edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Cullen Michael: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — First Reading 
Cullen Michael: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:12743] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Deputy Prime Minister) 
: 
 I move  
That the Foreshore and Seabed Bill be referred to the Fisheries and Other Sea-related Legislation Committee for consideration and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting except during questions for oral answer during any evening in a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 191 and 194(1)(b) and (c).
Barker Rick: Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Barker Rick: Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:618;Page:14277] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice) 
: 
 There are two amendments that I would like to talk about but firstly I thank the Law and Order Committee for doing an excellent job. It worked very well and strengthened the bill. 
Mr Ryall’s amendment would add a new paragraph (c) to clause 54(2). I can sympathise with the intention of the amendment but I am inclined to be against it because it does not help the transparency of the process. It states that the pawnbroker may sell the goods in any other way that can be reasonably shown to achieve a realistic price for the goods. We believe that it is important that the process be transparent and that there is opportunity to test the market as to the real value of the goods. Clause 54(2) provides that the pawnbroker must at least put the goods to auction once. It is a public auction so there is an opportunity to test the market value of the goods. If Mr Ryall’samendment goes through then we will subvert the transparency of the process and there will not be the ability to test the market value of those goods. So I am disinclined to support that amendment. 
Supplementary Order Paper 236 in the name of Marc Alexander makes a number of amendments. I am not particularly inclined to support his amendments because they seem to shift the balance which I think is what the member intends to do. But the select committee has come back with recommendations about how much should be paid—how much should be lost between the pawnbroker and the person who seeks to pawn the goods. His amendments seek to shift the balance backwards in favour of the pawnbroker. I am very much inclined to stick with the select committee’s recommendation and as far as I am concerned the original percentage should stand. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 236 in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 44A be agreed to.
Vote: Forests Amendment Bill —  
Vote: Forests Amendment Bill —  
[Volume:617;Page:12955] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Forests Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 94 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 25; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 21 
New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Bill read a third time.
Perry Edwin: Gisborne District Council (Alfred Cox Park)  Validation Bill — First Reading 
Perry Edwin: Gisborne District Council (Alfred Cox Park)  Validation Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:627;Page:22070] 
EDWIN PERRY (NZ First) 
: 
 As my fellow MP Maurice Williamson said we do not want to waste too much time on this matter. But having listened to his rhetoric I think he said a lot more words than he should have and actually supported the bill. Also I take up a point that Maurice said— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member will use another member’s full name or his or her title. 
EDWIN PERRY 
: Sorry the Hon Maurice Williamson. His party gave him the job of conducting the debate on this bill. Jim Peters has bestowed that difficult task on me. 
I am quite happy to say that New Zealand First will be supporting the bill. It is a common-sense bill no different from the Montfort Trimble bill that was put through by my colleague Georgina Beyer for the Masterton District Council and that New Zealand First supported for the right reasons. This bill points in the same direction: the council needs a change in the law to make available the land for alternative uses. I ask Janet Mackey—that is if she is listening—whether the National Party holds a stall at the mini-market day. 
Janet Mackey 
: No members. 
EDWIN PERRY 
: That is OK. I just wanted to clarify that point because the Hon Maurice Williamson raised the point that these people should not be there. The world has changed. It is no different in Masterton. There are areas where land has been put aside for reserves but are now being used for different things. 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: Does that make it right? 
EDWIN PERRY 
: The Hon Maurice Williamson is calling out. He has agreed about this and National is supporting the bill so I really do not want to refer back to that point. Some members have some difficulty with it and that is no different from the Montfort Trimble bill. Some people opposed that bill but for their own reasons and not from the point of view of the community as a whole. 
This bill needs to be supported for the reasons I have already mentioned because a large number of people are using these reserve areas for different things. I know the information centre at Tourism Eastland. I know it very well from when it was first set up. It plays a vital role in the East Coast. The East Coast is the part of the country that sees the sun first. [ 
Interruption 
] There we go! National members are talking about themselves. There is an old saying around Anzac Day: “Lest we forget.” Those members have forgotten what they have done in the past. 
