edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Vote: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading 
Vote: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5647] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a third time 
Ayes 60 
Noes 54 
Bill read a third time. 
Labour 52; United Future 8. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; Green Party 9.
Vote: New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12328] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 84 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 35 
New Zealand National 26; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Schedule 1 agreed to.
English Bill: Motions — Silver Ferns Victory 
English Bill: Motions — Silver Ferns Victory 
[Volume:610;Page:7131] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 The Opposition wholeheartedly concurs with the Government in the motion that it has moved. The victory was a magnificent display of spirit over an old foe. I would like to congratulate in particular fellow Southlander Lesley Nicol who has now played over 100 tests for New Zealand and finally won a world championship. I would also like to encourage all the volunteers and parents who support New Zealand netball from the schoolgirls right through to the clubs. That is the machine that will produce the next generation of New Zealand world champions. 
Motion agreed to.
Hunt Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hunt Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:423;Page:18529] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No the Government is entitled to list the Minister concerned.
Horomia Parekura: Third Readings 
Horomia Parekura: Third Readings 
[Volume:607;Page:4831] 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Minister of Maori Affairs) 
: 
 I move  
That the Treaty of Waitangi Amendment Bill the Broadcasting Amendment Bill and the Maori Land Amendment and Maori Land Claims Adjustment Amendment Bill be now read a third time 
 The Maori Purposes Bill (No 2) was introduced on 13 March 2002. The first reading debate commenced on 22 May 2002 and was completed on 10 September 2002. The bill was then referred to the Maori Affairs Committee for consideration and submissions were called for. After careful consideration of the bill as introduced and the submissions received the select committee reported back on 3 March 2003 with one amendment to Part 1 the part relating to amendments to the Treaty of Waitangi Act. 
Maori Purposes bills are used to give effect to amendments to existing legislation that relates to Maori affairs and various matters in respect of Maori land and property. Perhaps the most important of the amendments to the Treaty of Waitangi Act are those that give chairpersons certain powers. The first of those is the power to replace a presiding officer or other member of a tribunal and we have been through the amendments here today. 
 Only one amendment was recommended by the select committee during its consideration of the bill as introduced. The intention of the amendment which was unanimously adopted by the select committee was to ensure that only a member of the tribunal who is a barrister or solicitor of the High Court of at least 7 years’ standing would be qualified for appointment as an acting presiding officer. The bill now clearly provides for this. The amendment means that the tribunal will always be presided over by either a judge a barrister or solicitor of the High Court of at least 7 years’ standing. I acknowledge the efforts of all the select committee members and the guidance the committee has provided to the House. I extend my thanks to the members accordingly. The other amendments to the Treaty of Waitangi Act clarify the position regarding three inquiries in which membership changes have occurred namely the Hauraki Kaipara and Wellington inquiries. 
The second Act amended is the Broadcasting Act. This amendment provides for technical amendments to accommodate the transfer of responsibilities for Maori broadcasting policy from the Minister of Broadcasting to the Minister of Maori Affairs. 
The third Act amended is the Maori Land Amendment and Maori Claims Adjustment Act. The amendment to this Act increases the number of fishing licences to which Ngati Tuwharetoa are statutorily entitled from 50 to 200. The current entitlement to 50 licences was set in 1926 when the Act was passed. I am pleased to move the third readings of the three bills. I commend the Treaty of Waitangi Amendment Bill the Broadcasting Amendment Bill and the Maori Land Amendment and Maori Land Claims Adjustment Amendment Bill to the House.
Pettis Jill: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Pettis Jill: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9021] 
JILL PETTIS (Junior Whip—NZ Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Members in this Committee are also aware that when the Chairman makes a ruling that ruling is not to be relitigated. That is exactly what members are doing with regard to the very clear ruling you have made. The relitigation of issues happens too frequently and that is exactly what is happening now.
