edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Points of Order — Foreshore and Seabed Bill—Availability of Supplementary Order Paper 
Points of Order — Foreshore and Seabed Bill—Availability of Supplementary Order Paper 
[Volume:621;Page:16875] 
Points of Order 
Foreshore and Seabed Bill—Availability of Supplementary Order Paper 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Later in the day the House is expected to begin work on the Foreshore and Seabed Bill. Could I seek leave to ask the Leader of the House when he intends to make the very substantial 120-page Supplementary Order Paper available to the Opposition in order that we may appropriately participate in the debate? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 The Supplementary Order Paper will be made available as soon as it is printed—it will go to the Bills Office. I will also be seeking leave subsequently once the copies are available to table what is called a redline version of the bill which will look like a report-back version of the bill had the Fisheries and other Sea-related Legislation Committee been allowed to do its job properly. 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think it would be worth the House taking a moment for the Leader of the House to explain exactly what he means by a redline version of the bill that would be as the select committee might have reported back. The fact is that the select committee did not report back. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 This matter has been dealt with by the Business Committee which the member has been at over the last two meetings and he is well aware therefore of what I am talking about. I will be seeking leave to table a copy of the bill as originally introduced with the amendments as in the Supplementary Order Paper as if those amendments had been adopted by the select committee. The Committee of course will still consider the Supplementary Order Paper as the actual document in front of it but the purpose of that redline copy would be to enable members to see and to read the amendments more clearly in relation to the substantive provisions— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: What? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Dr Smith may find that disgraceful but I think most members would find it will actually help in understanding the bill.
Carter John: Points of Order — Party Vote—Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill 
Carter John: Points of Order — Party Vote—Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill 
[Volume:615;Page:11341] 
JOHN CARTER (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Just towards the end of the Committee stage as the Chairman was leaving the Chair—and he did so quite correctly—a point of order was taken by a member of the Greens who indicated that he had endeavoured to vote against the bill but for whatever reason had not been heard or perhaps did not express himself etc. I just want to point out that any party or member at any time can seek leave to correct a vote if they wish to do so and the member might want to take that into account at some stage.
Newman Muriel: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Newman Muriel: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15936] 
Dr MURIEL NEWMAN (Deputy Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. Can I just clarify. Is this the amendment that will bring in the voluntary register—this is the beginning of that amendment? Is that correct?
Hunt Jonathan: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
Hunt Jonathan: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9393] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think I had better state the facts as they are because I have had an opportunity to listen to the tape. The tape shows quite clearly that when Judith Tizard sat down Mr Carter moved that the House adjourn at that stage and no one was called. That is what the tape shows. If members look at the Order Paper they will see that it states: “11 x 10m speeches remain.” When I called the second reading I was waiting for the first person to get up to take a call. No one did and I put the question. I am obliged to do that. No one sought the call. There is no clerical error whatsoever on behalf of the Clerk’s Office. We have listened to the tape.
Maharey Steve: Business Statement 
Maharey Steve: Business Statement 
[Volume:606;Page:3631] 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Social Services and Employment) 
: 
 I cannot at this point but I will inform the member as soon as I am able.
Masterton Trust Lands Bill Anglican (Diocese of Christchurch) Church Property Trust Bill — Procedure 
Masterton Trust Lands Bill Anglican (Diocese of Christchurch) Church Property Trust Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:608;Page:5198] 
Masterton Trust Lands Bill 
Anglican (Diocese of Christchurch) Church Property Trust Bill 
Procedure 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the Masterton Trust Lands Bill and the Anglican (Diocese of Christchurch) Church Property Trust Bill to proceed from the second readings directly to the third readings. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none. It will be so ordered.
