edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Ross Jami-Lee: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Ross Jami-Lee: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 14 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8570. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany) 
: 
 I am happy to support this piece of legislation the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill. Clearly it is a piece of legislation that we wish we did not have to deal with right now but it is important because when Parliament made some decisions in 2006 on the existing Act it made some mistakes. [ 
Interruption 
] I hear the member from New Zealand First calling out. I might remind her that it was a Labour - New Zealand First coalition at the time that it was in place so hey if she wants to take ownership of the mistake she is welcome to. But it is clearly a mistake that we have to fix up. 
The reason why we have to fix this up is that the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board is an important occupational licensing body that is in place to protect New Zealanders. We need to give it the mandate and give it the ability to fund an important part of its job which is keeping the public safe by ensuring that plumbers are doing their jobs properly and that gasfitters are not operating without a licence and in an unsafe manner. There have been situations where members of the public have been put at risk have had their lives put in danger because unlicensed individuals have not been doing work appropriately. We expect this body that we are debating to be able to go out and do its job look after the public and ensure that unlicensed individuals are not putting lives unnecessarily in danger. It has to be able to fund that work. 
Clearly there was a situation in 2006 where an incorrect clause in a piece of legislation was put in place which has led to us now having to fix it up. It is not good but we have to do it. I say to the members who are opposed to this bill that opposing it and potentially getting into a situation where the board is unable to fund its activities if the regulations were ever to be disallowed would lead to a very precarious financial situation for the board. The board could potentially become insolvent and then it just could not operate at all. 
It is not desirable to do this on a regular basis but sometimes it is important to do so. We are doing it to protect the public and to ensure that the board can do its work properly. That is what the legislation is all about and this party supports that.
Carter David: Voting — Correction—Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Carter David: Voting — Correction—Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill 
[Sitting date: 14 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8562. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action? There is none. The result will be recorded as Ayes 33 Noes 85.
Ross Jami-Lee: Voting — Correction—Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Ross Jami-Lee: Voting — Correction—Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill 
[Sitting date: 14 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8562. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I seek leave for the votes of the Hon John Banks and the Hon Peter Dunne against the amendment in the name of the Rt Hon Winston Peters on the second reading of the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill to be recorded in the  
Journals of the House of Representatives 
.
Ardern Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Ardern Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 14 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8561. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
10. 
SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki - King Country) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: What progress is the Government making on access to free GP visits for children aged under 6? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) 
: 
 More children than ever are now able to see a general practitioner at no cost thanks to the Government’s $30 million zero fees for under-sixes scheme. More than 350000 children are now receiving free doctors visits during the daytime and 95 percent of children aged under 6 have access to free general practitioner care after hours. In 2006 under the previous Government only 77000 children were receiving free doctors visits during the day and there was no scheme providing free after-hours doctors visits. 
Shane Ardern 
: How many general practices are now providing free doctors’ visits to children under 6 during the day? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: Of the just over 1000 general practices in the country 1004 have opted to provide zero fee doctors visits to children under 6. Recently 12 general practices located in the North Shore Auckland Blenheim Templeton Rolleston and Invercargill joined the zero fees scheme which has enabled 3500 more children under 6 to see a doctor during the day at no cost. So that is 96 percent of children under 6 who can go to a general practitioner for free during the day and after hours compared with only 23 percent in 2006. I am sure the member will join with me in thanking general practices around the country for helping out children in this way.
Auchinvole Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Auchinvole Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 14 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8557. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
7. 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National) 
 to the  
Associate Minister for ACC 
: What is ACC doing to encourage safe sporting and fitness practices? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 ACC is working with industry leaders and other partnering organisations to reduce injuries suffered in sporting and fitness activities. Two examples of this are RugbySmart and ActiveSmart. For example since the inception of RugbySmart serious rugby neck and spinal injuries have gone down from double digits annually to three or fewer per year. The 
 British Journal of Sports Medicine 
 regards this as the world’s best community injury prevention programme. In 2013 RugbySmart has the potential to reach 12000 coaches 2000 referees and 150000 players. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: Is there an initiative that is more widely focused on general fitness? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Yes. ACC has also launched ActiveSmart which is a programme for walking running cycling and multisport—although obviously not boxing. ActiveSmart has a free website and smartphone app that give easy access to tailored training plans and tips. The New Zealand Rugby Union has endorsed ActiveSmart—and I understand from the interest shown by members on the opposite side I could arrange a briefing for them.
