edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Hughes Darren: Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Hughes Darren: Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12283] 
DARREN HUGHES (Junior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Hunt Jonathan: Budget Debate 
Hunt Jonathan: Budget Debate 
[Volume:618;Page:13740] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The question was that the Appropriation (2004/05 Estimates) Bill be read a second time. Since then a number of amendments have been moved. The first is in the name of Rod Donald.
Yates Dianne: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Yates Dianne: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:615;Page:11476] 
DIANNE YATES (Labour—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I will speak on just one aspect of this bill and that is the area around drug rape because I am the author of a member’s bill on drug rape. In contrast to Mr Worth I think the wording in the bill is better than in my member’s bill and I thank the Minister of Justice for including it in this bill. 
There is a problem around consent and I think Mr Worth would do well to look at some instances of case law made within recent months and at some opinions given by judges in recent months. I believe that the Minister has been listening and has got it right. I welcome the inclusion of what is commonly referred to as drug rape. The areas of consent as referred to in this bill and the amendments that are being made to the Crimes Act make it absolutely clear what consent means in this case. I suggest that the previous speaker looks at some recent case law in this regard. Once again I thank the Minister for the inclusion of drug rape in this bill.
Wilson Margaret: Urgent Debates Declined — Reviews—Targeted Policies and Programmes: Education Sector 
Wilson Margaret: Urgent Debates Declined — Reviews—Targeted Policies and Programmes: Education Sector 
[Volume:627;Page:21970] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from Dr Don Brash seeking to debate under Standing Order 373 the release by the Government on 23 June of its review of targeted policies and programmes. I have also received a letter from the Hon Bill English seeking to debate a report released by the State Services Commission on 18 July on an education sector review. 
These are particular cases of recent occurrence that involve ministerial responsibility but I am not persuaded that either requires the immediate attention of the House for an urgent debate today. In the case of the release of a report the circumstances must be exceptional in order to justify an urgent debate—see Speaker’s ruling 155/6—as they must be in any case but it is also the case that the House is about to embark on the estimates debate which is a relevant consideration for the Speaker in deciding whether to accept an application as per Speaker’s ruling 155/2. The applications are therefore declined.
Carter John: Points of Order — Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate Parliament Building—Media Access Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate 
Carter John: Points of Order — Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate Parliament Building—Media Access Members’ Day—Rescheduling of Debate 
[Volume:624;Page:19712] 
JOHN CARTER (National—Northland) 
: 
 I seek leave of the House to table Standing Order 1 “Purpose”. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table Standing Order 1. Is there any objection? There is.
Dyson Ruth: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Dyson Ruth: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10626] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for ACC) 
: 
 It gives me great pleasure to rise in support of the Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill. I support its further progress through the House.
Barker Rick: Registered Architects Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Barker Rick: Registered Architects Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19922] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister for Courts)  
on behalf of the  
Minister of Commerce 
: I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Registered Architects Bill that it take the bill part by part 
. 
Motion agreed to.
Burton Mark: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Burton Mark: Judicial Matters Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:12882] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I just make the observation that of course this is always a matter for the judgment of the chairperson and the quality of members’ contributions would normally determine how long the debate goes on.
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:9999] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Mr Speaker you have been recalled because there has been a request by the Hon Peter Dunne who is concerned that there were not enough speakers on Part 3. The member did refer me to the previous rulings you gave some time ago. As the Chair I listened to the debates. I had some trouble in getting relevancy on some parts of this legislation and having listened to the debate and accepted 19 speakers I felt it was time that the closure motion be accepted.
Vote: Maori Television Service Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled 
Vote: Maori Television Service Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled 
[Volume:607;Page:4999] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the preamble be agreed to. 
Ayes 61 
Noes 56 
Preamble agreed to. 
Labour 52; Green Party 9. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Mr Hide I have just warned people about talking during voting. The member should be in his seat while a vote is being taken.
Vote: Ngati Tama Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Ngati Tama Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:613;Page:10181] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 8 
ACT New Zealand 8. 
Noes 108 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 25; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Amendment not agreed to.
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:10004] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I will do that Mr Brown. I would like to refer the member to Speaker’s ruling 7/1: “Within the areas allocated to each party group or caucus in the Chamber the allocation of particular seats to individual members by practice of the House is left to the party leaders and whips and the Speaker does not intervene.” That means that members may sit in any seats that are allocated to that particular party. I refer members now to Speaker’s ruling 17/3. Members are free to raise points of order but where things start to get out of order and members are asked to desist it can lead to disorder and members can be asked to leave the Chamber. We have had a number of points of order on this issue already.
