edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Peck Mark: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peck Mark: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:616;Page:11720] 
11.  
MARK PECK (Labour—Invercargill) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Energy 
: What announcements did he make during the New Zealand Petroleum Conference held in Auckland recently? 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Associate Minister of Energy) 
: 
 During the Petroleum Conference I was pleased to announce the commencement of the offshore Northland block offer which will run for 9 months. Research by the Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences on the Northland Basin is showing signs that there is significant potential for North Sea - sized oilfields and gasfields to be present in that area. 
Mark Peck 
: How did this year’s conference differ from previous years? 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN 
: Remarkably. The 2004 Petroleum Conference demonstrated that there has never been a better time to explore in New Zealand. Conference participation was up considerably by over 25 percent on previous years and over 500 delegates were registered. During the conference Contact Energy and Mighty River Power also announced their intention to establish an $80 million fund to accelerate exploration for new gas resources. That initiative along with the new Northland block offer is excellent news for the industry in New Zealand. Overall I have to say it was a conference that was really buzzing.
Brownlee Gerry: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Brownlee Gerry: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:17098] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. You have just asked members to calm down and take a deep breath. All that members are doing—and there are considerable numbers of them—is trying to get a call. They sense that the Government eager to get off this very embarrassing part is about to start bombarding the Committee with closure motions and that at some point no doubt you will refer to a bit of paper see that the clock has reached a particular point and accept a closure motion. That is just not fair.
Simich Clem: Prostitution Reform Bill — In Committee 
Simich Clem: Prostitution Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5205] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Before we commence this debate I have a few announcements to make. The typescript amendments in the name of Stephen Franks have now been placed on a printed Supplementary Order Paper. It is Supplementary Order Paper 71. Supplementary Order Paper 70 in the name of the Hon Phil Goff has been withdrawn and replaced by Supplementary Order Paper 83. A list of all the amendments to Parts 1 to 3 and the schedule together with a brief description of each amendment as at 2 p.m. today has been prepared to assist members with voting. All those papers are available at the Table.
Carter Chris: Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Carter Chris: Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12478] 
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Local Government) 
: 
 I move  
That the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill be referred to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee 
referred to Transport and Industrial Relations Committee 
 for consideration that the committee report by 14 June 2004 and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sittingexcept during oral questions and during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House and outside the Wellington area on a day the House is sitting despite Standing Orders 191 193(a) and 194(1)(b) and (c).
Okeroa Mahara: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Okeroa Mahara: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16479] 
MAHARA OKEROA (Labour—Te Tai Tonga) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Tizard Judith: Standing Orders—Sessional 
Tizard Judith: Standing Orders—Sessional 
[Volume:614;Page:10751] 
Hon JUDITH TIZARD (Minister of Consumer Affairs) 
 on behalf of the 
 Leader of the House 
: I seek leave for the requirement that the Local Government and Environment Committee report on compliance with the Standing Orders in respect of local bills to continue to apply to any local bill before a select committee on 10 February 2004. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:616;Page:11989] 
Business Statement 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week in the House priority will be given to the Committee stage of the Income Tax Bill. Following the conclusion of that urgency will be taken. An email has gone to all party whips outlining the business to be included in the urgency motion. Urgency will certainly not go beyond 6 o’clock on Friday. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before Mr Brownlee comments I would like to refer to a matter that occurred yesterday in the House. I would like to ask Mr Brownlee whether he made a disparaging remark about the Chair as he left the House. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Sorry? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: A remark was made by the member when he was asked to leave the House. Did he make a disparaging remark about the Chair at the time? 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 No. I made a remark about a course of action that I intended to pursue. I have done that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That ends the matter. 