAVID BENNETT 
: Well that is familiar territory for him I am sure. The basic nature of this bill is to close a tax loophole where phoenix schemes have been involved. Essentially in order to close this loophole the bill requires that the GST be recorded at a zero rate for land if the buyer is also GST registered. That avoids the situation where had the rate not been set at zero the Inland Revenue Department could have been liable to pay the GST the company might not be in a position to fulfil its obligations and there is potential for fraud under the scheme. So this bill closes that loophole. 
The bill has a number of other important subsidiary clauses that deal with simplifying some of the rules concerning GST. There are also some legislative changes in regard to KiwiSaver fringe benefit tax joint bank accounts penalties portfolio investment entity schemes overseas donations and superannuation. Effectively this bill covers off an element of the taxation system that is important because a taxation system needs to be robust fair and equitable and we need to make sure that the legislation is such that people cannot take advantage of the system through schemes or the way that they structure their affairs. This bill is important in doing that so that people can see the fairness and equity that they demand be represented in the taxation system. We support the passage of the bill through the House.
Delahunty Catherine: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
Delahunty Catherine: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13323] 
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Deputy Speaker. Tena koutou katoa. I rise to take a very short call on this Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: No no—take 10 minutes. 
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY 
: —ha ha—because I am not actually a tax expert and my co-leader is not here to do it and because I really do like keeping to the point. However if it were October the Green Party would have a great deal to say about the rise in GST. As it is not October and as I will probably not be the Green member who makes the speech in October all I can say is that I am appalled by the concept of the increase in GST. I know that we passed legislation last night that will hurt people and the GST increase will hurt people more. I was ashamed to be part of Parliament last night and I have had many emails from people on the subject of that legislation. 
However this bill is the Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill. Tax is the price we pay to live in a civilised society. For the taxation system to work everyone must pay their share and be seen to pay their share. Tax loopholes and tax avoidance undermine the collective sense of trust and trust is a key word in our society. We have only a short amount of it around so we really need to have this legislation. When overseas-owned banks unlawfully avoided paying $2 billion in tax they did not just take money from ordinary New Zealanders; they undermined our collective will to pay our share which is a serious matter in a society increasingly bereft of trust. Hence— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Will the member yield her time to me? 
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY 
: —we strongly support closing tax loopholes. 
The Greens will support the bill but as I am making a short speech I will be happy to yield the balance of my time to Trevor Mallard. Thank you.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13323] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a first time. 
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. 
Bill read a first time.
Blue Jackie: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Blue Jackie: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13316] 
Dr JACKIE BLUE (National) 
: 
 I am pleased to speak in the first reading debate of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2). I congratulate the Minister of Labour on bringing the bill to the House. It will make a difference to many many New Zealanders. 
The bill amends the Employment Relations Act 2000. Importantly I want to take some time to talk about the 90-day trial period which is being extended to all businesses. In 2008 the trial was for businesses with fewer than 20 employees. It has been very successful. A recent survey showed that 40 percent of employers would not have hired without it. I want to correct the previous speaker Hone Harawira. I tell him that 75 percent of people hired under that scheme still have jobs and the 25 percent who left did so for a variety of reasons. They usually left in the first few weeks not at day 89 as some cynical people might suggest. 
This scheme has made a real difference in people’s lives. It is giving them an opportunity for a job they would not otherwise have had. This bill is all about giving people choice and opportunity. It is right behind the Government’s objective to increase the number of jobs and also to grow the economy. So I congratulate the Minister on this. 
The other issue is that most OECD countries already have this type of trial period. This is not a radical move by the Minister; this is in line with other OECD countries. In fact their trial periods are longer than 90 days. This is a very moderate scheme. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Hear the old trout brigade over there. 
Dr JACKIE BLUE 
: Absolutely. The other changes to this bill include union access to workplaces. It also clarifies communication with employees during collective bargaining and the personal grievance process. This bill is all about giving choice it is about giving flexibility and it ensures balance and fairness to both employers and employees. I commend this bill to the House.
