edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Cunliffe David: Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill — First Reading Second Reading 
Cunliffe David: Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill — First Reading Second Reading 
[Volume:654;Page:3222] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
: 
 I move  
That the motion be amended by omitting “now” and adding “this day six months” at the end of the question 
. We will table that amendment for the House. 
Titirangi te maunga Te Whau te awa Waitakere te rohe. 
[ 
Titirangi is the mountain Te Whau is the river and Waitakere is the region 
.] 
Waitakere is my city. I am here tonight with the voices of the vast majority of the 200000 residents of Waitakere ringing in my ears. I know that they are standing behind me. Seventy-two percent of the people of Hobsonville—the Prime Minister’s own electorate—70 percent of all the citizens of Waitakere and 62 percent of all Aucklanders oppose the moves that this Government is making. 
Yes the Government has the numbers to bulldoze this bill through the house just as it is bulldozing 300-plus homes in Mount Albert. It will get the bill through the House despite our best efforts. But the Government will pay for it at the next general election. As every local MP knows when 250 people come out on a wet Monday night to a public meeting or 1000 people march in the streets at short notice it means they care. When the hikoi comes from the north the south and the west to central Auckland in the next week all New Zealanders will know that the people have risen up against this anti-democratic move. The Government has shrewdly put the bill in the hands of Rodney Hide a Minister who is not from the National Party because he is expendable. If the heat gets too hot by the time of the next election the Prime Minister will bounce from cloud to cloud and the Minister will be left to carry part of the odium. 
But it will not be enough to take away the anger of the 200000 Waitakere residents who will say that those white men who represent the interests of Remuera have stolen their city. The member for Port Waikato whose people of Franklin will desert him said this is a bill to set Auckland up for the next 50 or 100 years. You bet it is! But it is not about making Auckland greater; it is about making Auckland bluer! It is about gerrymandering the Auckland Council; it is about stacking the deck with eight at-large councillors whom it will cost $250000 to send a letter to every resident. 
Chris Hipkins 
: How much? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: It will cost $250000 for one letter drop across the households of Auckland; only the rich need apply to be an at-large councillor—quarter of a million dollars for a letter drop! Which member of the Opposition can afford that? Clearly for the member for Port Waikato it is the equivalent of a day’s work but my constituents cannot afford it. Waitakere City gets two out of 20 councillors. Waitakere people are marginalised they feel silenced and they will get even with this one-term Government. I do not often get angry but I am angry about this bill. 
Debate interrupted.
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill — First Reading Second Reading 
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill — First Reading Second Reading 
[Volume:654;Page:3220] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill 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.
Barker Rick: Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill — First Reading Second Reading 
Barker Rick: Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill — First Reading Second Reading 
[Volume:654;Page:3220] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: I remind members that votes are to be heard in silence. The House has ruled on a number of occasions that it is not proper for members to make comments about how people vote. There will be quite a number of votes and I thought I would set the scene right from the beginning so that everybody is reminded and clear on what the rules are.
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill — First Reading Second Reading 
Vote: Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill — First Reading Second Reading 
[Volume:654;Page:3220] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be amended by omitting the word “now” and adding the words “this day 3 months”. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Barker Rick: Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill — First Reading Second Reading 
Barker Rick: Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill — First Reading Second Reading 
[Volume:654;Page:3220] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: The question is that the motion be agreed to. Before I put the question there is an amendment in the name of Su’a William Sio.
Vote: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
Vote: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
[Volume:654;Page:3196] 
A party vote  was called for on the question  
That the motion to establish a select committee on Auckland governance be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Vote: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
Vote: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
[Volume:654;Page:3196] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be amended by adding after the words “Maori Party 1” “all members of the committee must have been elected to represent a seat in the Auckland region or have registered a permanent home address with the Parliamentary Service which is in the Auckland region”. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Vote: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
Vote: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
[Volume:654;Page:3195] 
A party vote was called for on the question 
 That the motion be amended by omitting all words after “That” and adding the following: “any legislation concerning the governance of Auckland be referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee.” 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: The question now is that the amendment in the name of Su’a William Sio be agreed to.
Vote: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
Vote: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
[Volume:654;Page:3195] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be amended by omitting “11” and substituting “12” and omitting “3” and substituting “4”. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Noes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: We come to the amendment in the name of George Hawkins. The question is that the amendment in the name of George Hawkins be agreed to.