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 Given that the Leader of the House has published the urgency motion which has a reasonable amount of business in it and noting that much of that business is hardly of the urgent nature that urgency would portend can we expect that provision will be made for question time on Wednesday and Thursday of next week—noting of course that the Government at this time would have no fears about being placed under scrutiny by the Opposition? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Certainly the latter is true. However to come to the point raised by the member as is always the case that is a matter for discussion between myself and the other parties. Of course if we finish by 1 o’clock on Wednesday or by 1 o’clock on Thursday question time will follow automatically. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 Given that Easter is soon to be upon us and that for the umpteenth time nothing has been done in respect of giving the local community a chance to trade on Easter Sunday can I ask Dr Cullen whether the Government intends to give that legislation any priority at all? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 The bill that deals with Easter Sunday trading is a member’s bill. It would be open to the member to seek leave to take that bill under urgency at the conclusion of Government business in the urgency motion. I for one certainly would not oppose that. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I so move. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to have that bill considered as part of the urgency motion at the end of the other listed items. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Vote: Shop Trading Hours (Easter Trading Local Exemption) Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Shop Trading Hours (Easter Trading Local Exemption) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:15508] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the Shop Trading Hours (Easter Trading Local Exemption) Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 56 
Alexander   
Eckhoff   
Paraone (P) 
Sowry (P) 
Awatere Huata  
Franks 
Peck   
Stewart   
Beyer (P) 
Goudie (P) 
Perry (P) 
Sutton (P) 
Brash (P) 
Gudgeon (P) 
Peters J (P) 
Swain (P) 
Brown   
Hide   
Power   
Tamihere (P) 
Carter D (P) 
Hodgson (P) 
Prebble   
Tisch   
Catchpole (P) 
Hunt (P) 
Rich (P) 
Williamson (P) 
Chadwick   
Jones (P) 
Robertson (P) 
Wilson (P) 
Clark (P) 
Key (P) 
Roy  
Wong (P) 
Coddington   
Mackey J 
Ryall (P) 
Woolerton(P) 
Collins (P) 
Mapp (P) 
Samuels (P) 
Connell   
Mark (P) 
Scott (P) 
Cullen (P) 
McCully (P) 
Shirley (P) 
Donnelly (P) 
McNair (P) 
Simich (P) 
Teller: 
Dunne (P) 
Newman 
Smith L (P) 
Hutchison   
Noes 61 
Adams   
Dalziel (P) 
Hereora (P) 
Robson (P) 
Anderton (P) 
Donald (P) 
Hobbs (P) 
Smith M 
Ardern (P) 
Duncan (P) 
Horomia (P) 
Smith N 
Baldock (P) 
Duynhoven (P) 
Kedgley   
Tanczos (P) 
Barker   
Dyson (P) 
King   
te Heuheu (P) 
Barnett   
English (P) 
Laban (P) 
Tizard 
Benson-Pope   
Ewen-Street (P) 
Locke   
Turei (P) 
Bradford (P) 
Fairbrother (P) 
Mackey M (P) 
Turia (P) 
Brownlee   
Field   
Maharey (P) 
Turner (P) 
Burton (P) 
Fitzsimons (P) 
Mallard (P) 
Ward (P) 
Carter C (P) 
Gallagher   
O'Connor (P) 
Worth (P) 
Carter J 
Goff (P) 
Ogilvy   
Yates(P) 
Choudhary (P) 
Gosche (P) 
Okeroa (P) 
Copeland (P) 
Hartley (P) 
Parker (P) 
Cosgrove   
Hawkins 
Pillay (P) 
Teller: 
Cunliffe (P) 
Heatley (P) 
Ririnui (P) 
Pettis 
Motion not agreed to.
Franks Stephen: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Franks Stephen: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:16347] 
STEPHEN FRANKS (ACT) 
: 
 I was hoping that this might be seen by the Chair as a matter that affects Parliament generally and not seen just as a hobby horse of Mr Brown. I do not think that this is a party matter—this is a matter where we all have an interest in not looking as if we are colluding in trying to hide our views on these matters where there is strong emotions.
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Local Government—Election Results 
Hunt Jonathan: Urgent Debates Declined — Local Government—Election Results 
[Volume:620;Page:16099] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: All the member can conclude is that he did not comply with the Standing Orders which I have to administer. The Standing Order has been in existence ever since I have been in this House for 38 years. It has not changed.
Scott Lynda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Scott Lynda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:607;Page:4536] 
Dr LYNDA SCOTT (NZ National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 I wish to insert the words: “regarding the spread of SARS” after the word “population” as this was inadvertently missed from the original question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that? There is not. Please read the question as amended.
Peck Mark: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Peck Mark: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6507] 
MARK PECK (NZ Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question Time 
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question Time 
[Volume:610;Page:7442] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think that there is probably an additional point that could be made and it has to do with our using the advice of experienced members of the House. I think that on occasions like this it would have been more appropriate to invite one of the most experienced National Party members Mr Williamson to come to the front rather than to have him in the gallery.