Smith Nick: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Smith Nick: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5499] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (NZ National—Nelson) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. We received many submissions from individuals who agreed that this bill will increase the costs the uncertainties and the delays to members of the public in respect of the Resource Management Act. I challenge the view that an amendment that includes those words cannot be put to the vote of this Committee. It is for the Committee to decide what it wishes to call this bill—it is not for the Chair. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member is not correct. If he reads Speaker’s ruling 15/2 (Supplement) he will see that it is very clear: “An amendment to the title of a bill must be a serious description of the bill rather than an attempt to criticise its contents.” 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: We have seen bills introduced— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: I am sorry but we cannot relitigate that. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Is it a different point of order? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: It is a point of order in respect of what amendments you will consider in the Committee stage of this bill and those that you will not. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The decisions on the amendments are made by the Chair. The Speaker’s ruling is very very clear on that. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The Speaker’s ruling is a matter of whether the amendment is relevant and whether it is not serious. I have to tell you that members on this side of the Chamber are absolutely serious in saying that this bill will increase the costs the uncertainties and the delays for those who use the Resource Management Act. I suggest to you that we have had before this House bills that are according to what the Government has stated about compliance cost reductions. It has been acceptable within the Government for the titles of bills to make reference to compliance costs so why is it not possible for the Opposition to move amendments to include such words in the title of a bill? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The Speaker’s ruling is very clear on that and we have had clear rulings on that before. That is the end of the matter.
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer 
Hide Rodney: Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer 
[Volume:608;Page:5085] 
RODNEY HIDE (ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. We in the Opposition are having some difficulty in getting replies to questions for written answer and I have raised that matter with you. We have a serial offender in the Minister of Education and I just wonder what action your office has taken in making the Minister comply with the Standing Orders in replying to written questions. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will examine that matter and report back to the member.
Benson-Pope David: Crown Minerals Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Benson-Pope David: Crown Minerals Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7627] 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (Senior Whip—NZ Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Carter John: Personal Explanations — Trevor Mallard—Statement Made About Hon Dr Nick Smith 
Carter John: Personal Explanations — Trevor Mallard—Statement Made About Hon Dr Nick Smith 
[Volume:625;Page:20525] 
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.
Tisch Lindsay: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9021] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—NZ National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I want to query your ruling on this because I vividly recall that when we did the Gambling Bill on which I had a number of amendments the Minister’s amendments came first. They actually ruled out a number of the amendments that I had. If we look at the point that my colleague Richard Worth has raised concerning that second sentence of Standing Order 301 we see it is very clear that an amendment proposed by the member in charge of a bill is taken ahead of other amendments at the same place in the bill. There is a precedent set in recent times—when we passed the Gambling Bill in the last month—whereby the Minister’s amendments were taken first and a number of my own amendments were ruled out because of the Minister’s amendments. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I just tell the member that the Minister’s amendments are taken at the end and that has been the practice for a considerable amount of time. It enables other members’ amendments to be taken and voted on. Where there is a conflict members’ amendments may be ruled out if it is the case that the Minister’s amendments are taken first. That is the ruling and I will now declare the vote—
Vote: Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7394] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Lawyers and Conveyancing Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 108 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 8 
ACT New Zealand 8. 
Bill read a first time.
Tizard Judith: New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Tizard Judith: New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12313] 
Hon JUDITH TIZARD (Associate Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage) 
: 
 I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Bill that it take the bill part by part.
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:17025] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Speaker be recalled 
. 
Ayes 107 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 13 
New Zealand First 13. 
Motion agreed to and House resumed.
Connell Brian: New Zealand Guardian Trust Company Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Connell Brian: New Zealand Guardian Trust Company Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21160] 
BRIAN CONNELL (National—Rakaia) 
: 
 As the previous speaker has already pointed out the New Zealand Guardian Trust Company Amendment Bill is by its nature fairly technical and straightforward. I do not intend to take up a lot of the House’s time in discussing the bill in much more detail than the member in charge of it has. I would like to point out however that the National Party considers that it is something of a lost opportunity. 
The proposal that was put to the Commerce Committee by the Guardian Trust was that it seems that every time there is a change of ownership of a trustee company the company has to take the time of Parliament unreasonably in the view of the company—and I tend to agree with it—to pass legislation to essentially rubber-stamp the proposal. Some members of the select committee felt there was a clear conflict of interest. I on behalf of the National Party argued that a simple change by Order in Council was all that was necessary because the time it takes to change legislation is significant notwithstanding what some members might argue. We have gone through the process of a first reading we have gone through the select committee process we are now going through a second reading and we will go through a third reading yet the bill simply allows a company to continue with its business in the way it did prior to a change of ownership. Surely we have better things to do with our time than to change an Act of Parliament every time there is a change of ownership. 
