edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Hawkins George: Gambling Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Hawkins George: Gambling Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:622;Page:18104] 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Minister of Internal Affairs) 
: 
 I move  
That the Gambling Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
 I acknowledge the support of New Zealand First for the bill. New Zealand First did not approve of its content going into the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4); I acknowledge that and I also acknowledge Dail Jones’ support for it now. 
This short bill amends the Gambling Act to allow elected members of licensing trusts to be involved in decisions on the distribution of gaming-machine proceeds to the community. Licensing trust members are elected under the Sale of Liquor Act. Licensing trusts themselves are not eligible to operate gaming machines under the Gambling Act. However some gaming-machine societies choose to operate gaming machines on licensing trust premises. Some of those societies have traditionally allowed licensing trust members to be involved in decisions on the distribution of gaming-machine proceeds and the operation of gaming machines. 
The Gambling Act which came into force on 1 July 2004 prohibits this type of arrangement. It imposes a strict separation between those who run commercial premises at which gaming machines are operated and those who control the gaming-machine proceeds from those venues. This separation of functions is designed to reduce the risk of conflicts of interest. 
The potential for conflicts of interest is considerably lower in the case of licensing trust members. That is because they are publicly accountable to their local community and cannot benefit personally from the licensing trust. To reflect this the bill amends the Gambling Act to exempt licensing trust members from the provisions that require the separation of functions. This will enable those members to be involved in gaming-machine societies’ decisions on the distribution of gaming-machine proceeds and the operation of gaming machines. 
The amendment also extends to elected community trustees where a licensing trust has reconstituted as a community trust under the Sale of Liquor Act. I intend to move that the bill be referred to the Government Administration Committee and that the committee present its final report on or before 1 March 2005. I commend the bill to the House.
Goff Phil: Appointments — Deputy Police Complaints Authority 
Goff Phil: Appointments — Deputy Police Complaints Authority 
[Volume:627;Page:21935] 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I move  
That pursuant to section 8 of the Police Complaints Authority Act 1988 this House recommend Her Excellency the Governor-General to appoint John Alexander Lemon Gibson QC of Wellington as the deputy to the Police Complaints Authority for a term of 2 years. 
It is the function of the authority and any deputy to investigate complaints alleging any misconduct or neglect of duty by a member of the police or concerning any practice policy or procedure of the police that affects a complainant. Section 8(1) of the Police Complaints Authority Act 1988 provides: “There may from time to time be appointed a deputy to the person appointed as the Police Complaints Authority”. The position has been vacant pending the passage of the Independent Police Complaints Authority Amendment Bill which is currently before the House and awaiting the Committee stage. That bill allows for a three-member authority but in the meantime the Government would like to move now to provide some additional support to the authority which is under some pressure due to the number of complaints. 
As the Deputy Police Complaints Authority John Gibson QC will oversee the decision making of investigations and the administration of complaints. The Act requires that a deputy authority be a qualified barrister and solicitor of the High Court and possess suitable legal experience for the task. Mr Gibson has had a distinguished legal career and has an extensive range of experience in criminal law which will equip him well for the work with the authority. Mr Gibson was appointed as a QC in 1986 and remains in practice in Wellington. He is a former chairperson of the New Zealand Law Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal and until recently was chairperson of the New Zealand Stock Exchange disciplinary committee. 
I note that with the exception of one party this appointment is supported by all parties in the House. The current Police Complaints Authority Judge Borrin also welcomes the appointment of John Gibson QC and he joins me along with the majority of members in this House in wishing Mr Gibson well for his future position as Deputy Police Complaints Authority.
Robertson H V Ross: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:15200] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the honourable member for his contribution. I do have to hear points of order. That is part of the rules of the House. However frivolous interjections or points of order designed to break up a 5-minute speech are out of order. Such tactics lead to disorder and are unacceptable to the progress of business through the House. Members should consider Speaker’s ruling 19/8 a ruling from Speaker Steward in 1891. 
Simon Power 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairman. I want to support what my colleague the Hon Ken Shirley said because although I understand there is an unwritten convention in respect of seniority in the House—and I certainly acknowledge that the Rt Hon Winston Peters has that—you are required to rule when points of order are out of order and all we ask on this side— 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I am on my feet. 
Simon Power 
: I have not finished yet.
Hunt Jonathan: Speaker’s Rulings — Access to Chamber—Media Obstruction 
Hunt Jonathan: Speaker’s Rulings — Access to Chamber—Media Obstruction 
[Volume:616;Page:12483] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Following my ruling this afternoon regarding the conduct of the media in this building while members are on their way to the Chamber I have discussed the matter with the chair and deputy chair of the press gallery. They acknowledged that there have been unfortunate incidents in recent days and have expressed a wish to work with me on a protocol that while allowing the media access to members does not impede members’ own access to the Chamber. I am prepared to work with the press gallery on this matter. Consequently I am announcing that my ban on journalists approaching members after 1.45 p.m. tomorrow is suspended to allow further consideration of the issue. 