Tabling of Documents — Question No. 9 to Minister 
Tabling of Documents — Question No. 9 to Minister 
[Volume:606;Page:3355] 
Tabling of Documents 
Question No. 9 to Minister 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a page from a document supplied to me by the Shell Oil company that discusses the size of the Pohokura field and I think disputes the information given to the House today by Dr Cullen. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Brown Peter: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Brown Peter: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17519] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I would like to make two points. First of all I have just checked with my colleague as to whether he ever described himself as a bigot. He did not. Over the telephone he told me how he described himself which was basically as a “redneck conservative”. There is a total difference in meaning between the words “bigot” and “redneck conservative”. I take offence that the member used that term and has been allowed to get away with it. My second point is that if we allow members to carry on for a 5-minute speech when offence is taken in the course of it and then stand and take the point of order at the end we are allowing them carte blanche to say anything. That is not acceptable.
Points of Order — Ranfurly Shield Win—Bay of Plenty 
Points of Order — Ranfurly Shield Win—Bay of Plenty 
[Volume:619;Page:14929] 
Tuesday 24 August 2004 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Points of Order 
Ranfurly Shield Win—Bay of Plenty 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move a non-controversial motion to do with the rugby events in the Bay of Plenty last weekend. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:613;Page:10219] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I understand from talks around the traps that there is a proposal to set up a special select committee to deal with controversial legislation that the Government is proposing in the next short while. I wonder whether the Leader of the House might give us an indication of what legislation will go to that committee what the committee’s make-up will be and when those pieces of legislation are likely to be forwarded to that special select committee?
Vote: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
Vote: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:8949] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 11 
Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 104 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Brian Donnelly to clause 36 be agreed to: 
to omit paragraph (a) of section 68(1) and substitute the following paragraph: 
(a)significant cultural economic environmental ethical health or international effects;. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr Paul Hutchison to clause 36 be agreed to: 
to omit from paragraph (a) of section 68(1) the words “cultural” “ethical” and “spiritual”.
Kedgley Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Kedgley Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:611;Page:8198] 
11.  
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does she have confidence in the Minister for Food Safety in light of the Minister’s inability in this House yesterday to name the food products that tested positive for contamination by genetically engineered ingredients in the recent New Zealand Food Safety Authority report on food produced using gene technology; if so why? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Deputy Prime Minister)  
on behalf of the  
Prime Minister 
: 
 Yes because she is a hard-working and conscientious Minister. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Does she agree that parents feeding their babies soy infant formula have a right to know which infant formulas contain unlabelled GE soy; if so why does she have confidence in a Minister who is suppressing this information? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The Minister is not suppressing the information. Like many other surveillance and audit samples the tests are aimed at ensuring compliance with the law. Compliance was confirmed in this case no further action was taken and the names of the products are therefore not reported. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: Is it little wonder that more and more people distrust GM when they simply cannot trust the PM? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I note in the latest opinion polls that the Prime Minister was the first choice of some 40-odd percent of the public. I think the level of support for the Leader of the Opposition was below the tolerance level for GM content. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Why does she have confidence in her Minister for Food Safety when scientific bodies such as the UK Royal Society have expressed severe reservations about the safety of GE infant food when it has never been tested on humans or babies or for its long-term health effects yet her Minister is allowing such contaminated food to be fed to New Zealand babies? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The evidence so far is that there may be some benefits and some detriments involved in the feeding of soy products to infants but the clear position of the New Zealand Government is that the priority is first breast milk; second cows milk; and third—a long way behind—soy formula. 
Ian Ewen-Street 
: Is the Prime Minister concerned that the lack of public confidence in her Minister for Food Safety is resulting in groups like Mothers Against Genetic Engineering calling on parents in New Zealand to boycott all soy infant formula in the marketplace until such time as the Minister discloses which brands have been found to be contaminated with GE; if not why not? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: There is no evidence that soy formula that contains GE products is any more or less harmful than ordinary soy products.