Copeland Gordon: Prostitution Reform Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Copeland Gordon: Prostitution Reform Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4457] 
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
: 
 I wish to move an amendment to the title of this bill. My amendment is to omit the words “Prostitution Reform Act 2000” and to substitute the words “Prostitution Solicitation Pimping and Brothel-keeping Legalisation Act 2003”. Although based on the feedback I have received this is not yet clear to the public by now it should certainly be clear to the members of this House that prostitution in and of itself—that is the buying and selling of sex—is already legal in New Zealand. In spite of that I noted during the second reading of the bill that a number of members continued to state simplistically that the aim of this bill was to decriminalise prostitution. Even within this House therefore it would appear that members remain confused about what this bill is intended to do. This bill will in fact decriminalise soliciting pimping—that is living off the proceeds of prostitution—and brothel-keeping the three things listed as crimes in the Crimes Act. If that is the reality then let us simply give the bill a correct title. 
I will continue to vote against this bill. I do not agree with the decriminalisation of soliciting pimping and brothel-keeping. Prostitution is an extremely high-risk and a dangerous occupation for any woman from both a physical and an emotional point of view. But without in any way minimising that reality prostitution is also bad for men and bad for families. I was staggered to learn that New Zealand has a higher per capita number of prostitutes than the Netherlands which is regarded as the “sex for sale” capital of Europe. I asked myself how that could possibly be. Then I discovered that the rate of sole parent and therefore fatherless families in New Zealand is 3.5 times higher than in the Netherlands. What do members think all those missing men do? If those men are married they commit adultery and that is a wrong against their wives. If they are fathers then every time that they make a payment of $100 for sex—the figure mentioned by Judith Collins—that is in effect money stolen from the support of their children. 
When we look at prostitution in those terms we see we simply cannot risk further stimulating the demand for prostitutes in this country. Yet in my view that is exactly what this bill will do. I ask all members to examine their conscience clearly and objectively on this issue. If they knew for certain that an additional 500 women would be drawn into prostitution as a result of our passing this legislation would they vote for it? Would they vote for it if the number were 100 10 or just one? In the  
Lord of the Rings 
 trilogy Sam said when they were approaching Mordor: “This was not supposed to happen Mr Frodo.” Frodo replied: “Many things have happened Sam that were not supposed to have happened.” Members should think carefully and examine their own conscience about whether the decriminalisation of soliciting pimping and brothel-keeping is supposed to happen in New Zealand in 2003.
Mallard Trevor: Urgent Debates Declined — Tertiary Education Savings Scheme—Government Policy 
Mallard Trevor: Urgent Debates Declined — Tertiary Education Savings Scheme—Government Policy 
[Volume:624;Page:19374] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I just make it clear that the report on which the member relies was grossly inaccurate.
Hide Rodney: Election of Speaker 
Hide Rodney: Election of Speaker 
[Volume:623;Page:18948] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 Madam Speaker-Elect I rise on behalf of the ACT party to congratulate you on your election. It is no mean feat to be elected Speaker. It is a proud day for New Zealand in the sense that we now have women who have succeeded in the top three posts in our country: Governor-General Prime Minister and now Speaker and that is something that we should all be very proud of.  
 I hope that you will still see a place for men in this House but we certainly realise that you have got here on merit. We on this side of the House are pleased that you have promised to apply the rules and to be fair. In doing so I am afraid that you will have to leave your friendships and colleagues behind. No longer will you get the sense that you are on that side protecting the Government from the sometimes trivial sometimes zany but oftentimes serious questions of the Opposition MPs. 
Parliament is as the Prime Minister said the heart of our democracy. The executive has to come to the Chamber and answer to Parliament and in that way to the representatives of the people. That is a huge check and balance on the use of Government power and taxpayers’ money. I hope you will remember all the back-bench MPs all the Opposition parties and especially the smaller parties that have brought so much colour to this Parliament and may I say on behalf of us all so much insight. 
I believe that you have a good model to follow in the previous Speaker the Rt Hon Jonathan Hunt in the sense that he applied the rules and he applied them fairly. We often had cause to object but we know now with your observance of the Rt Hon Jonathan Hunt and our questioning of him that you will go further down the track of supporting Opposition MPs in their questioning of Ministers. I think that this in particular is an opportunity to thank the Rt Hon Jonathan Hunt for his contribution and most important for his love of Parliament his support of all MPs and his great sense of humour. I know that you bring those qualities to the Chair as well. On behalf of the ACT party I would like you to remember always that each and every one of us views you as Parliament’s lady and we are here to help.
