edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Horomia Parekura: Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill — In Committee 
Horomia Parekura: Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:662;Page:10491] 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Labour—Ikaroa-Rawhiti) 
: 
 I will stand quickly to commend the Minister and all the support for this great bill the Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill. I especially commend Labour members including former member Michael Cullen. I make a special mention of the Maori Affairs Committee and our colleague on that committee Nanaia Mahuta. I thank Hone Harawira for his kind words and everybody else. This is a great bill. Kia ora tatou. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson to the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 119 in his name to clause 34P be agreed to: 
to omit from subclause (14) “management”.  
Amendment to the amendment agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments as amended set out on Supplementary Order Paper 119 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson be agreed to. 
Amendments as amended agreed to.
Roy Heather: Motions — New Zealand Defence Force—Deaths of Air Force Personnel in Anzac Day Helicopter Crash 
Roy Heather: Motions — New Zealand Defence Force—Deaths of Air Force Personnel in Anzac Day Helicopter Crash 
[Volume:662;Page:10445] 
Hon HEATHER ROY (Deputy Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of the ACT Party to mark the passing of three Royal New Zealand Air Force personnel: Flight Lieutenant Muddy Madsen pilot; Flying Officer Dan Gregory co-pilot; and Corporal Ben Carson helicopter crewman who were tragically killed on Anzac Day. It shall always be that we remember they died on this our special day of remembrance and commemoration. It is fitting that we remember them. These men volunteered to serve their country and its air force. On that fateful morning they would have risen from their beds early and proceeded to their duty stations. They carried out their orders just as the thousands who have served this country before them have done. Their thoughts would have been on doing the best job they could in remembrance of their forebears. 
On Thursday we will farewell these men in the presence of their families and whanau both personal and air force. Representatives of the wider defence community will be present along with those who represent this nation. That is also fitting. It will be a sad day and it will also be a day of remembrance where we will learn more of their lives and of them as individuals and as a team members of a squadron. We will learn how they have lived their lives and fulfilled their dreams. We will hear of their love of flying and of the strength they derived from their comradeship in service both within the Royal New Zealand Air Force and the New Zealand Defence Force. We will hear of their commitment as servicemen and we will be reminded that they have all served this country on operational deployments. It is fitting that we remember. 
These men will be sorely missed by their friends and colleagues at Ohakea and more widely in the Royal New Zealand Air Force. Our thoughts are with their families and their loved ones at this time of loss. We also think of their colleague Sergeant Stevin Creeggan who survived this devastating crash. He was part of the team part of the squadron. He is facing his own long journey on the road to recovery. Our best wishes are with him and our thoughts are with his family whom I met yesterday. They too are greatly affected by this tragedy. 
Our thoughts are also with the family the friends and the Defence Force colleagues of Private Te Tahuna Tahapeehi who was tragically killed yesterday at Linton army base. 
We join with the other parties in this House in extending our sympathies and our condolences to the families and friends of these four fine talented young men. They will be sorely missed.
Turei Metiria: Motions — New Zealand Defence Force—Deaths of Air Force Personnel in Anzac Day Helicopter Crash 
Turei Metiria: Motions — New Zealand Defence Force—Deaths of Air Force Personnel in Anzac Day Helicopter Crash 
[Volume:662;Page:10444] 
METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 The Green Party also wishes to join the leaders in this House in extending our aroha our sympathy to the friends whanau and colleagues of the three aircrew who were killed on Anzac Day. We also extend our deepest sadness on the tragic death of the young man Private Te Tahuna Tahapeehi who was killed in an accident outside Linton. I know that the Linton army camp community too is very tight-knit and this will be a tragic loss for them. 
All these young men—Flight Lieutenant Hayden Madsen Flying Officer Daniel Gregory Corporal Benjamin Carson and Private Te Tahuna Tahapeehi—served their country because they believed in and loved our country and wanted to serve its people. All I understand had seen active service in East Timor—a time of pride for our country that we assisted there in a peacekeeping way. All of these young men were willing to put their lives at risk for us all because they believed in our country. They were loved and respected and they will be very sorely missed by their friends and whanau. But their friends whanau and colleagues can be very proud of what they achieved in just a few short years. We wish all of their whanau the very best. 
