edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Brownlee Gerry: UrgencyText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Urgency[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11425. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):I moveThat urgency be accorded the second reading of the Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill the first reading of the Royal Succession Bill and its referral to a select committee the introduction and first reading of the Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill and its referral to a select committee the first reading of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 2) the second reading of the Building Amendment Bill (No 4) the second reading of the Families Commission Amendment Bill the second reading of the Financial Reporting Bill the second reading of the Bail Amendment Bill the second reading of the Family Court Proceedings Reform Bill the second reading and Committee stage of the Psychoactive Substances Bill the Committee stage of the Legal Assistance Amendment Bill the Committee stage of the State Sector and Public Finance Reform Bill the Committee stage and third reading of the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill and any bills into which it may be divided the Committee stage of the Taxation (Livestock Valuation Assets Expenditure and Remedial Matters Bill the Committee stage of the Airports (Cost Recovery for Processing of International Travellers) Bill the Committee stage of the Administration of Community Sentences and Orders Bill the Committee stage of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (Covered Bonds) Amendment Bill and the Committee stage of the Medicines Amendment Bill . It is a long list that the Government has expressed a desire to make some progress with. Urgency is a very legitimate tool for a Government to be able to claim some extra time to get business on the Order Paper further progressed. I think it would probably come as some surprise to most New Zealanders that the House sits for only 31 weeks a year. It sits for only 3 days in each of those 31 weeks and each of those days accumulates to around about 13 hours of legislation in any given week. That adds up to twelve 40-hour weeks a year to progress the Government’s programme. That is a very very limited amount of time. Given that members of Parliament are elected primarily to be legislators it is not surprising that there should be strong support for more time taken on the legislative process.I asked the Business Committee to consider using the extended hours provision for some of these bills to make progress but there is one party New Zealand First that does not accept that that Standing Order should exist. The Labour Party has a view that only bills it agrees with should be progressed during those sessions or if there is a Wednesday morning session caused by the Government not the Thursday evening session as the Government proposed. Therefore I think the only option we have open to us to get on with the business of the Government is to in fact have this urgency at this time.
Kaye Nikki: Food Bill — Referral to Primary Production CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKaye Nikki: Food Bill — Referral to Primary Production Committee[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11424. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon NIKKI KAYE (Minister for Food Safety):I moveThat the order of the day for the second reading of the Food Bill be discharged and that the bill be re-referred to the Primary Production Committee for consideration .Motion agreed to.
Carter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Christchurch City Council—Building Consent Authority AccreditationText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgent Debates Declined — Christchurch City Council—Building Consent Authority Accreditation[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11424. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from the Hon Lianne Dalziel seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 a local authority being stripped of its building consent authority accreditation while a range of Government agencies failed to address the need to intervene prior to accreditation being revoked. An urgent debate is a way of holding the Government accountable for an action for which it is responsible. There must be distinct governmental responsibility for the particular case that is sought to be debated. There is no direct ministerial responsibility for the Christchurch City Council’s failure to respond adequately to the concerns of International Accreditation New Zealand. The responsibility for the fact that accreditation is to be revoked lies with the Christchurch City Council. I acknowledge that the Government has a general power to revoke accreditation but that does not render this particular revocation a matter of direct Government responsibility. Further the absence of action on the part of the Government has long been held not to be a particular case of recent occurrence that can be raised under Standing Order 386. The urgent debate procedure is a means of debating matters that have occurred. It is not a means of debating matters that might or might not occur as a result of meetings involving Government Ministers announced for later this week.
