edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Parker David: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParker David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 25 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1906. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]10.Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by the statement made on his behalf last year about his contact with Mr Liu that: “As Prime Minister and the leader of the National Party Mr Key attends a number of functions up and down the country which are attended by a large number of people. While we don’t have a record of who attends these events Mr Key recalls seeing Mr Liu at various functions including a dinner as part of a National Party fundraiser”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes.Hon David Parker: Why did he omit to disclose that the various functions included a private dinner with Donghua Liu at Mr Donghua Liu’s own home?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I did not.Hon David Parker: Did he know that Mr Liu’s citizenship application was then in process?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No.Hon David Parker: Were immigration issues discussed that night?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The dinner the member is referring to was a fund-raising dinner. I went there in my capacity as leader of the National Party. That was the capacity I was in quite obviously.Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Regardless of the capacity in which the Prime Minister originally attended the dinner if he discussed ministerial matters such as immigration matters then he was attending in his capacity as the Prime Minister.Mr SPEAKER: No no. [Interruption] Order! We have learnt that the Prime Minister attended the dinner. It is for the Prime Minister to judge on what basis he attended that dinner whether it was as the leader of a political party or as the Prime Minister. He has determined to answer in that way. That is an acceptable answer. I can understand that it may not satisfy the Opposition but that is a legitimate answer to the question that has been raised. Further supplementary—[Interruption] Order! I just want to be able to hear the questions.Hon David Parker: Was his private meeting with Donghua Liu before or after the private meeting that took place between his Minister of Immigration Michael Woodhouse and Donghua Liu?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I simply do not have those details. You will have to put it down in writing.
Muller Todd: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMuller Todd: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 25 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1901. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.TODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty) to the Minister for Social Development: What is the Government doing to support older New Zealanders receiving New Zealand superannuation?Hon Member: Not much.Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister for Social Development): Quite the contrary. As a result of the annual general adjustment superannuation and veterans pension payments will grow 2.07 percent from 1 April 2015. This year’s increase is in line with the Government’s commitment to keep the married couple rate at least 66 percent of the average wage. It means $11.68 extra each week for married superannuitants and $7.59 a week for those living alone compared with increases last year. Including this increase New Zealand superannuation and veterans pension payments will have increased by 31.01 percent since April 2008 which is double the consumer price inflation of 15 percent in that time.Todd Muller: How will other beneficiaries benefit from the annual general adjustment increase?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Benefit payments to around 440000 New Zealanders will also increase on 1 April 2015: an annual general adjustment of 0.51 percent. That annual general adjustment will see a 0.5 percentage increase to benefit rates student allowances student loan living costs and the foster care allowance an increase to rates and thresholds for supplementary assistance like the child disability allowance and also an increase to the threshold for the community services card. In 2011 we passed legislation to make sure that benefit payments increase each year in line with inflation and this increase will benefit thousands of New Zealanders receiving a wide range of assistance through Work and Income and StudyLink to keep up with the increase in living costs.David Seymour: Given the Minister’s desire to preserve these levels of benefit for superannuitants has she seen any reports from for example Treasury of what percentage of GDP will be required to do so as the current workforce heads into retirement?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: No.
Robertson Grant: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 25 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1901. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by all his answers to Oral Question No 4 on Tuesday 24 February 2015?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): Yes.Grant Robertson: With regard to his statements on prudent policies how much lower would debt levels have been had he not gone ahead with his 2010 cut to the top tax rate?Hon BILL ENGLISH: No lower—in fact debt probably would have been a bit higher because when you take into account all the decisions made about tax cuts after the 2008 election our tax package has resulted in a net increase in revenue compared with what the Labour Government expected to collect.Grant Robertson: Is it in fact correct that the cost of his reduction to the top tax rate has so far been around about $5 billion and how is it prudent to pursue policies like that?Hon BILL ENGLISH: No the member is wrong. He may forget that actually the first thing we did when we came in as a Government was cancel tax cuts that were on the books quite significant ones that were put in place by the previous Government simply because they could not be afforded. The net effect of all the decisions around tax packages is that they collected more revenue than the Labour Government expected to collect and more important we have now got a tax system that is well-balanced; favours incentives on work savings and investment; and taxes consumption and property more and that is a good result.Grant Robertson: I seek leave of the House to table a document prepared by the Parliamentary Library which shows the cost of the top tax rate cut in 2010 to be $4.7 billion to this day.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that particular document from the Parliamentary Library. Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Grant Robertson: Is he aware of any New Zealand Government that has run up so much debt in so little time as his Government has?Hon BILL ENGLISH: I have not checked back but I am not aware of any other New Zealand Government that has dealt with the Christchurch earthquake. On “Planet Labour” perhaps it happens all the time but in New Zealand it has happened only once and actually it has generated something like $15 billion or $16 billion extra of debt. Yes it would be better if we did not have to deal with that but I am certainly not going to follow the member’s advice which is to cut spending so that we can accommodate the Christchurch rebuild. That would be nuts.