Goudie Sandra: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
Goudie Sandra: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6876] 
SANDRA GOUDIE (NZ National—Coromandel) 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I do take offence because I hold local government in great regard and— 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I say to the member that under  
Speakers’ Rulings 
 offence must be taken at once not later.
Cullen Michael: Urgency 
Cullen Michael: Urgency 
[Volume:610;Page:7707] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the introduction and passing of the Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill 
. Urgency is sought because for the bill to be effective it has to be passed before the next sitting day.
Hartley Ann: Financial Review Debate — Procedure In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Hartley Ann: Financial Review Debate — Procedure In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:616;Page:11863] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Mr Brownlee you have had—[ 
Interruption 
] I was just going to remind Mr Brownlee that a member can only call twice in this debate and he has spoken twice. 
Ron Mark 
: I raise a point of order Madam Chair. I seek leave to give one extra speech to Don Brash if he wishes to stand and take it now. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member cannot seek leave for another member. The member knows that perfectly well.
Carter John: Points of Order — Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate Parliament Building—Media Access Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate 
Carter John: Points of Order — Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate Parliament Building—Media Access Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate 
[Volume:624;Page:19714] 
JOHN CARTER (National—Northland) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House to table Standing Order 6 “Amendment or revocation of Standing Orders”. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table Standing Order 6. Is there any objection? There is; it will not be tabled.
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13047] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Noes 61 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 8; Progressive 2. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Noes 61 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to.Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Lindsay Tisch to clause 212 be agreed to: 
to insert in subclause (1) after the word “section” the words “provided the Minister has written to that person advising that he no longer wishes that person to remain in office”. 
A party vote was called for on the question That the amendment be agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 212 be agreed to: 
to omit subclause (1).
Shirley Ken: Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading 
Shirley Ken: Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:623;Page:18407] 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Whip—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is a very serious matter and you might recall that on numerous occasions in the past I have raised the question of the difficulty that arises when the executive by its referral motion circumvents the Standing Orders—principally Standing Order 194. 
The point I am making is that under this Government this executive it has become standard practice automatically to circumvent the Standing Orders every time a bill is referred to a select committee. As you will appreciate the Standing Orders are there to protect members of Parliament particularly the interests of minor parties and Opposition parties against abuse by the executive. Here again with that very close vote following the vote on my colleague Stephen Franks’ amendment it is quite clear that it is only the executive with the support of United Future that effectively is allowing this House to suspend the Standing Orders. I draw this matter to your attention. What remedy do Opposition members have to protect the interests of members of Parliament who are here for a very good purpose and a very good reason? It is really the arrogance of the executive that means that select committees can sit through urgency or at any time the House may be sitting and that impinges on the rights of members of Parliament. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I refer members to Standing Order 284(4) which states: “An amendment to substitute another committee or to alter any proposed special powers or instruction may be moved if notice of such an amendment is delivered to the Clerk at the Table before the bill is read a first time.” The question now is that the motion be agreed to.
Benson-Pope David: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Benson-Pope David: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17869. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Minister of Fisheries) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Mackey Janet: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mackey Janet: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:608;Page:5911] 
7.  
JANET MACKEY (NZ Labour—East Coast) 
 to the  
Minister for Rural Affairs 
: What reports has he received on the Government’s decision to extend the Sustainable Farming Fund for another 3 years? 
Hon JIM SUTTON (Minister for Rural Affairs) 
: 
 The response to the announcement that the Sustainable Farming Fund was to be extended has been overwhelmingly positive. Applications have already been received for the next round and those applications close on 6 June. 
Janet Mackey 
: What has the Sustainable Farming Fund achieved so far? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: In the last 3 years 184 projects have been provided with grant support from the fund. An independent evaluation of the fund has demonstrated that the fund is achieving its intended purpose of supporting community-driven projects aimed at improving financial and environmental performance of land-based sectors.
Vote: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10683] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Employment Relations Law Reform Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 76 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 44 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Bill read a first time and referred to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee.