All I want to say is that New Zealand First will support this bill and we wish the council all the best in its endeavours to make sure the land is used for the community for the right reasons.
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
Vote: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:20991] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 57 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9; United Future 8. 
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 the amendment to insert new clause 15A set out on Supplementary Order Paper 374 in the name of the Hon Phil Goff be agreed to: 
to omit proposed new clause 15A.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:624;Page:19362] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I am concerned that you look at Speaker’s ruling 47/1 which you used in an attempt to demand that I apologise. That of course is a Speaker’s ruling from 1914 and members of this House will remember the Speaker’s ruling made by the previous Speaker when the Alliance was collapsing where he ruled that the party led by Laila Harré and the party led by Jim Anderton were two different things and one could not by way of aspersion be sheeted against the other. That was a very clear recent ruling the most recent one I know of and in my view it overrides this view that you have expressed on this Speaker’s ruling—and surely it was one that was drafted by the present Clerk if you want continuity and consistency of rulings. But to go back and look at that it is as clear as daylight that you cannot imply that someone outside this House is inside this House or someone inside this House is necessarily outside this House and thereby say there is a blanket insinuation. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The member is in fact relitigating the point of order. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: I know that and for good purpose. I do not want an answer today but I would like to know how your ruling today— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I will look at it for the member. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Thank you very much. I am just pointing to the authority in the precincts.
Power Simon: Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Power Simon: Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18605] 
SIMON POWER (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I thank you for your ruling on that. However I seek clarification. Under the heading “Minority views” there are paragraphs from National New Zealand First ACT Green Party and United Future. That would indicate to the Committee—and I appreciate that they are not bound—that the United Future and Green Party members of the select committee were in fact in the minority and opposed to the bill if they did indeed contribute a paragraph to the minority view part of the commentary. I know that does not bind them when voting now—you have made that ruling and I do not dispute that for one moment—but it puts us in an interesting position and I now look for clarification. Does it follow from your ruling that Gordon Copeland the member from United Future and the Green member Rod Donald were in the minority in opposing the bill at the select committee stage? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: No it is not a matter for the Committee of the whole House now. That was a matter for select committee members at the time. It is their report. 
Simon Power 
: Is my interpretation correct? I accept that it is not a matter for this Committee. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: It is not up to me to interpret that.
Pettis Jill: Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Bill — Third Reading 
Pettis Jill: Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9556] 
JILL PETTIS (Labour—Whanganui) 
: 
 Well good morning good morning good morning to listeners out there in radio land. I just want to tell them that the speaker who spoke immediately before the member who has just resumed his seat was “Paul from down south”. “Paul from down south” is actually Paul Hutchison who comes from somewhere around Waikato. He is so highly profiled in the National Party that his own leader at a recent function in Remuera could not remember his name and referred to him as “Paul from down south”. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: We do not do that in the House. We refer to members by their name in the House. 
JILL PETTIS 
: I asked Mr Hutchison by way of— 
Hon Member 
: Dr Hutchison. 
JILL PETTIS 
: —Dr Paul Hutchison. I asked him a question by way of an interjection—and I did not think I was asking anything untoward at all— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have ruled on that matter. The member will now come to the bill. 
JILL PETTIS 
: I do want to say that this a very good bill and for all the bleating whingeing and whining that has been coming from the Opposition side of the House about how long it has taken for this bill to be progressed through Parliament those members have done nothing but delay it. This is a good bill and the best thing that we can do is to get it passed. I recommend we do that as rapidly as possible.
Stewart Barbara: Social Workers Registration Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Stewart Barbara: Social Workers Registration Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4879] 
BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) 
: 
 New Zealand First supports this bill. It is very important legislation—well overdue as Taito Philip Field has said—that appropriately managed should have a very positive outcome for social workers. It is a step forward for this profession and it may assist with recruitment and retention of staff which is something we have a concern with. This increased professionalism will also have a positive effect on the confidence of the many New Zealanders who come into contact with the service and rely on social workers to help them. 