I nevertheless require that journalists act with consideration to everyone using the Parliament Buildings corridors and in particular do not in any way impede the free access of members to the Chamber. In the latter regard I wish to quote from  
Erskine May 
 22nd edition at page 121: “It is a contempt to molest a member … while attending the House or coming to or going from it …”. In our own Standing Orders—Standing Order 395(k)—it is specifically made a contempt to obstruct or molest a member. It is therefore necessary for me to re-emphasise the seriousness of obstructing a member in those circumstances.
Jones Dail: Wine Makers Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Jones Dail: Wine Makers Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4362] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 New Zealand First needs to take only a moment on this bill as we did in the second reading. It is a very important bill for the growers of wine in New Zealand. I believe previous speakers in the second reading and the like have made the issue clear: we need to get this bill through the House because of the requirements of the European Union on our winemakers. I have read all 111 submissions to the Primary Production Committee on Part 5 of the Wine Bill. All those in the industry and those who are interested in this bill want it to go through the House urgently. New Zealand First supports that and I have nothing further to say.
Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mark Ron: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:621;Page:16228] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is a point of order. It is not a speech but it will take a little bit of your time and I ask your indulgence to hear me out before I ask my question. It relates to Standing Order 366. On 14 October I wrote to you seeking your assistance and advice regarding the failure of the Minister of Police to answer five specific written questions on time in accordance with Standing Order 366. I now seek further assistance from you in respect of parliamentary question No. 13998 which was referred to in that letter which was lodged on 21 September and answered on 6 October. That question related to current response times to 111 calls. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Well— 
RON MARK 
: I asked your indulgence Mr Speaker. In the Minister’s answer which was late he told me that the information could be found in the yet-to-be-released 2004 annual report—which as it turned out was not made available until 14 October. There are two points of concern: firstly that report does not give the current response times; it gives last year’s. Secondly I would like your ruling on the practice of deferring answers in such a manner. This sets a precedent whereby I as a future Minister might be able to tell that member in answer to a parliamentary question that the answer he seeks will be given in a report yet to be released in 11 months’ time. I am seeking your assistance to ensure that Ministers do not show such cavalier disregard for the procedures of this House and that Opposition members are protected from such delaying tactics. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: A part of that was a point of order and I will certainly have a look at that matter and if necessary come back to the member. Members can criticise Minister’s practice in debate. There is nothing wrong with that. But I will have a look at the matter that the member has asked me to have a look at.
Barnett Tim: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
Barnett Tim: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6871] 
TIM BARNETT (NZ Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Robertson H V Ross: Minimum Wage Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Minimum Wage Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5151] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The amendments in the names of the Hon Tony Ryall and of Judith Collins and Shane Ardern to clause 2 are out of order as they are inconsistent with the previous decision just taken. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 2 be agreed to: 
to add the following subclause: 
(2)Notwithstanding any order made under subsection (1) no minimum rates of wages will apply to classes of workers who are employed under contracts of service under which they are required to undergo training instruction or examination for the purpose of becoming qualified for the occupation to which their contract of service relates.
Hunt Jonathan: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
Hunt Jonathan: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:613;Page:10000] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I want to repeat what I said. The Speaker cannot review the reasons for accepting the closure and that is where the matter ends. I declare the House now—
Vote: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
Vote: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
[Volume:624;Page:19211] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the Wills Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 76 
Anderton(P) 
Duynhoven (P) 
Locke (P) 
Samuels(P) 
Barker(P) 
Dyson(P) 
Mackey J (P) 
Shirley(P) 
Barnett (P) 
Ewen-Street(P) 
Mackey M (P) 
Simich(P) 
Benson-Pope(P) 
Fairbrother(P) 
Maharey(P) 
Sowry(P) 
Beyer (P) 
Fitzsimons(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Sutton(P) 
Bradford(P) 
Gallagher(P) 
Mallard(P) 
Swain(P) 
Burton(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mapp(P) 
Tamihere(P) 
Carter C (P) 
Gosche(P) 
Mark(P) 
Tanczos(P) 
Chadwick(P) 
Hartley(P) 
McCully(P) 
Tizard   
Choudhary(P) 
Hawkins(P) 
O'Connor(P) 
Turei(P) 
Clark(P) 
Hereora(P) 
Okeroa(P) 
Ward   
Coddington(P) 
Hide(P) 
Parker(P) 
Williamson(P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Hobbs   
Peck(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Cullen(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Pettis (P) 
Wong(P) 
Cunliffe   
Horomia(P) 
Pillay(P) 
Yates   
Dalziel   
Hunt(P) 
Rich(P) 
Donald(P) 
Kedgley(P) 
Ririnui(P) 
Donnelly   
Key(P) 
Robertson(P) 
Duncan(P) 
King(P) 
Robson(P) 
Teller: 
Dunne(P) 
Laban(P) 
Roy(P) 
Hughes   
Noes 44 
Adams (P) 
Copeland(P) 
Ogilvy(P) 
Stewart(P) 
Alexander   
Eckhoff(P) 
Paraone   
te Heuheu  
Ardern(P) 
English(P) 
Perry(P) 
Turia(P) 
Baldock(P) 
Field   
Peters J (P) 
Turner(P) 
Brash(P) 
Franks   
Peters W (P) 
Wang(P) 
Brown (P) 
Goudie(P) 
Power(P) 
Woolerton(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Gudgeon(P) 
Prebble(P) 
Worth(P) 
Carter D  
Heatley(P) 
Ryall(P) 
Carter J (P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Scott(P) 
Catchpole (P) 
Jones (P) 
Smith L (P) 
Collins(P) 
McNair(P) 
Smith M (P) 
Teller: 
Connell   
Newman(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Tisch   
Bill read a third time.
