edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Power Simon: Electoral Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Power Simon: Electoral Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1345] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 There is one return under the Electoral Finance Act.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Otago District Health Board—Removal of Chairperson 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Otago District Health Board—Removal of Chairperson 
[Volume:652;Page:1316] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Obviously I am not prepared to go back and reconsider my decision in respect of the application because it fails on more than one ground. The sub judice issue is simply one of the issues. The primary matter that I have to consider as Speaker is whether the matter is of sufficient moment to set aside the business of the House. 
Hon Annette King 
: It was when Hawke’s Bay went out. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Actually that is a very interesting point that the member has just made by interjecting—although she should not have interjected while I was speaking. The member referred to the Hawke’s Bay where an entire board was dismissed and replaced by a commissioner. There were issues therefore of a democratically elected board being replaced. In the case that is before me today only the chair of the board is being replaced—by another board member—and the chair remains on the board. It is my judgment that that is very much a different order of magnitude. 
But I now come back to the point raised by the Hon Trevor Mallard because this is a very interesting issue in respect of our sub judice rulings in this House. As I understand it and I will seek further advice—if anything I say at this juncture is not correct I will come back to the House on it—the sub judice rule relates to matters that are before the court and sentencing is part of the court process. I believe that it would not be appropriate for me to say that because a conviction has been delivered by a court therefore the matter is not sub judice and sentencing does not matter. It is my understanding that sentencing is part of the court process and therefore we need to be careful not to say that because the court has delivered its decision in respect of conviction the matter is no longer sub judice. If there is anything wrong with what I have just said—and I will seek further advice from the Clerk—I will certainly come back to the House on it because this is a serious issue.
Vote: Electoral Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Electoral Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1357] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Electoral Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 112 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Bill read a third time.
Hodgson Pete: Urgent Debates Declined — Otago District Health Board—Removal of Chairperson 
Hodgson Pete: Urgent Debates Declined — Otago District Health Board—Removal of Chairperson 
[Volume:652;Page:1316] 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Labour—Dunedin North) 
: 
 Mr Speaker I wish simply to provide you with some information which is that two people were arraigned in front of the High Court they were charged on a number of counts relating to fraud and both gentlemen were found guilty on all counts. This was some months ago both of them are in custody and the only thing remaining from this court case is the sentencing hearing and the sentencing.
Mallard Trevor: Urgent Debates Declined — Otago District Health Board—Removal of Chairperson 
Mallard Trevor: Urgent Debates Declined — Otago District Health Board—Removal of Chairperson 
[Volume:652;Page:1316] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It relates to your interpretation of Standing Order 111. Standing Order 111 refers to “prejudice to the trial”. This is not a case of prejudice to the trial. The trial has been completed. It is a sentencing matter and that is for the judge alone. I am not asking you to reverse your decision now but to come back with a considered ruling as to whether sentencing is regarded as part of a trial. To do that Mr Speaker you would have to indicate that a High Court judge as opposed to a jury was likely to be swayed by this House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The point raised by the Hon Trevor Mallard is a point worthy of consideration so I will listen to the Hon Pete Hodgson.
Cullen Michael: Urgent Debates Declined — Otago District Health Board—Removal of Chairperson 
Cullen Michael: Urgent Debates Declined — Otago District Health Board—Removal of Chairperson 
[Volume:652;Page:1316] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In the event that Mr Brownlee fails to move the urgency motion correctly would you be prepared to revisit that decision? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will choose to ignore that.
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Otago District Health Board—Removal of Chairperson 
Smith Lockwood: Urgent Debates Declined — Otago District Health Board—Removal of Chairperson 
[Volume:652;Page:1315] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have received a letter from the Hon Pete Hodgson seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the decision of the Minister of Health to remove the chairperson of the Otago District Health Board. This is a particular case of recent occurrence and it does involve ministerial responsibility. However not every decision by a Minister can give grounds for a debate. The Minister has made a governance change but the board is still in place and the previous chair is still a member of it. Furthermore the member in his application has referred to a case that I understand is currently before the court awaiting sentence. Standing Order 111 prevents reference in debate to matters that are before the courts up until the time that the sentence is delivered. I do not think I would be justified in giving priority to this particular issue over other business of the House today. There will be other more appropriate opportunities to consider the performance and current operations of the Otago District Health Board. The financial review of the board is currently before the Health Committee. The application is therefore declined.
Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:652;Page:1312] 
10.  
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
 to the  
Minister of State Services 
: Does he have a target for cuts in public sector jobs; if so what is that target? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of State Services) 
: 
 No. 
Grant Robertson 
: Which of the following statements is correct: the Hon Heather Roy’s that there is to be a 10 percent cut in public services Paula Bennett’s that there is to be at least a 5 percent cut or his own statement made just now? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The member misrepresents the views of the three members whom he has quoted. 
Louise Upston 
: Is it the Government’s policy to cut the number of public servants? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The Government’s policy is to cap the size of the core bureaucracy in our first term of Government. Our priority is to grow front-line services that directly benefit New Zealanders. 
Grant Robertson 
: Can the Minister confirm that up to 30 jobs will be cut at the National Library and that hundreds of people are set to lose their jobs at the Ministry of Social Development and the Tertiary Education Commission; and how does this fit with National’s promise to cap but not cut public service numbers? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The member will have to ask individual Ministers for confirmation of those figures. I can tell the member that after 9 years of a free-spending Labour Government the number of back-office public servants is out of proportion. This Government is determined that the focus will go on improving front-line services for New Zealanders. 
Grant Robertson 
: I seek leave to table a newsletter from the Hon Heather Roy in which she says that all Government Ministers and departments are looking at 10 percent cuts in public services. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that newsletter being tabled? There appears to be no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:652;Page:1307] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Without wishing to challenge your ruling the particular reason I raised the point of order was that I could see the Minister— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member is at risk of challenging my ruling. My ruling is that he will ask his question. It is up to the Government as to who answers it.
Hodgson Pete: Electoral Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Hodgson Pete: Electoral Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1343] 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Labour—Dunedin North) 
: 
 We are not going to take too much time over this but the regulation-making power of clause 23— 
Chris Tremain 
: You know you made a mistake. 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Thanks for coming buddy! Clause 23—and I can see why the Minister has had it put in or officials have advised him to put it in—is a kind of belt and braces thing and that is OK. It is unusual in electoral law to have that sort of provision. 
Hon Simon Power 
: Yes it is. 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: So why do I not just ask the Minister whether he would be happy by way of an oral undertaking to the Committee to say that if ever clause 23 were to be used between now and 1 March 2011 he would adopt the practice of circulating the regulation around the parties so that we can all have a bit of a pick at it. If he would be good enough to put that on the record that would suffice our needs. 
The other thing is that I am a bit embarrassed to say this but I cannot quite get clause 19(1) which states: “A party secretary is not required by section 210 of the principal Act to file by 30 April 2009 an annual return of party donations for the year ending 31 December 2008.” My simplistic question is why the hell not. I perhaps should talk a little longer; it might help the process of advice to the Minister. There is a hint in clause 19(2) that that is somehow a let-out clause where the party secretary is required to fund under— 
Hon Simon Power 
: There is no— 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: If the Minister is ready to take a call on that I will happily resume my seat.
Cullen Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Cullen Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:652;Page:1307] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am not disputing your ruling at all but it is legitimate for a member to seek an assurance that a Minister has not suddenly disappeared from the Chamber to avoid answering a particular question when he would be available— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Dr Cullen of all people knows that is not an appropriate point of order. I invite the honourable member to ask the question.
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:652;Page:1307] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This question is directed to the Minister of Finance who with a bit of luck is about to re-enter the Chamber—perhaps not. In the absence of the Minister I seek your guidance. The member was present— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will resume his seat. He knows that it is not consistent with the Standing Orders to refer to the absence of any member from the Chamber. It is not his responsibility who answers a question; it is his responsibility to ask it. I invite the member to do so.