Social work as we all know has become increasingly complex and a greater accountability is required in that role. So the setting up of a registration board is a step forward but it should be representative of all sectors of social workers. The board will also ensure that there is a greater accountability for social workers which is essential when the decisions that are made impact on the lives of children and their families. New Zealand needs well-trained well-qualified people in that profession in order to deal with the many challenges required of them so sufficient resources and support to accompany the new registration system is an absolute necessity. The review element too is essential and 3 years is a timely period for review. New Zealand First looks forward to monitoring the outcomes of the bill and to having a professional team of social workers in New Zealand working with our children and families.
Mark Ron: Points of Order — Access to Chamber—Media Obstruction  
Mark Ron: Points of Order — Access to Chamber—Media Obstruction  
[Volume:616;Page:12432] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Noting the comments made by Mr Brownlee and noting that you will consider further I ask you to consider this also. In the incident Mr Prebble was describing not only was the Minister herself being prevented from making good way to the House but behind her were Mr Copeland Mr Donnelly Mr Jones and myself who were totally prevented from getting through. I ask you to consider when you give such approval that people pay attention to the fact that they are delaying other members of Parliament who have no part in that interview or in those processes but who do have a right to get to the House on time. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Thank you for that comment which I agree with completely.
Vote: Aquaculture Reform Bill — Second Reading Instructions to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Aquaculture Reform Bill — Second Reading Instructions to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17719] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 36 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 9. 
Noes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Phil Heatley to clause 21 be agreed to: 
to omit paragraph (c) of new section 165ZF(1).
Vote: Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6959] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith to clause 3 be agreed to: 
to insert after the words “international obligations” the words “ as specified in section 2(1) of the principal Act”.
Robertson H V Ross: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
Robertson H V Ross: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:613;Page:10007] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The vote was 61 to 56. That is quite clear and we have already had a number of votes like that this evening. I repeat that this is not a conscience issue; it is a party vote.
Vote: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21581] 
A party vote was called for on the question T 
hat the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 81 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 20; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 26 
New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; Green Party 8. 
Amendment agreed to.
Worth Richard: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
Worth Richard: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:613;Page:9987] 
RICHARD WORTH (National—Epsom) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I did not want to interrupt the previous speaker but we did not have an interpretation of what the Maori tag on the relevant packet means and it may well influence the way I vote in respect of any amendment that may be forthcoming. I ask that a translation be given in accordance with the Standing Orders. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member is free to give his own translation if he so wishes.
Brown Peter: Standing Orders 
Brown Peter: Standing Orders 
[Volume:627;Page:22359] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I listened intently to my colleague who has just resumed his seat because he usually gives us some substance in his speeches or outlines a reason why a bill or an amendment is required. But this time he did not do a thing. He just said he gave the credit to Rod Donald for the merits of this amendment to the Standing Orders. He did not outline what those merits are and we cannot find them. This is a nosy parker amendment to the Standing Orders. It will encourage nosy parkers and Rod Donald is the prima donna when it comes to nosy parkers. He knows everything about “nosy parker-ing”. He is the No. 1 nosy parker in this Parliament so he welcomes this sort of amendment to the Standing Orders. It will discourage able successful people from standing for Parliament. 
Clayton Cosgrove 
: No danger for New Zealand First. 
PETER BROWN 
: Oh the Labour members do not know what such people are. They do not have any so they do not have to worry about it. Nor do the Greens have any able successful people standing for them. But New Zealand First has and I have to say that from time to time one or two bob up in the National Party. So I wonder why it is supporting this sort of carry-on. 
This is a case of much ado about nothing. There is little corruption in politics in this country and the corruption that has occurred has been targeted found out and exposed. We do not have to have this sort of carry-on in order to declare a war on corruption. It has no relevance to that at all. As I said this is a nosy parker amendment to the Standing Orders. We would have preferred to see a bill. We would not have agreed with a bill—we would have opposed it—but we would have preferred to see a bill for one honest reason: a bill if and when it became an Act could have been amended to embrace civil servants. Civil servants have greater influence on the Government than Opposition MPs—far greater influence. There is a higher risk of civil servants having a conflict of interest that will affect Government legislation than there is when it comes to Opposition MPs. 