Vote: Parole Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Parole Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1875. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Parole Amendment Bill be now read a third time.Ayes 104New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; New Zealand First 11; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 16Green Party 14; Māori Party 2.Bill read a third time.
Vote: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1860. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a third time.Ayes 109New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 11New Zealand First 11.Bill read a third time.
Tisch Lindsay: Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4) — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4) — Second Reading[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1894. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. The time has come for me to leave the Chair.Debate interrupted.
Tisch Lindsay: Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1888. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Stuart Smith—5 minutes.
Tisch Lindsay: Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1887. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call I understand.
Tisch Lindsay: Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1882. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Kris Faafoi—5 minutes.
Tisch Lindsay: Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1881. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I understand the next call is a split call. Jan Logie—5 minutes.
Borrows Chester: Parole Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Parole Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1874. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I call Brett Hudson—a 5-minute call.
Borrows Chester: Parole Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Parole Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1873. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I understand that this call will be a split call between National members.
Tisch Lindsay: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1859. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Barbara Kuriger—5 minutes.
Tisch Lindsay: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1858. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Jonathan Young—5 minutes.
Tisch Lindsay: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1853. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. I call Denise Roche—5 minutes.
Mitchell Clayton: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Clayton: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1851. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]12.CLAYTON MITCHELL (NZ First) to the Minister for Social Development: Does she stand by all her statements?Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister for Social Development): Yes.Clayton Mitchell: Why did she backtrack on her recent statement regarding migrant workers: “We must be careful we don’t fill up all the spaces with immigrants”?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: In fact I did not backtrack. That was part of a very long complex interview and the Gisborne Herald when I complained about those comments actually printed a retraction and the full transcript of the radio interview that I had completed.Clayton Mitchell: Can she explain why New Zealand job seekers are not equipped to take the spaces she talks about like the thousands at the Cricket World Cup in seasonal positions that so many migrant workers have come here for?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: As I said in that radio interview that the member referred to this is a very complex issue so we have to be very careful. The Government is very clear that it wants New Zealanders to have access to jobs first and foremost. So everything that we do—through Work and Income through our immigration policies—is predicated on that. But there are times when our growers in particular—and the member comes from an area that needs seasonal employment—tell us that there are times when New Zealand workers are not enough and we have to provide for migrant workers in order to get those crops to market.Clayton Mitchell: Would the Minister support tax breaks for employers so that they can afford to pay First World wages and reduce the number of job seekers instead of taking the cheap option of abusing the goodwill of migrant workers; if not why not?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Well it is a bit rich coming from a party that does not even believe in migrant workers. But however there is a great deal of support offered to employers in order to ensure they give support to the New Zealand workers. The issue I was discussing in that radio interview is the difficulty where we have some isolated rural communities where there are not the jobs available and other areas where there are jobs available. That is why this Government has put into place the 3K to Christchurch initiative and almost over 1000 people now have taken advantage of that. We have been able to move mainly young people into good jobs good paying jobs down in Christchurch. This Government intends to roll out more of that sort of support to make sure New Zealand workers get those jobs.
Bakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBakshi Kanwaljit Singh: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1850. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What actions is the Government taking to limit the powers of repossession agents?Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): Recently I joined the Associate Minister of Justice in announcing new laws that will better protect consumers from those repossession agents who act in an unscrupulous manner. From 6 June 2015 all repossession agents must be registered with fines of up to $40000 for those who breach those rules. Those new requirements are one of a number of changes focused on increasing consumer protection under the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Amendment Act 2014.Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: What other requirements of repossession agents is the Government implementing?Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: From 6 June 2015 creditors will be allowed to repossess an item only if it is specifically identified in the credit contract and repossession agents will no longer be permitted to take certain essential items such as beds and cooking equipment. The new changes will also prevent someone from becoming a licensed repossession agent if they have committed certain crimes including violence and dishonesty offences. Increasing consumer protection through an enhanced repossession agent licensing regime is just another important part of our Business Growth Agenda.
Guy Nathan: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGuy Nathan: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1849. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister for Primary Industries): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Once again this member cannot read the question from the sheet correctly. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member should have addressed it to the Minister for Primary Industries. The question will stand and the Hon Nathan Guy will answer the question.
O'Connor Damien: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Damien: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1849. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR (Labour—West Coast - Tasman): My question is to the Minister for biosecurity: does he consider that cuts the Government has made to biosecurity have contributed to the current fruit fly outbreak?
Lee Melissa: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLee Melissa: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1848. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.MELISSA LEE (National) to the Minister for Small Business: What steps is the Government taking to support growth for small business?Hon CRAIG FOSS (Minister for Small Business): A strong and growing economy with low interest rates helps to create an environment that supports small business growth. Policies limiting the amount of extra Government spending lowering personal and company tax rates and focusing on sustainable jobs have contributed to GDP growth of 3.2 percent and low interest rates. In addition to getting the macroeconomic policies right the Government’s Business Growth Agenda is also helping small business growth. These policies are creating an environment that is better for business.Melissa Lee: What evidence has he seen that shows these policies have contributed to small business growth under this Government?Hon CRAIG FOSS: According to the most recent 5-year MYOB Business Monitor report New Zealand small and medium sized businesses are now showing the highest revenue growth in more than 5 years. The report shows that almost twice as many businesses reported a rise in revenue performance compared with 2009. The report which canvassed over 1000 small and medium enterprises over 5 years indicates how business conditions have significantly improved. This is another example that under a National-led Government small businesses are more confident growing their businesses and hiring more Kiwis.Melissa Lee: How does the current environment which is helping to contribute towards small business growth compare with the environment in 2008?Hon CRAIG FOSS: Small Kiwi businesses are now more confident as they are now operating in a growing economy and are enjoying low interest rates. This is in contrast to 2008 when the economy had been in recession for 1 year prior to the global financial crisis and mortgage rates exceeded 10 percent. To continue this growth and to enable small businesses to employ more Kiwis the last thing they need is high extra spending policies and more complex taxes as proposed by the Labour Opposition.
Foster-Bell Paul: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]3.PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National) to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he received on trends in Government revenue and how does this compare with forecasts in the Half-Year Update in December?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): Last week Treasury released the Government’s financial statements for the 6 months to December. They show higher than expected tax revenue and lower than expected operating expenses which contributed to an operating balance deficit of $990 million for the 6 months to December. That is $380 million smaller than the one that was forecast by Treasury in the half-year update. The Government considers that a strong economy and responsible fiscal management can deliver a surplus when the final accounts are published in October this year. However it remains to be seen whether the additional tax revenue above forecast persists for the rest of the financial year.Paul Foster-Bell: What were the drivers of the better than expected out-turn on the Crown accounts?Hon BILL ENGLISH: Tax revenue was a bit above forecast: GST was about 1.7 percent above the forecast and corporate tax was 3.1 percent above the forecast. Customs and excise duties were $46 million above the forecast. Core Crown expenses were a bit lower than the forecast. We have yet to see whether corporate tax which is notoriously variable from a forecaster’s point of view and increases in GST persist through the rest of the year.Paul Foster-Bell: What steps has the Government taken to return its books to surplus?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The Government has focused particularly on two aspects. One is policy that underpins a growing economy that can deliver more tax revenue. We have also focused on reasonable constraints on expenditure. We could have got to surplus sooner if the Government had pursued the kind of large-scale drastic cuts that Governments in other developed countries have pursued. However we have chosen a more considered and incremental path. It does mean that getting to surplus depends less on drastic spending cuts and more on continued growth and revenue.Paul Foster-Bell: What approaches to fiscal management would make it more difficult for the Government to reduce debt?Hon BILL ENGLISH: Other approaches would be opposing every single Government measure to constrain spending and debt joining union protests calling for unsustainable increases in public sector spending and advocating policies that persist with previous spending and borrowing that Treasury forecasts would push New Zealand Government debt to very high levels. This is the approach of the finance spokesman in the Labour Party.