Ward Mike: Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Ward Mike: Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11341] 
MIKE WARD (Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. The Greens voted against it.
[Volume:615;Page:11260] 
I seek your guidance as to the procedures that we should follow because as Dr Mapp said there are actually two different versions. My view is that the decision is made when we come to vote and an amendment is ruled out of order.
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members Questions to Ministers 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:618;Page:14469] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I do not want to take this matter too much further except that when you were questioned about it before particularly about the matter of Mr Carter saying that Dr Smith had said something when clearly he had not you said that the best way to deal with it was by point of order and indeed allowed Dr Smith to explore that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Yes. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: It now goes a little bit further. What we have here is a Minister who has come to question time made a claim that is completely untrue and now has had that claim proved untrue in the House through this long and protracted process. I wonder whether it might be appropriate for you to instruct Government Ministers in future simply to stick to the truth when they are giving answers in this House.
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17557] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 46 
Adams(P) 
English(P) 
Peters J (P) 
Tisch  
Alexander(P) 
Franks(P) 
Peters W (P) 
Turner  
Baldock  
Gudgeon(P) 
Power(P) 
Wang(P) 
Brash(P) 
Heatley(P) 
Prebble(P) 
Williamson(P) 
Brown  
Hutchison(P) 
Roy(P) 
Woolerton(P) 
Carter D (P) 
Jones(P) 
Ryall(P) 
Worth(P) 
Carter J (P) 
Key(P) 
Scott(P) 
Catchpole(P) 
Mapp(P) 
Shirley(P) 
Coddington(P) 
McNair(P) 
Smith L (P) 
Collins(P) 
Newman(P) 
Smith M (P) 
Connell(P) 
Ogilvy(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Dunne(P) 
Paraone(P) 
Stewart  
Teller: 
Eckhoff  
Perry(P) 
te Heuheu(P) 
Copeland  
Noes 74 
Anderton(P) 
Duynhoven(P) 
Laban(P) 
Simich(P) 
Ardern(P) 
Dyson(P) 
Locke(P) 
Sowry(P) 
Barker(P) 
Ewen-Street(P) 
Mackey J (P) 
Sutton(P) 
Barnett(P) 
Fairbrother(P) 
Mackey M (P) 
Swain(P) 
Benson-Pope  
Field(P) 
Maharey(P) 
Tamihere(P) 
Beyer  
Fitzsimons(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Tanczos(P) 
Bradford(P) 
Gallagher(P) 
Mallard(P) 
Tizard(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mark(P) 
Turei(P) 
Burton(P) 
Gosche(P) 
McCully(P) 
Turia(P) 
Carter C (P) 
Goudie(P) 
O'Connor(P) 
Ward(P) 
Chadwick(P) 
Hartley(P) 
Okeroa(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Choudhary(P) 
Hawkins(P) 
Parker(P) 
Wong(P) 
Clark(P) 
Hereora(P) 
Peck  
Yates (P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Hide(P) 
Pettis 
Cullen(P) 
Hobbs(P) 
Pillay(P) 
Cunliffe(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Rich(P) 
Dalziel(P) 
Horomia(P) 
Ririnui(P) 
Donald(P) 
Hunt(P) 
Robertson(P) 
Donnelly(P) 
Kedgley(P) 
Robson(P) 
Teller: 
Duncan(P) 
King(P) 
Samuels(P) 
Hughes  
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 312 in the name of Marc Alexander to omit clauses 17 and 18 be agreed to.
Brownlee Gerry: Speaker’s Statements — Ringing of the Bell 
Brownlee Gerry: Speaker’s Statements — Ringing of the Bell 
[Volume:608;Page:5457] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. With regard to the comment you have just made I see that the Standing Orders Committee might have reached a unanimous decision but how does that impose itself upon Parliament? Surely it should be the House that ratifies such a decision.