Once upon a time I will concede it was a fairly rare occurrence. The member in charge of the bill made the same recommendation in her speech on the first reading as I am making now. We should deal with this matter once and for all and just leave it to the Minister at the time to make sure that there is no conflict of interest and that the funds of the trust’s beneficiaries are being managed in a sensible and safe way. We should let the Minister at the time make those decisions. 
I conclude by saying that I think it is a lost opportunity. I am not for a moment suggesting that we should in any way put at risk beneficiaries’ money but I think the time has come when we can trust the judgment of the Minister with all the checks and balances that are in place and allow him or her to make some commercial decisions. We as members of Parliament should invest in him or her the confidence to do just that.
Chadwick Steve: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
Chadwick Steve: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6879] 
STEVE CHADWICK (NZ Labour—Rotorua) 
: I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13027] 
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 7; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 73 be agreed to: 
to omit clause 73.
Brown Peter: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Brown Peter: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18638] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I draw your attention to the fact that New Zealand First is the third-largest party in Parliament and we will probably be the second-largest after the next election and we have not had one single call in this debate—not one. I have taken a close interest in this bill. I was not on the Government Administration Committee but I have listened to members speaking. I have heard very little from the Government members except from the honourable Minister. I have deliberately sat back to listen intently to the debate. It is quite outrageous that we did not even get the opportunity to contribute to it at all. 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I will first answer Mr Brown because I think he is entitled to it. Mr Brown you are quite right. You have been here in the Chamber and you have not sought the call at all. We had over 15 speeches and I therefore took the closure motion. It was not the first closure motion. I turned down the first closure motion and took the second one.
Barnett Tim: Christchurch City Council (Robert McDougall Gallery) Land Vesting Bill — First Reading 
Barnett Tim: Christchurch City Council (Robert McDougall Gallery) Land Vesting Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:3589] 
TIM BARNETT (NZ Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 I shall briefly exercise my right of reply. I know we have equally important business coming up in the House later tonight so I do not want to take up our time. First I reiterate Lianne Dalziel’s comments. I did ensure firstly that the city council undertook not just the minimal consultation it has to in terms of our Standing Orders but went further. Secondly as sponsor of the bill I ensured that it had undertaken some public consultation because the last thing we need is for what should be primary consultation between the city council and its public to happen through a select committee. So I ensured that happened and I think the concerns that remain in the community are limited. I do urge the select committee to organise a hearing in Christchurch assuming they get sufficient submissions so that they can hear about the issues first hand and visit the site.  
Second I will just respond to Mr Eckhoff’s comments. For long we have known that Mr Eckhoff has chosen to want to lay waste to our national bird but now he seems to be after our cultural icons as well. One of his political friends from the Business Roundtable once referred to Christchurch as the people’s republic and within 7 days the city council had printed a number of T-shirts reading “The People’s Republic of Christchurch”. I do not think those from outside the city always understand the very nature of the Christchurch version of public ownership of what is important. We have a higher level of services there because we kept control over strategic assets.  
Third I thought both Rod Donald and Lianne Dalziel illustrated in their comments the kind of affection and passion that those of us from Christchurch have for our icons. This new art gallery will be an icon and so is the Robert McDougall Art Gallery. We are all concerned to see that the legislation that Parliament can give to the city to protect that icon is up-to-date and in place. The art gallery the arts centre the botanic gardens and the museum comprise the southern hemisphere’s largest and most significant cultural precinct and the legislation before us today will help to ensure that that precinct is even better in the years to come. 
Bill read a first time and referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee. referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee
Carter John: Masterton District Council (Montfort Trimble Foundation) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Carter John: Masterton District Council (Montfort Trimble Foundation) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10423] 
JOHN CARTER (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I seek leave that the bill be taken as one question. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Leave has been sought. Is there any objection to that? There appears to be none.
Vote: Crown Minerals Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Crown Minerals Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7536] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments recommended by the Commerce Committee by majority be agreed to. 
Ayes 62 
Labour 52; Green Party 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 55 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8. 