Borrows Chester: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Borrows Chester: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:652;Page:1306] 
5.  
CHESTER BORROWS (National—Whanganui) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: What plans does the Government have to deal with the most serious and persistent young offenders? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 The new Fresh Start programme announced yesterday will give judges many of the tools they have been asking for to break cycles of reoffending. 
Chester Borrows 
: What is the difference between the corrective training programmes of 20 years ago and the new military activity camps? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: There are several key differences. Fresh Start is not like corrective training; rather it is a concentrated long-term strategy to address the behaviour of some of the most high-risk young offenders. Core components of the military-style camps—intensive mentoring drug and alcohol rehabilitation and literary and numeracy programmes—are completely new and were never part of the old corrective training scheme. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: How does the Minister plan to address the risk factors associated with youth offending—including poverty; dysfunctional disadvantaged and violent families; and alcohol and drug abuse—given her Government’s proposed cuts to Pathways to Partnership which worked to address these very issues; or would her Government rather focus on offender programmes that just do not work? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: I thank the member for that scaremongering political speech to the non-governmental organisation sector! Fortunately those organisations see more sense and know that we are working together on plans for these young offenders and on what really needs to be done. We take this programme seriously: we are committed to it we will fund it accordingly and we will make it work. 
Chester Borrows 
: Has the Minister seen any media reports about the Government’s announcement? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: Yes. Last night I heard TV3 saying that the Prime Minister had delivered on another election promise with the announcement of the new Fresh Start programme and commenting that Labour was on the wrong side of the issue. In addition a poll out this morning showed that more than two-thirds of participants think that Fresh Start will help young offenders. Finally the mother of murder victim Michael Choy was interviewed last night and she welcomed the new approach to turning young offenders’ lives round.
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
[Volume:652;Page:1317] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the adjourned debate on the first reading and remaining stages of the Electoral Amendment Bill 
. This bill overturns a number of the provisions in the Electoral Finance Act that caused a great deal of difficulty and angst during the last election period. The Government considers it desirable that this bill be passed into law as soon as possible.
Vote: Urgency 
Vote: Urgency 
[Volume:652;Page:1317] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That urgency be accorded. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Chadwick Steve: Voting — Correction—Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill 
Chadwick Steve: Voting — Correction—Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill 
[Volume:652;Page:1301] 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK (Junior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to correct the vote on the first reading of the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill. A vote was cast in error for the Progressive party. There was no entitlement to exercise a proxy vote on that occasion. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to the record being corrected? There is no objection. The record will be corrected accordingly.
Norman Russel William: Electoral Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Norman Russel William: Electoral Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1345] 
Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I would definitely like a response on the record to that. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: You cannot seek leave for another member. If the Minister does not seek leave we are moving on. [ 
Interruption 
] Leave is sought for the Minister to respond. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action being taken? There is not.
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:652;Page:1312] 
11.  
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: What reports has he received on the financial health of district health boards? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) 
: 
 I have received several reports. I regret to advise the House that in total these reports reveal that the new Government has inherited district health boards that are on track to financial crisis. The outgoing Labour Government told New Zealanders that district health board deficits were expected to grow to $111 million in this financial year. One of my first actions as Minister was to personally require district health boards to provide information on their true financial situations. Their responses have revealed that district health board deficits are expected to be around $160 million this year. The Labour Government’s legacy includes 18 of 21 boards with worsening financial deficits. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: What is the latest advice the Minister has received in relation to district health board deficits? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: I have received fresh advice this week from the Crown Health Financing Agency. The agency expects district health board deficits to be well in excess of $200 million in 2009-10. It is a matter of very serious concern that the agency also expects seven further district health boards to be classified as at risk meaning 14 of our 21 district health boards will be at risk according to the Crown Health Financing Agency. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Did the former chairperson of the Otago District Health Board show any commitment to resolving issues of that board’s deficit as compared with say the chairperson of the Hawke’s Bay District Health Board who said publicly in relation to his board’s deficit that its predicted $500 million savings were never real and were presented only to pacify the Minister? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The former Minister will be interested to know that the Otago District Health Board’s deficit has worsened from $9 million to $13.2 million. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: What reports has the Minister received in relation to capital? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The blowout in deficits to $160 million is very concerning for this year but as serious or more serious is the crisis track in relation to resources for important capital works like new hospitals. In 2008 over $200 million in capital requests were unable to be funded and in 2009 requests of over $400 million have already been received—a total of over $600 million in capital needs from district health boards. The Labour Government left very little provision for any of these demands.