Stewart Barbara: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Stewart Barbara: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 14 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8556. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
6. 
BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: Is he satisfied that the current number of beds and staff in neonatal intensive care units throughout New Zealand is enough to service our growing population? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) 
: 
 Yes. There are six neonatal intensive care units which provide specialised intensive care services for very unwell or premature babies for the whole of New Zealand. From time to time mothers and babies are transferred between the units. This can be a very difficult time for families. The most important consideration is the safety of the baby. A new $7.3 million unit is currently being built at Dunedin Hospital and is expected to be open by the end of this year. 
Barbara Stewart 
: How can he be satisfied when 33 expectant mothers in 2012 were transferred out of the Waikato to a location away from their families; and can he assure the public that the safety of these women and unborn children will not be impaired? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The number of these neonatal intensive care unit beds has increased by about 10 percent since 2008; the birth rate has dropped and slowed in those last few years. It has always been the case that babies are moved between these units. I know it is incredibly disruptive. That is why we are investing to improve the one in Dunedin because it was substandard and not up to what you would expect. I am confident that the safety of mothers and their babies is the priority for all of this being dealt with by the national clinical neonatal network. 
Barbara Stewart 
: Does he believe that transferring expectant Waikato mothers to cities as far away as Invercargill at a cost of $8000 to $11000 on air transfer alone is a good use of Government funding? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: Yes I do because it is about protecting the mother and the baby and that is why they go to a neonatal intensive care unit. I know it is incredibly disruptive for these parents but we have a level across the whole country. It is a network. Mothers and babies at times do need to move around those units and that is why we provide support around that. But the priority has to be the baby and the mother. That is the commitment of this Government and that is why we are moving to improve neonatal facilities particularly in Dunedin that have needed upgrading and improvement for many years. 
Barbara Stewart 
: Does he have any plans to increase the number of beds and staff in other neonatal intensive care units throughout New Zealand to ensure that expectant mothers will not have to undergo lengthy costly and potentially unsafe hospital transfers? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: Yes. I can tell the member that the Government is investing $7.3 million in the new neonatal intensive care unit in Dunedin which is expected to be open by the end of this year.
Young Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Young Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 14 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8553. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
4. 
JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) 
 to the  
Minister of Energy and Resources 
: What recent reports has he received regarding increased production of methanol from New Zealand gas? 
Hon Member 
: Speaking of gas! 
Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Energy and Resources) 
: 
 There is a lot of natural gas over there. I have seen reports that Methanex plans to invest almost $80 million to increase its New Zealand production of methanol. This reflects the improving and secure natural gas supply in this country. This will involve adding capacity at its current Motunui site as well as restarting the Waitara Valley site later this year. By the end of this year its operating capacity is expected to increase from 700000 tonnes to 2.2 million tonnes. I am encouraged that businesses such as Methanex are confidently expanding their operations in this country. 
Jonathan Young 
: How will Methanex’s expanded operations in New Zealand benefit both the local and the national economy? 
Hon SIMON BRIDGES 
: There will be many benefits to the member’s region as well as to New Zealand. There will be more jobs—some 500 more a mixture of contractors and full-time workers—there will be more equipment and materials bought mainly from within this country and of course there will be wider benefits to the economy. The increased scale of Methanex’s business will also generate more taxes over the long term and through increased export revenue assist with the country’s balance of payments.
O'Connor Simon: Minimum Wage (Starting-out Wage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
O'Connor Simon: Minimum Wage (Starting-out Wage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 14 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8593. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
SIMON O’CONNOR (National—Tamaki) 
: 
 What an array of contradictions we have just heard there from Phil Twyford. We know that under this Government take-home wages are increasing. Regardless of the fact that it is by 25c the minimum wage is going up. We protected jobs around  
The Hobbit  
and so forth—you know we reacted there—but that is somehow a problem. One of my colleagues pointed out to me a bit earlier that this hands-on approach of the Labour Party is really around your throat and in your wallet. What is the solution? What is the solution for more jobs? A tax—a tax. Let us have more taxes. Boy what economic policy there! 