Carter David: Ministerial Statements — Iraq—Deployment of Military PersonnelText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Ministerial Statements — Iraq—Deployment of Military Personnel[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1838. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not a point of order.
Carter David: Ministerial Statements — Iraq—Deployment of Military PersonnelText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Ministerial Statements — Iraq—Deployment of Military Personnel[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1838. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I have not called the member yet. [Interruption] Order! [Interruption] Order! I have a point of order from the Rt Hon Winston Peters and I expect to hear it in silence.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: To enable the Defence Force to be sent with the best wishes of the Prime Minister and this Parliament perhaps the Prime Minister could be given an extension of time to debate that—rather than the tirade we have just heard.
Peters Winston: Ministerial Statements — Iraq—Deployment of Military PersonnelText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Ministerial Statements — Iraq—Deployment of Military Personnel[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1838. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [Interruption]
Key John: Ministerial Statements — Iraq—Deployment of Military PersonnelText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKey John: Ministerial Statements — Iraq—Deployment of Military Personnel[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1837. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): I take this opportunity to sum up the statements that have been made in the House. On Monday the Government made a decision to send New Zealand forces to train Iraqi forces. It made the decision to send 106 people to Taji for up to 2 years. We made the decision to stand up to the evil and barbaric behaviour we have seen from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.I want to focus not on political parties that have either well-established positions or fundamentally not much to add to the debate but on Her Majesty’s loyal Opposition. The interesting thing is this. Labour in New Zealand when it comes to sending New Zealand forces for training says no—it says no. But the interesting thing is that the Labour Opposition in the UK says yes. The Labor Opposition in Australia says yes and the equivalent of the Labour Opposition in Canada says yes. So every Labour Opposition in like-minded countries says yes but apparently the Labour Opposition in New Zealand says no. But hold on a minute Labour when it was the Government said yes to sending 60-odd engineers to Iraq. No debate no vote—“You’re going boys.” And Labour when it was in Government said yes to sending the combat forces of the SAS and it did not tell the country; it just said yes.I listened to Andrew Little’s speech and here is the bottom line: he did not believe it and I do not believe him because he knows that these people are barbaric and evil. He knows that there are 35 to 40 New Zealanders at risk of being a domestic threat. He knows like I know that the number of people on the list is growing to 60 or 70. He knows like I know that New Zealanders are in the region. He knows like I know that New Zealanders travel prolifically. He says that he cares about New Zealanders and he says that he wants to stand up for them. Well in Government he would be making this decision. You see the reason he is not doing so is this. It is not that it is not the right thing because Phil Goff when he was the Minister of Defence used to do all this stuff with bells on. The reason is that he wants politics to win over what is right for the people.I will not—will not—stand by while Jordanian pilots are burnt to death when kids execute soldiers and when people are out there being beheaded. I am sorry but this is the time to stand up and be counted. Get some guts and join the right side.
Carter David: Ministerial Statements — Iraq—Deployment of Military PersonnelText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Ministerial Statements — Iraq—Deployment of Military Personnel[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1835. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I understand that Labour will split this call.
Carter David: Points of Order — Deployment of Troops to Iraq—Leave to Move Motions Without NoticeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Deployment of Troops to Iraq—Leave to Move Motions Without Notice[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1813. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is.
Graham Kennedy: Points of Order — Deployment of Troops to Iraq—Leave to Move Motions Without NoticeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGraham Kennedy: Points of Order — Deployment of Troops to Iraq—Leave to Move Motions Without Notice[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1813. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate requesting the Government to not deploy troops to Iraq.