Question agreed to.
Parker David: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Parker David: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16493] 
DAVID PARKER (Labour—Otago) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13046] 
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. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 210 be agreed to: 
to omit clause 210.
Brown Peter: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brown Peter: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:619;Page:14529] 
10.  
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Internal Affairs 
: Does he have confidence in the chief censor Bill Hastings; if so why? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Minister of Internal Affairs) 
: 
 Yes he is a proven chief censor. 
Peter Brown 
: How can the Minister have confidence in a censor who has just cleared a film for general release albeit with an R18 restriction that contains brutal sexual violence including a 9-minute anal rape scene for screening in cinemas around this country? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: I am advised that in the last 2 financial years nine decisions by the Office of Film and Literature Classification have been upheld by the Film and Literature Board of Review. He is doing a very good job. If anything the board says he is a little soft. 
Steve Chadwick 
: Has the Minister seen any reports about the performance of the chief censor? 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: Yes. Even the deputy leader of the New Zealand First Party Peter Brown earlier this year in a press release headed “The Censor is right this time” sang his praises. Mr Brown went on to state: “I believe the Censor was right when he classified the controversial film ‘The Passion of Christ’ as R16”. 
Peter Brown 
: Going back to the Minister’s earlier answer when he said the censor is a little too soft is he telling this House he is quite comfortable with the censor’s decision to allow a brutally sexually violent movie described by critics as “near-unbearable despicable violence” and to condone it by suggesting exhibitors provide numbers for Rape Crisis and sexual abuse services at the end of the film? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That question can be answered. 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: I have not seen the film. I do not know whether the member has seen it but this is probably a very good way of advertising it so that more people are curious about it. But I have to say that the censor’s decisions are appealed if needed to the Film and Literature Board of Review. It is a process it works and of course the censor has been right most of the time. 
Peter Brown 
: I seek leave to table the censor’s decision on this particular film. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Peter Brown 
: I seek leave to table certain media statements outlining the effects of this particular film on audiences. 
Documents by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS 
: I seek leave to table a document that states: “The Censor is right this time” a media release by Peter Brown earlier this year. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Trinidad and Tobago—Speaker of the House of Representatives and Parliamentary Delegation 
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — Trinidad and Tobago—Speaker of the House of Representatives and Parliamentary Delegation 
[Volume:618;Page:13757] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that the Hon BarendraSinanin Speaker of the House of Representatives of Trinidad and Tobago accompanied by a parliamentary delegation is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure members would wish that he be welcomed and accorded a seat on the left of the Chair and that the House would also wish to welcome members of the parliamentary delegation who are present in the gallery. 
The Hon BarendraSinanin accompanied by the Deputy Speaker entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
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:17050] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 10 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 109 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment to the amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Metiria Turei to proposed new clause 9A set out on Supplementary Order Paper 302 in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen be agreed to: 
to omit the words “must not take any action other than one of” and substitute the words “may take any action it sees fit including but not restricted to”.
Tizard Judith: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
Tizard Judith: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8707] 
Hon JUDITH TIZARD (Minister of Consumer Affairs) 
: 
 I think the member is trying to be helpful but I also think he is not reading the bill very carefully. I do understand that he was not on the Commerce Committee. I need to point out to the Committee that this bill does not require disclosure of any commissions. Brokerage fees are included in the definition of credit fees and are required to be disclosed if they are payable under the credit contract and are payable to the creditor or payable for the benefit of the creditor. If those conditions do not apply the creditor does not necessarily have a way of knowing the brokerage fee because the debtor has gone to the broker. The debtor would find it out directly from the broker because that would be part of the service. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Brokers often pay the commission because they have a letter of engagement and if they’ve got knowledge they should have to declare it. 
Hon JUDITH TIZARD 
: I am happy to accept the officials’ advice that obviously if those conditions do not apply the creditor has no way of knowing the brokerage fee. We do have a provision in the bill under which extra disclosures can be required by regulation if necessary and I am very happy since we do have a long run-up on this for those extra disclosures to be required. But the point of this bill is that commissions are not included in the disclosure. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Well they should be. The importance of— 
Hon JUDITH TIZARD 
: Perhaps the member should have brought that up at the select committee. It is a fairly fundamental issue. I thank the Committee for its assistance.