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17547] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 46 
Adams(P) 
English(P) 
Peters J (P) 
Tisch  
Alexander(P) 
Franks(P) 
Peters W (P) 
Turner(P) 
Brash(P) 
Gudgeon(P) 
Power(P) 
Wang  
Brown  
Heatley(P) 
Prebble  
Williamson  
Carter D (P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Roy(P) 
Woolerton(P) 
Carter J (P) 
Jones(P) 
Ryall(P) 
Worth(P) 
Catchpole(P) 
Key(P) 
Scott(P) 
Coddington(P) 
Mapp(P) 
Shirley(P) 
Collins(P) 
McNair(P) 
Smith L (P) 
Connell(P) 
Newman(P) 
Smith M (P) 
Copeland  
Ogilvy(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Dunne(P) 
Paraone(P) 
Stewart(P) 
Teller: 
Eckhoff  
Perry(P) 
te Heuheu  
Baldock  
Noes 74 
Anderton(P) 
Duynhoven(P) 
King(P) 
Simich  
Ardern(P) 
Dyson(P) 
Laban(P) 
Sowry(P) 
Barker (P) 
Ewen-Street(P) 
Locke(P) 
Sutton(P) 
Barnett(P) 
Fairbrother(P) 
Mackey J (P) 
Swain(P) 
Benson-Pope  
Field (P) 
Mackey M (P) 
Tamihere(P) 
Beyer(P) 
Fitzsimons(P) 
Maharey(P) 
Tanczos(P) 
Bradford(P) 
Gallagher(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Tizard(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mallard(P) 
Turei(P) 
Burton(P) 
Gosche(P) 
Mark  
Turia(P) 
Carter C (P) 
Goudie(P) 
McCully(P) 
Ward(P) 
Chadwick(P) 
Hartley(P) 
O'Connor(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Choudhary(P) 
Hawkins(P) 
Okeroa(P) 
Wong(P) 
Clark(P) 
Hereora (P) 
Parker(P) 
Yates (P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Hide(P) 
Peck(P) 
Cullen(P) 
Hobbs(P) 
Pillay(P) 
Cunliffe(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Rich(P) 
Dalziel(P) 
Horomia(P) 
Ririnui(P) 
Donald(P) 
Hughes 
Robertson(P) 
Donnelly(P) 
Hunt(P) 
Robson(P) 
Teller: 
Duncan(P) 
Kedgley(P) 
Samuels(P) 
Pettis  
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 314 in the name of Richard Worth to clause 8A be agreed to: 
to omit the words “(except by changing the form of their relationship in accordance with section 18)”.
Vote: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Vote: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9016] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 51 
New Zealand National 25; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 8. 
Noes 63 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 3(1) be agreed to: 
to omit from paragraph (c) the word “end” and substitute the word “deny”.
Brownlee Gerry: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Brownlee Gerry: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16985] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. That is his third warning. I just want to know what the process is. We notice that Mr Peters has had two calls New Zealand First has had I think four— 
Opposition Members 
: Three! 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I am sorry; I thought that that party had had more than that. I thought that party had more competent members. With no disrespect intended to Mr Prebble I notice that he is now getting a second call. A number of our members want to make contributions on this part. After all unlike the ACT party we do represent constituencies and have a direct association with voters. Further I would like to say that I intend to take a second call. I would like to have an assurance that the Committee as we approach the second hour of debate on this particular part will not suddenly be bombarded by requests for closure motions. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Thank you for raising that issue. I am quite conscious of it. All parties will have their opportunity to take part.
Wilson Margaret: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Deferment 
Wilson Margaret: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Deferment 
[Volume:625;Page:20525] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No I did not hear it. However I did hear the intervention from the Hon Chris Carter which is why I asked him to leave the Chamber.
Barker Rick: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — First Reading 
Barker Rick: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20619] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister for Courts) 
: 
 I move  
That the Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill be referred to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee 
referred to Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee 
 for consideration and that the committee present its report to the House on or before 3 June 2005 and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting except during oral questions during any evening on a day in which there has been a sitting of the House on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House and outside the Wellington region on a day the House is sitting despite Standing Orders 191 193(a) and 194(1)(b) and (c).
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13048] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
The amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8. 
Noes 61 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Lindsay Tisch to clause 217 be agreed to: 
to add the following new paragraph (c): 
(c)Notwithstanding any other provision in this section any new strategy issued under section 123 must be consistent with an abstinence approach.
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:624;Page:19699] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (National—Clutha-Southland) 
: 
 I seek leave to table an email from the Minister of Education Trevor Mallard to one of his staffers in his office pointing out that he does not understand the new early childhood roster system. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that email. Is there any objection? Yes. It will not be tabled. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I seek leave to table an email from a teacher who attended a ministry training session in New Plymouth where teachers were told to ask parents to change their working hours to fit the system. 