Little Andrew: Points of Order — Deployment of Troops to Iraq—Leave to Move Motions Without NoticeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLittle Andrew: Points of Order — Deployment of Troops to Iraq—Leave to Move Motions Without Notice[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1813. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move and vote on a motion without notice—Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am hearing a point of order.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Yes but I asked you for a point of order before and you asked me to wait for the vote—Mr SPEAKER: And I have now taken a call from Andrew Little.ANDREW LITTLE: I seek leave to move and vote on a motion without notice and without debate at the end of this debate about the deployment of troops to Iraq.Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is.
Carter David: Business of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Business of the House[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1813. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being—[Interruption] Order! I need to put the leave. Can I just understand—are you raising a point of order?Rt Hon Winston Peters: I just want to ask the Minister a question.Mr SPEAKER: Order! At this stage leave has been sought for this course of action. I will put the leave. The member will resume his seat. Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.
Brownlee Gerry: Business of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrownlee Gerry: Business of the House[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1813. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I understand that the Prime Minister will seek leave to make a ministerial statement on the deployment of troops to Iraq. Before he does I seek leave for the statement to be up to 10 minutes for there to be comments of up to 10 minutes each as follows—two from National three from Labour two from the Green Party two from New Zealand First and one each from the Māori Party United Future and ACT and for the Prime Minister to speak in reply for up to 5 minutes.
Points of Order — Deployment of Troops to Iraq—Leave to Move Motions Without NoticeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePoints of Order — Deployment of Troops to Iraq—Leave to Move Motions Without Notice[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1813. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Points of OrderDeployment of Troops to Iraq—Leave to Move Motions Without NoticeANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move and vote on a motion without notice—Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am hearing a point of order.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Yes but I asked you for a point of order before and you asked me to wait for the vote—Mr SPEAKER: And I have now taken a call from Andrew Little.ANDREW LITTLE: I seek leave to move and vote on a motion without notice and without debate at the end of this debate about the deployment of troops to Iraq.Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is.Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate requesting the Government to not deploy troops to Iraq.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is.
Business of the HouseText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBusiness of the House[Sitting date: 24 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1813. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Tuesday 24 February 2015Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.Business of the HouseHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): I understand that the Prime Minister will seek leave to make a ministerial statement on the deployment of troops to Iraq. Before he does I seek leave for the statement to be up to 10 minutes for there to be comments of up to 10 minutes each as follows—two from National three from Labour two from the Green Party two from New Zealand First and one each from the Māori Party United Future and ACT and for the Prime Minister to speak in reply for up to 5 minutes.Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being—[Interruption] Order! I need to put the leave. Can I just understand—are you raising a point of order?Rt Hon Winston Peters: I just want to ask the Minister a question.Mr SPEAKER: Order! At this stage leave has been sought for this course of action. I will put the leave. The member will resume his seat. Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.
Vote: Intelligence and Security Committee — MembershipText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Intelligence and Security Committee — Membership[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1725. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the question That the terms of reference for the Intelligence and Security Committee be agreed to.Ayes 95New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Māori Party 1; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 25Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11.Motion agreed to.
Vote: Intelligence and Security Committee — MembershipText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Intelligence and Security Committee — Membership[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1725. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat under section 8 of the Intelligence and Security Committee Act 1996 this House endorse the following as members of the Intelligence and Security Committee: Hon Christopher Finlayson and Hon Amy Adams nominated by the Prime Minister under section 7(1)(c) of the Act; and David Shearer nominated by the Leader of the Opposition under section 7(1)(d) of the Act.Ayes 95New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32;Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 25Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11.Motion agreed to.
Vote: Debate on Prime Minister’s StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1707. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat this House express its confidence in the National-led Government and commend its programme for 2015 as set out in the Prime Minister’s statement to Parliament.Ayes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11.Motion agreed to.