Vote: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:624;Page:19104] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 67 
Anderton(P) 
Dyson(P) 
Laban(P) 
Samuels(P) 
Barnett(P) 
Ewen-Street(P) 
Locke(P) 
Shirley(P) 
Benson-Pope(P) 
Fairbrother(P) 
Mackey J (P) 
Simich  
Beyer(P) 
Fitzsimons(P) 
Mackey M 
Sutton(P) 
Bradford(P) 
Gallagher  
Maharey(P) 
Swain(P) 
Burton(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Tamihere(P) 
Carter C (P) 
Gosche(P) 
Mallard(P) 
Tanczos(P) 
Chadwick  
Hartley(P) 
Mapp  
Tizard(P) 
Choudhary(P) 
Hawkins(P) 
O'Connor(P) 
Turei(P) 
Clark(P) 
Hereora(P) 
Okeroa(P) 
Ward(P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Hide(P) 
Parker(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Cullen(P) 
Hobbs  
Peck(P) 
Yates  
Cunliffe(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Pettis 
Dalziel(P) 
Horomia  
Pillay(P) 
Donald  
Hughes  
Ririnui(P) 
Duncan(P) 
Hunt(P) 
Robertson(P) 
Dunne(P) 
Kedgley(P) 
Robson(P) 
Teller: 
Duynhoven(P) 
King(P) 
Roy(P) 
Barker  
Noes 50 
Adams(P) 
Eckhoff(P) 
Paraone(P) 
te Heuheu(P) 
Alexander(P) 
English(P) 
Perry(P) 
Turia(P) 
Ardern(P) 
Franks  
Peters J 
Turner(P) 
Baldock(P) 
Goudie(P) 
Peters W (P) 
Williamson(P) 
Brash(P) 
Gudgeon(P) 
Power(P) 
Wong(P) 
Brown  
Heatley(P) 
Prebble(P) 
Woolerton(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Rich(P) 
Worth(P) 
Carter D (P) 
Jones(P) 
Ryall(P) 
Carter J (P) 
Key(P) 
Scott(P) 
Catchpole(P) 
Mark(P) 
Smith L (P) 
Collins(P) 
McCully(P) 
Smith M 
Connell(P) 
McNair(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Copeland(P) 
Newman(P) 
Sowry(P) 
Teller: 
Donnelly(P) 
Ogilvy(P) 
Stewart(P) 
Tisch  
Amendments agreed to. 
Progress reported. 
Report adopted.
Gallagher Martin: Financial Review Debate 
Gallagher Martin: Financial Review Debate 
[Volume:607;Page:4186] 
MARTIN GALLAGHER (NZ Labour—Hamilton West) 
: 
 I want to speak about a virus that is of some concern which we believe comes from Asia. I do not know whether it is a viral attack but the Opposition benches have suffered and are suffering from a collective attack of amnesia. It is mind-boggling how their brains stop when they go back before 1999 when for 9 long years they were the Government. 
I want to take this brief opportunity in the financial review debate tonight to talk about Vote Police. I remind the House of something that the National Opposition certainly wants us to forget but we have not forgotten. One of the first things the Labour-led Government did when it came office was to cancel National’s planned $24 million cuts to police spending. National’s cost-cutting would have meant fewer police staff rusty old police cars and run-down police stations—something that the Opposition does not want to remind us of at this point. All that cost-cutting—of which we have the written evidence—took its toll and during its last 4 years in office National spent an average of $725000 per year on police stations. 
It is all very well for Mr Ryall to go on about needing to increase the appropriation for Vote Police but funding for police vehicles almost vanished under his Government. In 1996-97 140 police vehicles only were purchased. In the current financial year the Government will spend around $960 million on Vote Police. That funding reverses the cost-cutting promoted by National. The Labour-led Government is spending about $60 million over 5 years to rebuild police stations. If members want an example of the performance of MPs Mark Peck is getting a new police station for Invercargill. That is because Mark Peck got off his chuff and lobbied. Ross Robertson is getting a new police station in Howick. That excellent member Darren Hughes who is well known to the deputy leader of the official Opposition is getting a new police station in Paraparaumu. Not bad! What was the record of his predecessor? It was a few rusty old cars tanking around Otaki and no police station. Under Darren Hughes there are new cars and a new police station. David Parker is a very good member. In fact he is so good that over the weekend the press mistook him for a new Cabinet Minister. That is the impact David Parker is having. He is getting a new police station in Oamaru and he has also got a new police station for Waikouaiti. Those are the kinds of members we have on this side. 