Dr Cam Calder 
: Around your throat and in your wallet. 
SIMON O’CONNOR 
: Absolutely. It is a slap in the face and a kick in the guts to New Zealand. That is the Labour approach: hands-on Government. 
This bill the Minimum Wage (Starting-out Wage) Amendment Bill is a good opportunity and I want to acknowledge the Minister of Labour who is here in the House supporting this bill. This bill is really about opportunities and incentives to get young people into work. What we have heard from the other side can be best defined as utopianism a world where everyone is perfect everyone can be paid the same amount of money for whatever they do and everything is perfect. Well some of us live in the real world. Some of us do not believe in utopianism. We believe we have to do something. 
Someone talked a little bit earlier about oh my Lord how dare we pay them a little bit less. The key comes down— 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I bet you love Charles Dickens. 
SIMON O’CONNOR 
: Oh Mr Micawber’s quote does come well to mind again if Labour wants to start talking about Dickens. Go and look up Mr Micawber. The key here is that we want the dignity of work and a lot of people submitted that to us—the dignity of work. Andrew Little tried to quote the pope. Well maybe he should go and read  
Rerum 
Novarum 
 some time. At the end of the day the dignity of work comes first and foremost. This party the National Party is behind the dignity of work. We want our young people to get into jobs and if part of that facilitation in the real world is giving them a slightly more minimum wage to start on then we are behind that. I support the passage of this bill. 
Sue Moroney 
: Mr Speaker—
Tisch Lindsay: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tisch Lindsay: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 14 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8575. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I am going to give the call to the Green member. This is normally a 5-minute call but you can actually take 10 minutes if you wish.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 14 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8562. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
12. 
KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Internal Affairs 
: What recent announcements has he made about reducing unnecessary red tape under the Gambling Act 2003? 
Hon CHRIS TREMAIN (Minister of Internal Affairs) 
: 
 This week I announced that the Government is considering changes to regulations around spot prize draws. I have released a consultation document which includes a proposal that spot prize draws at these events should not be classified as gambling. This would mean event organisers do not need to apply for a licence to run spot prizes and can focus on their events rather than red tape. 
Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi 
: Why are the changes to the current regulations necessary? 
Hon CHRIS TREMAIN 
: Changes have been called for by organisers of events such as fishing competitions and sports events. Problem-gambling organisations report that there is little risk of problem gambling if any associated with spot prizes at these events so I do not believe that rigorous rules are necessary. Event organisers should not have to worry about complying with the Gambling Act when considering spot prizes. They should be able to get on with providing fun activities for families and for their communities.
Finlayson Christopher: Motions — Papal Election—Pope Francis 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Finlayson Christopher: Motions — Papal Election—Pope Francis 
[Sitting date: 14 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8547. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate concerning the election of the new pope. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none. 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: I move  
That this House note the election in Rome earlier today of Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Argentina as Pope Francis I 
. He is the 266th Roman pontiff the first pope from the southern hemisphere and the first pope from the Americas. He has been for some years the Cardinal Archbishop of Buenos Aires and is well known for his humility and commitment to social action. On behalf of the House I wish him the best for his term of office and congratulate the people of Argentina on a hugely significant day in the history of their country. 
Motion agreed to.
Tolley Anne: Business Statement 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tolley Anne: Business Statement 
[Sitting date: 14 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8547. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 When the House resumes on Tuesday 19 March the Government will look to progress the Appropriation (2011/12 Financial Review) Bill the Minimum Wage (Starting-out Wage) Amendment Bill the Local Electorate Amendment Bill (No 2) and the Marine Legislation Bill. On Wednesday 20 March with the agreement of the Business Committee and effective on Thursday 21 March the House will have extended hours to progress a number of bills on the Order Paper as notified in the determinations of the Business Committee on Tuesday 19 March.