Woods Megan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWoods Megan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11423. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]3.Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram)to theChairperson of the Education and Science Committee: Did he consider inviting the Minister to appear again to answer questions around responses to questions on the 2013/14 Estimates for Vote Education if so did he receive any advice about the Minister’s willingness to appear again?Dr CAM CALDER (Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee):Kia ora te Kaihautū. No. The chairman is a servant of the committee. Following her lengthy appearance and her comprehensive answers to the wide variety of questions posed by members the committee resolved not to ask her to return.Dr Megan Woods: Has he received any briefings or advice as to whether the Minister of Education her staff or her officials contacted her Government colleagues on the committee to discuss her willingness—Mr SPEAKER: Order!Dr Megan Woods: —to return—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That question is not in order.Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Could you explain why the chairman of the committee receiving advice from the clerk of the committee is out of order to be the subject of questions in this House?Mr SPEAKER: Because I did not understand the question to be from the clerk of the committee. I understood it to be whether the member Cam Calder had been talking to the Minister’s office and staff.Chris Hipkins: It asked about advice.Mr SPEAKER: Let us be clear. We will have the question read again but it had better be in order this time.Dr Megan Woods: OK. Has he received any briefings or advice as to whether the Minister of Education her staff or her officials contacted her Government colleagues on the committee to discuss her willingness or otherwise to return to the committee at a later date to answer questions around the responses to the 2013-14 estimates review for Vote Education questions received by the committee; if so from whom and what was the nature of those briefings or advice?Mr SPEAKER: Order! No. That question is not in order. The chairperson as the chairperson of the committee is not responsible for the actions of the Minister. The question must relate to a matter that the member as the chair is responsible for. I refer the member to Speakers’ ruling 175/7.Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Repeatedly in this House Ministers are asked about reports they have received or advice they have received. This question was very clearly and very carefully drafted to include advice that that member as chairman could have received from the clerk of the committee. If the member receives advice from the clerk of the committee that is about a matter that the clerk should not be advising on that does not exclude it from examination in this House.Mr SPEAKER: I have ruled on the matter. If the member wants that particular question the member should frame it in such way that it is a question to the Minister.
Ardern Jacinda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeArdern Jacinda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11423. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]2.JACINDA ARDERN (Labour)to theChairperson of the Social Services Committee: On what date did the Minister for Social Development appear before the committee to answer questions regarding the 2013/14 Estimates review for Vote Social Development?PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA (Chairperson of the Social Services Committee):The Minister appeared on 11 June 2013.Jacinda Ardern: Given the significant delay between the Minister’s appearance and the completion of what were meant to be pre-hearing questions has the chair approached the Minister or her staff about the potential for having her reappear before the committee as Minister Parata offered to do?Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA: No I have not and that is not my role as chair of the committee.
Ardern Jacinda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeArdern Jacinda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11422. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]1.JACINDA ARDERN (Labour)to theChairperson of the Social Services Committee: On which date and time if any did he receive the Minister for SocialDevelopment’s written responses to the pre-hearing questions for the 2013/14 Estimates review for Vote Social Development?PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA (Chairperson of the Social Services Committee):Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. As yet the responses to pre-hearing questions for Vote Social Development have not been received by the Social Services Committee. However I am advised by the clerk that the responses will be provided this afternoon.Jacinda Ardern: On what date were the written responses to the pre-hearing questions for the 2013-14 estimates for Vote Social Development due and what explanation has he received as chair of the select committee for the delay?Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA: The request was sent out on 30 May. The responses were expected by Tuesday 4 June given the hearing was scheduled for 5 June and in the interim period there was Queen’s Birthday on the Monday. The ministry has advised the clerk that the Minister’s office has asked to inform that the answers will be provided in one lot in due course.
Young Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYoung Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11421. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth)to theMinister of Broadcasting: What progress has been made on the regional rollout of the digital switchover for New Zealand television viewers?Hon CRAIG FOSS (Minister of Broadcasting):At the end of April the remaining areas of the South Island had successfully made the switch to digital television. Recent research shows that at the end of April 99 percent of South Island homes had switched over to digital. I would like to congratulate the South Island households on a very smooth transition to digital TV. That is a significant milestone in a project with fewer than 6 months to go until the remainder of New Zealand is entirely digital. We are looking to the North Island to make the move to digital TV just as successfully. Many households have gone digital and are enjoying more channels more choice and better-quality pictures and services. Going digital will free up the radio spectrum for the next generation of mobile phone and data services benefiting New Zealand families and supporting our continued economic growth.Jonathan Young: Which is the next region to go digital?Hon CRAIG FOSS: The lower North Island including Taranaki and the East Coast will go digital on 29 September. We recently marked 100 days until these areas make the switch to go digital. To keep watching TV households need to go digital by getting FreeView Sky Igloo or Vodafone cable TV in Wellington. I must remind listeners that they do not need a TV to go digital. Practically any TV can go digital with the right equipment.Hon Trevor Mallard: Of course you need a TV to go digital.Hon CRAIG FOSS: People wanting to find out what they need to do to go digital—including members opposite—can go to www.goingdigital.co.nz or call 0800 838 800.