Vote: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
Vote: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
[Volume:654;Page:3195] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 64 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: There are a number of amendments to the motion and they are taken in the order that they are moved—members can check that in Standing Order 126. The first amendments are in the name of Darren Hughes.
Gilmore Aaron: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
Gilmore Aaron: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
[Volume:654;Page:3195] 
AARON GILMORE (National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Guy Nathan: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
Guy Nathan: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
[Volume:654;Page:3193] 
NATHAN GUY (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Urgency 
Vote: Urgency 
[Volume:654;Page:3175] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That urgency be accorded. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
[Volume:654;Page:3175] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded Government order of the day No. 1 the introduction and passing of the Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill and the introduction and first readings of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill and the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill 
. These bills are those that the Government believes should be progressed with some haste. The first bill—the introduction and passing through all stages of the Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill—facilitates the transitional arrangements that are to apply to Auckland City as it goes through the process of merging into one council. For the second bill the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill which is the bill that will set out the size of the council and the nature of the electoral arrangements for the council etc. the motion relates to the introduction and first reading and referral to a select committee. That bill will be considered by a special select committee to be set up under the motion that is Government order of the day No. 1.
Mallard Trevor: General Debate 
Mallard Trevor: General Debate 
[Volume:654;Page:3161] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I think from the Opposition’s point of view we would be happy for the speech to start again. In fact we would be happy for that as long as the debate was extended for him to have the full 15 minutes that he would have if in fact there was an urgent debate on the matter. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the honourable member. The clock was stopped when the point of order was raised. We will continue.
Guy Nathan: General Debate 
Guy Nathan: General Debate 
[Volume:654;Page:3161] 
NATHAN GUY (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In respect of your ruling about noisiness during the Minister of Transport’s opening address from the Government side in this general debate I seek your indulgence to allow him to start his speech again.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Process for Urgent Questions 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Process for Urgent Questions 
[Volume:654;Page:3160] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not need assistance on this matter. The House by leave can do many things and that is why it is in the hands of the House. The House did not approve leave. The member is quite right. The normal process for an urgent question is exactly as he outlined but the House by leave has power to do all sorts of things; leave was not granted though. And I apologise for interrupting the honourable Minister.
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Process for Urgent Questions 
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Process for Urgent Questions 
[Volume:654;Page:3160] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sorry to interrupt but I was going to raise this point earlier. It is not possible for a member to stand up and use Standing Order 379 to seek leave to ask an urgent question. The question has to be put in writing it has to be given to the Speaker and it has to be given to the Minister.
Joyce Steven: General Debate 
Joyce Steven: General Debate 
[Volume:654;Page:3160] 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport) 
: 
 Every Wednesday we come along here in the hope that Opposition members will want to talk about matters of import. They never want to talk about matters of importance to the country. Their latest example is that they want to talk about the timing of a press release. They flatter themselves hugely at the thought that the Government actually bothered to think about them in terms of timing its press release this afternoon. They absolutely flatter themselves. What is their view on Auckland governance? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I apologise for interrupting the member. I cannot hear what the member is saying. I believe there is public interest in hearing what the Minister of Transport has to say on this matter and I think there should be a little reasonableness in the interjections. I do not blame members for wanting to interject but there should be some reasonableness because we want to hear what the Minister has to say. At least that is what I thought the member wanted when he wanted an urgent question. So let us hear what the Minister has to say. 
Debate interrupted.
Hughes Darren: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
Hughes Darren: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
[Volume:654;Page:3160] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
:  
I seek leave under Standing Order 379 to ask the Minister of Transport an urgent question relating to the decision the Government announced one minute after question time finished not to build tunnels at Waterview. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for the honourable member to ask the Minister of Transport an urgent question. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
[Volume:654;Page:3160] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: We do not need to take this matter any further. We can see exactly the problem that arises when an invalid point of order is raised: we get debating material being brought into the point of order process. This is not a matter for the order of the House at all in any shape or form. But questioning my rulings is a matter for the order of the House. A point of order the Hon Darren Hughes but I warn him he had better not question my ruling.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
[Volume:654;Page:3159] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 That is a— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: We are going to get into debate here and that is what concerns me. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I submit to you that the shadow Leader of the House is trifling with the Chair by even raising this matter. The fact is that an urgent question has to be lodged prior to 1 o’clock and the member knows that. The second point is that a Government will make announcements at any time. If people have read the press releases from the Labour Party over the last couple of days they will think that the Labour Party somehow had some insight into this decision already.