Voting — Correction—Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Voting — Correction—Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill 
[Sitting date: 14 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8562. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Voting 
Correction—Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill 
JAMI-LEE ROSS (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I seek leave for the votes of the Hon John Banks and the Hon Peter Dunne against the amendment in the name of the Rt Hon Winston Peters on the second reading of the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill to be recorded in the  
Journals of the House of Representatives 
. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action? There is none. The result will be recorded as Ayes 33 Noes 85.
Motions — Papal Election—Pope Francis 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Motions — Papal Election—Pope Francis 
[Sitting date: 14 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8547. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Motions 
Papal Election—Pope Francis 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate concerning the election of the new pope. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none. 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: I move  
That this House note the election in Rome earlier today of Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Argentina as Pope Francis I 
. He is the 266th Roman pontiff the first pope from the southern hemisphere and the first pope from the Americas. He has been for some years the Cardinal Archbishop of Buenos Aires and is well known for his humility and commitment to social action. On behalf of the House I wish him the best for his term of office and congratulate the people of Argentina on a hugely significant day in the history of their country. 
Motion agreed to.
Business Statement 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Business Statement 
[Sitting date: 14 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8547. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Thursday 14 March 2013 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business Statement 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 When the House resumes on Tuesday 19 March the Government will look to progress the Appropriation (2011/12 Financial Review) Bill the Minimum Wage (Starting-out Wage) Amendment Bill the Local Electorate Amendment Bill (No 2) and the Marine Legislation Bill. On Wednesday 20 March with the agreement of the Business Committee and effective on Thursday 21 March the House will have extended hours to progress a number of bills on the Order Paper as notified in the determinations of the Business Committee on Tuesday 19 March.
Vote: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8545. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 77 
Adams (P) 
Dunne (P) 
Hutchison (P) 
Sage 
Ardern J 
Dyson 
Jones (P) 
Sharples (P) 
Auchinvole 
Faafoi 
Joyce (P) 
Shearer 
Banks (P) 
Fenton 
Kaye 
Simpson 
Barry 
Flavell 
Key (P) 
Street 
Beaumont 
Foss (P) 
King A 
Tirikatene 
Bennett P (P) 
Genter 
Lees-Galloway 
Tremain (P) 
Blue (P) 
Gilmore 
Little 
Turei 
Browning 
Goff 
Logie 
Turia (P) 
Calder 
Goldsmith 
Mackey (P) 
Twyford (P) 
Carter (P) 
Goodhew 
Mahuta (P) 
Wagner 
Clark 
Graham 
Mathers 
Walker 
Clendon 
Groser (P) 
Moroney 
Wall 
Collins (P) 
Hague 
Norman (P) 
Wilkinson 
Cosgrove (P) 
Harawira (P) 
Parata (P) 
Williamson (P) 
Cunliffe 
Henare 
Parker (P) 
Woods 
Curran 
Hipkins 
Prasad 
Dalziel 
Horomia (P) 
Robertson G 
Dean (P) 
Hughes 
Roche 
Teller: 
Delahunty 
Huo (P) 
Ross 
Mallard 
Noes 44 
Ardern S (P) 
Horan 
O’Connor D (P) 
Stewart 
Bakshi 
King C 
O’Connor S 
Tisch (P) 
Bennett D 
Lee 
O’Rourke 
Tolley (P) 
Borrows 
Lole-Taylor 
Peters (P) 
Williams 
Bridges (P) 
Lotu-Iiga 
Prosser 
Woodhouse (P) 
Brownlee 
Macindoe 
Robertson R 
Yang 
Coleman 
Martin (P) 
Roy (P) 
Young (P) 
English (P) 
McClay 
Ryall 
Finlayson (P) 
McCully (P) 
Sabin 
Guy (P) 
McKelvie 
Shanks (P) 
Hayes (P) 
Mitchell 
Sio 
Teller 
Heatley 
Ngaro 
Smith (P) 
Upston 
Bill read a second time.
Roy Eric: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8543. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: The next question is that the amendment in the name of the Rt Hon Winston Peters which is in order be agreed to. So the question is that a referendum be held at the time of the next general election to decide whether the Marriage Act 1955 should be amended to recognise marriage between two people regardless of their sex sexual orientation or gender identity.