Document not tabled.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:612;Page:8969] 
9.  
Hon DAVID CARTER (NZ National) 
 to the  
Convenor Ministerial Group on Climate Change 
: Does he stand by his description of the O’Hara report into agricultural greenhouse gas emissions research as a “comprehensive report”; if so why? 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Convenor Ministerial Group on Climate Change) 
: 
 Yes. In the forward to the report I described it as comprehensive balanced and robust; so did the co-signatory to the forward Mr Jeff Grant chairman of the Primary Industries Council. 
Hon David Carter 
: How much did the O’Hara report identify as contributions to greenhouse gas emission reduction research by farmers and farmer organisations? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: I am not sure what “How much” means. But if the member is referring to the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions on a comparison with business as usual it depends on the area of research under consideration. 
Hon David Carter 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked a very specific question about how much the O’Hara report identified as contributions. The Minister said he was not sure what I meant. I am quite happy to rephrase it by asking: How much money did the O’Hara report report? I expect the question to be answered sensibly. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thought the Minister did address the question. 
Hon David Carter 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Can you tell me how much money then because the Minister was not able to? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not up to me to say— 
Hon David Carter 
: Well you said it was addressed. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister said he did not know how much and that is a perfectly sensible answer to give. 
Janet Mackey 
: Has the O’Hara report provided the solid foundation for discussions with the agriculture sector and the science community as the Minister and Mr Grant said in the foreword? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Yes it has. Those discussions which will result in a detailed science plan decisions on managing intellectual property and management and so on are now under way. 
Hon David Carter 
: Is it not a fact that the O’Hara report was a politically contrived report written solely to justify the flatulence tax and that it totally mis-records current greenhouse gas reduction research? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: No no and no.
Carter David: New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Carter David: New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9611] 
Hon DAVID CARTER (National) 
: 
 I have two points to raise and the first is with regard to the commencement date. I am certainly not proposing that we alter the commencement date. The sooner this legislation is passed the better. I see that Mr Cosgrove is already applauding silently although I do not know quite why. I have been concerned that this legislation has sat around for so long on the Order Paper. The Primary Production Committee is always asked to rush these things back. There is a bit of a pattern around this kind of thing as the Minister in the chair the Hon Damien O’Connor will well appreciate because he spent so much time working on the committee prior to his elevation to higher things. An explanation as to why the industry has had to wait for so long would be much appreciated. 
My second point is the issue of the quantitative restrictions and the removal of the ability to apply quantitative restrictions. I refer to a number of submissioners in particular the impassioned pleas made to us by the New Zealand Avocado Industry Council Ltd and the New Zealand Avocado Growers Association. Those people were quite genuinely concerned that the removal of quantitative restrictions would allow one particular grower who has established a market to a particular destination but who is having trouble with that destination suddenly to change plans and dump a large amount of product into another market which could have an adverse effect on people who had spent some months or years establishing a credible marketing plan in that particular destination. I think the committee took note of their concerns in a very credible way. 
We acknowledge that the removal of quantitative restrictions does not mean that any grower does not have the ability to consider and formulate a marketing strategy that he or she will maintain throughout any particular season of export to any other nation. The growers were concerned about whether they would still have the ability to manage the flow of fruit on a consistent basis and according to their production processes their pack houses shipping requirements and shipping availability to any market. I think the changes the select committee has embarked on have given a level of comfort to those people who were concerned about the removal of quantitative restrictions. Certainly all members of the committee acknowledged the need for that. We must make sure as a country that is so dependent on exports—as I am sure Mr Chairman will appreciate—that we are squeaky clean. We cannot have an accusation raised against New Zealand that we are using quantitative restrictions to try to hike the price in any market. 
I would appreciate a comment from the Minister on those two points before I raise any other points of view.
Vote: Maritime Security Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Maritime Security Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12210] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Noes 111 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Amendment not agreed to and Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:623;Page:18853] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 13 be agreed to. 
Ayes 98 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 22 
New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9. 
Schedule 13 agreed to.
Vote: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21416] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 8 
Green Party 8. 
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.
Vote: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13520] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 78 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 6; United Future 8. 
Noes 28 
New Zealand National 21; ACT New Zealand 6; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Motion agreed to. 