A greater level of funding has meant modernisation of police vehicles. During National’s last 5 years it acquired around 270 new police vehicles each year. In Labour’s first 3 years in office 480 new police vehicles were purchased each year. That is a 75 percent increase under this Government. It is good government and good Vote Police appropriation.
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
Cullen Michael: Business Statement 
[Volume:611;Page:8183] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Yes I can confirm that there is no intention at this point to take any urgency in this 4-week period barring any untoward judicial decisions that might occur between now and the end of it. I anticipate getting the second reading of the Organisms and Other Matters Bill done in this 4-week session but probably there will not be a great deal more progress than that.
Tisch Lindsay: Smoke-free Environments (Exemptions) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Tisch Lindsay: Smoke-free Environments (Exemptions) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:627;Page:22085] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 That is correct.
Mallard Trevor: State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Mallard Trevor: State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12178] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I want to speak relatively briefly to draw the attention of members to the amendments. I have not yet heard anyone refer to the amendments that have been sitting on the Table for some time. There are now three amendments. There is a Supplementary Order Paper in my name. There is a minor amendment to that and there is also the Greens’ amendment. The only reason for speaking is to draw members’ attention to them so that they do not get a fright later on. I notice that National Party members especially had not quite picked up the fact that the amendments were there.
Tizard Judith: Charities Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Tizard Judith: Charities Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19967] 
Hon JUDITH TIZARD (Minister of Consumer Affairs) 
: 
 I thank members for their very useful contributions. I think it is a pity that Mr Jones did not have more discussions with the very good New Zealand First members who were present for the submissions on this legislation. If he had he would have heard about cases where for example a person helping to run an athletics club in which a charitable trust is involved may have a driving conviction or some issue of that sort. I think we want charities to be as free as possible to represent the communities for which they are working and for a range of people to be enabled. 
The point was made that many education trusts have been a means by which people have gone on into business and into self-employment in all sorts of ways. People get governance experience through community organisations. Sometimes they are trustees sometimes they are members of charitable trusts and sometimes they are not. The Government is satisfied that the provisions around who can and cannot be a trustee are satisfactory without prescribing exactly what people may have been convicted or not convicted of. The point was made that a member of parliament might be affected. I hope that the widest range of people will realise that working for communities is beneficial gives people a great deal of hope and energy in life and can often help individuals families and communities. The Government is very happy with the new state. I thank New Zealand First for its comments but I assure Mr Dail Jones that those issues were considered. 
On the issue that was raised by I think Katherine Rich relating to clause 26 I just point out that the deregistration power is discretionary—it is not obligatory. I would expect the Charities Commission to go through a range of choices and discussions with any charity before that charity is deregistered but the commission should have the power if it is clear that fraudulent behaviour is systemic in a charity to deregister that charity quite quickly. 
Of course all of that comes back to the fact that the establishment of the Charities Commission is a result of working parties discussion papers and a great deal of work going back—as Mr Copeland has very helpfully pointed out—to the 1980s. It is a result of the voluntary sector’s desire to have a commission that is separate from the Government. In the first instance it will clearly be funded by the Government but it will be separate from the Government. That matter was discussed in some detail and at some length in the Social Services Committee. The commission will be independent. It will have the responsibility of educating enabling and providing support and information to charities. 
I thank members of the Committee for their useful comments. I hope that this new legislation will be what hundreds of organisations have asked for and will be of service to the thousands of charities that serve New Zealand so well.
Samuels Dover: Aquaculture Reform Bill — Second Reading Instructions to Committee In Committee 
Samuels Dover: Aquaculture Reform Bill — Second Reading Instructions to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17718] 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS (Minister of State) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:612;Page:8966] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I would like to be absolutely clear about what you are saying. Where for example the criminal record of someone who has been accused of and is being tried for a crime is not made available to the jury but a member of Parliament becomes aware of it would it be perfectly reasonable for that member of Parliament to put that criminal record into the public arena by disclosing it here in this House?