Roy Eric: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8542. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: The debate has now concluded. I wish to acquaint members with the process from here on because we are to some extent breaking new ground. We are now going to enter into the voting but before I do that I want to just read Standing Order 294: “At the conclusion of the debate on the second reading of a bill the Speaker puts a question that the amendments recommended by the committee by majority be agreed to”. Therefore I am going to put whatever votes that we now have ahead of us which may take us past 10 o’clock—that is from Standing Order 294. 
So the first vote will be on the amendments that the Government Administration Committee recommended. We will then go to the amendment in the name of Winston Peters and subsequently follow a process after that. I will call the votes on the voices first. When we get to the amendments if a personal vote is required—if there is a division—members should indicate. Can I just say to the gallery that you have been well behaved. I would just ask for some decorum while we do this voting. Thank you very much. 
The question was put that the amendments recommended by the Government Administration Committee by majority be agreed to.
Vote: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8543. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the question be agreed to. 
Ayes 66 
Ardern J 
Fenton 
Lees-Galloway 
Sharples (P) 
Auchinvole 
Flavell 
Little 
Shearer 
Barry 
Genter 
Logie 
Simpson 
Beaumont 
Goff 
Mackey (P) 
Street 
Bennett D 
Goldsmith 
Mahuta (P) 
Tirikatene 
Borrows 
Goodhew 
Mathers 
Turei 
Browning 
Graham 
McKelvie 
Turia (P) 
Calder 
Hague 
Mitchell 
Twyford (P) 
Clark 
Harawira (P) 
Moroney 
Upston 
Clendon 
Henare 
Norman (P) 
Wagner 
Cosgrove (P) 
Hipkins 
Prasad 
Walker 
Cunliffe 
Horomia (P) 
Robertson G 
Wall 
Curran 
Hughes 
Roche 
Wilkinson 
Dalziel 
Huo (P) 
Ross 
Woods 
Delahunty 
Jones (P) 
Ryall 
Dyson 
Kaye 
Sabin 
Teller 
Faafoi 
King A 
Sage 
Mallard 
Noes 21 
Brownlee 
Lole-Taylor 
O’Connor D (P) 
Williams 
Coleman 
Lotu-Iiga 
O’Connor S 
Yang 
Heatley 
Macindoe 
O’Rourke 
Horan 
Martin (P) 
Peters (P) 
King C 
McClay 
Prosser 
Teller: 
Lee 
Ngaro 
Stewart 
Bakshi 
Abstentions2 
Robertson R 
Sio 
Question agreed to.
Henare Tau: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Henare Tau: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8535. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is a conscience vote a free vote and therefore I think that it is wrong for you to go down that path. I think it is—
Roy Eric: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8535. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I call Kanwaljit Bakshi.
Roy Eric: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8535. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Order! I have made a ruling. The member may well disqualify himself if he persists.
Henare Tau: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Henare Tau: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8535. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have stood to take the call on a lot of occasions tonight. I want to know from you how you are determining who speaks.
Roy Eric: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roy Eric: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8535. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I took the precaution of actually sending to whips beforehand what may be a preferential way of doing this which was principally the mover of the bill select committee members or leaders of the House and then I as Speaker would choose subsequently after that. I have noted the member’s intention to take a call.
Mallard Trevor: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Mallard Trevor: Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8531. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 For the reasons outlined by my friend and colleague Ruth Dyson I will speak for a relatively short time as well. I want to thank her for her able chairing of the Government Administration Committee and I thank the previous speaker Chris Auchinvole for the work he did also on that select committee. 
I will speak to contrast the attitude of most of the submitters to the select committee with my experience of chairing a select committee on a similar subject 27 years ago. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: You were about 17. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: When I was 17 says Ruth. It was earlier as opposed to the mid-point of my career. 