We also wish Sergeant Stevin Creeggan a very speedy recovery. Of course this time will be very bitter-sweet for him and for his whanau as well. 
It is always tragic to lose young men such as these and it is particularly poignant that we lost three of them on Anzac Day. But the truth is that to lose young men of such potential and of such strength and value on any day and at any time is a tragic loss. Kia ora.
Goff Phil: Motions — New Zealand Defence Force—Deaths of Air Force Personnel in Anzac Day Helicopter Crash 
Goff Phil: Motions — New Zealand Defence Force—Deaths of Air Force Personnel in Anzac Day Helicopter Crash 
[Volume:662;Page:10444] 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 I join with the Prime Minister today on this very sad occasion in expressing on behalf of the New Zealand Labour Party our sadness at the tragic loss of life of the three Royal New Zealand Air Force personnel from No. 3 Squadron who were killed in the Iroquois crash on Anzac Day. I also record our sorrow at the death yesterday of a young soldier from the neighbouring Linton army base who was killed in a motorbike accident. To the family and friends of Flight Lieutenant Muddy Madsen Flying Officer Dan Gregory Corporal Ben Carson and Private Te Tahuna Tahapeehi we offer our sincere condolences and we share in the grief that they will feel at this time. 
All were young men with so much ahead of them in life: the prospects of raising a family and of developing promising careers in the New Zealand Defence Force. All four young men had served their country in overseas deployments in East Timor and in the case of Dan Gregory in Afghanistan also. We have as I know from having been a Minister of Defence a comparatively small Defence Force that is very close-knit. It is like a family. In Ohakea and at Linton and in our military bases across New Zealand and around the world our Defence Force personnel are suffering a sense of shock and loss at the deaths of these men. 
Loss of life in any accident is tragic but the fact that three men lost their lives before dawn on Anzac Day as they flew from Ohakea to Wellington for a flyover of the Dawn Parade makes the loss particularly tragic. For those of us who learnt early in the day of that accident the playing of the last post on Anzac morning was particularly poignant. 
I also express our best wishes for recovery to Sergeant Stevin Creeggan whose survival in that crash was a miracle. 
On this occasion I also note that daily our Defence Force personnel in the course of their duties often put their well-being at risk. We have an obligation to minimise that risk and I acknowledge and pay tribute to the Royal New Zealand Air Force for the quality of its training and the quality of its aircraft maintenance. We have had the Iroquois for 44 years and this is only the second occasion on which there has been a crash that has resulted in loss of life. 
Once again to the families of those who have lost their sons we express our sorrow and our condolences in the House today.
Vote: Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Third Reading 
Vote: Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10579] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 118 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 1 (Boscawen); Maori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 4 
ACT New Zealand 4 (Douglas Garrett Hide Roy H). 
Bill read a first time.
Vote: Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Third Reading 
Vote: Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10599] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 118 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 1 (Boscawen); Maori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 4 
ACT New Zealand 4 (Douglas Garrett Hide Roy H). 
Bill read a third time.
Turia Tariana: Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Third Reading 
Turia Tariana: Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10599] 
Hon TARIANA TURIA (Associate Minister of Health) 
: 
 I move  
That the Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill be now read a third time 
.
Parata Hekia: Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Third Reading 
Parata Hekia: Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10599] 
HEKIA PARATA 
:—Quinn Davis Bridges—to my tuakana Parekura Horomia and to all of them e waha nei i tenei kaupapa tena koutou tena koutou katoa [ 
who are responsible for this policy greetings to you all 
]. 
I pay tribute to the National-led Government which has had the confidence the strength and the courage to support this issue alongside the Maori Party. I pay tribute to us and to this Parliament. To the members of this House who have shared their views tonight and who will give their vote to this bill I say that I thank them all very much. We can look forward to a stronger and healthier future for all New Zealanders. I proudly commend this bill to the House. Tena tatou katoa.