Vote: Debate on Prime Minister’s StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1707. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat all the words after “That” be deleted and replaced with “this House express no confidence in this National-led Government because this is a government that has lost its moral compass and turned a blind eye to the deplorable actions of its MPs; that is fixated on selling off our state houses rather than building more homes; that is leading us into a war with no clear goals and no exit strategy; that has more Kiwis out of work and in poverty today than when it came to power; and that now has no greater ambition for New Zealand than changing our flag while leaving the real issues to fester.”Ayes 57New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 11.Noes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment not agreed to.
Borrows Chester: Judicature Modernisation Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBorrows Chester: Judicature Modernisation Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1742. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is a shared call between the Greens and Labour. I call Dr Kennedy Graham.
Martin Tracey: Intelligence and Security Committee — MembershipText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMartin Tracey: Intelligence and Security Committee — Membership[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1724. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TRACEY MARTIN (Deputy Leader—NZ First): Kia ora Mr Assistant Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to take a very quick call just to clarify to reiterate New Zealand First’s position on this motion as articulated by Fletcher Tabuteau. I want to make it very clear that New Zealand First has not at any time criticised Mr Shearer his experience his abilities or the job that we believe he will be able to do on that committee nor have we at any time criticised Mr Goff and his input or Mr Little and his input or the Labour Party’s input around other issues for the Government Communications Security Bureau and the security of this nation.The concerns that New Zealand First has expressed have been around the statutory obligation to consult. The concern that New Zealand First will continue to express is the unfortunate position we find ourselves in where we are asked to agree to an assumption that we will agree. That is a very difficult place to come from from the Labour Party when talking about the fact that it will uphold transparency trust and these other things. We obviously have a very experienced member but there is nothing to say that should New Zealand First have been spoken to we would not have endorsed Mr Shearer’s selection. I want to be very clear. New Zealand First does not see this as a gender issue; nor do we see this as an issue around Mr Shearer’s abilities. We see this as an unfortunate incident where a single phone call could have created a sense of collaboration that would have meant our position would be different today. Kia ora.
Tisch Lindsay: Intelligence and Security Committee — MembershipText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Intelligence and Security Committee — Membership[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1717. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): No I mentioned also in my third paragraph that the Speaker has no part in the statutory process and if one is referring to the point that I made earlier about consultation that is a statutory requirement. It is not a requirement for this House to determine. That can be determined only in a court. So the ruling that I have given is a ruling that stands and I am now calling the next speaker.
Graham Kennedy: Intelligence and Security Committee — MembershipText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGraham Kennedy: Intelligence and Security Committee — Membership[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1717. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Well I do conclude from what you have said particularly from your first statement that the only remedy for any procedural invalidity lies within the hands of the two people who have committed the procedural invalidity. I draw that conclusion and so be it—that appears to be the ruling. May I make one more point Mr Assistant Speaker?The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Yes.Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM: From what you have said and having studied the Act it appears to me—and no doubt you can make a ruling and no doubt the House will—that there appears to have been a procedural invalidity committed by one of those two persons. I presume it appears to be only in the hands of the House to make that determination but in the event the House acknowledged that would it then follow that if there is a procedural invalidity the House cannot then proceed to endorse all of them or any of them or omit one?
Tisch Lindsay: Intelligence and Security Committee — MembershipText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Intelligence and Security Committee — Membership[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1717. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The second paragraph—I will just read that again. The process of nomination is a statutory one. The Intelligence and Security Committee Act 1996 requires the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition to make nominations. Then the final paragraph that I read states: members may move to omit a name of a nominee but cannot move amendments. The House does not make the appointments. It merely confirms the nominations of the Prime Minister or the Leader of the Opposition.
Graham Kennedy: Intelligence and Security Committee — MembershipText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGraham Kennedy: Intelligence and Security Committee — Membership[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1717. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am just attempting to understand and draw accurate conclusions from what you have said. Are we to understand that if the two people who have the responsibility statutorily to nominate other members for the committee fail to perform their statutory obligations in that respect the only remedy lies within the hands of those very same two people? Is that a correct understanding?