Hughes Darren: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
Hughes Darren: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
[Volume:654;Page:3159] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
:  
I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I agree with you; it is not a matter for you in terms of the agency. This release was made by the Minister of Transport a member of this House the Hon Steven Joyce who is laughing about what he has done. I ask whether you are prepared to see your authority as Speaker treated in this way by the Government deliberately timing announcements— 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Grow up! 
Hon DARREN HUGHES 
: Mr Henare is busy interjecting; he should take his own advice. The Government knowing the House is about to move into urgency—there will be no question time tomorrow and we are in a parliamentary adjournment next week—has deliberately manipulated to the detriment of the House its announcement. The minute you finished your ruling Mr Speaker the Minister of Transport made his announcement.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
[Volume:654;Page:3159] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not need assistance on this. The member will resume his seat. That is not a matter for the order of the House. The member will not disagree with the Speaker—or he will not disagree for long with the Speaker. That is not a matter for the order of the House. The New Zealand Transport Agency is at liberty to release its announcements whenever it chooses in this House. As Speaker that is not a matter for me to get involved in at all and it is not a matter for the order of this House.
Hughes Darren: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
Hughes Darren: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
[Volume:654;Page:3159] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
:  
I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sorry to interrupt the Minister; we are very keen to hear from him. But I want to raise a very serious breach of process of the House. The minute you had finished ruling on the application for an urgent debate from the Opposition and the minute the opportunity for an urgent question to be lodged was completed the Government released its decision about the Waterview tunnel option. That is a clear breach—
Hughes Darren: Urgent Debates Declined — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
Hughes Darren: Urgent Debates Declined — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
[Volume:654;Page:3158] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave for there to be an urgent debate led by the Leader of the Opposition on the Government’s decision not to build tunnels at Waterview. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection to that? There is objection.
Hughes Darren: Urgent Debates Declined — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
Hughes Darren: Urgent Debates Declined — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
[Volume:654;Page:3158] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I wonder whether you would consider an application from the Opposition for an urgent question. The announcement was meant to be made at 3 o’clock. There are no details available about it yet which is convenient enough in itself. I ask whether you would consider an urgent question from the Opposition to the Minister of Transport when the decision is made. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There is no provision for such— 
Hon DARREN HUGHES 
: I am just asking whether you will. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No I am not about to do that. There is a general debate coming up and I am sure members will debate the issue with great passion.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
[Volume:654;Page:3157] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member is actually questioning a ruling of the Speaker. Occasionally these urgent debate matters are finely balanced decisions if you like but the Standing Orders rule this one out because the event that the members seek to debate has not occurred. Forgive me that event might have occurred by now but it had not occurred by 2 o’clock this afternoon and the Standing Orders leave the Speaker no discretion on that basis. In the member’s own application the announcement that he referred to was made on a previous sitting day so the opportunity to debate that was gone. The issue that he wished to debate was the Government’s announcement that it would announce something but that application should have come in yesterday.
Hughes Darren: Urgent Debates Declined — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
Hughes Darren: Urgent Debates Declined — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
[Volume:654;Page:3157] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is a very important matter not only for the Opposition—and that is why we have written to you 2 days in a row now on the matter—but also for the communities affected by this decision. This is the only opportunity the House will have to address this matter. The House is about to go into urgency and there will be no question time tomorrow when the executive might be called to account. Your letter yesterday—
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Waterview Connection—Announcement of Preferred Option 
[Volume:654;Page:3157] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Hon Phil Goff Leader of the Opposition seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the Government’s announcement on the preferred option for the Waterview Connection. 
Standing Order 380 requires that the matter for debate be a particular case of recent occurrence involving the administrative or ministerial responsibility of the Government. For there to be a particular case of recent occurrence the event upon which an urgent debate is sought must have occurred when the application is lodged. Standing Order 380(1) requires the application to be lodged 1 hour before the House sits but gives the Speaker discretion to allow a lesser period of time where the event occurs within 1 hour of the sitting of the House. However the event must have occurred before the House meets. An announcement made after the House sits at 2 p.m. does not give grounds for a debate at that sitting. As I said yesterday this does not mean that the matter is not of sufficient importance to require the attention of the House. It simply does not meet the requirements of the urgent debate procedure today. 