Urgency 
Urgency 
[Volume:652;Page:1317] 
Urgency 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the adjourned debate on the first reading and remaining stages of the Electoral Amendment Bill 
. This bill overturns a number of the provisions in the Electoral Finance Act that caused a great deal of difficulty and angst during the last election period. The Government considers it desirable that this bill be passed into law as soon as possible. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That urgency be accorded. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Vote: Corrections Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
Vote: Corrections Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
[Volume:652;Page:1366] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 112 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Part 1 agreed to.
Voting — Correction—Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill 
Voting — Correction—Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill 
[Volume:652;Page:1301] 
Tuesday 17 February 2009 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Voting 
Correction—Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK (Junior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to correct the vote on the first reading of the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill. A vote was cast in error for the Progressive party. There was no entitlement to exercise a proxy vote on that occasion. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to the record being corrected? There is no objection. The record will be corrected accordingly.
Katene Rahui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Katene Rahui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:652;Page:1306] 
4.  
RAHUI KATENE (Maori Party—Te Tai Tonga) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: What are the expected outcomes of the Fresh Start approach? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 We want to break cycles of youth offending. 
Rahui Katene 
: What assurances can the Minister give that iwi Maori can be involved in managing programmes and services to address serious recidivist offending by children and young people? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: The increased involvement of Maori providers is a priority. I have made a commitment to broaden the range of providers. This will be done by consulting with both the Maori Party and Maori in general. 
Hon Annette King 
: Has the Minister seen reports both internationally and in New Zealand that show that the use of military-style corrective training has led to a 94.5 percent rate of reoffending and that such programmes have been unsuccessful? Can she confirm that the Government’s programme for 40 youths is nothing more than window dressing? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: No I have not seen reports like that. I have seen reports that say that if we work with young people over a long period of time and if that work includes mentoring programmes parenting orders getting into family and whanau making the work eyeball to eyeball and making it really mean something we can turn these young people around. 
Rahui Katene 
: How will the Government’s commitment to whanau ora be demonstrated in these youth justice reforms? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: We are committed to working long term. The work we have been doing is not working for those thousand worst young offenders; we have to do it differently. This will be done over a period of time and it will be done in different ways for different individuals. We recognise that Maori have different needs and we will be implementing programmes that will have a real effect.
Vote: Student Loan Scheme Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Student Loan Scheme Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14540] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Student Loan Scheme Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 115 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 8; ACT New Zealand 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 5 
Maori Party 5. 
Bill read a first time. 
Bill referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee.
Williamson Maurice: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Williamson Maurice: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14521] 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister for Building and Construction) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Agriculture 
: I move  
That the Primary Production Committee consider the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill 
 that the committee report finally to the House on or before 28 February 2011 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except 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 despite Standing Orders 187 and 190(1)(b) and (c). 
Motion agreed to.
King Colin: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
King Colin: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14520] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to have the last word so to speak on the first reading of the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill. As I do so I reiterate those fine words that have been uttered today about the success of the dairy industry. 