Gilmore Aaron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGilmore Aaron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11419. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National)to theMinister of Justice: How is the Government improving its justice and other services to local communities?Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice):I have recently launched the Hutt Valley mobile community office. This is an initiative by 13 front-line service providers in the Hutt Valley area. Some months earlier the justice sector began a discussion about improving front-line community services. That discussion resulted in this specially fitted out mobile van which will deliver a range of justice health and social services including victim support neighbourhood support health immunisations Plunket Work and Income services ACC services budget advice and probation services. The police health corrections and local bodies will all be providing staff to the mobile office which will operate throughout the Hutt Valley including Wainuiōmata. They may even have some anger management courses available.Paul Foster-Bell: How does the mobile community office contribute to the Government’s Better Public Services?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Yet another excellent question. The whole justice sector including the police corrections and the courts is focused on driving initiatives that make a real difference for New Zealanders. The Hutt Valley mobile community office is a first for New Zealand because it delivers a range of public services from different agencies through a single community office. The justice sector is delivering on its Better Public Services targets of reducing crime reducing reoffending and reducing youth crime. Bringing services into local neighbourhoods delivers on these promises to keep our community safe.
McKelvie Ian: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMcKelvie Ian: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11417. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei)to theMinister of Police: What updates has she received on how Police are using technology to prevent crime?Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Police):Today police have completed their initial roll-out of 6259 smartphones and 3702 tablets to front-line police officers throughout the country. These smart devices allow officers to view offenders’ photographs input and access information access email and maps dictate information and take photos all while out in the community. The access to this information means that police will spend less time in police stations accessing databases and doing paperwork and much more time being visible out on the streets tackling and preventing crime.Ian McKelvie: How are smartphones and tablets being used to prevent crime?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Smartphones and tablets allow our front-line officers to have access to critical information when they need it allowing them to make better-informed decisions. An 11-month trial last year found that the use of these smart devices allowed each front-line officer to spend an extra 30 minutes per shift out in their community. This translates to an additional 543000 front-line police hours per year or the equivalent of an extra 354 front-line staff out there focused on preventing crime. And this is all on top of the 600 extra police delivered by this Government and a 70 percent increase in foot patrols which has seen the lowest crime rate in 30 years.Kris Faafoi: What risks were highlighted by police for the use of mobile devices especially in situations of major events where mobile coverage can be overloaded; and does she think it is appropriate that details like this were blacked out in an Official Information Act response preventing the full picture of the roll-out from being presented?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Well as I said there was an 11-month trial of these devices run across four different districts of New Zealand last year including the West Coast which we all know has difficulty with some of its coverage for mobile devices. This has been identified and taken up with the suppliers. This very good contract which has been negotiated by Deputy Commissioner Bush is particularly focused on the service that was delivered rather than on the capital expenditure. So those risks have been clearly identified and are being addressed by the suppliers of the equipment. And in fact if the member goes to the police website this afternoon he will see that there is in fact a comment from a West Coast officer detailing when he was able to use his mobile device to locate and find two lost hunters.Kris Faafoi: I seek leave to table the business case for police mobility dated 14 November 2012 where the main risks and the key risks to this project were blacked out.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that. Is there any objection? There is.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11416. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I can deal with this very quickly. [Interruption ] Order! I can deal with this very quickly. The Hon Trevor Mallard is always welcome to come and see me after question time.
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11416. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: If it is a fresh point of order I am happy to hear it.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: It is. I am going to agree with you but suggest that we look at that tape together. [Interruption ]
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11416. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I invite the member to go back and have a look at theHansard . The member quoted a specific date—from memory 22 May—and the Prime Minister said he could not be absolutely sure offhand that it was 22 May. It was certainly not helpful for the Prime Minister to then add the point that the interjection from Grant Robertson has just made.