Shaw James: Intelligence and Security Committee — MembershipText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShaw James: Intelligence and Security Committee — Membership[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1716. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAMES SHAW (Green): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I would just like your view on Speaker’s ruling 209/1. My understanding is that last night Metiria Turei wrote to the Speaker to ask for a ruling in relation to the legality of the nomination prior to consultation and a letter was sent back saying that the Speaker did not have the authority to enforce that. But it seems from this ruling that actually it is within the Speaker’s gift to enforce that and from what we have just heard from the member Fletcher Tabuteau it appears that New Zealand First was also not consulted prior to the nomination being made. This is new information and it may change the nature of things from the exchange of letters last night.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I thank the member for those comments in relation to Speaker’s ruling 209/1. I have sought advice and I have a written statement here which I hope will clarify it for the member. The motion asked for the House to endorse members of the Intelligence and Security Committee nominated by the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition.The process of nomination is a statutory one. The Intelligence and Security Committee Act 1996 requires the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition to make nominations having consulted with the leaders of parties. The Speaker has no part in the statutory process but obviously has a concern to ensure that the House operates within the law which requires consultation to be undertaken. The House cannot make good a failure to consult. This is a matter for the Prime Minister or the Leader of the Opposition. It is they who have the statutory responsibility. It is not for the Speaker to set out what is required by way of consultation.However it is well established that in consultation the consulter should give the person being consulted the opportunity to be heard. It is more than simply informing a person of a decision but beyond that we cannot be too precious about consultation in a political context. Debate in the House provides members with the opportunity to make their case. Concerns have been raised about consultation. The Leader of the Opposition was advised of these concerns in the expectation that he would resolve them. It is always open for the House not to endorse a nomination to the Intelligence and Security Committee. If this were to happen the Act provides for further consultation or a new nomination to be made to the House.Members may move to omit a name of a nominee but cannot move amendments. The House does not make the appointments. It merely confirms the nominations of the Prime Minister or the Leader of the Opposition.
Carter David: Debate on Prime Minister’s StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1704. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I understand this is a split National call Dr Shane Reti.
Carter David: Debate on Prime Minister’s StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1699. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I understand this is a split National call.
English Bill: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 5 to MinisterText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeEnglish Bill: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 5 to Minister[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1688. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): I just want to correct an answer I gave earlier—Mr SPEAKER: So the member is going to seek leave to correct his answer?Hon BILL ENGLISH: I seek leave to correct an answer.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to correct an answer made earlier today. Is there any objection? There is none.Hon BILL ENGLISH: I think in my answer I said that ACC levy reductions relevant to car registrations would start from 1 April this year. In fact it is 1 July this year.
Shearer David: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShearer David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1687. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]12.DAVID SHEARER (Labour—Mt Albert) to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Will New Zealand troops operate under a status of forces agreement if they are deployed to Iraq?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Energy and Resources) on behalf of theMinister of Foreign Affairs: No decision has been made on whether to deploy troops in Iraq. Were such a decision to be made clearly discussions would then need to occur to work through what legal arrangements would operate.David Shearer: Is it true that both New Zealand and Australia’s strategic assessment as to the likelihood of green on blue attacks—those are attacks on our trainers—has been assessed as high?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: I am not aware of that specific fact.David Shearer: Has the New Zealand Government discussed with the Australian Government the use of private contractors as force protection for New Zealand troops should they be deployed in Iraq?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Of course we discuss many things with our Australian friends. We know here that it is quite clear that we have not made any decisions to deploy anyway so those kinds of questions are hypothetical.David Shearer: Can he categorically rule out then the use of private contractors as force protection of New Zealand troops deployed to Iraq if they are deployed to Iraq even if Australia and the United States do rely on them?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: We have not even with respect to the member reached a decision on deployment yet. That as has been made quite clear is a decision that will be discussed next week. So it is not appropriate at this time to be answering what are in effect hypothetical questions.David Shearer: Is it true that Australia and the United States till now have been negotiating on New Zealand’s behalf on our possible deployment to Iraq given that New Zealand does not have diplomatic representation in Iraq and Dr al-Jaafari’s visit to New Zealand last week was the first time that New Zealand and Iraq had discussed the possibility?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: New Zealand negotiates on its own behalf and will make a decision in the interests of New Zealanders but we are not going to do what the member seems to be arguing for and leave the heavy lifting to everyone else on matters as important as this and the human rights of other people.