Points of Order — Tabling of Ministerial Documents 
Points of Order — Tabling of Ministerial Documents 
[Volume:608;Page:5816] 
Points of Order 
Tabling of Ministerial Documents 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I raise a matter with you because I was expecting a statement from the Government. Last week we were told by the Prime Minister when I raised a question about whether she would table a ministerial document that she would table all of the documents relating to the Ministry for Culture and Heritage and the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2). I was expecting that. I would also like to know from the Prime Minister whether she stands by her view of 23 February when she said to the then Prime Minister Jenny Shipley when she was tabling documents that it should be done by ministerial statement. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is in the hands of the Government. 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. We have an interesting situation here. We have an MMP Parliament. Under first past the post the Opposition party was allowed to raise a procedural matter. I am the leader of my party. I had what I took to be a solemn assurance from the Prime Minister that she would table those statements. I stopped asking questions on the basis that they were coming. I think I am entitled to ask the Prime Minister whether she will table them and whether that will be done by ministerial statement—just as she said should be the course for Jenny Shipley. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I say to the member that he is perfectly entitled to raise a point of order and I did not rule him out of order for raising it. I am just saying that the matter of whether that will be responded to is a matter for the Prime Minister not a matter for anyone else.
Vote: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8487] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Noes 71 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: A further amendment to clause 103(1) set out on Supplementary Order Paper 109 in the name of the Hon Georgina te Heuheu is out of order because it is inconsistent with the one we have just voted on. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 132 in the name of the Hon George Hawkins to clause 119(2)(d) be agreed to. 
Amendment agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: There is an amendment to clause 119 in the name of Lindsay Tisch set out on Supplementary Order Paper 110 to omit subclause 2(d). That amendment is out of order given that the Committee has just agreed to the previous amendment. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 110 in the name of Lindsay Tisch to clause 119(3)(b) be agreed to.
Hobbs Marian: Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
Hobbs Marian: Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11241] 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Associate Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade 
: I seek leave for the Committee of the whole House in its consideration of the Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Amendment Bill to have authority to consider and if it thinks fit to adopt the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 190. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears not to be.
Vote: Third Readings 
Vote: Third Readings 
[Volume:622;Page:17248] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Land Transport Management Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 36 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 9. 
Bill read a third time.
Vote: Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14017] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 36 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Amendments agreed to.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:423;Page:18525] 
Thursday 10 February 2005 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business Statement 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week in the House priority will be given to the remaining stages of the Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill the Films Videos and Publications Classification Amendment Bill and the Committee stage of the Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill. Priority will also be given to any first readings on the Order Paper. 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 Noticing that the Government clearly wants to get the Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill dealt with by the end of certainly the next session of Parliament can we expect that there will be no urgency next week? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Yes I am hopeful the House will be able to deal with the Committee stage of that bill without urgency at all.
Smith Nick: Financial Review Debate — Procedure In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Smith Nick: Financial Review Debate — Procedure In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:616;Page:11859] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 Today we have the extraordinary situation where the Prime Minister has actually turned up in the House. I have been in this House so many times on a Tuesday afternoon and this is the first time in 5 years that I can remember on a Tuesday afternoon when the Prime Minister has chosen to front up. Why has the Prime Minister chosen to front up today in the House? The reason is her weak excuse for not fronting with Don Brash on the  
Holmes 
 programme. Why does the Prime Minister want to front up in the House rather than on the  
Holmes 
 show? She has probably only 50-odd cheerleaders for the Labour Party—the only 50 she can find. She was quite happy to give a sermon in the Christchurch Cathedral. She was quite happy to do that. She thought the Christchurch Cathedral was quite an appropriate forum to lecture on politics but she was not prepared to front up on the  
Holmes 
 programme. Why? 