But I will touch on a subject that is fairly close to my heart. I can remember dairy farming when we used to put our milk into 10-gallon or 45-litre cans and we would lug those around. Technology has certainly been applied to the dairy industry and it is that innovation that has created a range of products today that certainly meet the needs of a modern society. We are living in a global economy. We have a globally competitive organisation called Fonterra; it is incredibly successful. That having been said I tell members that we do lumber it with some pretty balancing sorts of requirements and one of those is to pick up milk no matter where the milk is produced in New Zealand. We certainly do expect an enormous amount of vigour and enthusiasm from Fonterra’s management and the 10000-odd farmers who are its shareholders. 
When we look at dairy farming in the context of what it has meant to New Zealand over the last hundred-odd years we see that it has been an opportunity for many families to get on to farms and that is one thing that the National Party is very very proud of. Down in Marlborough down in Canterbury in the Waikato in the Manawatu in Northland and all over New Zealand in places like that we have seen very large properties cut up and farming practices change to milking cows and to harvesting the product from growing grass. So when we look at the context of where we have got to today with the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill we can see that we are just critiquing the provisions to the extent that we are enhancing them as we move forward. We are giving certainty to the industry certainty to the banking fraternity and confidence in the dairy industry. 
One thing that would be appropriate to mention at this time is the tax cuts—the switch in the balance of the economy on 1 October that occurred courtesy of Budget 2010. It will do a great deal for those dairy farmers. It will enable them to continue investing in their properties investing in the provinces investing in training and investing in research and development. This bill is an excellent bill and I look forward to working on it in the Primary Production Committee.
Dean Jacqui: Identity Information Confirmation Bill — First Reading 
Dean Jacqui: Identity Information Confirmation Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14540] 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) 
: 
 I will continue my speech on the Identity Information Confirmation Bill which was interrupted in its first reading. This bill is sponsored by the Minister of Internal Affairs Nathan Guy. Its intention is to help combat identity fraud. As we know that is a very important issue for us all. The bill helps to prevent the use of fake identities that somebody has created. It extends the use of the web-based data validation service to public and private sector agencies but on a strictly need-to-know basis. This allows agencies to check whether the identity information presented by a customer is consistent with that held by the Department of Internal Affairs through the citizenship registers the passport database and the various registers of Births Deaths and Marriages. 
Importantly this bill will help ensure compliance with the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act which was put through the House in 2009. It requires banks and other financial institutions to undertake more comprehensive checks on customer identity so they are now really compelled to know their customers to a greater level. The bill is also an important tool in preventing identity fraud and in reducing compliance costs. 
At the same time the Government is mindful of privacy concerns. Any agency using this tool must have the consent of the customers. It is up to individuals whether to give permission. Agencies must also have an alternative process for dealing with people who do not consent to a check via this service. This means that they are effectively not being forced into consenting. This is a point I make because I think it is important to note. The service is designed to protect the privacy of personal information. The tool confirms only whether the information provided by customers is accurate and does not give out any additional information about the person. The data validation service will be available only to organisations that meet strict security privacy and integrity criteria. The Government has also agreed that the Privacy Commissioner will monitor this service. With those few comments I commend the bill to the House. Thank you.
Ardern Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Ardern Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:667;Page:14501] 
9. 
SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki - King Country) 
 to the  
Minister of Civil Defence 
: What is happening over Get Ready Week? 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Minister of Civil Defence) 
: 
 Mr Speaker— 
Hon Annette King 
: Here’s the other class clown. 
Hon JOHN CARTER 
: It is a real shame given the events in Christchurch that the Opposition cannot take this seriously. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Members interject and if they interject they are likely to get a response. But let us get on with answering the question. 
Hon JOHN CARTER 
: Mr Speaker—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Did Chris Hipkins not hear what I just said? I ask for a bit of common sense and common courtesy please. 
Hon JOHN CARTER 
: For Get Ready Week there will be an increase in radio and television advertisements— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If you are to name members on this side of the House for interjecting before the Minister has started can you do that for the member who interjected just then from the Government side? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Forgive me; I can only react to what I see and hear. Sadly for the member’s colleague I happened to see him making a very loud interjection. I did not hear or see the other one. I apologise for that but I cannot deal with what I do not see or hear. 