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:615;Page:11581] 
Business Statement 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week the House will go into a 1-week adjournment. When the House returns on Tuesday 16 March priority will be given to the third reading of the Civil Aviation Amendment Bill and the remaining stages of the Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill to the Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 2) and to the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Transitional Provisions and Controls) Amendment Bill. I will be seeking the support of all parties to take through all stages quickly a Tax Administration Act amendment bill that will enable the Inland Revenue Department to react positively to the situation in flood-affected areas. 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 Noting that the progress on the Government’s legislation in the last 4 weeks has been particularly slow can members expect a long dose of urgency at some stage during the next parliamentary session and would the Leader of the House be able to indicate whether he would have support for that urgency to go beyond the standard 6 o’clock on Friday night? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I think reasonable progress has been made in the last 4 weeks without any urgency but the Government has a very busy programme coming up in the next 4-week session so members can anticipate the probability of some urgency in the third week of that session with the intention being to lift the House by 6 o’clock on Friday.
Gosche Mark: General Debates 
Gosche Mark: General Debates 
[Volume:617;Page:12860] 
Hon MARK GOSCHE (Labour—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 I seek leave to table the documents I referred to which are letters from the Office of the Controller and Auditor-General the Ministry of Transport and Cabinet papers. 
Documents by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Tisch Lindsay: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:16346] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 National concurs with your ruling Madam Chairperson as we did the last time this subject came up. The member said he was unaware that names would not be divulged but it is very clear— 
Peter Brown 
: That’s not the point. 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: No it is very clear that the House gave leave which I sought. Every party agreed to it otherwise it would not have happened and we would have gone back to a party vote system. I recall that Mr Brown actually sought the leave of the House to have a party vote when he was not happy with the result the last time this subject came up. The member sought leave and it was denied because we were already proceeding by way of a split vote. We have agreed that on this bill there can be split votes and that is the way it has to remain. Simon Power and Minister Burton have identified the process that can be gone through and we concur with that. Unfortunately in the member’s case the House has given leave and that is the process we need to follow through to its conclusion. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: I have ruled on this matter. It is a very simple ruling. There is nothing more to be said or added to the ruling.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:615;Page:11159] 
Thursday 19 February 2004 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business Statement 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week in the House priority will be given to progressing the Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Amendment Bill the Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill the Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Bill and the Resource Management (Energy and Climate Change) Amendment Bill.
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Assistant Speaker Simich—Ruling Questioned by Member Ahmed Zaoui—Birthday 
Hunt Jonathan: Points of Order — Assistant Speaker Simich—Ruling Questioned by Member Ahmed Zaoui—Birthday 
[Volume:622;Page:17422] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have now had enough. In the presence of so many distinguished parliamentarians I think that some people’s conduct is a little bit silly today. That point has been made. The balloons will not be shown here. If there is any noise the members concerned will leave the Chamber.
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:17144] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 11 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 109 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 302 in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen to schedule 3 be agreed to.
Vote: Identity (Citizenship and Travel Documents) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Identity (Citizenship and Travel Documents) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20119] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 10 
Green Party 8; Maori Party 1; Other: Robson. 
Noes 105 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 25; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8; Progressive 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Keith Locke to clause 6 be agreed to: 
to omit subclause (2) and substitute the following new subclause: 
Section 6 of the principal Act is amended by repealing subsection (3) and substituting the following subsection: 
(3)Notwithstanding subsection (2) of this section every person born in New Zealand on or after the 1st day of January 1978 shall be a New Zealand citizen by birth if he would otherwise be stateless.
Vote: Appropriation (2003/04 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
Vote: Appropriation (2003/04 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
[Volume:610;Page:7707] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Appropriation (2003/04 Estimates) Bill be now read a third time and the Imprest Supply (Second for 2003/04) Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 62 
Labour 52; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 57 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Green Party 9. 
Appropriation (2003/04 Estimates) Bill read a third time and Imprest Supply (Second for 2003/04) Bill read a second time.
Vote: Urgency 
Vote: Urgency 
[Volume:608;Page:5358] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That extraordinary urgency be accorded the introduction and passing of the Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill. 
Ayes 71 
Noes 44 
Motion agreed to. 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 12; ACT New Zealand 5.
Fairbrother Russell: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Fairbrother Russell: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:6790] 
RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (NZ Labour—Napier) 
: I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The question is that the question be now put. As many as are of that opinion will say “Aye”; to the contrary “No”. The Ayes have it?