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
[Volume:662;Page:10559] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That extraordinary urgency be accorded the introduction and passing of the Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill 
. The bill’s title is somewhat self-explanatory. This move has been taken in the interests of public health and the speeches that I am sure will come from members across the House will indicate the feeling that this move should help to stem the large numbers of people who are taking up smoking and to encourage many of those who smoke to stop; in saying that I know that I am straying into the debate. Procedurally it is desirable that this bill is passed as quickly as possible in order that it can be given assent and that new tax provisions can be applied. 
Motion agreed to.
Brownlee Gerry: Sittings of the House 
Brownlee Gerry: Sittings of the House 
[Volume:662;Page:10559] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the dinner break today notwithstanding the provisions under the extraordinary urgency arrangements to be from 6 p.m. until 7.30 p.m. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is none.
Brownlee Gerry: Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — Procedure 
Brownlee Gerry: Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:662;Page:10559] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill after its second reading to be set down for third reading forthwith without debate. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is none.
Wong Pansy: General Debate 
Wong Pansy: General Debate 
[Volume:662;Page:10548] 
Hon PANSY WONG (Minister for Ethnic Affairs) 
: 
 No wonder Labour needs to re-brand itself! We have heard reports on Labour’s very expensive taxpayer-funded “Axe the Tax” bus tour. The  
Nelson Mail  
said: “Labour’s ‘Axe the Tax’ roadshow drew just a handful of supporters—mainly union representatives and party stalwarts”. The  
Taranaki Daily News  
reported: “Phil Goff was out and about in Taranaki yesterday—but the crowds weren’t.” No wonder Labour needs to use taxpayers’ money to re-brand itself! But it will all be a waste of money because everybody still remembers Labour’s brand: tax-and-spend envy politics. 
Let us look at some of that record. In 2000 Labour took office and immediately increased the top personal tax rate to 39c—an “envy tax” rate. 
Dr Cam Calder 
: How much? 
Hon PANSY WONG 
: It was 39c. For the next 5 years while New Zealand was enjoying one of the best growth periods because of the world economic situation Labour refused to cut tax despite the massive surplus. In 2005 Labour announced a “chewing gum tax cut” only to reverse it in 2006. Finally when it was staring at defeat in the general election it grudgingly brought out a tax cut. 
But Phil Goff back to form immediately announced that he will set up a top tax threshold to punish rich people. He will impose the highest income tax rate on people who earn over $70000 a year. I thought that I had better find out who these rich people earning $70000 a year and who drew the ire of Labour are. Apparently they are 11 percent of our hard-working workforce. Let us look at those people. Those 200000 workers include 8000 teachers 1700 machine and stationary plant operators 1200 forestry and garden workers and—guess what—4000 labourers. Is that not incredible? Labour is not backing labourers. It is a waste of taxpayers’ money for Labour to try to re-brand the so-called Labour Party. Its members should just own up and be proud of their high-tax envy-politics party. 
It is such a privilege and a delight to be the Minister for Ethnic Affairs because on the other hand our ethnic communities are hard-working aspirational people. Every day I meet members of those communities they walk up to me and tell me that the Prime Minister the Hon John Key and my Government are doing a very good job backing them wanting tax cuts as a reward for hard work. Ethnic New Zealanders are aspirational. They want to do better. They want to create wealth. They want to create jobs to contribute to this country of paradise. For a very long time ethnic businesses have concentrated their business dealings largely within their own communities. Now my good Office of Ethnic Affairs is championing the cause by providing a platform for our ethnic businesses to utilise their international relationships and their business skills to benefit New Zealand. The Office of Ethnic Affairs has hosted the ASEAN Business Forum.
Gilmore Aaron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Gilmore Aaron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:662;Page:10529] 
2. 
AARON GILMORE (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What role can the State sector play in lifting economic growth? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 State services represent about 25 percent of the New Zealand economy so the sector has a significant influence over our economic performance. The Government is focused on increasing State sector productivity because it is beneficial to the wider economy and because it means that we can deliver more and better public services and provide better value for taxpayers. It is both desirable and necessary as the Government prepares Budget 2010 under difficult fiscal conditions due to the ongoing effects of the global recession and Labour’s reckless spending. 