Vote: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15651] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 101 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 12; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 17 
Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Clause 2 agreed to.
Vote: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15931] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 84 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 36 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Amendments agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 268 in the name of Judy Turner to insert new clause 35A be agreed to.
Ewen-Street Ian: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
Ewen-Street Ian: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:14549] 
IAN EWEN-STREET (Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I just seek clarification on your last statement. Are you saying that this debate at the moment is a wide-ranging debate? Is it just on the title and commencement? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: No the debate is not being dealt with as a wide-ranging wrap-up debate; it is being dealt with as a limited title debate only.
Hughes Darren: Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill — First Reading 
Hughes Darren: Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21178] 
DARREN HUGHES (Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a document that includes the statement: “I think that New Zealand will be a better place if we can accommodate the concepts of partnership expressed in Te Tiriti o Waitangi.” The document is the maiden speech of Mr Gerry Brownlee. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Locke Keith: Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Locke Keith: Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:21634] 
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. In this debate the Green Party is the only party opposing the bill. There have been a whole series of speakers supporting the bill and it seems that the Green Party is being bypassed. It does not seem—
Vote: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
Vote: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:14570] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Noes 105 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 4; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Visitors — Deputy Foreign Minister of Vietnam 
Visitors — Deputy Foreign Minister of Vietnam 
[Volume:608;Page:5983] 
Thursday 22 May 2003 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
Deputy Foreign Minister of Vietnam 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that His Excellency the Hon Mr Nguygen Dinh Bin Deputy Foreign Minister of Vietnam accompanied by the Minister for Trade Negotiations is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed. 
His Excellency the Hon Mr Nguygen Dinh Bin accompanied by the Minister for Trade Negotiations entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
Mark Ron: Amended answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 9 to Minister 11 May 
Mark Ron: Amended answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 9 to Minister 11 May 
[Volume:617;Page:12957] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am seeking your assistance as the Speaker of this House. We know that the Minister’s officers and his department have some 4 hours in a day in which to get factual answers to specific questions. I have been subjected on many occasions by this Minister and his department to accusations of saying falsities in this House—of asking questions and making statements that are not correct. On this particular occasion it was very clear to me that the answers that were being given were somewhat out of kilter with the public record. I ask you what protection or assistance you can give members of the House to ensure that we get factual answers to our written questions on the day not some sort of apology 5 or 8 days after the fact. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member has made his point very effectively but there is no point of order that I can rule on. If the Minister has made a mistake and he corrects it that is fine. If he does not then of course other actions can follow. But I can assure the member that I have taken note of what he has said.
Burton Mark: Maori Television Service Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled 
Burton Mark: Maori Television Service Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled 
[Volume:607;Page:5004] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 Mr Chair obviously you have made a decision on the translation which is entirely your prerogative but to assist you as you say you were not in the Chamber earlier my observation—I was sitting where I am now during the entire exchange—was that the Chair made a decision based perhaps more on frequent interjections speaking through points of order and during voting and so on by the member who was ejected than on the content of a particular point of order. Members who were in the Chamber at the time would have to acknowledge that that is a call for the presiding officer to make at the time. The Chair did so based on the conduct of the member. As I observed it that is how she reached her judgment and I think members should uphold the authority of the Chair. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the honourable member. I cannot overturn the decision that was made prior to the dinner break. There that matter rests.
Vote: Budget Debate 
Vote: Budget Debate 
[Volume:608;Page:6029] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 48 
Noes 70 
Amendment to the amendment not agreed to. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Labour 52; Green Party 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Bill English be agreed to: 
that all the words after “That” be omitted and the following words substituted: 
this House has no confidence in the Labour minority Government because it has abandoned the task of lifting New Zealand’s long-term growth prospects because it is smothering our economic vitality in regulation and unworkable policy on energy and transport infrastructure because it is overtaxing families and businesses to pay for welfare dependency political correctness and educational failure and because it has developed a culture of deceit around public accountability.