Vote: Civil Union Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Civil Union Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17485] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 58 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9; United Future 8; Maori Party 1.
Tisch Lindsay: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Tisch Lindsay: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:623;Page:18280] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—National:  
I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Will you be conferring with Mr Carter to the effect that he needs to apologise or is it up to myself as junior whip to notify him that he is required as per your ruling to apologise the next time he is in the House? 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: That is correct. The next time he comes into the House he will be asked to withdraw and apologise for that remark.
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Deferment 
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Deferment 
[Volume:625;Page:20521] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 That is right. That of course would not alter the allocation of questions on the next sitting day. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that matter. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Vote: Fiordland (Te Moana o Atawhenua) Marine  Management Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Fiordland (Te Moana o Atawhenua) Marine  Management Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:19870] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Noes 105 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; United Future 8. 
Amendments not agreed to and Part 2 agreed to. 
Progress reported. 
Report adopted.
Vote: Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Vote: Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6861] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 46 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Noes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 8 be agreed to: 
to amend subclause (3) by adding to new subsection (3) of section 40 the words “For the avoidance of doubt this subsection will not apply retrospectively to matters which occurred 3 years before the commencement of this Act.”
Hartley Ann: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
Hartley Ann: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
[Volume:624;Page:19175] 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: The member cannot say that. He will stand withdraw and apologise. 
Dail Jones 
: I withdraw and apologise. 
LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I simply said that that was how it was reported in the media. It was certainly reported in the Christchurch  
Press 
 in that way because we had to ensure that a full retraction was printed the following day to make up for the mess that that member caused. 
The last point I want to make relates to our references to the Law Commission but I do want to clarify one point. A friend rang me the other day to ask: “Why has the select committee taken de facto couples out of the property relationships legislation so now I have to enter into a civil union or get married or enter into a property agreement with my long-term de facto partner with whom I have children? Why has this happened?”. I had to explain that there has been no change to the law. The property relationships law simply covers civil unions. It continues to cover de facto couples same-sex and otherwise and that has always been the case since the property relationships legislation was passed. 
We told the Government that it would be really good to send some issues back to the Law Commission to reconsider in the light of legislation having been passed to cover civil unions. We have asked the Government to look at whether it would make terms of reference to the Law Commission to report on a number of matters including the Property (Relationships) Act. We have also asked the Government to consider people related by next of kin status and also to report on other domestic relationships where people are not accorded next of kin status because they are not married or in a civil union. We think those issues should be explored by the Law Commission and we commend those recommendations to the House.
Simich Clem: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Simich Clem: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7713] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I thank Mr Peters again for his point of order. The member was absolutely right. I apologise for not calling him first.
Tisch Lindsay: Civil Aviation Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Tisch Lindsay: Civil Aviation Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:615;Page:11202] 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 This is very important legislation and National will be supporting it. As members have just heard from the Hon Maurice Williamson we have over the years viewed the civil aviation legislation as very important. The aviation industry is an integral part of our whole economy and of the way that we do business with overseas countries. The first stop when visitors come into New Zealand is usually an airport and Auckland International Airport in particular is probably the gateway to New Zealand. In fact I think that airport even has a sign stating that as one goes into the airport complex. That airport is not just an airport but is actually a whole industrial estate where people arrive or depart.