Will she answer why she thought it was appropriate to give a sermon in the Christchurch Cathedral but was not prepared to front up on State-owned television? I will tell members why. As my colleague says we can smell the poultry from here. The Prime Minister does not want to front on the  
Holmes 
 show. She does not want to have a neutral chair. She would much rather be in the House where she has a Labour Party MP chairing the debate than have Paul Holmes. She does not want to have to— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member will be seated. That is not— 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: She has suddenly got all pricklish about the Standing Orders. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member will stand withdraw and apologise. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I withdraw and apologise. Have you left the Labour Party? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member will now leave the House. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I am sorry? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member will now leave the House. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I will recall the Speaker. I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Please be seated. I have ruled. The member commented on my ruling. The member will now leave the House. I have ruled. The member will leave the House now please. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Please be seated. The member will leave the House. An instruction has been given. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith withdrew from the Chamber.
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8140] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 4 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 82 
Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 33 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 6. 
Part 4 as amended agreed to.
Hide Rodney: Voting — Correction 
Hide Rodney: Voting — Correction 
[Volume:610;Page:7505] 
RODNEY HIDE (ACT NZ) 
: 
 For the vote on the Death with Dignity Bill last night I inadvertently missed Heather Roy’s proxy vote. I apologise to you Mr Speaker and to the House and I seek the leave of the House for Heather Roy’s vote for the Ayes to be recorded. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that to be done. Is there any objection? There is not. It will be so done. The result is now declared as Ayes 58 Noes 60 Abstentions 1.
Mallard Trevor: Motions — New Zealand Black Sox  
Mallard Trevor: Motions — New Zealand Black Sox  
[Volume:615;Page:10781] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister for Sport and Recreation) 
: 
 I move 
 That the  
House congratulate the Black Sox on winning the men’s world softball championship on 8 February 2004 and in so doing winning the world championship for the third successive time. 
 This victory is especially sweet given that it was achieved on home soil. I am sure the House will join me in congratulating the efforts of the coach Don Tricker captain Jarrad Martin and Mark Sorenson who I think has been in the team Mr Speaker nearly as long as you have been here and other members of the world champion Black Sox.
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13043] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Peters Winston: Points of Order — Privilege—Hon Harry Duynhoven 
Peters Winston: Points of Order — Privilege—Hon Harry Duynhoven 
[Volume:610;Page:7292] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That is what my concern is. If you follow the law then sadly the result will be inevitable. I want you to tell the House that you are prepared to take advice or direction from other members of Parliament so that you can act on a law that we might have to pass.
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Algerian Refugee—Ahmed Zaoui 
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Algerian Refugee—Ahmed Zaoui 
[Volume:612;Page:9315] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from Keith Locke seeking to debate under Standing Order 376 the transfer of Ahmed Zaoui to Auckland Central Remand Prison. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving the administrative responsibility of the Government but I do not believe that the transfer of a prisoner requires the immediate attention of the House by way of an urgent debate. The application is declined.
Cullen Michael: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Cullen Michael: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14317] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Confusion now seems to be developing. It is perfectly appropriate for the member to call for a vote because the Chair had ruled in favour of the affirmative. As the member had voice voted in favour of the negative he was perfectly entitled to call for an actual party vote in that case. It would have been inappropriate for a member who had voted with the affirmative to have called for a party vote because only people who voted against the declaration of what was the majority can call for a party vote following the voice votes. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: There was no voice; that’s the point! 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I again point out to the member that people frequently vote on the voices in this House but the Speaker and the Chair are able to make their own judgments about where the majority lies. The very purpose of calling for such a vote is not just for the fun of having another vote; it is because people are actually questioning whether the Speaker’s judgment was correct in their call. The decisions of the Speaker and the Chair are not final on the basis of the voice vote. If that were so we would have no procedure for anything before the voice vote and indeed Governments would feel very comfortable in many instances. It would not matter what the numbers were in the House they would somehow have the numbers on the basis of the voting because all they would have to do is to get a declaration in their favour on the voice vote.