This measure is a sop to the Greens. I hope it is the only one because they will disappear at the end of this Parliament and we can forget all about them. This measure is unnecessary; it is a mistake. It will encourage nosy parkers and in the longer term it will discourage able people from putting their names forward to stand for Parliament. New Zealand First opposes this measure vehemently.
Gallagher Martin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Gallagher Martin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:617;Page:13066] 
12.  
MARTIN GALLAGHER (Labour—Hamilton West) 
 to the  
Minister for Courts 
: Is he satisfied that the “Confiscated Car Club” advertising and enforcement campaign has been effective in dealing with fines defaulters? 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister for Courts) 
: 
 Yes. Good progress was made. In the 4-week campaign 324 cars belonging to fines defaulters were either clamped or seized; 125 of those owners paid their fines in full. I am advised that as of 30 April a total of $10.18 million had been either paid in full or put under time-to-pay arrangements as a result of the campaign. During the campaign period more than 35500 calls were made to the special 0800 number. It is clear that people heard and understood the message that this Government considers unpaid fines simply unacceptable. 
Martin Gallagher 
: If the campaign has been so successful why is it not being continued indefinitely? 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: It is not feasible to run an intensive campaign throughout the year. Campaigns are better used as short sharp shocks. Campaigns like the “name and shame” campaign will be run again and fines defaulters have a clear message that they cannot sleep easy. The Collections Contact Centre has learnt a good deal from this last campaign and I expect that next time it is run we will do even better. 
Richard Worth 
: What has been the cost of the campaign given that the total of outstanding traffic fines is in the order of $170 million? 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: I have no particular cost breakdown of the campaign but I can say that it has been hugely successful in this way: in 1999 for example the amount collected by the Collections Contact Centre was about $112 million; this year we have already collected $159 million in fines and fines arrears and are on track to collect a record $190 million.
Hughes Darren: Voting — Correction 
Hughes Darren: Voting — Correction 
[Volume:618;Page:13989] 
DARREN HUGHES (Junior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 On the question before the House previously on the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill Mr Peck’s proxy vote was inadvertently omitted from being recorded with the Ayes. I would seek leave for Mr Peck’s vote to be recorded as being in favour of the first reading. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is not. It will be so. The new result is Ayes 77 Noes 42.
te Heuheu Georgina: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
te Heuheu Georgina: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20205] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 I am very pleased with that explanation made by the Minister. I think the further important point to be made and to become part of the record relates to the phrase: “in accordance with Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) tikanga (customary values and practices)”. The Minister is quite right. If Ngati Tuwharetoa according to their tikanga want to include Gerry Brownlee or a Chinese person kei te pai. I think that is what the Minister is saying. That is fine. 
Hon Mita Ririnui 
: That is their concern. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: The Minister is saying that that is not for us as parliamentarians to question. That is fine as well. 
But I flag a concern that some future Government would suggest that. Well if it is good enough for Ngati Tuwharetoa ki Kawerau to include Gerry Brownlee a Chinese person or any other person—we are not picking just on Chinese people and I hope any Chinese people who are listening understand that; it is just by way of an example—then it should be good enough for any other tribe settling subsequently. 
But that will not be the case because the settlement is limited by the words: “in accordance with Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) tikanga …”. The tikanga of Ngati Tuwharetoa Bay of Plenty is bound to be different from the tikanga of say Ngati Hine up north—it may be different. If it is different and if Ngati Hine or any other tribe that comes to settle decide that some person outside of the kin group or blood group is not to be a beneficiary then that is their right too. 