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11416. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I think you missed my point of order. Members are not meant to doubt members’ words in this House without some sort of evidence. The Prime Minister did that to Mr Robertson.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11415. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have heard quite enough. The reason members seek to table a document is to help further inform members. When it is an answer to a written question they are published and are available to all members and it is not necessary for them to be tabled.
Key John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKey John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11415. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):I am more than happy for members if they want me to to go back and look at all the quotes that they have put to me and you will find that more often than not they are not accurately reported they are quite incorrect and I can only accept the member’s word if I think it is right. Often it is not right.
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11415. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think we are getting to a point where the Prime Minister is regularly saying that he doubts members’ words and their figures. When someone is quoting from the Prime Minister I do not think they should be disparaged in that way. If it was wrong it was his fault.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11415. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! No. [Interruption ] Order! They are available to all members.
Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11415. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader—Labour):In light of the Prime Minister’s answers to the questions earlier—I know this is unusual—I seek leave to table written question No. 7472—
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11409. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]1.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First)to thePrime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):Yes.Rt Hon Winston Peters: When he said on 25 September 2012 that he was not briefed on who would be involved in the Kim Dotcom raid saying: “The activity in question did not require a ministerial warrant and I am not briefed on operational matters on every operation it undertakes.” was he telling the truth?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Yes.Rt Hon Winston Peters: When he was asked on 25 September 2012 regarding when he was first briefed about the ministerial certificate that the Deputy Prime Minister signed on his behalf and he answered “Last night.” was he telling the truth?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Yes.Rt Hon Winston Peters: When he replied to a question on 26 September 2012 on when other agencies knew about the Government Communications Security Bureau’s involvement in the Kim Dotcom case: “I am simply not in a position to understand whether those organisations knew that or not. What I do know is that the first I was aware of it was on Monday 17 September. Whether those other organisations had some information I am not sure.” was he telling the truth?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Yes.Rt Hon Winston Peters: On 8 September 2011 when he said in regard to the appointment of Mr Ian Fletcher as the director of the Government Communications Security Bureau: “Mr Fletcher has extensive policy and operational experience” and further: “Mr Fletcher is a skilled leader who will make a valuable contribution to the bureau and wider New Zealand intelligence community.” does he stand by those statements?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Yes.
Carter David: Points of Order — United Nations Security Council New Zealand’s Candidature—Leave to Move MotionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — United Nations Security Council New Zealand’s Candidature—Leave to Move Motion[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11409. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I am afraid the leave has been put. It has been denied. I am sorry but there is nothing else I can do to assist the member. What I suggest the member does is take an opportunity to talk to some other members of the House. There may be an opportunity to do so at the end of question time.
Points of Order — Royal Succession Bill—ProcedureText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePoints of Order — Royal Succession Bill—Procedure[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11443. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Points of OrderRoyal Succession Bill—ProcedureBRENDAN HORAN (Independent):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I came at the earliest possible convenience but I would like to ask for your considered ruling in the time available before the conclusion of this debate as to whether the Royal Succession Bill the next bill on the Order Paper can properly be debated today. The reason I ask this is that this legislation is subject to judicial challenge through the courts. As you know in this House we are guarded by the principle of comity the mutual respect of Parliament and the courts for each other’s jurisdictions. We work in ways to maintain this respect and I am concerned that we may be about to breach these.What is unusual about the Royal Succession Bill is that changes are required in 16 nations where the Queen is head of State. Papers were filed several weeks ago—and I am happy to provide you with a copy now—in the Superior Court of Quebec by Professors Motard and Taillon. They are two of Canada’s pre-eminent constitutional experts. The motion for declaratory judgment is set down for hearing on 18 July. Normally I would not think that proceedings half a world away would give the House reason to pause but given the unique nature of this bill and the need for concurrent changes in multiple legislatures I suspect that it would be best for this House to wait until the Quebec proceedings are resolved. For that reason I ask for your considered ruling.Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice):This House is not subject to the courts of Quebec in whatever form they might be. This House has full jurisdiction to hear the Royal Succession Bill and to deliberate accordingly. The member should know that. He is supposed to be a member of this Parliament. He should know that we are not subject to the laws of Quebec.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): All right well thinking about that I would have to take advice on that because it is another jurisdiction. I take on board what the Minister has said and I am inclined to agree with the Minister but I will seek some advice and I will come back.