Aaron Gilmore 
: What steps has the Government taken to ensure that State services remuneration practices reflect the goal of increased productivity? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The Government’s expectations require State sector pay and conditions to be fiscally sustainable within existing baselines to demonstrate value for money and to drive productivity improvements. This follows several years of State sector pay rises that outstripped those in the private sector without a matching increase in productivity. For instance the most recent labour cost index for the December quarter of 2009 showed that wages increased by 0.3 percent in that quarter. Against that backdrop it is not reasonable for some State sector groups to attempt to claim pay rises of up to 4 percent per year when most taxpayers would be getting either no pay rises or much lower pay rises than that. 
Aaron Gilmore 
: What reports has the Minister seen on State sector pay? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I have seen reports that by and large pay negotiations within the State sector have been reasonable constructive and forward-looking. However some groups received pay rises of 4 percent or more last year at the height of the global economic crisis. For example teachers have had a 4 percent pay rise in each of the last 3 years including last year. Teachers’ overall pay has increased by 50 percent since March 2000. Groups that have experienced increases way beyond those of ordinary New Zealanders in recent years should not expect for instance to have a ready reception from the public to another claim for a 4 percent pay rise.
Twyford Phil: Points of Order — Nuclear Disarmament—Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Review Conference 
Twyford Phil: Points of Order — Nuclear Disarmament—Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Review Conference 
[Volume:662;Page:10546] 
PHIL TWYFORD (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move members’ motion No. 16 in my name relating to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Young Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Young Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:662;Page:10546] 
12. 
JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) 
 to the  
Minister for Economic Development 
: What initiatives has the Government undertaken to ensure that New Zealand businesses can create economic benefits from the 2011 Rugby World Cup? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Economic Development) 
: 
 Last night I launched the New Zealand 2011 Business Club an online platform to connect overseas business people who are interested in attending the Rugby World Cup with their Kiwi counterparts. The club will enable regions— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: What an insult to Colin Meads. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The club will enable regions and businesses throughout the country to get information on the visitors coming to their area including their businesses and social interests so they can offer to host them at events and as a result learn more about how they operate in their own markets. The club will create a lasting legacy and strong international connections. It is free to join and it can be found at www.nz2011.govt.nz. Might I say that it took a National Government to put the title “Sir” on Sir Colin Meads. 
Jonathan Young 
: How is the Government promoting the business opportunities from the Rugby World Cup? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The Government has an office called New Zealand 2011 and it has been working closely with Business New Zealand regional economic development agencies and chambers of commerce to develop its business engagement programme. In addition New Zealand Trade and Enterprise has developed a guide to opportunities in 2011 as well as a website to make procurement opportunities easy and accessible for local businesses. Our 2011 ambassadors have been successful in promoting New Zealand in overseas markets through the vehicle of the Rugby World Cup. Regions are putting events into the Festival 2011 which will help showcase the capacity of New Zealand business. We will soon be undertaking a regional roadshow to promote the business club and encourage New Zealand businesses to get involved. The tickets are on sale the stadiums are going up and there are only 499 days to go.
Lee Melissa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Lee Melissa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:662;Page:10532] 
6. 
MELISSA LEE (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Economic Development 
: What support is the Government giving to attracting major events to New Zealand? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Economic Development) 
: 
 The Major Events Development Fund provides Government funding to add value to major events taking place in New Zealand. A great example of what the fund can achieve is seen in the announcement that New Zealand will host a stop-over in the 2011-12 Volvo Ocean Race. The Government is working in partnership with the Auckland City Council to enable this to happen. The Volvo Ocean Race is a high-profile round-the-world yacht race held ever 3 years and spans a 9-month period and that includes a number of stop-overs. These stop-overs provide significant economic benefits for host cities generating millions of dollars of economic activity and also increasing the global exposure of those countries’ ports and country. It will be a good event for New Zealand. 