I think the importance of this discussion is the recognition that these settlements are distinctive and unique to the tribe that is settling. In this Committee tonight we are dealing with Ngati Tuwharetoa Bay of Plenty and no other tribe and what is their right to decide cannot or ought not to in the future be taken as something generic to be applied to all other tribes settling. As long as we all understand that and as long as it goes into the record then no harm is done. 
As I said I appreciated the explanation from the Minister and I appreciate the Chair giving me that extra time to put that into the record. It is very important. Other tribes of course are already starting to grapple with the issue. The Adoption Act makes adopted children beneficiaries whether or not one wants them to be and whether or not they are blood or kin. In respect of whangai without a legal adoption there is still room for the tikanga of a particular tribe to apply.
Bradford Sue: Social Workers Registration Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Bradford Sue: Social Workers Registration Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4880] 
SUE BRADFORD (Green) 
: 
 I am delighted that this bill is finally having its third reading tonight and that all organisations involved with employing and/or training social workers will now be able to begin working towards the new era with both hope and confidence. As I mentioned earlier today this bill has been a long time coming especially from the point of view of people in the profession as they have been working towards this moment for decades rather than months or years. I am sure that there will be some quiet celebrations tonight or tomorrow when people learn that the bill has finally been passed. 
Social workers operate at a number of the frontlines of society where the details of life are cruel complex and all too often tragic. Social work is a really hard job to do well and that is exacerbated by the fact that it is one of the professions most vulnerable to public criticism and comment. Working towards the registration of all social workers with a board ensuring high standards of fitness and competence is an overdue and acutely necessary step on the road to lifting the capacity of New Zealand social workers. I am the first to acknowledge that the new Act will not of itself heal all the wounds within the profession or eliminate all poor practice overnight. However I believe that what it will achieve will be a steady improvement in performance and accountability across all social work settings which will in the end benefit all of us in this country not just those directly affected.
Vote: Income Tax Bill — Third Reading 
Vote: Income Tax Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12538] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Income Tax Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 109 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 25; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 8 
ACT New Zealand 7; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Bill read a third time.
Appropriation (2003/04 Estimates) Bill — First Reading 
Appropriation (2003/04 Estimates) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5761] 
Thursday 15 May 2003 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Appropriation (2003/04 Estimates) Bill 
First Reading 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Appropriation (2003/04 Estimates) Bill be now read a first time. 
Bill read a first time.
Cullen Michael: Rodney District Council (PENLINK Toll Road) Empowering Bill — Procedure 
Cullen Michael: Rodney District Council (PENLINK Toll Road) Empowering Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:611;Page:8740] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the time by which the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee must finally report the Rodney District Council (PENLINK Toll Road) Empowering Bill to be extended to 13 October 2003. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none.
Mahuta Nanaia: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Mahuta Nanaia: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:17139] 
NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Tainui) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Simich Clem: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
Simich Clem: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:613;Page:9982] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Before I call the next member I point out that I did say that a fairly wide-ranging debate would be acceptable—wide-ranging in so far as members might seek to explain what they are discussing in terms of what is in Part 3. But let us not range too wide because we have covered most of those issues in the earlier parts.
Peters Winston: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Peters Winston: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:615;Page:11016] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
:  
I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You will be aware that we do not have the full complement of 13 speeches in respect of this matter and I therefore seek leave to amend the original motion in the following way. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to move an amendment. Is there any objection to that course being followed? There is not. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: I move  
That the amendment be amended by omitting all the words after “this House has no confidence in the Labour-led Government because” and the following words inserted: “that Government has no policies to raise New Zealand’s living standards back to the mid part of the OECD; it complacently accepts more than 300000 working-age adults being dependent on benefits and it continues down the dangerous road of promoting policies commenced by Labour and continued and promoted by National that treat New Zealanders differently on the basis of their race. 
” 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The question is that the amendment to the amendment be agreed to.
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:607;Page:5047] 
11.  