Robertson H V Ross: Points of Order — United Nations Security Council New Zealand’s Candidature—Leave to Move MotionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Points of Order — United Nations Security Council New Zealand’s Candidature—Leave to Move Motion[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11409. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]H V ROSS ROBERTSON (Labour—Manukau East):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If I could just clear up something for the Government this notice of motion has been cleared with the Government through John Hayes and also through Katrina Shanks.
Carter David: Points of Order — United Nations Security Council New Zealand’s Candidature—Leave to Move MotionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — United Nations Security Council New Zealand’s Candidature—Leave to Move Motion[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11409. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Robertson H V Ross: Points of Order — United Nations Security Council New Zealand’s Candidature—Leave to Move MotionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson H V Ross: Points of Order — United Nations Security Council New Zealand’s Candidature—Leave to Move Motion[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11409. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]H V ROSS ROBERTSON (Labour—Manukau East):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move a non-debatable motion No. 14 in my name. It is to do with New Zealand’s candidature for a non-permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council.
Carter David: Speaker’s Statements — Chamber—Commemorative PlaquesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Speaker’s Statements — Chamber—Commemorative Plaques[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11409. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed?Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I just want an indication as to whether or not such a statement would breach urgency.Mr SPEAKER: Does the Minister wish to clarify? It will not if leave is sought. Leave is so sought. Is there any objection to that leave? There is none.
Brownlee Gerry: Speaker’s Statements — Chamber—Commemorative PlaquesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Speaker’s Statements — Chamber—Commemorative Plaques[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11409. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):I seek the leave of the House for the Speaker to make a statement about the unveiling of the commemorative plaques when the House resumes after the dinner break this evening.
Carter David: Speaker’s Statements — Chamber—Commemorative PlaquesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Speaker’s Statements — Chamber—Commemorative Plaques[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11409. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members I draw your attention to the three new plaques installed at the back of the Chamber to commemorate military deployments and peacekeeping missions since the 1950s. The plaques will be unveiled during a ceremony scheduled for the dinner break this evening.
Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCompanies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11443. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment BillSecond ReadingDebate resumed.JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany):I commend the Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill to the House.Bill read a second time.
Families Commission Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFamilies Commission Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11494. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Families Commission Amendment BillSecond ReadingDebate resumed from 9 April.DENISE ROCHE (Green):I am not sure I am going to get through my speech before the bell goes tonight either. However just to go back to what I was saying before I was interrupted we were looking at the Families Commission the work that had been done before the changes that are in this Families Commission Amendment Bill and particularly the changes and their impact on evaluation and research.I am making a case that the changes under this bill will mean that there will be a loss of independence in the research that will be compiled around theFamily Status Report . This is particularly important when we look at how the committees are being set up—in particular the expert advisory committee. We do not believe that this bill will actually benefit families and children the way the commission has.Debate interrupted.
Speaker’s Statements — Chamber—Commemorative PlaquesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSpeaker’s Statements — Chamber—Commemorative Plaques[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11462. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Speaker’s StatementsChamber—Commemorative PlaquesMr SPEAKER: During the dinner break we have unveiled three commemorative plaques for Afghanistan Timor-Leste and missions in support of peace. These plaques acknowledge and honour our service personnel and are a reminder to us as members as we sit in this House of the magnitude of each decision to send our service personnel overseas on active operations.I will now read the names of those who have fallen during these operations. Captain Kelly Ross Banks Major Neil John McNutt Warrant Officer Class 2 Tony Michael Walser Staff Sergeant William Edward White Private Leonard William Manning Private Boyd Reagan Hēnare Atkins Private Dean Russell Johnston Lieutenant Timothy Andrew O’Donnell Private Kirifi Mila Corporal Douglas Grant Lance Corporal Leon Kristopher Smith Corporal Douglas Charles Hughes Lance Corporal Pralli Durrer Lance Corporal Rory Patrick Malone Corporal Luke Douglas Tamatea Lance Corporal Jacinda Francis Elyse Baker Private Richard Lee Harris. I thank members.