Hon JOHN CARTER 
: For Get Ready Week there will be an increase in radio and television advertisements the film  
Eruption 
 made its debut last night and very important civil defence volunteers will be recognised. For example long-service civilian civil defence volunteers in Manukau will be presented with awards. It is important that New Zealanders are ready to get through. 
Shane Ardern 
: What message would he like new mayors to know so they can help their communities to get ready? 
Hon JOHN CARTER 
: Firstly I would like to congratulate all the mayors who have been elected or re-elected especially Bob Parker who has done so much and a wonderful job in assisting earthquake recovery along with Kelvin Coe. I also thank Ron Keating for his work. Emergencies will happen in our communities and we will all want our communities to be as resilient as they can be. We do that through the four Rs of reduction readiness response and recovery. The importance of focusing on this cannot be underestimated. Mayors have a critical role to play in providing leadership and advocacy for their community in difficult times working with their local civil defence management controller and preparing their communities for emergencies that we know will happen sooner or later.
Quinn Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Quinn Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:667;Page:14494] 
3. 
PAUL QUINN (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: Has he recently referred any projects to the Law Commission; if so what? 
Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 Yes; earlier today I asked the Law Commission to undertake a review regarding interaction between the Internet and the justice system. It is my view that the law must keep pace with technology and that we must have one set of rules and ethical standards for all news media. It is my view that that may not be the case at present. 
Paul Quinn 
: Why has the Minister referred this review to the Law Commission? 
Hon SIMON POWER 
: I am concerned that the lack of regulation or professional or ethical standards for bloggers and online publishers has created a bit of a Wild West in cyberspace. The specific issues I am concerned about include how trials can be potentially prejudiced by information posted on websites and seen by jurors real-time online streaming of court cases breaches of court suppression orders and republication of a libel.
Power Simon: Business Statement 
Power Simon: Business Statement 
[Volume:667;Page:14489] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 When the House resumes next week priority will be given to the second reading of the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill and other bills relating to various Treaty settlement matters. Wednesday will be a members’ day.
Smith Lockwood: Speaker’s Rulings — Committee of the Whole House—Correction to Report on New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill 
Smith Lockwood: Speaker’s Rulings — Committee of the Whole House—Correction to Report on New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill 
[Volume:667;Page:14489] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Honourable members yesterday following the Committee of the whole House on the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill confusion arose as to the form of the bill set down for third reading. An amendment to Part 1 was agreed by the Committee but Part 1 was agreed to without amendment and the bill reported to the House without amendment. Standing Order 295(1) sets out the form of the question to be proposed on a provision of a bill. The question proposed is that the provision stand part of the bill or stand part of the bill as amended. An amendment to Part 1 having been agreed to a procedural error occurred and the incorrect question was proposed: “That Part 1 stand part” and agreed by the Committee. Such a procedural error cannot negate an amendment agreed. Only a recommittal to consider the amendment could achieve that now and that is a matter for the Minister in charge of the bill. However the Committee’s decision on Part 1 did leave doubt about whether the amendment to Part 1 agreed unanimously by the Committee had been properly incorporated in the bill. 
The Speaker cannot overturn decisions of the Committee. But the bill having been set down for third reading the Speaker must ensure it is in a form agreed by the Committee. Despite its report to the House the Committee agreed an amendment to the bill. The bill on the Order Paper has been reprinted to show that amendment. 
The Speaker is also concerned with the accuracy of the House’s records. A procedural error in proposing the question on Part 1 led to an error in the Committee’s report to the House. While the Committee’s decision on Part 1 was procedurally incorrect it will stand. However the record will be corrected to show that the report from the Committee of the whole House on the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill adopted unanimously by the House was with amendment.