Robertson H V Ross: Legislation (Incorporation by Reference) Bill — Instruction to Committee Second Reading Instruction to Committee Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Legislation (Incorporation by Reference) Bill — Instruction to Committee Second Reading Instruction to Committee Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:19796] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Before I call the next member I just say that I had referred the member on my left to Standing Order 115 “Offensive or disorderly words”. I expect the member to understand by that that I took offence at the use of that word. 
Hon David Carter 
: It’s OK for John Tamihere. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: In this debating chamber we have a certain standard.
Cullen Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Cullen Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:610;Page:7135] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 First of all the comments referred to were quite clearly made by the Associate Minister of Justice. Had a determination been made that they were to be addressed to the Prime Minister I think you would have found yourself contesting the authenticity of the claims that were being made.
Robertson H V Ross: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16040] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member should know that it is highly disorderly to interject when votes are being cast. It can actually be seen as a form of intimidation and can ultimately amount to a breach of privilege.
English Bill: Motions — Crop and Food Research—Air Accident 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
English Bill: Motions — Crop and Food Research—Air Accident 
[Sitting date: 10 June 2003. Volume:609;Page:6038. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 The Opposition supports the Government motion and extends its condolences to the families of those who were lost. Even though Christchurch may be regarded as a large city there is no doubt that the loss of this number of lives will have a big effect on it. New Zealand is a small country and on behalf of some of my constituents whose brother was the pilot and who are also good friends of mine I can say that they will live with the effects of this for some time. Also the science community in New Zealand has lost some people who were friends and colleagues and who as the Minister has said were starting to make a significant impact as a group of people on the progress of New Zealand science. 
We also offer our support to Paul Tocker who is the chief executive of Crop and Food Research and who is known to many of us. He now has the task of taking the team that he leads through this difficult time and as the Minister proposed rebuilding it quickly. I compliment the Minister on meeting people from Crop and Food Research as soon as he was able to after the tragedy. As has been pointed out the staff who were lost had unique skills. Among them were those who had both national and international reputations but despite the opportunities they may have had elsewhere they chose to work in New Zealand because of the contribution they could make to this country. Those who knew them have the comfort of knowing that even with this loss they left the legacy of their work from which the whole community will benefit. 
Finally I record our thanks as members of Parliament to all those who contribute every day to the safety of air travel which we all take for granted. Every time we get on either a commercial or a charter flight we believe that we will arrive at our destination safely. This tragedy has taught all of us who fly so often that we cannot take that for granted.
Amended answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 9 to Minister 3 August 
Amended answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 9 to Minister 3 August 
[Volume:619;Page:14686] 
Amended answers to Oral Questions 
Question No. 9 to Minister 3 August 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE (Minister of Youth Affairs) 
: 
 I seek leave to correct part of an answer that the Hon Phil Goff gave when answering a question in the House on my behalf on Tuesday 3 August relating to the number of young people who had completed the Specialist Youth Service Corps programme. The wrong answer was given with regard to numbers. The answer given that 86 young people had completed the programme related to the 2002-03 year not the 2003-04 year. In addition a further 146 young people completed the programme in 2003-04. 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Whip—ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This issue was raised during question time today—that the inaccurate answers we are consistently getting from Ministers— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Is the member speaking to the point of order? 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY 
: I am speaking to the point of order. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: What point of order? 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY 
: The one raised by Mr Tamihere. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: That has been dealt with. 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is a new point of order. We have already had discussion today about members’ concerns over Ministers giving false information inadvertently perhaps then coming down to the House to correct it. The expectation of members is that it is corrected at the first opportunity. My point is that in this instance Mr Goff was in the House during question time. He could have corrected it himself at that time over an hour ago. But here we have the Minister coming down to the House much later when there is not the same interest or attendance and trying to slip it in on the quiet as it were. I think that does need to be watched. Mr Goff should have corrected that answer during question time earlier this afternoon. 
DARREN HUGHES (Junior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 Mr Goff was answering on behalf of Mr Tamihere so the answer was Mr Tamihere’s responsibility; and the Minister has just assured me that when the information came to his attention he immediately came down to the House and corrected the answer. It is quite within the Standing Orders. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Yes that is the correct position. I do not intend for this to be pursued any further.
Speaker’s Observations — 11 September 2001 
Speaker’s Observations — 11 September 2001 
[Volume:611;Page:8603] 
Thursday 11 September 2003 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Speaker’s Observations 
11 September 2001 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I invite members to rise and observe a moment’s silence before business commences in memory of the events of 11 September 2001. 