There is no doubt that the winds of change have blown. They have moved us a very very long way and that is reflected not only in society’s attitude over the period of time but in the attitude of members of Parliament and the public as they have taken part in this debate. It is enormously different. There are a few of my colleagues who were there at the time but the attitude of some members from one side—Graeme Lee John Banks and Norman Jones—was appalling. It was absolutely shocking and revolting. Some of the people who spoke for that legislation were not that flash either. I think of Trevor de Cleene whose main thrust was: “Just don’t make it compulsory.” I think that was the line that Trevor de Cleene took. But I was proud at that time at the third reading to be the teller for the Ayes and to come out and put five fingers in the air because that was the margin that we got. Times have changed. 
I am going to now surprise some people by saying that I have a lot in common with the position that Tim Macindoe got to. I think actually that the State has almost no role in marriage. My view is that if everyone had a civil union or went to the State and got a bit of paper that said: “You are married” and then went off to their church or if they wanted to dance around a fire on the beach—have whatever appropriate celebration of that new relationship that they wanted—then that would be the best approach. But I have canvassed colleagues. What became clear to me is that the winds of change have not quite blown that far yet. Colleagues in the House do feel that the State has a role in marriage and if that is to be the case then in my view it has to be equal for all. Thank you.
Vote: Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8523. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Maori Party 3; Mana 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan. 
Noes 60 
New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1. 
Bill read a second time.
Clendon David: Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Clendon David: Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8520. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DAVID CLENDON (Green) 
: 
 I am pleased to speak in support of this bill the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill. It is socially responsible it will aid our very hard-working tourism sector and the Greens are very happy to support it. Kia ora.
Robertson H V Ross: Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Robertson H V Ross: Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8519. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is the member calling? I could not hear him. 
Brendan Horan 
: I am sorry Mr Assistant Speaker. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I call the honourable member Brendan Horan.
Vote: Habeas Corpus Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Habeas Corpus Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8514. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clauses 1 to 5 and 7 to 12 be agreed to. 
Ayes 113 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Maori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; Mana 1; United Future 1; Independent: Horan. 
Noes 7 
New Zealand First 7. 
Clauses 1 to 5 and 7 to 12 agreed to. 
Bill reported without amendment. 
Report adopted.
Little Andrew: Habeas Corpus Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Little Andrew: Habeas Corpus Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8510. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
ANDREW LITTLE (Labour) 
: 
 I take the opportunity to speak at this stage of the Habeas Corpus Amendment Bill. This is a bill that the Labour Party will be supporting. I just want to draw the Committee’s attention to the fact that this is a very important right or set of rights that we are dealing with in this bill—in fact it is one of the most basic rights. It is a protection against the arbitrary detention of citizens by the State. This is an area of the law that forms part of the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction and it is unusual or difficult in fact to intervene in the court’s exercise of its powers in this regard. So when we are legislating for this then we need to tread very carefully. 
The member who is the sponsor of this bill Chris Auchinvole I think has shown the appropriate sobriety and caution in championing this piece of legislation. He has followed to the letter the recommendations of the Law Commission and perhaps one day Mr Auchinvole might find himself sitting on that august body but not today as he shepherds through this bill. The point I would make in that regard—my respect for Mr Auchinvole aside—is that this bill ought to have been one brought to this House by the Minister of Justice. But she has not done that. She has been busy closing courts. She has been busily destroying the effectiveness of the Auckland Family Court. But we are left with the assistance of Mr Auchinvole to consider this very important bill and the very important rights under it. 
What this bill does is take away what is presently a mandatory requirement of the High Court when faced with an application for habeas corpus to give it urgency and to give the court some discretion on managing it. I have to say that this is a very sensible measure in that regard because it means that other urgent and important applications that the court might have to consider can be managed in accordance with the priority of those applications and the court need not be totally hamstrung by these sorts of applications important as they are. I do not think they lose any sense of importance with the measures that are proposed in this bill. 
The other important thing that the bill does is to allow the management of applications by video technology which is a pretty modern step in the 21st century. As I say these are sensible changes. What is not sensible and I will conclude on this point is that this bill comes here being championed by a member using his rights as a member of this House. An important piece of legislation like this is not brought here by the Minister and it is important that in future we see a Minister of Justice doing what she is meant to do not relying on members exercising their rights as members of this House to bring such important legislation. Notwithstanding that Labour will be supporting this bill.