Power Simon: Business Statement 
Power Simon: Business Statement 
[Volume:667;Page:14489] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 Despite misunderstandings the bill does not contain any amendments from the Hon Ruth Dyson nor were any voted on as I understand it. In respect of the first matter relating to urgency—and I assume the member is referring to this particular 3-week sitting—I am not aware of that at this stage.
Hughes Darren: Business Statement 
Hughes Darren: Business Statement 
[Volume:667;Page:14489] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I wonder whether the Deputy Leader of the House could advise us whether the Government is planning on a week of urgency during this particular sitting period and also whether next week we can expect the third reading of the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill which I understand contains an amendment from the Green member Kevin Hague. We would be interested to know whether that bill will be receiving its third reading next week.
Norman Russel William: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Norman Russel William: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:667;Page:14503] 
11. 
Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) 
 to the  
Minister of Transport 
: Will he support an inquiry into the impacts of oil price shocks on the economy including the transport sector; if not why not? 
Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Transport 
: No because Government policy already recognises the potential for alternative transportation. The Government will also continue to invest in all modes of transport including public transport. 
Dr Russel Norman 
: Was the risk of an oil price shock considered in the development of the business case for the Puhoi to Wellsford four-laning motorway project? 
Hon SIMON POWER 
: I am sorry but I do not have that level of specific information in front of me. But I am sure that if the member puts down a written question to the Minister of Transport the Minister will be happy to answer it. 
Dr Russel Norman 
: I seek leave to table the business case for the Puhoi to Wellsford four-laning project which shows that the oil price shock was not considered by the Government in the business case. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:667;Page:14503] 
12. 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Labour 
: Does she stand by the statement made on her behalf on 22 September 2010 in relation to the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2): “the Government made sure there were adequate protections in the bill in a number of areas in terms of the trial period”? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 Yes. 
Darien Fenton 
: Is the requirement for the 90-day trial period to be voluntary as she claims one of the so-called protections that she was referring to; if so will she rule out making the 90-day trial period a default provision for all employers? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: Yes and no. 
Darien Fenton 
: What are the requirements for good-faith negotiations in relation to reaching agreement for a 90-day trial period and what protections are there in the bill for a prospective employee if genuine good-faith negotiations do not occur? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: There are several protections in the legislation and I refer the member to section 4A section 134 and section 103(1)(b) (c) (d) (e) (f) and (g). 
Darien Fenton 
: Goodness! It is good to know the Minister can count. What protections—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I want to hear the question. 
Darien Fenton 
: What protections or remedies are available to an employee— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I apologise to the member. Members the noise level is unreasonable. I want to hear what is possibly the last supplementary question today. 
Darien Fenton 
: What projections or remedies are available to an employee who is dismissed under the 90-day scheme and given no reason given that section 113(1) of the Employment Relations Act states that “If an employee who has been dismissed wishes to challenge that dismissal or any aspect of it for any reason in any court that challenge may be brought only in the Authority under this Part as a personal grievance.” yet section 67(1)(b) states that a person dismissed under the 90-day scheme may not bring a personal grievance or legal proceedings in respect of the dismissal? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: There are many other grounds upon which a personal grievance may be pursued. The member as I explained can find them in the Employment Relations Act in section 103(1)(b) through to 103(1)(g) as well as in the breach of good faith conditions which are in section 4A and the breach of employment agreement conditions which are in section 134. If the member would like line-by-line advice or a lecture on how to read a statute we are happy to oblige.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:667;Page:14489] 
Thursday 14 October 2010 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business Statement 
Hon SIMON POWER (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 When the House resumes next week priority will be given to the second reading of the Rugby World Cup 2011 (Empowering) Bill and other bills relating to various Treaty settlement matters. Wednesday will be a members’ day. 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I wonder whether the Deputy Leader of the House could advise us whether the Government is planning on a week of urgency during this particular sitting period and also whether next week we can expect the third reading of the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill which I understand contains an amendment from the Green member Kevin Hague. We would be interested to know whether that bill will be receiving its third reading next week. 