[Volume:619;Page:15077] 
I think one of the important things is what has happened since we decided to carry out the trials. The trials have been carried out in New Zealand on hemp growing since 2001. Nandor Tanczos outlined some of the problems they had in the very early trials with bird strikes and some people who did not follow the rules. There were a few issues like that that had to be addressed. But in the main they have been successful in terms of looking at the way one would regulate. What we do not know is whether hemp will grow well in New Zealand and whether it will become a very lucrative crop right alongside the rest of our agricultural crops.
Pettis Jill: State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
Pettis Jill: State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10631] 
JILL PETTIS (Labour—Whanganui) 
: 
 Mr English might think that the public has amnesia but I want to assure him that they do not. The teaching profession in particular remembers only too well what National Parties have done to it in the past. This is a very good bill and we need to get on and pass it.
Vote: International Treaties Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: International Treaties Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:3607] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the International Treaties Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 16 
ACT New Zealand 7; Green Party 9. 
Noes 101 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Motion not agreed to.
Vote: Maori Purposes Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Maori Purposes Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4830] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 16 
Noes 101 
Amendments not agreed to. 
ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9. 
The question was put that the following amendments in the name of Murray Smith to clause 5 be agreed to: 
to amend new clause 5AB by inserting before the words “For the purposes of an inquiry” the words “Notwithstanding clause 1”; and 
to amend new clause 5AB by adding the words “ whose office has been vacated pursuant to clause 2”.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:615;Page:11365] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 No but I would be happy to organise a seminar for the member so he can understand the nature of the policy.
Peck Mark: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Peck Mark: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4768] 
MARK PECK (NZ Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Cullen Michael: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Cullen Michael: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16964] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Deputy Prime Minister) 
: 
 I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Foreshore and Seabed Bill that it take the bill part by part.
Personal Explanations — Trevor Mallard—Statement Made About Hon Dr Nick Smith 
Personal Explanations — Trevor Mallard—Statement Made About Hon Dr Nick Smith 
[Volume:625;Page:20525] 
Personal Explanations 
Trevor Mallard—Statement Made About Hon Dr Nick Smith 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House under Standing Order 343 to make a personal explanation in respect of the statement made by Mr Trevor Mallard on nationwide TV—the  
Close Up 
 programme—that I was personally responsible for the $20 million bail-out in respect of Te Wananga o Aotearoa. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to make a personal statement. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
JOHN CARTER (National—Northland) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. We have now got ourselves into a particularly difficult situation. One of the rights or conventions—and indeed accepted as a right—of this House is that when members believe they been wronged they can have the opportunity to put the record right. 
An honourable member—in this case Nick Smith—has now asked for that to be done. In my 18 years here I cannot recall a person who wanted to make a position clear when there has been a reflection on him or her publicly being prevented from doing so in this House. I do recall a couple of occasions when leave was refused but advice was taken and the member who refused the leave reflected and allowed it to happen. I suggest that it might be well advised for the House to allow Nick Smith if he were allowed to seek leave again to make his statement. 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 If the suggestion made is indeed followed then in the interests of making progress and of allowing the member to make his comment—with the assurance that it will be made strictly in accordance with the Standing Orders—I do not think there will be a problem. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The member has sought leave to make a personal statement. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 On Monday evening on  
Close Up 
 the Minister of Education said in response to a question from Susan Wood as to who should be held responsible for the mess in the wananga and the $20 million bail-out that it was me Nick Smith. 
I wish to make it absolutely plain to the House that I have never held any responsibility for the portfolio of tertiary education or for the wananga. I have dealt with no ministerial correspondence and no Cabinet papers. I have never had responsibility for any of the vote. I find it extraordinary that the Minister went on to say that I was responsible for developing a funding system. I was not responsible for developing any funding system in any of the responsibilities I held during my 3 years as a Minister of the Crown. I seek the leave of the House to table the ministerial delegations and responsibilities held during the time that I was a Minister of the Crown. 
Document not tabled.
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — National Certificate of Educational Achievement—Examinations System 
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — National Certificate of Educational Achievement—Examinations System 
[Volume:618;Page:13558] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from Donna Awatere Huata seeking to debate under Standing Order 382 matters relating to the National Certificate of Educational Achievement examination system. The member provided no authentication for the statements set out in her letter. Therefore in accordance with Speaker’s ruling 153 the application is declined on that ground.