I have received a similar application from the Hon Darren Hughes seeking to debate the Government’s announcement that it will announce the preferred route for the Waterview Connection at 3 p.m. today. Not every announcement by the Government can give grounds for a debate particularly not one made on a previous sitting day that an announcement of an actual decision is to be made at some time in the future. Both applications are accordingly declined.
Jones Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Members 
Jones Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Members 
[Volume:654;Page:3157] 
5.  
Hon SHANE JONES (Labour) 
 to the  
Member in charge of the Regulatory Responsibility Bill 
: Does his bill increase the rigour of the regulatory impact assessment process that is conducted before Government legislation is introduced to the House? 
Hon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS (Member in charge of the Regulatory Responsibility Bill): 
 Yes.
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Members 
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Members 
[Volume:654;Page:3156] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I apologise to my colleague. I know there have been a number of Peters through this House but I do not think that it was Wayne Peters who made that interjection. I wonder whether it is appropriate to refer to someone who is not in the House in that way. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not need further assistance in this matter. I ask the Hon Shane Jones to just ask his question. Thank you.
Jones Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Members 
Jones Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Members 
[Volume:654;Page:3156] 
Hon SHANE JONES (Labour) 
: 
 Mr Speaker— 
Hon Member 
: Oh you are here today. 
Hon SHANE JONES 
: Thank goodness for Wayne Peters.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Statement by Minister of Transport 
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Statement by Minister of Transport 
[Volume:654;Page:3155] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There will be no interjections. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I invite you to look back at previous Speakers’ rulings that allowed such questions and invite you to consider whether it is only the Standing Orders or whether it is the custom and practice of this House from which the procedures have developed. It is my view that like all areas of law it is a combination of both.
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Statement by Minister of Transport 
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Statement by Minister of Transport 
[Volume:654;Page:3154] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 There is no provision under the Standing Orders to ask questions across the House through a point of order. It is true that other Speakers have not worried about the Standing Orders in that regard but there is actually no mechanism within the Standing Orders to achieve that result. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not need any further assistance. I indulged the member because I felt that I had been pretty hard on him today and I did not want to be seen to be unfair to him. But the point that the Hon Rodney Hide has made is absolutely valid; there is no provision for such questioning. We come now to questions to members.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Statement by Minister of Transport 
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Statement by Minister of Transport 
[Volume:654;Page:3154] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: A point of order is being heard. I urge members to treat it with respect. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: In the past there has been some flexibility on the part of Speakers for people to inquire of the Leader of the House as to House business and to ask whether a statement is to be made in the House by a Minister on a particular issue. This is a very serious issue. There is an expectation that the announcement having been made at 3 o’clock the Minister will make a statement either now or at the end of questions to members. It was a simple inquiry as to whether the Government intends to grace the House with a statement.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Statement by Minister of Transport 
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Waterview Connection—Statement by Minister of Transport 
[Volume:654;Page:3154] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My point of order is by way of inquiry around the planning of the House to the Leader of the House. I ask whether it is the intention of the Government to make a statement on the Waterview question. We understand from the locals that the decision was to be announced at 3 o’clock and it is a question of whether the Minister of Transport will make a statement on it to the House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order at all. There is no provision for the member to seek such information under a point of order. I apologise for not allowing the point of order but it has nothing to do with the order of this House. When a Minister might make an announcement has nothing to do with the order of this House.
Gilmore Aaron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Gilmore Aaron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:654;Page:3152] 
11.  
AARON GILMORE (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Energy and Resources 
: What is the Government doing to strengthen the national electricity grid? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Energy and Resources) 
: 
 On Friday last week I released a revised Government policy statement for electricity. The new policy statement introduces a streamlined simplified process for transmission investments under $20 million in value. This will save Transpower time and cost and will speed up important grid upgrades. Events in recent months—indeed in recent weeks—demonstrate the critical need to ensure that investment in the grid is not delayed but rather accelerated. 