DAVID PARKER (NZ Labour—Otago) 
 to the  
Minister for Land Information 
: What action is the Government taking to ensure that the Alexandra Holiday Park will continue to be a camping ground? 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Energy) 
 on behalf of the 
 Minister for Land Information 
: The Government has decided to make a lease available for the property on the strict condition that it must continue to be used as a camping ground. This decision responds to local wishes as opposed to selling it freeholding it and having it not as a camping ground. This decision responds to local wishes to retain the site as a holiday park—articulated strongly repeatedly and with unassailable logic by the member for Otago Mr Parker. 
David Parker 
: What impact will this decision have on the sale price the Government will obtain for the property? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Surprisingly very little. The value of the long-term lease will be only marginally less than that of the freehold title. Again the member for Otago was instrumental in drawing this important consideration to the Government’s attention. 
John Carter 
: I seek leave of the House to table the  
Otago Daily Times 
 of today in which Mr David Parker announced the decision yesterday. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:607;Page:4545] 
12.  
DAVID PARKER (NZ Labour—Otago) 
 to the  
Minister of Customs 
: What is the Government doing about the burgeoning problem of synthetic hard drugs crossing into New Zealand’s borders which has seen an unprecedented 3000 percent increase in Ecstasy seizures by the New Zealand Customs Services from 2000 to 2002? 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister of Customs) 
: 
 Concurrent with the release of  
Project Horizon 
 a wonderful document put out by the Customs Service that outlines the problems of the increasing imports of amphetamine-type substances I am delighted to announce the Government has allocated a further $1.9 million to the Customs Service for a proactive drug enforcement strategy. That is in line with the actions of the ministerial action group on drugs and the Government’s objective of harm minimisation from drugs and alcohol. 
David Parker 
: What will the taxpayer get for the additional $1.9 million granted in this year’s Budget? 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: The additional funding will ensure that we have 12 front-line specialist investigators in Auckland Wellington and Christchurch. We will also be able to employ four full-time intelligence analysts to target transnational organised crime groups trafficking in drugs in New Zealand and we will give those investigators the resources and support necessary for them to operate effectively. 
Shane Ardern 
: In the light of the Minister’s focus on imported manufactured drugs from overseas why has his department not given him any advice on controlling or monitoring the bulk chemicals used in the manufacture of methamphetamine arguably a more dangerous drug than some of the drugs that are being targeted? 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: The document  
Project Horizon 
 which I commend to the member lists all the precursors to drugs and outlines the fact that many of those precursors are used legitimately in this country. Part of the resources of the Customs Service will be used to make sure that the legitimate imports of those precursors go to be used for their intended purpose. We will be making sure that they are not siphoned off.
Williamson Maurice: Obituaries — Maurice Wilkins 
Williamson Maurice: Obituaries — Maurice Wilkins 
[Volume:620;Page:15946] 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National—Pakuranga) 
: 
 I seek leave to move a non-debatable non-controversial motion concerning the death in London last night of Maurice Wilkins. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: Maurice Wilkins who died in London last night aged 88 was one of three people who were instrumental in discovering the helix structure of DNA. He is one of only three Nobel Prize winners from New Zealand and his death now leaves only one Nobel Prize winner left and that is Alan MacDiarmid. I read with great interest about the work he had conducted— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I wonder whether the member could just move the motion first. 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: I said: “I seek leave to move …”. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member has been given leave to move so just move the motion please. 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: I move the motion. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: We will construct something from that. I know what the member’s intention is and I have no desire in any way to denigrate this person who was a very very fine New Zealander. I presume the member is moving a motion acknowledging his life and works. 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: Yes indeed. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The question is that the motion be agreed to.
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order —  
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order —  
[Volume:620;Page:16081] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the member wants to do that then of course he can do so. I refer members further to my rules for admission to the Chamber under the section headed “Admittance of strangers to the Ayes or Noes lobbies”: “When the House is sitting … the following strangers may enter the Ayes or Noes lobbies as far as strictly necessary through the lobby behind the Speaker’s Chair: (3) Ministers’ advisers departmental officials and research unit officers—for access to meeting rooms:”. I will consult the Minister on this matter.
Vote: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Discharge In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Vote: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Discharge In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8808] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 64 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 3; Green Party 9. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand National 24; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8. 