House resumed.
Peters Winston: Motions — Presidential Election USA—Congratulations 
Peters Winston: Motions — Presidential Election USA—Congratulations 
[Volume:621;Page:16594] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 Obviously we all endorse the comments made—or most of the comments made—by previous speakers. We also say that when a growing population turns out in greater numbers than ever before there are likely to be very high numbers of votes for both the winner and the loser. But I would hope that in future rather than members of Parliament and party leaders seeking to gain a vicarious benefit from a victory they had nothing to do with whatsoever maybe it would be better and more courteous if a member who had that in mind would consult others so that we could move just one motion and then get on with our own business in our democracy.
Fairbrother Russell: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
Fairbrother Russell: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3815] 
RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (NZ Labour—Napier) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Mahuta Nanaia: Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Mahuta Nanaia: Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:621;Page:16770] 
NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Tainui) 
: 
 This bill signals yet another election commitment by this Government that has been kept. Can we fix it? Yes we can. Will it matter? Yes it does. Is this a Government that cares? Yes it is. Around 31000 older people will benefit from this bill. That amounts to about 7 percent of our population. In 1999 the Government promised to introduce legislation to remove asset testing from all forms of long-term care for older people. This bill is a step in the right direction. Asset testing is unfair. If only Maori lived to be 65 and older they would get the benefit of this legislation. If only Maori had assets valued at above about $200000— 
Lianne Dalziel 
: Who put asset testing in? 
NANAIA MAHUTA 
: The previous National Government did. When that Government introduced asset testing in no way at all did that benefit Maori. I hope that in the years to come we will have a lot more Maori living beyond 65 and realising the benefits of this legislation. Having said that it is a step in the right direction. It is a step that clearly signals that we are moving towards a fairer system. Although the policy contained in the bill will not be retrospective—it will be implemented on 1 July 2005—it is a good bill and a step in the right direction. It will help many older people and it will make a difference to many people. 
Pita Paraone 
: What about Maori? 
NANAIA MAHUTA 
: As soon as Maori get out and walk the pavements and live to a ripe old age they will certainly reap the benefits of this legislation.
Vote: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:619;Page:14867] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 36 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 7; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Schedule 1 agreed to.
Voting — Correction 
Voting — Correction 
[Volume:618;Page:13756] 
Voting 
Correction 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Before I adjourn the House I advise members there is a correction to a vote. The result of the vote on the question that the amendment to the amendment to the amendment be agreed to on the second reading of the Appropriation (2004/05 Estimates) Bill was incorrectly announced. The correct result is Ayes 9 Noes 108.
Hughes Darren: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Hughes Darren: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:623;Page:18721] 
DARREN HUGHES (Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 With the exception of the ACT party at the fringes of politics all parties in this Parliament will be supporting this bill receiving its third reading tonight. There have been many speakers from across the political divide which shows that we can come together on important matters like this. The bill increases penalties tenfold improves the abilities of the Department of Internal Affairs to complete its investigations—I note that it has an almost 100 percent success record—and also moves the law in this area into the 21st century particularly around issues concerning the Internet where most images of children are unfortunately traded very cheaply and very quickly. The law we currently have is from 1993. Mr Goff’s law brings that up to 2005 and I am pleased to support the comments that have been made by every party in Parliament with the exception of ACT which for some reason has not stood with the consensus on this matter and has put itself at a very peculiar fringe of New Zealand politics.
Power Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Power Simon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:617;Page:12546] 
7.  
SIMON POWER (National—Rangitikei) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does she have confidence in the Minister for ACC and the Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment (CYF); if so why? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes because she is a hard-working and conscientious Minister. 
Simon Power 
: Does the Prime Minister believe that it is acceptable for a Minister to portray to Parliament that a taxpayer grant was not used to buy a computer for a teenage offender and then admit it had been and to respond to written questions that there had been no cases of work-related stress in the Accident Compensation Corporation since mid-2003 when such cases had been raised with her by the National Union of Public Employees; if so why? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: My recollection of the first matter is that the Minister was asked whether the computer had been given as a carrot and she correctly said “No”. I also understand that the Speaker has ruled there is no privilege case to answer on the matter. On the second question the Minister answered the question on advice from the Accident Compensation Corporation. The question was: have any claims of work-related stress been reported within the Accident Compensation Corporation; if so how many in each of the last 5 years? She answered on the basis of the information that was given. I understand that the corporation has acknowledged to the Minister that it should have provided her with better background to explain the complexity. 