Dyson Ruth: General Debate 
Dyson Ruth: General Debate 
[Volume:627;Page:22065] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for ACC) 
: 
 I seek leave to table the National Party press release that Nick Smith denied ever making dated 6 July 2004 in which he states: “The situation is now so serious that Parliament should pass special legislation so that these lines can be installed for Transpower.” 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Prebble Richard: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Prebble Richard: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:615;Page:11016] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 If the House is prepared to allow the New Zealand First member to move such an amendment on the basis that there are no other speakers I have no other speakers and I seek leave to also move an amendment somewhat shorter. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection? There is objection.
Pettis Jill: Immigration Amendment Bill — Instructions to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Pettis Jill: Immigration Amendment Bill — Instructions to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8268] 
JILL PETTIS (Junior Whip—NZ Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Electoral Act—Debate on Report of Privileges Committee 
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Electoral Act—Debate on Report of Privileges Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7895] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There is only an obligation if the Speaker believes that a vacancy has occurred. The Speaker does not rule on no vacancy. It is not legitimate to raise questions to the Speaker by way of debate and no answer was called for. I do not give hypothetical rulings now that the law has changed.
Turei Metiria: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
Turei Metiria: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
[Volume:614;Page:10560] 
METIRIA TUREI (Green) 
: 
 The Greens will be supporting this motion to establish a special select committee to look at the fisheries legislation. We accept that the Maori Affairs Committee is as appropriate a body as any to look at this legislation. As a member of that committee I have every confidence that it is perfectly capable of dealing with this issue and dealing with it as effectively as it should be dealt with. This is after all an issue to do with the settlement and reparation of the extinguishment of Maori rights and the restoration to Maori of some compensation for that extinguishment. 
None the less it is also true that the Primary Production Committee will have some interest in this bill given that the bill concerns issues of fisheries for which the committee would have some expertise. But in the end the Greens accept that a special select committee for this purpose is a useful thing to have. It is a useful way of making sure that a select committee with representatives from all the political parties in this House has the opportunity to be part of the scrutiny of this legislation. 
This bill is a landmark for this Parliament and for this country. It is one of the early Maori settlement deals and has taken a very very long time to come to the House in this form. There are some very major issues around it that need to be addressed and properly dealt with by a wide variety of political representation particularly issues between the commercial aspects of this bill community issues and hapu whanau and tikanga issues. 
 As a potential member of the select committee if it is established I certainly look forward to participating with a wide variety of members from different backgrounds so that we can have a good hearing of the issues. I think that the people who come to that select committee and make submissions on the bill will appreciate that there will be people there with an enormous range of expertise. There is some significance in this Parliament establishing a special select committee to hear a bill that is so significant. The Greens will support this motion.
Connell Brian: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
Connell Brian: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15995] 
BRIAN CONNELL (National—Rakaia) 
: 
 I am very happy to assist the Chair by yielding my call to allow my colleague to continue— 
Hon Roger Sowry 
: You can’t yield. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: —on the basis that Mr Sowry gets the call.
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:17082] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 11 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 109 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment to the amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Metiria Turei to proposed new clause 43 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 302 in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen be agreed to: 
to omit proposed new subclause (3) and substitute the following new subclause: 
(3)However the exercise of a recognised commercial activity to which subsection (2) applies is subject to any conditions or limits imposed by or under any enactment or rule of law.
Vote: Counter-Terrorism Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: Counter-Terrorism Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9373] 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Keith Locke to clause 34 be agreed to: 
to insert the following new section 200P in the principal Act: 
200P Offence of using a tracking device without authorisation or consent 
(1)A person commits an offence who knowingly installs uses or maintains a tracking device to determine the geographical location of a person or object: 
(a)in the case of a device to determine the location of a person without the express or implied consent of that person; or 
(b)in the case of a device to determine the location of an object without the express or implied consent of a person in lawful possession or having lawful control of that object. 
(2)Subsection (1) does not apply to the installation use maintenance or removal of a tracking device in accordance with: 
(a)a tracking device warrant issued under section 200C or renewed under section 200F; or 
(b)authority granted by section 200G; or 
(c)a removal warrant issued under section 200H. 
(3)A person who commits an offence against subsection (1) is liable on conviction to a term of imprisonment not exceeding 12 months or a fine not exceeding$10000. 