Aaron Gilmore 
: Is the Government doing anything else to ensure reliable transmission of electricity; if so what? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Yes; the Government believes that disentangling the regulatory overlap between the Electricity Commission Transpower and the Commerce Commission is important. I have launched a ministerial review into the electricity market which will consider those very issues. The Government is taking the interim step of amending the Government policy statement to ensure that transmission investment can happen more quickly.
Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:654;Page:3151] 
10.  
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: Does she believe that it is her department’s responsibility to carry out Government policy? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 Yes. 
Grant Robertson 
: Why then given the Government policy to cap but not cut the Public Service did she not tell her chief executive that sacking 200 people was contrary to Government policy? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: It is this Government’s policy to let chief executives to do their jobs and manage their departments. 
Grant Robertson 
: Does the Minister accept that the result of yesterday’s announcement is a net loss of 200 jobs and that it means that rather than shifting resources to the front line she is in fact cutting the resources of a ministry that is facing an increased workload? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: No cuts are happening; what is happening is that the chief executive is making decisions for his department. We certainly support his making decisions like that. 
Louise Upston 
: What plans has the Government put in place to support public sector staff made redundant as a result of the focus on front-line services? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: We have taken immediate steps to assist those people in the public sector being made redundant. Yesterday my colleague the Hon Tony Ryall announced a redeployment package to help match public sector staff who are made redundant with other jobs in the State services. This redeployment option has been developed in conjunction with the Public Service Association and will give people the option of entering the redeployment pool during a notice period. 
Grant Robertson 
: Why did she not raise with the Minister any concerns about the impact of cutting staff of the ministry at a time when the ministry is facing an increased workload? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: I am sorry but the member asked why I had not raised concerns with the Minister and I am not sure which Minister he was talking about. 
Grant Robertson 
: Can I rephrase that question so that the Minister can understand it? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I guess the member was raising a point of order. I believe that he asked a question. The Minister said she could not understand the question. I believe that is a fair answer. 
Grant Robertson 
: How does the Minister reconcile John Key’s statement on 11 March—“I believe it is important to save as many jobs as we can while we can.”—with over 200 jobs being cut at the Ministry of Social Development or is she telling the staff of her ministry that she sees them as second-class workers? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: Not at all. There is no one silver bullet to save jobs but this Government will continue to focus on putting jobs first. Money is tight for everyone and we have to prioritise our resources where they are needed which is at the front line.
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:654;Page:3151] 
9.  
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
 to the  
Minister of Agriculture 
: What recent reports has he received on the New Zealand dairy industry? 
Hon DAVID CARTER (Minister of Agriculture) 
: 
 Last week the Prime Minister and I launched the  
Strategy for New Zealand Dairy Farming 2009/2020 
. This comprehensive document sets out the direction for the vital dairy industry over the next 10 years. It outlines the way in which the industry will increase the profitability sustainability and competitiveness of New Zealand dairy farmers. This is a first for the primary sector and it is something that I think we need to see more of. I commend it to the House. 
Colin King 
: What has been the Government’s reaction to the dairy industry strategy? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: As I said the Government has welcomed the strategy and it strongly endorses its five key goals. However as both the Prime Minister and I made clear at the launch of the document it is important that the dairy industry takes greater ownership of its environmental performance and sees it not as a compliance issue but as an integral part of future business success. The vast majority of dairy farmers are already doing this well. Unfortunately a small number refuse to do so and this is unacceptable to me.
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:654;Page:3150] 
8.  
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What reports if any has he received on international economic developments? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 The member will know that there is an endless number of reports on international economic developments. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Has the Minister for example seen reports that the Australian Budget includes measures that will protect up to 210000 jobs? Can New Zealanders expect his Budget to address their fears about rising unemployment and the loss of their jobs homes and dignity by delivering significant job-saving measures? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: What I can confirm is that Australian unemployment is consistently higher than New Zealand’s and its Budget deficit forecasts are higher than recent forecasts I have seen from New Zealand. So whatever we are doing it seems to be working better than what Australia is doing. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Further to the work of the previous Labour Government does the Minister agree with the Australian Treasurer’s moves to invest the $5.7 billion being spent on education and innovation to help those who have lost their jobs and to help the country grow out of recession? Is this not exactly the sort of investment New Zealanders can expect to see from him in his Budget? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: Of course our investments are going to be better targeted and that will show up in lower unemployment in New Zealand. I can assure the member that despite his anxiety the Government will be continuing investment in education innovation and infrastructure on a larger scale and with much better focus than his Government ever achieved. 
Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga 
: How does the New Zealand response to these developments compare with other major economies? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: We are responding actively and assertively to global economic developments but we start with some disadvantages; New Zealand was in a recession before the global crisis struck. None the less there are some encouraging signs. The lift in the unemployment rate to date has been modest and remains well below that of most Western countries and certainly remains well below that projected for Australia in yesterday’s Australian Budget. As I said to the Opposition before whatever Australia says it is doing we seem to be doing it better because our unemployment is lower. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Will the Minister confirm that he intends to follow the lead set by the Australian Budget and deliver bold steps to increase investment in clean energy initiatives research and development and infrastructure; and does he agree that now is the time to be investing in New Zealand and in New Zealand’s future? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I think that with typical Kiwi understatement we will probably use less extravagant terms than the Australians and we will achieve better results.
Auchinvole Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Auchinvole Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:654;Page:3149] 
7.  
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National—West Coast - Tasman) 
 to the  
Minister of Energy and Resources 
: Will Budget 2009 contain any measures to encourage oil and gas exploration in New Zealand waters; if so what are those measures? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Energy and Resources) 
: 
 Yes; I am obliged to the Minister of Revenue who supported Budget 2009 making provision for a 5-year continuation of the exemption for non-resident operators of offshore rigs and seismic vessels. The exemption is known as the 183-day tax rule. The exemption has had a positive effect on oil and gas exploration. The number of non-resident offshore rigs operating in New Zealand has more than doubled in the last 5 years the number of offshore wells has increased fivefold and the offshore gas reserves have also increased. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: How does the exemption to the 183-day tax rule work to encourage oil and gas exploration? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: New Zealand is distant from other countries with petroleum programmes; the cost of sending rigs and seismic vessels to New Zealand is high. Prior to the exemption non-resident offshore rig operators and seismic vessels had tended to stay in New Zealand for a period of less than 183 days even if further exploration had been desirable beyond the 183-day window. Different rigs were then required to be brought back into New Zealand to complete the work causing extra mobilisation and demobilisation costs. This disrupted sensible exploration and development programmes. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: Will the Budget contain any other measures to assist our natural resources sector? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Yes the Budget will also contain as previously announced the $20 million injection into the acquisition of seismic data by the Government that is then made available to explorers. This step along with the continuation of the 183-day rule indicates the Government’s strong commitment to the natural resource sector in New Zealand and its contributions to New Zealand’s future economic prosperity.
Quinn Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Quinn Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:654;Page:3148] 
5.  
PAUL QUINN (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: What decisions have been made by the Government in relation to hospital building developments? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) 
: 
 In 2008 the previous Government approved the redevelopment of Hutt Hospital campus—under consistent and highly effective political pressure I remind those members—subject to final ministerial approval of the preliminary design. Today the National Government can announce that further approval and Hutt Valley District Health Board can now progress the $82 million redevelopment of Hutt Hospital’s emergency department and theatres. This approval includes a $62 million contribution from central government and we funded this commitment despite the fact that we inherited over $600 million of capital requests from district health boards with only a small amount of money to pay for them. 
Paul Quinn 
: When will the people of the Hutt Valley area see the benefits of this necessary and important investment? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: It is well recognised that the Hutt Valley emergency department is inadequate and access to elective surgery there needs to be improved. The full project is expected to be completed and operational in 2012. In the meantime the district health board has built its own temporary and innovative “theatre pods” as it calls them to provide more elective surgery for Hutt Valley people. 
Paul Quinn 
: What other decisions has the Government made in relation to hospital services for people in the Hutt Valley and Wellington region? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: I have advised the House before that the new Government inherited a health sector on track to financial crisis with over $600 million of capital demands for regional projects. The Capital and Coast District Health Board’s underlying deficit of around $70 million is a significant issue and it is clear to me that the previous Government did not sufficiently factor in the interest and capital charges associated with the enormous borrowings required for the regional hospital. I can today advise that the Government has agreed to pump a total of $53 million of health cash into Capital and Coast District Health Board as deficit support for the current financial year. This will ensure the ongoing viability of important hospital services in Wellington as we work to tidy up yet another mess inherited from the previous Government. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That answer was too long.