Amendment agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 117 in the name of the Hon Peter Dunne to insert subclause (5A) in clause 1A be agreed to.
Simich Clem: Families Commission Bill — Third Reading 
Simich Clem: Families Commission Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10699] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: That is not a point of order.
Benson-Pope David: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
Benson-Pope David: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6906] 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (Senior Whip—NZ Labour) 
: I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6302] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Noes 108 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 9 be agreed to: 
to omit subclause (1)(a)(ii).
McNair Craig: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
McNair Craig: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17855. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CRAIG McNAIR (NZ First) 
: 
 I do not intend to take too long on this part. 
Brian Connell 
: Take as long as you like. 
CRAIG McNAIR 
: About 5 minutes is not too long; I will have made my point. I just want to compliment the Minister of Finance. He is a real character sometimes. He has a wicked sense of humour and he is very entertaining to listen to sometimes. 
Simon Power 
: Is this his valedictory? 
CRAIG McNAIR 
: No no—do not worry. The Minister was talking about the valuation of State-owned assets. I have a better idea: the Government should just not sell them. Then we will never get into problems with the valuation of those assets and we will be able to steer clear of any ambiguity or problems that might occur. 
I believe that Part 1 is a very important part of this bill just as Part 2 is. Part 3 is also important because it involves the academic situation. I think Part 1 is important as John Key stressed as it allows for the allocation of money and expenditure—the Government’s finances. It includes all of that. When we add up the billions of dollars that go through the Government coffers we see that Part 1 is a very very important part of this legislation. Apart from the Minister talking about how some members of the National Party need to be a bit more clear and some of them might need to— 
Opposition Member 
: Careful careful now! 
CRAIG McNAIR 
: That is what the Minister was saying as far as scrutiny is concerned. Something I would like the Minister to clarify is whether at the end of the day the Government will be able to cover up a fiddle and if it could how that would happen and what would happen. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Hell no—you cannot even cover up Judy Bailey’s salary. 
CRAIG McNAIR 
: Well that is a very good point. But that is something I would like the Minister to address.
Vote: Resource Management (Energy and Climate Change) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Resource Management (Energy and Climate Change) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11325] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 8 
Green Party 8. 
Noes 106 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 25; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Carter David: Points of Order —  
Carter David: Points of Order —  
[Volume:620;Page:16081] 
Hon DAVID CARTER (National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I wish to raise with you an issue regarding Standing Order 42. I raised this matter at the conclusion of the Committee of the whole House last night and I understood that the Chair of the Committee was going to bring this matter to your attention. It concerns the presence of Mr Ross Wilson President of the Council of Trade Unions within the lobbies of Parliament. Standing Order 42 determines that you have a right to control who is admitted to the meeting rooms and lobbies of Parliament. I am just wondering whether you have given Mr Ross Wilson some form of official status; if so whether the House should be informed of that official status being given to Mr Ross Wilson. If not as the House is discussing employment relations legislation at this time could you rule on whether it is appropriate for the president of the Council of Trade Unions to be in the lobby meeting with officials and the Minister during a part of the Committee of the whole House.
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17870. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Noes 110 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Rod Donald to clause 8 be agreed to: 
to add to subsection 26P(1) the following new paragraphs: 
(e)overseas trade in goods balance 
(f)overseas trade in services balance 
(g)reserves of natural resources 
(h)social well being 
(i)environmental quality.
Adams Paul: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Adams Paul: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:6771] 
PAUL ADAMS (United Future) 
: I have heard the name United Future a few times in the last few speeches and what a great name it is: a united future for New Zealand. I think it is a fantastic name. United Future is pleased to support this legislation because we are working towards a better New Zealand for all New Zealanders. 
At the current time in an industry that I am involved in the motor industry there is a shortage of tradespeople. This legislation will bring them up according to priority and we will be able to have more mechanics. Winston Peters will be very pleased to know that we are training New Zealanders through the apprenticeships scheme so that they can also become mechanics and work within this country. But we also recognise that there are skills shortages in a lot of trades right throughout this nation and this legislation will bring in priorities so that we will be able to address those shortages. 