Melissa Lee 
: What economic benefits will the Volvo Ocean Race stop-over provide to New Zealand? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I am glad the member asked me that question; it demonstrates that members on this side of the House are keen to know the economic benefits for the nation when members on the other side clearly are not. The feasibility study prepared by Covec and jointly funded by the Government and the Auckland City Council estimated the direct expenditure benefits of hosting a stop-over at $15.3 million for Auckland and a further $12 million to $13 million in additional GDP nationally. It further estimated that $4 million to $8 million will be spent in the media sector. The benefits are likely to be significantly higher now because Emirates Team New Zealand has confirmed that it will enter a boat in the campaign. It is sponsored by Camper the Spanish-based international footwear manufacturer. The stop-over is likely to provide some long-term benefits. It will allow New Zealand to continue showcasing our world-class marine and shipbuilding industry.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
[Volume:662;Page:10527] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: We are not going to spend any more time on this. I suggest that members look at the Speakers’ rulings on page 132. That will give members guidance on how this matter is handled in this House. If a member has been misquoted the member by way of a personal explanation can correct that and the House must accept that correction. I suggest that members look at the Speakers’ rulings on the matter. They are well-established. We do not need to take further time on the matter today.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
[Volume:662;Page:10527] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 If a member makes a statement outside the House about a particular issue and then someone comes into the House and uses that quote in debate it becomes part of the debate and the interpretation of what was meant is a debatable matter. The fact that a member has taken a position cannot be withdrawn by way of a personal statement. If however a member alleges that someone did something as was the case recently where the Green Party made allegations against a member that member has every right to put right or to correct the interpretation being put on the matter because the material facts will not support it. But where a member makes a statement outside the House for the member to use the personal explanation process to effectively withdraw that statement from debate is quite wrong.
Turei Metiria: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
Turei Metiria: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
[Volume:662;Page:10526] 
METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is difficult now to know how to proceed. I am not clear about the position now on whether my use of a personal explanation to dispute an allegation—which is what it was—is now considered to be a protected statement if you like in some form by you Mr Speaker. The allegation can no longer be used in this House—is that currently the state of your ruling?
Vote: Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Third Reading 
Vote: Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10599] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 118 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 1 (Boscawen); Maori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 4 
ACT New Zealand 4 (Douglas Garrett Hide Roy H). 
Bill read a second time.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
[Volume:662;Page:10526] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not want to take more time of the House on this right now because members are talking about something and I do not even know what the personal explanation is. We do not want to take the time of the House on that today. I draw members’ attention to Speakers’ rulings. There have been numerous Speakers’ rulings about this issue; it is not a new issue. A particularly relevant ruling is Speaker’s ruling 132/2: “A member’s denial of the accuracy of a statement attributed to the member by a newspaper must be accepted without question … but the House is not precluded from discussing in a later debate what the member actually said.” The member’s denial that he or she has been quoted correctly must be accepted but that does not mean to say that the issue is no longer able to be talked about in the House at all. I think that that is where we need to leave the matter for today because we have no further concrete information for me on which to base any ruling.
Sittings of the House 
Sittings of the House 
[Volume:662;Page:10599] 
Sittings of the House 
CHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 The House has made good progress on the legislation under this extraordinary urgency motion tonight. I seek leave for the House to rise early and to return for a normal day’s business tomorrow. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
[Volume:662;Page:10526] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think it is pretty important that we get this right. I state now that I know which quote the member is concerned about and I give an undertaking that it will not be used in the House today. We have plenty of other stuff to discuss as it happens. But we have to be careful about this matter because a personal explanation should not be used effectively to withdraw something that has been said. That is not how it works. 
Previous Speakers have dealt with this matter. Interestingly we saw an ongoing battle a few years back between the Rt Hon Winston Peters and Keith Locke MP over a disputed interpretation of something that one of those two gentlemen had said. I think Mr Speaker that if we undo it to the point where giving a personal explanation can effectively mean that something that someone has said or a position that he or she took is withdrawn from parliamentary debate then that is quite a constraint upon the House. Where an allegation comes out of an interpretation of what someone has said and a misrepresentation of a motive it is fine for the House to deal with that by way of a personal statement. But it is not fine to have outright the statement withdrawn from debate. 