Food Bill — Referral to Primary Production CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFood Bill — Referral to Primary Production Committee[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11424. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Food BillReferral to Primary Production CommitteeHon NIKKI KAYE (Minister for Food Safety):I moveThat the order of the day for the second reading of the Food Bill be discharged and that the bill be re-referred to the Primary Production Committee for consideration .Motion agreed to.
Urgent Debates Declined — Christchurch City Council—Building Consent Authority AccreditationText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeUrgent Debates Declined — Christchurch City Council—Building Consent Authority Accreditation[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11424. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Urgent Debates DeclinedChristchurch City Council—Building Consent Authority AccreditationMr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from the Hon Lianne Dalziel seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 a local authority being stripped of its building consent authority accreditation while a range of Government agencies failed to address the need to intervene prior to accreditation being revoked. An urgent debate is a way of holding the Government accountable for an action for which it is responsible. There must be distinct governmental responsibility for the particular case that is sought to be debated. There is no direct ministerial responsibility for the Christchurch City Council’s failure to respond adequately to the concerns of International Accreditation New Zealand. The responsibility for the fact that accreditation is to be revoked lies with the Christchurch City Council. I acknowledge that the Government has a general power to revoke accreditation but that does not render this particular revocation a matter of direct Government responsibility. Further the absence of action on the part of the Government has long been held not to be a particular case of recent occurrence that can be raised under Standing Order 386. The urgent debate procedure is a means of debating matters that have occurred. It is not a means of debating matters that might or might not occur as a result of meetings involving Government Ministers announced for later this week.
Points of Order — United Nations Security Council New Zealand’s Candidature—Leave to Move MotionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePoints of Order — United Nations Security Council New Zealand’s Candidature—Leave to Move Motion[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11409. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Points of OrderUnited Nations Security Council New Zealand’s Candidature—Leave to Move MotionH V ROSS ROBERTSON (Labour—Manukau East):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move a non-debatable motion No. 14 in my name. It is to do with New Zealand’s candidature for a non-permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection.H V ROSS ROBERTSON (Labour—Manukau East):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If I could just clear up something for the Government this notice of motion has been cleared with the Government through John Hayes and also through Katrina Shanks.Mr SPEAKER: I am afraid the leave has been put. It has been denied. I am sorry but there is nothing else I can do to assist the member. What I suggest the member does is take an opportunity to talk to some other members of the House. There may be an opportunity to do so at the end of question time.
Speaker’s Statements — Chamber—Commemorative PlaquesText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSpeaker’s Statements — Chamber—Commemorative Plaques[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11409. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Tuesday 2 July 2013Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Karakia.Speaker’s StatementsChamber—Commemorative PlaquesMr SPEAKER: Honourable members I draw your attention to the three new plaques installed at the back of the Chamber to commemorate military deployments and peacekeeping missions since the 1950s. The plaques will be unveiled during a ceremony scheduled for the dinner break this evening.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House):I seek the leave of the House for the Speaker to make a statement about the unveiling of the commemorative plaques when the House resumes after the dinner break this evening.Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed?Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I just want an indication as to whether or not such a statement would breach urgency.Mr SPEAKER: Does the Minister wish to clarify? It will not if leave is sought. Leave is so sought. Is there any objection to that leave? There is none.