Robertson H V Ross: Debate on Budget Policy Statement 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Robertson H V Ross: Debate on Budget Policy Statement 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8494. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I call the honourable member Dr David Clark. Just before the member stands up I inform the House that this is a split call and I will give the member the bell with 1 minute remaining.
Gilmore Aaron: South Taranaki District Council (Cold Creek Rural Water Supply) Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Gilmore Aaron: South Taranaki District Council (Cold Creek Rural Water Supply) Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8508. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
AARON GILMORE (National) 
: 
 I rise to support the South Taranaki District Council (Cold Creek Rural Water Supply) Bill at its third reading. I want to just touch on a couple of things that have not been mentioned here in summing up this bill which I look forward to being passed so that the people and users of the scheme can finally after nearly 30 years take ownership and control of the scheme as they desire to do. 
About 2 years ago in October the council voted 6 to 4 in favour of the transfer of the scheme and undertaking this bill which Chester Borrows that fine member from Taranaki brought to Parliament in October 2011. I think it is important to note that this is the end of a long-ranging process that has occurred for many months and many years throughout this Parliament as well. 
I think also that one of the strange things that has not been touched on which I would like to touch on quickly is that this scheme actually feeds 21000 cows which I discovered in a bit of research—21000 cows use the water from the scheme. That contributes well and strongly to the economy of South Taranaki and to New Zealand generally. I think it is important that we understand the importance not only to the people of South Taranaki but to the people of New Zealand generally of the milk that those 21000 cows produce and the export earnings it provides. 
I believe that this is a bill with a good process in place. It deals with the problems that have been put forward by the members who had been voting against it. I do not believe that the strange so-called referendum put forward by New Zealand First is in the best interests of either the users or the council or the people generally in South Taranaki who use this water or those in the wider area and it would be a complete waste of time and money. Look I think this bill is one of those ones that we understand brings local users in to own the local assets in a way that is best for them and best for the wider community and that is something that this Government supports wholeheartedly.
Street Maryan: South Taranaki District Council (Cold Creek Rural Water Supply) Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Street Maryan: South Taranaki District Council (Cold Creek Rural Water Supply) Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8506. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 I would like to contribute briefly to this third reading of the South Taranaki District Council (Cold Creek Rural Water Supply) Bill. I have only recently got on to the Local Government and Environment Committee but I speak on this bill because the area that is covered by it is part of my old turangawaewae and therefore it is important to me. I just want to make two points about the bill. Clearly the purpose of it is to transfer or to specify a process by which the South Taranaki District Council can transfer the Cold Creek rural water supply scheme to Cold Creek Community Water Supply Ltd. That means that there will be some security around the provision of water not only to farmers in that area but as I understand it to an emergency supply to the Opunake township itself. 
 There are two objections that I have heard to this bill that I would like to dispose of. One has been the cry from the Maori Party that iwi have not been consulted. I would like to draw the Maori Party’s attention to clause 5 in Part 2 of the bill which specifically spells out the transfer process which includes the holding of a referendum conducted under section 9 of the Local Electoral Act using the first-past-the-post system so it has got to be more than 50 percent of the votes cast. The council complies with the provision in the process as long as it has consulted on the proposed transfer with amongst other people “every iwi authority in relation to each iwi whose rohe comes wholly or in part within the scheme distribution area;”—in other words all iwi whose rohe are affected by the delivery of water through this scheme. So in order to get to a referendum the South Taranaki District Council has to have demonstrated reported on and “made publicly available in a balanced and timely manner” the legislation says the results of consultation with every iwi. 
The second thing I would like to say is that I am very puzzled by the party that wants to rule by referendum finding opposition to this piece of legislation. If one were to follow New Zealand First’s logic every piece of legislation would go to referendum which would be a crazy way to run a country. But when there is an opportunity for a referendum by local communities to vote on whether or not this particular water scheme should be transferred to the ownership of those who will be using it then it does not seem that that is sufficient. So I am puzzled by that. The Labour Party supports this bill and I commend it to the House.