We do not need to take much more time on the issue now—I have given an undertaking that that particular comment will not be part of today’s transcript—but I think it would be worth looking back at the previous case that I have cited. It is a pretty important sort of position for the House to continue to uphold—that a personal explanation is about an activity or a circumstance and does not necessarily provide an opportunity for a member to withdraw a statement that has been made. 
Metiria Turei 
: Speaking to the point of order—
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
[Volume:662;Page:10525] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not think that we should take more time on this matter right now. The dilemma we have with regard to quotations of course is that sometimes they can be wrong because they are reported quotations—that is unless they are in  
Hansard 
 of course. If a member is quoting  
Hansard 
 then that cannot be disputed. But if the quotation is from a media outlet members often say they have been misquoted. But once a member has given his or her word that word cannot be contested further; it has to be accepted by the House. That does not mean of course that the subject matter cannot be talked about. But where the member has made a personal explanation we have to accept what the member has said even if there is an apparent quotation that appears on the face of it to be contrary to that. Presumably the member in the personal explanation has told this House that the quotation is incorrect and that is what we have to accept. If the member has not said that in the personal explanation then that is another matter again. I do not know the particular personal explanation that was put to the House so without checking back on the record I cannot really assist the member further. But we do have to accept the word of members where they make a personal explanation to the House. If they are proved to have misled the House that is a very serious matter.
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
Smith Lockwood: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
[Volume:662;Page:10525] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the member. I understand what the member is saying. Indeed where a member has made a personal explanation on a matter that is the end of the matter and the House must respect that. So if a situation occurs where that is not happening the member is welcome to draw that to my attention.
Turei Metiria: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
Turei Metiria: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
[Volume:662;Page:10525] 
METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek your advice in anticipation of some answers to questions that I may raise later today. It concerns the repetition of an allegation that has been refuted or clarified by a personal statement. On 20 April Mr Speaker in relation to questions concerning a conflict of interest you ruled that as the Minister in question had made a personal statement clarifying the issue that clarification could not be further disputed. You reiterated that point saying that as the Minister had made a personal explanation in the House that matter could no longer be disputed in the House. I am in a similar position to that so I seek your advice on this matter Mr Speaker. In response to questions on mining Minister Brownlee the Prime Minister and others have alleged that I have supported mining operations deliberately misquoting a press release of mine. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Let me just check this with the member. It sounds as though the member is seeking to make a personal explanation and she needs the leave of the House to do that. I am not clear on the issue of order. Could she quickly establish it because if she wishes to make an explanation about anything to do with her own statements she needs the leave of the House in order to do that. 
METIRIA TUREI 
: I understand that Mr Speaker; I have made a personal explanation. I am describing the situation to you so that you can compare it with your previous ruling to see whether that ruling now applies to my situation. Unless I explain it you will not be able to compare the two sets of circumstances. It will take only a minute. It is not a personal explanation. I have made a personal explanation to clarify the deliberate misquoting of me by Ministers in the House. According to your ruling of last week Mr Speaker it appears to me that Ministers and members in this House may no longer make that allegation against me because of that personal explanation. I just seek your advice on that. If that is the case I seek your protection in the House Mr Speaker.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Personal Explanations—Repetition of Allegations 
[Volume:662;Page:10525] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Certainly matters of personal explanation are dealt with with respect by the House and are considered in that way. If there is a quote of something that someone has said does the giving of a personal explanation mean that that quote can never be used in the House again? Surely the member is concerned about the issue of interpretation. The words in the quote had some meaning at some point.
Sittings of the House 
Sittings of the House 
[Volume:662;Page:10559] 
Sittings of the House 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the dinner break today notwithstanding the provisions under the extraordinary urgency arrangements to be from 6 p.m. until 7.30 p.m. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is none.
Peachey Allan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peachey Allan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:662;Page:10531] 
4. 
ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tamaki) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What improvements will be made to the National Certificate of Educational Achievement from next year? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 From next year course endorsements will be available for all National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) levels. Course endorsements will mean that students can aim for Excellence or Merit endorsements in individual courses if they obtain at least 14 credits at these levels. When we signalled the introduction of course endorsements last year we said that there would be a staggered roll-out with the endorsements being available for NCEA level 1 next year and for higher levels in subsequent years. I am very pleased to say that officials have progressed the work quickly and that all students at all NCEA levels will be able to obtain course endorsements from next year. 