Draft transcript - Thursday 08 August 2013Published as advance copy.Draft transcript - Thursday 08 August 2013
Curran Clare: Psychoactive Substances Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCurran Clare: Psychoactive Substances Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 27 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11406. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South):I welcome the opportunity to speak at the second reading of this bill the Psychoactive Substances Bill. It is an important opportunity to talk about the absolute hope that is out there in the communities throughout New Zealand that this bill is going through the House as quickly as possible and that it will go some way to addressing some of the terrible harm that is being done in our community by the psychoactive substances that are prevalent. First of all I would like to just put on the record—if it has not been put on the recordalready—my congratulations to our spokesperson on this bill Iain Lees-Galloway who has done such a great job on pushing this forward. It was he who said very loudly last year that this change should be happening and should have happened sooner. In fact he said that we think it is ridiculous that we have basically been experimenting on our kids by allowing the substances to come on the shelf and then constantly chasing our tails trying to get them off the shelf again. That absolutely encapsulates just what has been happening in communities throughout New Zealand. Although I certainly do also acknowledge my colleague Louisa Wall who has been working extremely hard in her community in Manurewa there are many other communities for which this is a terrible scourge and in which there are terrible harms being done.I want to talk in my speech on this bill about some of the harm that has been done in my community in Dunedin but before I do that I would also like to just point out that it must be said that this Government has not taken the opportunity to completely overhaul the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975. In 1975 many of the people who are standing in this House were not even born. Many things have actually moved on since then.Hon Trevor Mallard: Ha ha!CLARE CURRAN: Not all of the members of the House—some of them were probably sitting in this House in 1975 but only a very few. But certainly times have changed and as we know the composition of drugs has changed the way that they are being taken has changed and our ability to respond to drug abuse has changed. The only thing that has not changed is the law.I just want to say what has actually brought me to be speaking about this particular issue today. It was the community that came into my office earlier this year and raised this with me. There was a stream of people from the community talking about the absolute importance of making change happen and making change quickly and the impact that this problem has had on so many young people in the community. For example there was the woman who came into my office to offer me her support and give me her story on how she had been affected by taking these drugs. She had just come out of a psychiatric institution.Debate interrupted.
Bridges Simon: Health and Safety (Pike River Implementation) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBridges Simon: Health and Safety (Pike River Implementation) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 27 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11389. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Labour):I moveThat the Health and Safety (Pike River Implementation) Bill be reported back to the House on or before 30 October 2013.Motion agreed to.
O'Connor Simon: Health and Safety (Pike River Implementation) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Simon: Health and Safety (Pike River Implementation) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 27 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11389. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SIMON O’CONNOR (National—Tāmaki):I am pleased to stand in support of this first reading of the Health and Safety (Pike River Implementation) Bill. As I think I have said in the House several times before context is important. I firstly therefore join with colleagues around the House in acknowledging the context of the Pike River coalmine and the tragedy there that has facilitated the approach of this bill in the House. Secondly this area of safety is always something that is constantly evolving. As those who have spoken before me have noted this is a bill of three parts dealing with everything from the mines to an omnibus aspect and to the establishment of WorkSafe New Zealand. I commend this bill to the House.Bill read a first time.Billreferred to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee.
Tisch Lindsay: Health and Safety (Pike River Implementation) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Health and Safety (Pike River Implementation) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 27 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11387. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I understand the next call is a split call—5 minutes.
Calder Cam: Health and Safety (Pike River Implementation) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCalder Cam: Health and Safety (Pike River Implementation) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 27 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11387. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr CAM CALDER (National):There have been some very thoughtful contributions from all sides of the House on this piece of legislation the Health and Safety (Pike River Implementation) Bill. TangiwaiWahine  Christchurch Pike River—tragedies seared into our nation’s collective consciousness. I want to acknowledge those lost at Pike River and the continued pain and suffering of the loved ones left behind who will continue to mourn their loss as long as they are alive.We are committed as a Government to our Pike River Implementation Plan. This is an omnibus bill that enacts the recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Pike River Coal Mine Tragedy. It establishes WorkSafe New Zealand which is a new workplace health and safety agency it amends the Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 and it creates a new Mines Rescue Act 2013.The Pike River Implementation Plan has 16 recommendations and we are aiming to have these implemented by the end of this year. National is committed as a Government to improving workplace safety across the board and so we have set a firm target for ourselves of having a 25 percent reduction in the rate of workplace fatalities and serious injuries by 2020. This is a significant step in the Government’s workplace health and safety reform programme. I commend this bill to the House.