Winston also accused United Future of selling out its supporters. Does he not remember that in— 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: The honourable member cannot refer to someone by his or her first name. Speaker’s ruling 6/1 (Supplement) states that the reference must be to the member’s full name title or portfolio. 
PAUL ADAMS 
: The Rt Hon Winston Peters—that name has a nice ring to it. He is very charismatic and I enjoy his speeches but it is the same old record. We need to hear something new. We need something for the future and we do not want to play the record again I say to Winston Peters. Does he not remember that in the leaders’ debate on Television One before the last election it was Peter Dunne who made the very popular suggestion that the shortage of rural doctors could be solved by making it easier for qualified immigrant doctors to fulfil that role? This bill will enable that to occur by prioritising those applicants for residency. 
I stand to confirm that United Future supports this bill because we believe it is good legislation. We believe it will be good for New Zealand and will get the country moving again. We want there to be a united future in this country.
Hunt Jonathan: Obituaries — Ronald Morrison Barclay Possum Bourne 
Hunt Jonathan: Obituaries — Ronald Morrison Barclay Possum Bourne 
[Volume:608;Page:5163] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I regret to inform the House of the death on Tuesday 29 April 2003 of Ronald Morrison Barclay QSO MBE JP who represented the electorate of New Plymouth from 1966 to 1975. He was senior Labour whip during that period. I desire on behalf of this House to express our sense of the loss we have sustained and our sympathy with the relatives of the late former member in particular his wife Joy. I now ask members to stand with me and observe a period of silence as a mark of respect for his memory. 
Honourable members stood as a mark of respect.
Power Simon: Visiting Forces Bill — In Committee 
Power Simon: Visiting Forces Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:13750] 
SIMON POWER (National—Rangitikei) 
: 
 At first glance this bill is a reasonably straightforward and uncomplicated piece of legislation. In fact during the second reading a number of members referred to it as such describing it as legislation that was straightforward simple uncomplicated and a reasonably simplistic instrument. I can tell the Committee that the work that went into getting this bill to where it is does not in any way reflect that this is a simple and straightforward piece of legislation. Whilst the bill itself might be small in size in the sense of the number of pages that it contains it certainly is not uncomplicated. 
 There are indeed complicated matters relating to jurisdiction contained in the Visiting Forces Bill; and although in its simplest and purest form it is designed to update and amend the law relating to recognised international practice and to enable New Zealand to give effect to status of forces agreements concluded with other States and to repeal the Visiting Forces Act the jurisdictional questions contained in the bill I would submit—and I would be interested in the Minister’s view on this—are not straightforward actually. I know that the officials did a fine job of trying to explain to members of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee over and over again how the primary and secondary jurisdiction was to work in the absence of a status of forces agreement—or a “SOFA” as it quickly became known. I suspect that that is like military lingo but nevertheless it was a term that was adopted by the committee very quickly. 
The guts of the Visiting Forces Bill is contained in Part 2 but I just forewarn members—and no doubt the chairman of the select committee the Hon Peter Dunne will have a view on this—that although the bill looks simple it contains quite complicated messages. It is not a straightforward measure. National has indicated it will be supporting this bill and will continue to do so through the Committee stage. The bill does do those things that are set out in the purpose clause. 
I do not want to say anything more than that at this stage other than to say that Part 2 contains the complicated and in-depth jurisdictional questions. I am sure the Minister if he has a quick flick through will be interested to see what the new clause 8 definitions do because it is not straightforward. I imagine for soldiers on the ground a quick look at clause 8 would not solve the questions they had in their mind about jurisdictional issues at first glance. It is the sort of thing that takes a bit of getting one’s head around. 
I do not propose to add anything further in respect of Part 1 but I look forward to taking a call this evening on Part 2 and discussing with other members of the Committee of the whole House the provisions contained therein.