(4)Where any person is convicted under subsection (1) the court may as part of the sentence order that the tracking device and any associated equipment be forfeited to the Crown.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:617;Page:13129] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week in the House the Government will seek to make progress on the remaining stages of the Corrections Bill and the Border Security Bill. If time is available the first readings will be taken of the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill and the Disabled Persons Employment Promotion (Repeal and Related Matters) Bill. On Tuesday the first item of business will be the debate on the financial reviews of Crown entities public organisations and State enterprises which is a 3-hour debate. Thursday is Budget day.
Vote: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Vote: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:15187] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Amendments as amended agreed to.
Jones Dail: Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Jones Dail: Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11247] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 This is straightforward legislation and I note that when the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee considered it its members noted that they had no matters to bring to the attention of the House. I really had not intended to speak on this bill especially on the title because it is so clear-cut. Nonetheless we seem to be having speeches from every party in the Chamber and it seems to me that that is a clear example of having too many members of Parliament in the Chamber. It is a clear example of the fact that the membership of this House needs to reduced to 99. That would reduce some of the time-wasting that takes place so often on the title. The reduction to 99 members is part of New Zealand First policy. I do not intend to take any more time because as I have said we support the bill and nothing further needs to be added to my speech.
Brownlee Gerry: Speaker’s Rulings — Questions for Oral Answer—Ministers' Replies 
Brownlee Gerry: Speaker’s Rulings — Questions for Oral Answer—Ministers' Replies 
[Volume:620;Page:15445] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think Mr Hide raised some very very good points that should be considered. Perhaps one of the difficulties the House has at the moment is that in your efforts to try to be fair to all parties it now appears that parties have a fairly strict limit on the number of supplementary questions that can be asked. Opposition members expect that for every question they ask they will be able to ask two supplementary questions and one supplementary question for each other question of the day and they can choose when to use that limited number. This provides an opportunity for a Minister to engage in the frustrating exercise of giving parts of an answer bits of an answer or perhaps even red herrings as an answer to burn up some of those supplementary questions and ultimately avoid some of the scrutiny. Frustration levels rise when members know that they are not getting the information that they themselves are quite often aware of and they simply want the Minister to state that fact publicly. They are finding that the number of their supplementary questions is beginning to run out and therefore they are resorting to appealing to the Speaker to protect their interests. 
 It might be worth considering when a Minister appears to be obfuscating the questions that are being put to him or her that the number of supplementary questions may continue for some time until answers are forthcoming or a statement is made such as: “According to this part of my Act that I administer I can’t answer you” or: “In my judgment in the public interest it’s best I don’t answer you.” 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will hear the Hon Richard Prebble as an experienced member.
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
[Volume:622;Page:17686] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I make a similar request to the House—that the words “New Zealand National” and the number “2” be removed from that motion. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that. Is there any objection? There is not.
Vote: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
Vote: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12398] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 80 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 39 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13. 
Motion as amended agreed to.
Benson-Pope David: Taxation (Disaster Relief) Bill — Procedure First Reading Second Reading Third Reading 
Benson-Pope David: Taxation (Disaster Relief) Bill — Procedure First Reading Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:11685] 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Minister of Fisheries) on behalf of the Minister of Revenue 
: 
 I move  
That the Taxation (Disaster Relief) Bill be now read a third time. 
Bill read a third time.
Jones Dail: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Jones Dail: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21566] 
DAIL JONES (Junior Whip—NZ First) 
: 
 New Zealand First has the utmost faith in your decisions on these matters Mr Chairman and would not want to question them at all. But I presume there is a practice that where there is a spokesperson he or she is entitled to get a second call. I think it was part of the Standing Orders some time ago that spokespersons were supposed to get a second call if possible. I am sure that Mr Rod Donald is the spokesperson for the Green Party on this issue but I do not think Mr Connell is the spokesperson for National on it. In any event I am sure you are working out the proper apportionments and New Zealand First has every faith in your decision to give the call to Mr McNair.
Chadwick Steve: Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
Chadwick Steve: Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16590] 
STEVE CHADWICK (Labour—Rotorua) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.