Alexander Marc: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Alexander Marc: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:606;Page:3405] 
MARC ALEXANDER (United Future) 
: 
 In reply to the Prime Minister’s address yesterday I say that there are two issues that I think are worthy of some mention. First where is the wealth of this country heading and secondly where in the Prime Minister’s statement was there a mention of one of our nation’s fundamental concerns the safety and security of all New Zealanders?
Business of Select Committees — Reporting Dates Membership 
Business of Select Committees — Reporting Dates Membership 
[Volume:606;Page:3767] 
Wednesday 26 February 2003 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business of Select Committees 
Reporting Dates 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
I seek leave for the time by which the Maori Affairs Committee must finally report the Te Whanau-a-Taupara Trust Empowering Bill to be extended to 21 March 2003. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There is not. 
Membership 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for Keith Locke to be a member of the Law and Order Committee for the purposes of its consideration of the Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Bill but without the right to vote on any question before the committee. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none.
Urgent Debates Declined — New Zealand Security Intelligence Service—Inquiry and Allegations of Spying 
Urgent Debates Declined — New Zealand Security Intelligence Service—Inquiry and Allegations of Spying 
[Volume:622;Page:17228] 
Urgent Debates Declined 
New Zealand Security Intelligence Service—Inquiry and Allegations of Spying 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from Keith Locke seeking to debate under Standing Order 373 allegations by journalists that the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service spied on the Maori Party and other organisations and the decision of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security to initiate an inquiry into the allegations. Standing Order 373 permits a member to raise “a particular case of recent occurrence” for debate yet the member’s letter raises two issues: the allegations and the announced inquiry. I will deal with the two cases separately. 
Allegations can never constitute a particular case of recent occurrence—see Speaker’s ruling 154/2. There can therefore be no grounds for a debate on the allegations. The decision to hold an inquiry is a particular case of recent occurrence and because it requires the concurrence of the Prime Minister it does involve ministerial responsibility. However it would be very unusual for the decision to set up an inquiry to require the immediate attention of the House and I can see nothing in this case that would justify it. The application is consequently declined.
Vote: Identity (Citizenship and Travel Documents) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Identity (Citizenship and Travel Documents) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20121] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 34 
New Zealand National 25; Green Party 8; Other: Robson. 
Noes 80 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8; Progressive 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Pansy Wong to clause 17 be agreed to: 
to omit from paragraph (a) of subclause (3) the words “1 January 2005” and substitute the words “1 May 2005”.
Mahuta Nanaia: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Mahuta Nanaia: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:21722] 
NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Tainui) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Personal Explanations — Question No. 9 to Minister 
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Personal Explanations — Question No. 9 to Minister 
[Volume:625;Page:19785] 
JEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 This afternoon on a point of order I told the House that the Local Government and Environment Committee had issued a press release stating simply that we had met in private with Judge Bollard the Principal Environment Court Judge in relation to the Resource Management and Electricity Legislation Amendment Bill. The select committee decided to issue such a release on Friday at its meeting in Auckland last week. Because it was a straight statement of fact I did not expect that it would be run past me before release and I expected that it would have been issued yesterday. I was wrong. The clerk’s intention was always to put it in the weekly omnibus release that goes out on a Friday. Our resolution was not in time to make the 11 o’clock deadline last Friday so it was to be issued next Friday. I apologise if I have misled the House about that. The release has not been issued. The committee decided that it would be issued but it has not yet been published.
Hartley Ann: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Hartley Ann: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16974] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: I thank the member for his point of order but just remind him that it was not the same as the one ruled on previously. However the member is correct. I did not quite hear the context and that is why I discussed it with the Clerk at the Table. We clarified that what Mr Prebble said about the use of the term “forked tongue” was absolutely correct. It is after the event and I know that the member would prefer that the debate was more robust but it is quite clear now we have discussed the context that the matter should be ruled on and that the member be required to withdraw his remark. I ask him to stand and withdraw the remark. 