Barry Maggie: South Taranaki District Council (Cold Creek Rural Water Supply) Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Barry Maggie: South Taranaki District Council (Cold Creek Rural Water Supply) Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8506. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore) 
: 
 I rise to speak to the third reading of the South Taranaki District Council (Cold Creek Rural Water Supply) Bill. The sponsoring member of this bill the Hon Chester Borrows outlined very eloquently earlier the history of this bill and why it is needed and I would like to echo his sentiments. The people of this area—there are 162 members 400 individual people and 162 connections just to be specific about it—have been working on this for about 12 years and it really does need to progress. Why did they want to make this change in the first place? I was on the Local Government and Environment Committee that heard the submissions and we have discussed it and argued it through. The people of Cold Creek those 400 members went to all of this trouble and fought for 12 years because it is a common sensible approach. They want to run their own water supply and in my opinion and in the opinion of the majority on that committee they should be allowed to do so because it is an excellent idea. 
The other point that Chester Borrows made earlier today in his earlier call that I think is particularly useful—and again it comes back to representing a group of people and being a good local member of Parliament—is that this is a broad philosophical situation that we are looking at here. The investment that was made they felt they wanted to own it. They felt that that point came across loud and clear in the submissions. They felt they wanted ownership of something they paid for and were prepared to look after—to share with the fire authorities for example if there was a broader community need. This is all a very useful well-thought-through cooperative and collaborative approach. 
As far as the iwi is concerned Nga Ruahine Rangi they have advised us that they are not interested in acquiring the asset as any part of any future claim. These were issues that did need to be resolved and it was appropriate that as Chester Borrows outlined earlier they sat down around the table and discussed it in some detail. The iwi have according to the Opposition felt marginalised. This was certainly not the experience of the iwi that came to speak to us and the nature of the submissions that they gave us. According to that evidence that came before us they are very happy indeed with the arrangement. They reaffirmed that they were not interested in acquiring the asset. They were consulted and there was enough accord within this to make it an excellent community initiative. I personally believe that this is a piece of legislation that should proceed through the House directly and without further opposition. I commend it to the House.
Barry Maggie: Debate on Budget Policy Statement 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Barry Maggie: Debate on Budget Policy Statement 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8497. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore) 
: 
 I am very proud to rise to take a call on the Budget Policy Statement and I am going to concentrate in my call today on the outstanding environmental and conservation policies that this John Key - led Government has put forward. We understand only too well that this economy needs to grow and that these Resource Management Act reforms and also the discussion document that we released at the Bluegreens forum at the weekend—and I have got both of them here in front of me and have read them carefully—are the things that will promote growth. Earlier the Minister of Finance Bill English laid out the Business Growth Agenda and in his call he mentioned the importance of the Resource Management Act reforms and the vitally important water management. That is what is important to the economy long term and job growth—as we know and as the Opposition benches are clueless about—emerges from a strong economy. 
In my electorate on the North Shore the Resource Management Act process I am told by my constituents all the time is cumbersome costly and time-consuming. I get a lot of feedback from the North Shore. It is a part of the country that encourages businesses. These people are business-friendly. They know how to grow their businesses. They tell me that the Resource Management Act system is difficult to understand and use and that they believe that it is actively discouraging investment and innovation and I agree. It is no surprise to me at all that when it comes to customer satisfaction Resource Management Act matters rank the lowest of all public services in the Kiwis Count report. Why is that? There are just too many occasions where the view of one well-funded party manages to derail the decision of a community. 
Looking at some of the things that have gone wrong has been something that this Government has done carefully. We have had plenty of examples for those dark 9 years where Labour predominated on the Treasury benches. Over and over again we have seen with the Resource Management Act process in particular planning happening almost by default as decisions are fought over on a consent by consent basis blow by blow. It is a big waste of time and money. Fundamentally the reforms that Amy Adams the Minister for the Environment outlined at the Bluegreens forum on the weekend will help to resolve that. They will provide greater confidence for business growth and creating jobs greater certainties for communities to plan for their areas’ needs and stronger environmental outcomes as our communities grow and change. There is no time today to list all of the reforms but I would recommend that you read these documents to be familiar with them and to make submissions on them. That is a cry to the public. I am absolutely wholeheartedly behind our Resource Management Act and water management reforms. Thank you.