Bennett David: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Bennett David: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13310] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I will take a short call on the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2). First of all I congratulate the Minister of Labour on bringing this legislation forward. The first thing that New Zealanders need to do is acknowledge the success of the Employment Relations Amendment Act 2008 and the number of people who have obtained employment in very tough times through that legislation. It is good that this Government has recognised things that have worked and it has delivered even more so that we can get more people into work and give them opportunities dignity and the ability to work. 
It was very disappointing to hear that last speech from Labour member Trevor Mallard. It tried to attack people’s emotions and included a lot of inaccuracies about vulnerable workers and reducing wages. It was all a load of rubbish that is not in this bill. This bill is about giving opportunities and promise to New Zealanders and that is what we will be doing through providing employment and making sure that the rules and regulations around it are easy so that people can get those jobs and get that chance in the future. 
We look forward to this bill passing through the House to the select committee where I am sure there will be some submissions on it. In essence this bill builds on the very successful Act that this Parliament passed in the first term of this National Government. We look forward to this legislation progressing through the House and being successful. Thank you.
Quinn Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Quinn Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:665;Page:13301] 
10. 
PAUL QUINN (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Building and Construction 
: What progress has been made on the Government’s financial assistance package for owners of leaky homes? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister for Building and Construction) 
: 
 Good progress has been made on the Government’s leaky homes financial assistance package which we announced on 17 May. Twenty-eight councils are now on board which collectively represent more than 90 percent of the current leaky home claims. Other councils will be able to opt into the scheme at a later stage. Several meetings and workshops have now been held with the local authorities and banks on developing the operational details of the package. We are certainly on track to have the package up and running by early 2011. 
Paul Quinn 
: What reports has he received on reaction to the Government’s proposed leaky homes package? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: I have been advised by the Department of Building and Housing that up to 145 new weathertightness claims involving 289 homeowners have been lodged since the Government announced its financial assistance package for owners of leaky homes. This means that people recognise that it is a good scheme and it is worthwhile to sign up. Anecdotal evidence suggests that many more potential claimants are waiting for more information before they make a claim. We encourage those people to apply now if they are approaching the 10-year cut-off period in order to determine their eligibility to stop the clock.
Woodhouse Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Woodhouse Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:665;Page:13300] 
8. 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Labour 
: What changes has she announced regarding public holidays? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 The Holidays Amendment Bill which has just been introduced includes a late amendment in order to clarify the law around the Christmas and New Year public holidays. The Employment Court recently ruled that if a firm shuts its doors over the Christmas and New Year period employees are not legally entitled to Christmas and New Year public holidays so employees may have needed to use up 4 days of annual leave to cover those days instead. Christmas and New Year holidays are an established feature of the New Zealand summer. Where firms decide to close their doors it is important that staff are not unfairly disadvantaged by losing four public holidays. 
Michael Woodhouse 
: Were any recommendations to the holidays advisory group not accepted? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: Yes there was a suggestion that the day after St Patrick’s Day be made a public holiday. Although I had some sympathy for that suggestion in the interests of productivity and growing the economy we rejected it.
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:665;Page:13295] 
4. 
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie) 
 to the  
Minister of Energy and Resources 
: What progress has been made in upgrading New Zealand’s national grid? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Energy and Resources) 
: 
 Today the Prime Minister opened a second substation at Otahuhu. This marks the completion of Transpower’s Otahuhu substation diversity project. A third of New Zealand’s power supply and nearly all of Auckland and Northland’s power is currently supplied through the Otahuhu site. This $100 million project will provide greater diversity of power supply to the Auckland and Northland regions. It is a significant piece of infrastructure. 
Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga 
: What other projects are under way that will reinforce supply into Auckland? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Reliable electricity infrastructure is very important to New Zealand’s largest city. There are a number of other projects under way such as the underground cable circuit between Pakuranga and Albany and the new line into Pakuranga from the south. Transpower will spend around $1.7 billion in total on transmission projects to reinforce its network into and across Auckland. It is a significant infrastructure spend. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Given that Transpower spent over $1 million last year on overseas travel for its staff and contractors and given its decision to spend over a quarter of a million dollars this year on its own— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have just pointed out that members are not meant to insert statements claims or assertions into questions. I do not insist on members starting a question with a question word necessarily the way previous Speakers have but to keep a list of “givens” going is simply a bit beyond the pale. I invite Charles Chauvel to reword his question. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Can taxpayers be satisfied that the decision to offer Transpower dividend relief has been accompanied by an appropriately strict oversight by him of Transpower’s planning and spending processes in light of Transpower spending $1 million last year on travel for staff and contractors its spending over a quarter of a million dollars this year on its own fibre-based internal phone network and its lack of any plan to incorporate smart grid technology into its $3 billion upgrade? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Yes.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:665;Page:13285] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Firstly I thank the member for the endorsement of the extended hours’ proposition. I think that is a very positive thing for the House. On the second point yes we are quite happy to have question time. That of course would be by leave of the House given the nature of the proceedings but members should expect that.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:665;Page:13285] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 As advised to the Business Committee some time ago next week the House will sit for extended hours in order to facilitate the passing of a range of non-controversial bills that have been on the Order Paper for some time. The House will also debate the first readings of some bills. It is the Government’s hope that we will have a question time each day next week and that the extended hours will conclude by 6 p.m. on the Thursday evening.
Henare Tau: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Henare Tau: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13322] 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
: 
 Mr Speaker— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: This will be a bottler. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: This will be a bottler all right. Back in 1966 there was the FIFA World Cup final between England and West Germany. For years later a battle raged over who actually won that game. The battle went on and on. Well this debate is a bit like that because Labour members are fighting the old battles that were won and lost a long long time ago. 
I heard the lady from west Auckland Lynne Pillay who talked about the Employment Contracts Act and how this bill the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) resembled that Act. But if that were the case thousands upon thousands of down-trodden workers would be piled up outside. The last big protest that had thousands of people parked up outside this building was over the foreshore and seabed legislation. That is a telling little example. Who won that game? The Maori Party won that game—and England won the World Cup back in 1966. The Employment Contracts Act is so long ago that it does not bear even mentioning. 
I will get up in this House and say a big thankyou to Sir Roger Douglas because he has hit the nail on the head. Putting all the philosophy and the old rhetoric aside this bill is about hope. It is about giving people a second chance. All we need to do is ask an ex-prisoner who is looking for a job— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: A bottler. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Absolutely! Oh no I mean somebody who has actually been convicted—oh but that is OK. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: No no—someone who’s bottled someone and cut their head open. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Let us not go there. 
This is about opportunity this is about giving a chance and this is about giving hope to the ex-prisoner who may want to get a job and get on the rung that Sir Roger Douglas talks about. 
Where are all those thousands and thousands of union protests? They are nowhere. They are nowhere to be seen. In fact the only place that they are seen is in the minds of the Opposition members. I tell members that my parting shot is this: they should go and look at the film  
Inception 
 because that is where the Opposition belongs—in dreamtime.
Hughes Darren: Business Statement 
Hughes Darren: Business Statement 
[Volume:665;Page:13285] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I wonder whether the Leader of the House could confirm that just as a cut is now known as “changed funding” urgency is now known as “extended hours” as part of the rebranding of the Standing Orders that is under way—if he could assist in respect of that. I also ask him whether the Government is committed to holding question time next week.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13323] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:665;Page:13285] 
Thursday 19 August 2010 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business Statement 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 As advised to the Business Committee some time ago next week the House will sit for extended hours in order to facilitate the passing of a range of non-controversial bills that have been on the Order Paper for some time. The House will also debate the first readings of some bills. It is the Government’s hope that we will have a question time each day next week and that the extended hours will conclude by 6 p.m. on the Thursday evening. 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I wonder whether the Leader of the House could confirm that just as a cut is now known as “changed funding” urgency is now known as “extended hours” as part of the rebranding of the Standing Orders that is under way—if he could assist in respect of that. I also ask him whether the Government is committed to holding question time next week. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Firstly I thank the member for the endorsement of the extended hours’ proposition. I think that is a very positive thing for the House. On the second point yes we are quite happy to have question time. That of course would be by leave of the House given the nature of the proceedings but members should expect that.