Hon Dover Samuels 
: I withdraw and apologise.
Newman Muriel: Smoke-free Environments (Exemptions) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Newman Muriel: Smoke-free Environments (Exemptions) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:627;Page:22085] 
Dr MURIEL NEWMAN 
: Therefore I ask the House to support it. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I need to confirm that there is no objection to Lindsay Tisch’s seeking of leave. Is there any objection? There is not. It is agreed to. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Vote: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7767] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 69 
Labour 50; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Abstentions 1 
Hunt. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dail Jones to clause 1 be agreed to: 
to omit from subclause (1) the words “Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Act 2003” and substitute the words Electoral (Harry Duynhoven Inadvertent Error) Act 2003”.
Vote: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Discharge In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Vote: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Discharge In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8808] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 55 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8. 
Noes 61 
Labour 52; Green Party 9. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Tabling of Documents — Question No. 7 to Minister 18 November 
Tabling of Documents — Question No. 7 to Minister 18 November 
[Volume:613;Page:10138] 
Tabling of Documents 
Question No. 7 to Minister 18 November 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
In light of the questions raised in the House today I seek leave to table an email received at our offices detailing circumstances surrounding two alleged assaults. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:17106] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 4 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 66 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Progressive 2. 
Noes 54 
New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Part 4 as amended agreed to.
Prebble Richard: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Prebble Richard: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:611;Page:8117] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I appreciate that this is not a matter within your capacity but I do think that the point that has been raised is a reasonable one. I wish the Minister of Maori Affairs a rapid recovery but when MPs listen to the Minister speaking on the radio and then be condemned because he is ill that causes some trouble—and you can see that the question has not been asked. I think it is reasonable for the Leader of the House to say that he will ensure an email is put around before 10 o’clock when questions have to be in to let members know whether the Minister of Maori Affairs regardless of whether we have heard him on radio will be able to appear in the House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the member for the way in which he phrased that point of order. Of course it is up to the Government to do that if it wishes.
Jones Dail: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Jones Dail: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:622;Page:17382] 
9.  
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: How many of the failed refugee status claimants who entered New Zealand between 1 January 2001 and 30 September 2004 with false lost or destroyed travel documentation are still in New Zealand and why? 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Acting Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 Of the 966 claimants who entered with false lost or destroyed passports 329 failed claimants are still in New Zealand. 
Dail Jones 
: What is he doing about making sure that those 330-odd claimants are sent back; and when people arrive in New Zealand with false lost or stolen travel documentation can the Immigration Service be sure that they are who they eventually claim to be and if it cannot be sure is he not concerned that he may be allowing our national security to be threatened by this lack of certainty and removal action by his Immigration Service? 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR 
: It is important to say that of the 329 failed claimants 259 have appeals or applications under consideration and/or hold valid permits and 79 are recorded as being unlawfully in New Zealand. In the last Budget this Government committed $19.8 million to boost our intelligence capacity to work with other countries to make sure that we do know who is coming to this country. This Government implemented the Advance Passenger Processing system which checks people coming to New Zealand before they board an aircraft. That is something we have done that the previous National Government neglected to do. 
Dail Jones 
: What is the Minister doing about his obviously failed new service which is allowing so many of these people into the country; and how many of the 438 people who came here between January 2001 and September 2004 with false lost or destroyed travel documents and who have been found to be refugees have subsequently applied to have family member join them in New Zealand how many family members have they brought in and if he does not have the answers why not? 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR 
: I cannot give the member the answers now but I am perfectly willing to provide those details to that member if he asks for them in written form. We are doing everything we can to ensure we uphold the security of this country. That is why we put extra money in. The number of people coming into this country and claiming refugee status has declined drastically since we have been in Government and we intend to keep it that way.