Honourable members stood as a mark of respect.
English Bill: Points of Order — Replies to Written Questions—Electronic Format 
English Bill: Points of Order — Replies to Written Questions—Electronic Format 
[Volume:617;Page:13233] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (National—Clutha-Southland) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I want to raise a procedural issue around parliamentary questions. When I have submitted a written parliamentary question to the Minister of Education in the past I have received replies where extensive data has been supplied in an electronic form. That practice has now ceased and the Minister now supplies any extensive data in paper form which is often hundreds of pages of printouts of spreadsheets. This is a practice he complained about when he was in Opposition. 
So my question is whether there is a practice followed by the House in respect of receiving appropriate answers in electronic format and furthermore if there is not a practice whether members could establish one. Given that our whole system is now electronically based it would seem rather odd that the very information most suited to that medium—large-scale data—can be answered in only a paper format.
Cosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Cosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:624;Page:19033] 
1. CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
 to the  
Minister for State Owned Enterprises 
: What reports has he received on the recent performance of Solid Energy? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Minister for State Owned Enterprises) 
: 
 I have seen a report stating that Solid Energy has increased the value of shareholders’ funds by $125 million since 1999 and was awarded New Zealand’s Supreme Exporter of the Year award at the New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Export Awards in July 2004. I have also seen a report that the National Party wants to privatise that well-performing taxpayer-owned company. 
Clayton Cosgrove 
: Could he further advise what reports he has received on the future outlook of Solid Energy? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: The Government will not sell Solid Energy unlike the National Party which has decided to take New Zealand back to the 1990s and flog off State assets that have been built up over the years with taxpayers’ money. 
John Key 
: Does he agree with the mixed-ownership model currently operating in Air New Zealand where the Government owns 80-odd percent and the other 20 percent is floating on the stock market or should I infer from his answer today that he is announcing that he is renationalising Air New Zealand? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: It is important to remember that the Government had to buy back that airline after it was privatised—an example of privatisation and that included New Zealand Rail. That is why this Government will not privatise State-owned assets. 
Rod Donald 
: Has the Minister seen the report on Solid Energy’s environmental performance in the Christchurch  
Press 
 where chief executive Don Elder told the Environment Court he recognised that some of the company’s past mining practices had been unacceptable and the company still had considerable work to do and does he accept that Solid Energy has been making profits at the expense of the environment? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: I have not seen that particular report from the Christchurch  
Press 
. I have seen reports however where Solid Energy has acknowledged that it made mistakes and stated that it is making major steps in order to be able to rectify those mistakes. I commend Solid Energy for doing that. 
Nanaia Mahuta 
: Is the Minister aware of the strong feeling of the people of Huntly against the privatisation of Solid Energy a taxpayer-owned company they have worked long and hard for? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: Yes I am aware of the very strong feelings of the people of Huntly against the privatisation of Solid Energy and the fact that the National Party is now advocating the sale of that taxpayer-funded company. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I seek leave to table the E9 from the 1990 election demonstrating that when the Labour Party was busily selling everything that moved Mr Swain was happy to line up as a candidate. 
Document not tabled.
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — United Kingdom—Leader of the House of Commons 
Hunt Jonathan: Visitors — United Kingdom—Leader of the House of Commons 
[Volume:621;Page:16781] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing members that the Rt Hon Peter Hain Leader of the House of Commons United Kingdom is within the precincts of this Chamber. I am sure that members would wish that he be welcomed and accorded a seat on the left of the Chair. 
The Rt Hon Peter Hain accompanied by the Hon Dr Michael Cullen entered the chamber and took a seat on the left of the chair.
Dyson Ruth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Dyson Ruth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:613;Page:9637] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment (CYF)) 
: 
 During an answer to a supplementary question in relation to question No. 8 I gave an incorrect figure. I would like to correct it now. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There is not. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: In relation to the recommendations completed on the Judge Brown report the correct number is 34.
Vote: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Electricity and Gas Industries Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:619;Page:14746] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments recommended by the Commerce Committee by majority be agreed to. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 50 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Question agreed to.
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:9018] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 43 
New Zealand National 25; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5. 
Noes 71 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Richard Worth to clause 15(1) be agreed to: 
to insert in paragraph (b) after the word “any” the word “relevant”.