Hon SIMON POWER (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 Despite misunderstandings the bill does not contain any amendments from the Hon Ruth Dyson nor were any voted on as I understand it. In respect of the first matter relating to urgency—and I assume the member is referring to this particular 3-week sitting—I am not aware of that at this stage.
Vote: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:667;Page:14521] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 112 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Bill read a first time.
Speaker’s Rulings — Committee of the Whole House—Correction to Report on New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill 
Speaker’s Rulings — Committee of the Whole House—Correction to Report on New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill 
[Volume:667;Page:14489] 
Speaker’s Rulings 
Committee of the Whole House—Correction to Report on New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Honourable members yesterday following the Committee of the whole House on the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill confusion arose as to the form of the bill set down for third reading. An amendment to Part 1 was agreed by the Committee but Part 1 was agreed to without amendment and the bill reported to the House without amendment. Standing Order 295(1) sets out the form of the question to be proposed on a provision of a bill. The question proposed is that the provision stand part of the bill or stand part of the bill as amended. An amendment to Part 1 having been agreed to a procedural error occurred and the incorrect question was proposed: “That Part 1 stand part” and agreed by the Committee. Such a procedural error cannot negate an amendment agreed. Only a recommittal to consider the amendment could achieve that now and that is a matter for the Minister in charge of the bill. However the Committee’s decision on Part 1 did leave doubt about whether the amendment to Part 1 agreed unanimously by the Committee had been properly incorporated in the bill. 
The Speaker cannot overturn decisions of the Committee. But the bill having been set down for third reading the Speaker must ensure it is in a form agreed by the Committee. Despite its report to the House the Committee agreed an amendment to the bill. The bill on the Order Paper has been reprinted to show that amendment. 
The Speaker is also concerned with the accuracy of the House’s records. A procedural error in proposing the question on Part 1 led to an error in the Committee’s report to the House. While the Committee’s decision on Part 1 was procedurally incorrect it will stand. However the record will be corrected to show that the report from the Committee of the whole House on the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill adopted unanimously by the House was with amendment.
Calder Cam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Calder Cam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:667;Page:14496] 
5. 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Corrections 
: What advice has she received about the level of employment training in New Zealand prisons? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 I am very pleased to report that a record number of prisoners are undertaking job training in literacy and numeracy education. In the 10 months ended July 2010 the number of prisoners in employment and job training increased by 9 percent to 4791. This means that nearly 70 percent of all sentenced prisoners are now engaged in some form of prisoner employment or job training. In addition over the past financial year the number of prisoners undertaking literacy and numeracy education has increased by 15 percent. These results are very impressive and I commend the department for its commitment towards rehabilitating offenders. 
Dr Cam Calder 
: Why is the Government placing such a high priority on increasing prisoner employment training? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: This Government is determined to reduce reoffending and to help offenders turn their lives round. Prisoners who have work skills and good literacy and numeracy skills are more likely to gain jobs and less likely to go back to jail. International studies have shown that participation in education can reduce the risk of reoffending by 9 percent and having a job can reduce the risk of reoffending by 6 percent. The goal of the Prisoner Skills and Employment Strategy is to have at least a thousand extra prisoners gaining skills and work experience on any given day by the end of 2012. This Government is committed to achievement of that goal. 
Rahui Katene 
: What progress has she been advised of about the level of Maori participation in prisoner employment and what information if any is there about the longer-term outcomes associated with such participation? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Since the Prisoner Skills and Employment Strategy was launched the number of Maori participating in Department of Corrections’ inmate employment has increased from 42 percent to 46 percent of all prisoners employed. Maori prisoners also make up 56 percent of prisoners in polytech-run trade and technical training courses. As I mentioned earlier international studies have shown that prisoners with work skills and good literacy and numeracy skills are far less likely to go back to jail. This is particularly encouraging when taking into account that Maori make up half of the prisoner population.