Allan Peachey 
: Why did the Government provide funding to make these improvements? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: We know from principals and teachers that overall certificate endorsement has motivated students to have their certificates endorsed with Merit or Excellence. This Government also wants to motivate students to obtain Merit or Excellence results in individual courses. We want to give students recognition for great results. That is why we put $2.4 million towards developing this measure in Budget 2009. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Why did she set NCEA level 2 as the benchmark against which her national standards are calibrated? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: That is the minimum qualification that students need to gain Modern Apprenticeships. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: When the New Zealand Qualifications Authority this month proposed new literacy and numeracy standards which NCEA level did it identify as being required for someone to fully participate in work? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: I do not have those details in front of me. I am happy to provide them to the member. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Given that the New Zealand Qualifications Authority has said that the literacy and numeracy standards needed for someone to fully participate in work are level 1 standards why has she said national standards based on NCEA level 2 on the grounds that research showed that NCEA level 2 was what—she said—was required to succeed in work? She said she was backed by research; what is that research? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: The evidence is very clear that students leaving school to enter the modern world today need level 2 NCEA as a minimum qualification. That is the entry level required for Modern Apprenticeships. There is much evidence and I am happy to make it available to the member.
Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — Procedure 
Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:662;Page:10559] 
Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill 
Procedure 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill after its second reading to be set down for third reading forthwith without debate. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is none.
Points of Order — Nuclear Disarmament—Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Review Conference 
Points of Order — Nuclear Disarmament—Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Review Conference 
[Volume:662;Page:10546] 
Points of Order 
Nuclear Disarmament—Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Review Conference 
PHIL TWYFORD (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move members’ motion No. 16 in my name relating to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Urgency 
Urgency 
[Volume:662;Page:10559] 
Urgency 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That extraordinary urgency be accorded the introduction and passing of the Excise and Excise-equivalent Duties Table (Tobacco Products) Amendment Bill 
. The bill’s title is somewhat self-explanatory. This move has been taken in the interests of public health and the speeches that I am sure will come from members across the House will indicate the feeling that this move should help to stem the large numbers of people who are taking up smoking and to encourage many of those who smoke to stop; in saying that I know that I am straying into the debate. Procedurally it is desirable that this bill is passed as quickly as possible in order that it can be given assent and that new tax provisions can be applied. 
Motion agreed to.
Tremain Chris: Sittings of the House 
Tremain Chris: Sittings of the House 
[Volume:662;Page:10599] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 The House has made good progress on the legislation under this extraordinary urgency motion tonight. I seek leave for the House to rise early and to return for a normal day’s business tomorrow. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Mallard Trevor: Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill — Third Reading 
Mallard Trevor: Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10856] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I was listening carefully and expected a call for a party vote. I am not surprised that you did not hear it Mr Deputy Speaker because I did not either. I thought the member was being polite and voting on the voices as he has a right to do and deciding not to divide the House. That has been the procedure of politeness in this House for many years and I thought the ACT Party might have been following that tradition by voting No on the voices but not calling for a division. We did not hear a division called for. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I thank the member. I certainly did not hear the member call for a party vote. I also listened very carefully knowing that the ACT Party had voted against the bill but I did not hear a call for a party vote. I made the decision that we proceed and that was at my discretion. The vote stands as recorded.
Garrett David: Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill — Third Reading 
Garrett David: Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10855] 
DAVID GARRETT (ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Of course it is a foregone conclusion but I believed you would have heard my clear call for a party vote. I did not want to be rude and interrupt the waiata but ACT wishes to have its vote recorded.
Street Maryan: Education Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Street Maryan: Education Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10867] 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to speak to the third reading of the Education Amendment Bill. I note three points of which two are in the bill and one is missing. The two items in the bill that I wish to draw attention to which Labour supports completely relate to the provisions on police vetting and the provision relating to information matching between the New Zealand Teachers Council and the Ministry of Education to identify individuals teaching in schools without registration. Both items go to the heart of the quality of teaching in schools and the safety of the students who receive that teaching. So both items are critical. 