Urgency 
Urgency 
[Volume:654;Page:3175] 
Urgency 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded Government order of the day No. 1 the introduction and passing of the Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill and the introduction and first readings of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill and the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill 
. These bills are those that the Government believes should be progressed with some haste. The first bill—the introduction and passing through all stages of the Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill—facilitates the transitional arrangements that are to apply to Auckland City as it goes through the process of merging into one council. For the second bill the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill which is the bill that will set out the size of the council and the nature of the electoral arrangements for the council etc. the motion relates to the introduction and first reading and referral to a select committee. That bill will be considered by a special select committee to be set up under the motion that is Government order of the day No. 1. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That urgency be accorded. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Process for Urgent Questions 
Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Process for Urgent Questions 
[Volume:654;Page:3160] 
Points of Order 
Questions for Oral Answer—Process for Urgent Questions 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sorry to interrupt but I was going to raise this point earlier. It is not possible for a member to stand up and use Standing Order 379 to seek leave to ask an urgent question. The question has to be put in writing it has to be given to the Speaker and it has to be given to the Minister. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not need assistance on this matter. The House by leave can do many things and that is why it is in the hands of the House. The House did not approve leave. The member is quite right. The normal process for an urgent question is exactly as he outlined but the House by leave has power to do all sorts of things; leave was not granted though. And I apologise for interrupting the honourable Minister.
General Debate 
General Debate 
[Volume:654;Page:3160] 
General Debate 
Debate resumed. 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport) 
: 
 Every Wednesday we come along here in the hope that Opposition members will want to talk about matters of import. They never want to talk about matters of importance to the country. Their latest example is that they want to talk about the timing of a press release. They flatter themselves hugely at the thought that the Government actually bothered to think about them in terms of timing its press release this afternoon. They absolutely flatter themselves. What is their view on Auckland governance? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I apologise for interrupting the member. I cannot hear what the member is saying. I believe there is public interest in hearing what the Minister of Transport has to say on this matter and I think there should be a little reasonableness in the interjections. I do not blame members for wanting to interject but there should be some reasonableness because we want to hear what the Minister has to say. At least that is what I thought the member wanted when he wanted an urgent question. So let us hear what the Minister has to say. 
Debate interrupted.
Ardern Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Ardern Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:654;Page:3068] 
11.  
SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki - King Country) 
 to the  
Minister of Agriculture 
: What reports has he received on drought conditions throughout New Zealand? 
Hon DAVID CARTER (Minister of Agriculture) 
: 
 The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry has been providing me with regular updates on the developing dry conditions on the East Coast of both the North Island and the South Island over the last several months. Until very recently dry weather has meant that conditions have deteriorated in many of those areas and a high number of farming families are facing extremely tough conditions. As such in recent weeks I have declared medium-level droughts in Gisborne Wairoa Hawke’s Bay the Bay of Plenty Taihape Wairarapa and North Canterbury. 
Shane Ardern 
: What do these drought declarations mean? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: Declaring a medium-level drought means that Government officials can provide a number of vital recovery measures for financially and emotionally stressed farmers. These include tax flexibility under the Income Equalisation Scheme funding for rural support trusts to provide welfare and counselling to affected farm families and funding for field days and publications to give advice on drought management options. The declarations are also an important psychological step in demonstrating to affected farmers that they have this Government’s full support. 
Shane Ardern 
: Why are droughts being declared now when we are heading into winter and some of the wettest months of the year? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: The recent rain has simply been too late for these drought-affected areas. Plummeting soil temperatures mean that grass will not grow and farmers have been left desperately short of feed. Even with sustained heavy rain over coming weeks the outlook is bleak and making matters worse is the fact that many of these farmers have endured back-to-back droughts for the last 3 years and are now suffering from the cumulative effects of those tough conditions. 
Hon Jim Anderton 
: Has the National Drought Committee established by the previous Government met yet on these issues; if so what recommendations or initiatives is it advocating? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: The National Drought Committee has been meeting on a regular basis including today and I visited it about an hour or so ago. It is happy with the initiatives that the Government has taken to date. I seek leave to table two maps that demonstrate quite clearly the effect of the drought around New Zealand. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table those two documents. Is there any objection? There is none. 
Documents by leave laid on the Table of the House.