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:13195] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 65 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 1 (Turia); United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4 (Flavell Harawira Katene Sharples); Progressive 1. 
Motion as amended agreed to. 
Bill reported without amendment. 
Report adopted.
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:13194] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 65 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 1 (Turia); United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4 (Flavell Harawira Katene Sharples); Progressive 1. 
Clause 1 agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The typescript amendment in the name of the Hon Annette King to omit clause 2 is ruled out of order as being a direct negative of the question. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Annette King to clause 2 be agreed to: 
to omit “September 2010” and substitute “December 2015”.  
Amendment not agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The remainder of the proposed amendments are ruled out of order as being substantially the same as the amendment that has been negatived.
Flavell Te Ururoa: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:13193] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Whip—Maori Party) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I am sorry Mr Chairperson but I think I have recorded most of the Maori Party votes slightly wrong in the sense that we were looking at a split vote in regard to one of our members. I know that we are fairly well down the line in terms of those votes and I offer my apologies to the Minister. If there were to be a blanket change to all of our votes one of the five votes that I registered would be put on the other side of the ballot. I apologise to the Committee for that problem. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Is the member seeking leave that we amend the votes accordingly? 
TE URUROA FLAVELL 
: Yes if that is possible. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection. So in each vote that the member has cast one is with the Opposition? 
TE URUROA FLAVELL 
: Wherever I have cast five votes one of the votes will go on to the opposite side because I have cast votes for both sides. In the votes where I have cast five one of the votes will go to the opposite side. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: So in all the votes that have been recorded so far where the Ayes were 64 and the Noes were 57 it would now be that the Ayes are 65 and the Noes are 56. Are we comfortable with that? 
TE URUROA FLAVELL 
: That is correct yes. I apologise to the Committee. Thank you very much. 
Schedule 2 agreed to. 
Schedule 3 agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Before I put the question on clause 1 we have typescript amendments in the name of the Hon Annette King to omit and substitute the title of the bill. These amendments are out of order as not being a serious description of the bill.
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:13191] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4 (Flavell Harawira Katene Sharples); Progressive 1. 
Noes 65 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 1 (Turia); United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 57 Noes 64. 
The question was put that the following amendments in the name of the Hon Annette King to clause 27 be agreed to: 
to insert the following subclauses after subclause (2) in new section 102: 
(2A)The work test does not apply to a work-tested beneficiary if the chief executive is satisfied that the beneficiary is undertaking volunteer work which if it was paid work would satisfy the work test for that beneficiary. 
(2B)The work test does not apply to a work-tested beneficiary if the chief executive is satisfied that the beneficiary is in education or training as a way of improving their employment opportunities.; and 
to add the following subclauses to new section 102: 
(4)The work test does not apply if the chief executive is satisfied that there is no suitable employment for the beneficiary. 
(5)For clarity suitable employment does not include work that— 
(a)a sole parent beneficiary with a child no younger than 6 would not be required to undertake work or training to satisfy their work-test obligations outside of school hours; and 
(b)a Maori person either living in or returning to their papa kainga would still be entitled to a benefit even though there may be no work or training available to them in their papa kainga.
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:13190] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4 (Flavell Harawira Katene Sharples); Progressive 1. 