The third item however is absent from the bill. I am sorry for that. The Labour Government had proposed an Education Amendment Bill (No 3). 
Debate interrupted.
Garrett David: Voting — Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill—ACT Party Votes 
Garrett David: Voting — Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill—ACT Party Votes 
[Volume:662;Page:10865] 
DAVID GARRETT (Whip—ACT) 
: 
 I seek the leave of the House for the ACT Party’s votes on the third reading of the Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill to be cast as Noes and for the vote to be recorded in the  
Journals of the House of Representatives 
. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: The provision is set out in  
Parliamentary Practice in New Zealand 
 by McGee at page 204. Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? It appears not; the  
Journals 
 will therefore record that.
Douglas Roger: Education Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Douglas Roger: Education Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10865] 
Hon Sir ROGER DOUGLAS (ACT) 
: 
 I want to make just one or two points on the Education Amendment Bill and I will certainly not speak for more than 2 or 3 minutes. 
I want to make it clear that the ACT Party will be voting for this bill at its third reading. But I want to make it clear as a member of the Education and Science Committee where I stand on the issue that Trevor Mallard raised in reference to the validation of some expenditure that King’s High School in Dunedin had incurred and its desire to pay that debt off out of its future capital grants. I believe irrespective of what the situation is or what the rules are that the school should be allowed to do this. I think that for three basic reasons: firstly it will not cost the Government one extra dollar in terms of expenditure; secondly the Government does not need to spend one dollar earlier than it would otherwise spend it; thirdly I believe that the board of governors is better equipped because it is closer to the action to determine how that money should be spent than some bureaucrat in Wellington. I for one simply cannot understand the attitude that the Ministry of Education takes and why the Minister does not simply tell the ministry to pull its head in. 
Debate interrupted.
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Maori King—Te Arikinui Ta Kingi Tuheitia 
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — Maori King—Te Arikinui Ta Kingi Tuheitia 
[Volume:662;Page:10830] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that Te Arikinui Ta Kingi Tuheitia 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. 
Te Arikinui Ta Kingi Tuheitia accompanied by the Minister of Maori Affairs entered the Chamber and took a seat on the left of the Chair.
Hughes Darren: Tabling of Documents — Proposed New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2008—Board of Inquiry Report 
Hughes Darren: Tabling of Documents — Proposed New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2008—Board of Inquiry Report 
[Volume:662;Page:10815] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Labour) 
: 
 On to more serious and statesmanlike matters I seek leave of the House to table the report of the board of inquiry into the Proposed New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2008. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:662;Page:10830] 
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a survey from the Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners which shows that it is currently consulting about concerns about the Accident Compensation Corporation’s guidelines. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Henare Tau: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Henare Tau: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:662;Page:10828] 
11. 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Transport 
: What recent measures has the Government taken to improve the safety and monitoring of commercial pilots? 
Hon NATHAN GUY (Associate Minister of Transport) 
: 
 I have recently announced two new initiatives by the Civil Aviation Authority. It will work with the Ministry of Justice to introduce random checks on commercial pilots for any criminal convictions that have not been declared. This will be in addition to the existing check required when a pilot first enters the system. Also the Civil Aviation Authority is proposing to introduce an electronic database which will enable it to more effectively gather information and monitor medical issues affecting pilots. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: What recent measures has the Government taken to improve the safety and the monitoring of commercial pilots? 
Hon NATHAN GUY 
: I wanted to reassure the travelling public of New Zealand that these new measures are in addition to the current legislative requirements and will be cost-effective. I am very confident that airlines take the issue of drug and alcohol abuse seriously and that the vast majority of pilots do an outstanding job.
Kaye Nikki: Education Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Kaye Nikki: Education Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10867] 
NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) 
: 
 I rise to speak on the Education Amendment Bill. I acknowledge the Minister of Education for bringing this bill to the House. I will briefly mention that I support this bill because it ensures that the children of New Zealand are safer and it reduces compliance costs. I commend this bill to the House.