Peter Brown 
: Is the Prime Minister aware that significant concerns are held by accident victims over accident compensation outcomes and treatments that there are also concerns with regard to the culture of the Accident Compensation Corporation and allegations of its bullying of staff and in addition that physiotherapists have problems with the Accident Compensation Corporation; if she is aware of all that does she still have confidence in her Minister for ACC? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I am now aware that the National Union of Public Employees has raised issues of what it says is bullying by Accident Compensation Corporation managers. Those allegations certainly need to be investigated because it is not acceptable to this Government that managers bully staff. As for claimants not feeling happy with Accident Compensation Corporation decisions I imagine that will happen as long as there is an Accident Compensation Corporation and there are claimants. But the corporation has clear rules which it must apply. 
Simon Power 
: Does the Prime Minister believe that it is acceptable then for a Minister to release the private information of 1354 children in foster care; and when will she just admit that that Minister is hopeless and sack her? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I have heard the Minister deal with that issue in full in the House today. That list was not attached to the document that she saw and signed out.
Barker Rick: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Barker Rick: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7750] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill that it take the bill part by part and consider any schedules as one question.
Vote: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
Vote: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
[Volume:624;Page:19194] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the Estate and Gift Duties Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 76 
Anderton(P) 
Duynhoven   
Laban(P) 
Samuels(P) 
Barker(P) 
Dyson(P) 
Locke (P) 
Shirley(P) 
Barnett (P) 
Ewen-Street(P) 
Mackey J (P) 
Simich(P) 
Benson-Pope(P) 
Fairbrother(P) 
Mackey M 
Sowry(P) 
Beyer   
Fitzsimons(P) 
Maharey(P) 
Sutton(P) 
Bradford(P) 
Gallagher   
Mahuta(P) 
Swain(P) 
Burton(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mallard(P) 
Tamihere(P) 
Carter C (P) 
Gosche(P) 
Mapp(P) 
Tanczos(P) 
Chadwick(P) 
Hartley(P) 
Mark(P) 
Tizard   
Choudhary(P) 
Hawkins(P) 
McCully(P) 
Turei   
Clark(P) 
Hereora(P) 
O'Connor(P) 
Ward(P) 
Coddington(P) 
Hide(P) 
Okeroa(P) 
Williamson(P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Hobbs(P) 
Parker(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Cullen(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Peck(P) 
Wong(P) 
Cunliffe(P) 
Horomia(P) 
Pillay(P) 
Yates (P) 
Dalziel(P) 
Hughes   
Rich(P) 
Donald(P) 
Hunt(P) 
Ririnui(P) 
Donnelly(P) 
Kedgley(P) 
Robertson(P) 
Duncan(P) 
Key(P) 
Robson(P) 
Teller: 
Dunne(P) 
King(P) 
Roy(P) 
Pettis   
Noes 44 
Adams   
Copeland(P) 
Paraone(P) 
te Heuheu(P) 
Alexander(P) 
Eckhoff(P) 
Perry(P) 
Turia(P) 
Ardern(P) 
English(P) 
Peters J (P) 
Turner(P) 
Baldock(P) 
Franks   
Peters W (P) 
Wang(P) 
Brash(P) 
Goudie(P) 
Power(P) 
Woolerton(P) 
Brown (P) 
Gudgeon(P) 
Prebble(P) 
Worth(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Heatley(P) 
Ryall(P) 
Carter D (P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Scott(P) 
Carter J (P) 
Jones   
Smith L (P) 
Catchpole   
McNair(P) 
Smith M (P) 
Collins(P) 
Newman(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Teller: 
Connell   
Ogilvy(P) 
Stewart(P) 
Tisch   
Bill read a third time.
Vote: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
Vote: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5580] 
A party vote was called for on the question That  
the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 69 
Noes 45 
Amendments agreed to. 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6.
Dyson Ruth: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Dyson Ruth: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:17140] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for ACC) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Cullen Michael: Retirement Villages Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH 
Cullen Michael: Retirement Villages Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH 
[Volume:610;Page:7874] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Retirement Villages Bill that it take the bill part by part and consider any schedules as one question.
Vote: Retirement Villages Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Retirement Villages Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9444] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Retirement Villages Bill be now read a third time.  
Ayes 108 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 7. 
Noes 7 
ACT New Zealand 7. 
Bill read a third time.