Noes 65 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 1 (Turia); United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 57 Noes 64. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Annette King to clause 27 be agreed to: 
to add the following subclause to new section 102: 
(4)For clarity suitable employment does not include work that— 
(a)a sole parent beneficiary with a child no younger than 6 would not be required to undertake work or training to satisfy their work-test obligations outside of school hours; and 
(b)a Maori person either living in or returning to their papa kainga would still be entitled to a benefit even though there may be no work or training available to them in their papa kainga.
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:13190] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4 (Flavell Harawira Katene Sharples); Progressive 1. 
Noes 65 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 1 (Turia); United Future 1. 
Amendments not agreed to. 
The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 57 Noes 64. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Annette King to clause 27 be agreed to: 
to insert the following subclauses after subclause (2) in new section 102: 
(2A)The work test does not apply to a work-tested beneficiary if the chief executive is satisfied that the beneficiary is undertaking volunteer work which if it was paid work would satisfy the work test for that beneficiary. 
(2B)The work test does not apply to a work-tested beneficiary if the chief executive is satisfied that the beneficiary is in education or training as a way of improving their employment opportunities.
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:13190] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4 (Flavell Harawira Katene Sharples); Progressive 1. 
Noes 65 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 1 (Turia); United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 57 Noes 64. 
The question was put that the following amendments in the name of the Hon Annette King be agreed to: 
to omit clause 18; 
to omit clause 20; and 
to omit clause 27.
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:13194] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 65 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 1 (Turia); United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4 (Flavell Harawira Katene Sharples); Progressive 1. 
Clause 2 agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Paula Bennett be agreed to: 
to omit “Amendment” from the part of the motion relating to the bill to be divided from Part 3. 
Amendment agreed to.
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:13189] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4 (Flavell Harawira Katene Sharples); Progressive 1. 
Noes 65 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 1 (Turia); United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 57 Noes 64. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Annette King to clause 13 be agreed to: 
to insert the following subclause after subclause (8): 
(8A)Section 3(1) is amended by inserting the following definition in its appropriate alphabetical order: 
suitable employment 
 is work that a beneficiary is able to reasonably carry out ensuring that— 
(a)a sole parent beneficiary with a child no younger than 6 would not be required to undertake work or training to satisfy their work-test obligations outside of school hours; and 
(b)a Maori person either living in or returning to their papa kainga would still be entitled to a benefit even though there may be no work or training available to them in their papa kainga.
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:13192] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4 (Flavell Harawira Katene Sharples); Progressive 1. 
Noes 65 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 1 (Turia); United Future 1. 
Amendments not agreed to. 
The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 57 Noes 64.
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:13193] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4 (Flavell Harawira Katene Sharples); Progressive 1. 
Noes 65 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 1 (Turia); United Future 1. 
Amendments not agreed to. 
Schedule 1 agreed to. 
The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 57 Noes 64.
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:13192] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 4 be agreed to. 
Ayes 65 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 1 (Turia); United Future 1. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4 (Flavell Harawira Katene Sharples); Progressive 1. 
Part 4 agreed to. 
The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 64 Noes 57.
King Annette: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
King Annette: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:13173] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a speech made by the Hon Judith Collins in which she sets out her views about beneficiaries sitting around watching Sky TV living off the taxpayer letting their children run riot and getting stoned. Who was criticising beneficiaries? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Heatley Phil: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Heatley Phil: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:13155] 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY (Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I just query whether Shane Jones should be occupying his leader’s seat so early in the coup. [ 
Interruption 
] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: There will be no interjections—a point of order has been called. 
Hon Annette King 
: Silly. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I will decide. The member will not interrupt. The point is irrelevant and Mr Heatley is interrupting the flow of the debate.
Bennett Paula: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Bennett Paula: Social Assistance (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:13194] 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 I move  
That the Committee divide the bill into the Children Young Persons and Their Families Amendment Bill the Education Amendment Bill (No 3) the Taxation (Definitions of Dependent Child) Bill the Social Security (New Work Tests Incentives and Obligations) Amendment Bill and the War Pensions Amendment Bill (No 3  
pursuant to Supplementary Order Paper 153 as amended 
.