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Replies to Written Questions—Adequacy 
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Replies to Written Questions—Adequacy 
[Volume:620;Page:15867] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I tell the member that I have been here 38 years as he knows. I myself lodged many hundreds of questions as an Opposition MP. I doubt whether I was ever entirely satisfied with the answer. I will however judge any issue that is brought to me as Speaker.
Cullen Michael: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Cullen Michael: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14316] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 When the Chair or the Speaker is declaring a vote I am sure he or she is judging where the majority lies in terms of the votes cast. The fact that one member of the Committee even called for a vote to be taken on the matter separately— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: No he called on the vote. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Let me finish my sentence or two. He called for a vote to be taken separately on the issue. [ 
Interruption 
] Yes the member did. He actually rose on a point of order and sought to take that vote separately from the other votes in this section and then voted against. The Chair was perfectly in order to assume that the other parties present were voting in favour and called the vote in favour of the affirmative particularly on an estimates position where clearly the two Government parties automatically can be assumed to be voting in favour of the motion. 
I have been in this House on a number of occasions when people have not voted on their voice—even in the days when there were divisions. It was not necessarily assumed that they were not voting at that point. But if the member wants to take up the estimates time which is a time-limited debate with points of order of this sort then that can certainly happen but I would have thought the Opposition’s time was better spent on debate.
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) Health and Safety in Employment Amendment Bill (No 2) Human Rights Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Vote: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) Health and Safety in Employment Amendment Bill (No 2) Human Rights Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:621;Page:16286] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Human Rights Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 63 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Bill read a third time.
Pettis Jill: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Pettis Jill: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:8988] 
JILL PETTIS (NZ Labour—Whanganui) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I did not interrupt the member because he has 5 minutes only but the phrase he was using has already been ruled out of order. I ask that he stand withdraw and apologise.
Vote: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Vote: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20292] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 2 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 110 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 9 
ACT New Zealand 9. 
Clause 2 as amended agreed to. 
Bill reported with amendment. 
Report adopted.
Carter John: Financial Review Debate — Procedure In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Carter John: Financial Review Debate — Procedure In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:616;Page:11843] 
JOHN CARTER (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I seek clarification because this is a little different from what was signalled originally. Is it correct that following the debate on the Minister of Finance’s votes we will be moving on to the Prime Minister’s and the Speaker’s votes? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The Speaker’s votes first.
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 27 
New Zealand National 27. 
Noes 90 
Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Green Party 9; 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)(iii).
Benson-Pope David: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
Benson-Pope David: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:8944] 
DAVID BENSON-POPE (Senior Whip—NZ Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Ngati Tama Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Ngati Tama Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:613;Page:10184] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Noes 107 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 25; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
Part 3 agreed to.
Dunne Peter: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure 
Dunne Peter: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:613;Page:9954] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 Under Standing Order 71 I want to move that members’ order of the day No. 1 be postponed until the first members’ day after 1 March 2004. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: We are coming to the general debate now. 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am aware that the Leader of the House is to move some motions a little later on that will have the impact of making some change in the order of that debate. My understanding is that as the Leader of the House his motions will take precedence over mine. If I can have your assurance that I can move this motion at a later time I certainly will do so but the reason for seeking to move it now is to ensure that the opportunity to move it is not lost. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will do it by leave now. Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is. We proceed to the general debate.
King Annette: Care of Children Bill — Instruction to Committee Procedure In Committee 
King Annette: Care of Children Bill — Instruction to Committee Procedure In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16668] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Health) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Ryall Tony: Motions — Floods—Eastern Bay of Plenty 
Ryall Tony: Motions — Floods—Eastern Bay of Plenty 
[Volume:618;Page:14293] 
Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay Of Plenty) 
: 
 I move  
That the House note the recent severe flooding in the Eastern Bay of Plenty with consequent damage to homes farms roads and stopbanks; express its sympathy to the family of the late Mrs Beverley Freeman and further commend the tireless efforts of the emergency services and the many hundreds of volunteers assisting families and farmers in the huge recovery ahead.
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Electoral Act—Debate on Report of Privileges Committee 
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Electoral Act—Debate on Report of Privileges Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7896] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The question of a vacancy— 
Rod Donald 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not need any further assistance. The question of vacancy arose and has been dealt with. There is no longer anything for the Speaker to rule on. It is up to members themselves if they wish to promote amendments to the Electoral Act but not for the Speaker.