Brownlee Gerry: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Brownlee Gerry: Supreme Court Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9027] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I think we could spend a lot of time this evening discussing the finer points of the Standing Order and the circumstances that led us to this point of order in the first place. At the end of the day much of the confusion probably surrounds the fact that the Standing Orders were written for a clause by clause debate. In that event there would not be the confusion that currently exists. What is probably required Mr Speaker is a ruling from you that makes it very clear how these matters should be dealt with. Although we have the ability to say that we dealt with them in the Gambling Bill in one way and in other bills dealt with them in other ways—and Dr Cullen says that for some 10 or more years now we have dealt with them in the way he believes we have and as I think you were trying to rule—it would be far better Mr Speaker if you were to come up with a new ruling given that the current Government has no desire to see any bill debated clause by clause—that would be too difficult for it and probably too embarrassing. For you to come up with a new ruling would be quite a reasonable thing I think.
Vote: Motions — Confidence Motion—Government 
Vote: Motions — Confidence Motion—Government 
[Volume:617;Page:12540] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 58 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 52; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Motion not agreed to.
Key John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Key John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:613;Page:9842] 
4.  
JOHN KEY (National—Helensville) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: Does he think he was being responsible when he stated that any action taken to curb the exchange rate by the Government would be declared “if and when I have done something.”; if so what impact does he think such a statement has on New Zealand’s international credibility in the financial markets? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 Yes and none. 
John Key 
: Is the Minister considering an increase in the current $4.5 billion target for New Zealand’s reserves so that he can intervene with more confidence in the currency market; if so does he acknowledge that the current reserves cost the taxpayer $10 million a year in carry costs and that any increase in reserves would lead to a $20 million or $30 million cost and would run against the advice given to him by the Reserve Bank in his briefing that it would be marginal at best? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: No I am not considering that. I have been informally advised that the Reserve Bank may raise the issue with me despite its briefing to me as Minister. I have yet to consider it. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Why does the Minister think it is respectable to repeat past experience when he was first a member of Government when the dollar rose to US44c and finished at US72c—destructively against the interests of exporters—then between 1994 and 1996 it rose 26 percent under a National Government without any effort by the then Minister of Finance to do a thing; why does he think that a rise of 33 percent in the last 15 months is good for exporters good for a country dependent upon exports and good for our wealth as an exporting country overall? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I thought I had made it rather clear I do not but unlike the member I act according to the law. I do not believe that one can call in the Reserve Bank governor and simply order him to lower the exchange rate as that member seems to think one can. 
John Key 
: Is the Minister considering any changes to the treatment of foreign investments in New Zealand as the Thai authorities did on 14 October when they prohibited non-residents from earning interest in their current accounts dated less than 6 months; if so what does he think these impacts will have on the $98 billion of foreign investment currently in New Zealand? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: No. The member may rest easy on that score. 
John Key 
: Does the Minister think that his comments to curb the dollar last week are working; if so has he noticed that the Kiwi has gone up 100 points since he made them to a 6½-year high? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Yes I have noticed that. But what I do know about exchange rates is that what goes up does eventually come down again.
Pettis Jill: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Pettis Jill: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:606;Page:3489] 
JILL PETTIS (NZ Labour—Whanganui) 
: 
 Some fantastic things are happening in terms of learning in the workplace environment. For example 47 percent more trainees have been involved in workplace training since we became the Government. I can tell members that 4344 people in Modern Apprenticeships are now in workplace training. That is a 112 percent increase on the previous year. This training is of a very high quality and it is responding to the skill needs of industry and employees. This situation contrasts dramatically with the almost total absence of workplace training when National was in Government.  
Workplace training enables young people to stay in their home cities in many instances. It is meeting the huge gaps in skill shortages that came about because National failed to invest in the future. National failed to invest in ensuring that we had appropriate skills in place to meet the needs of the market and the needs of the workplace. I sometimes wonder where members opposite were in the last 9 years when we had massive unemployment in the provinces and when young people were leaving their home towns and cities in droves. I ask members to compare that situation with the very buoyant employment market we have now. I am proud of this Government’s achievements.
Vote: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8696] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to 
. 
Ayes 35 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Noes 82 
Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Tony Ryall to clause 1 be agreed to: 
to insert after the word “Finance” the words “Disclosure and Regulation”.
Ryall Tony: Speaker’s Rulings — Privileges of the House and Speaker’s Actions 
Ryall Tony: Speaker’s Rulings — Privileges of the House and Speaker’s Actions 
[Volume:611;Page:8657] 
Hon TONY RYALL (NZ National—Bay of Plenty) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek clarification from you on a point that Mr Prebble raised. Mr Prebble asked you to consider the reference to the police coming to the Parliament Buildings to interview and depose Mr Ardern which may be a matter of privilege. The point I raise as a matter of urgency for your consideration is that the evidence the police took from Mr Ardern which no doubt will be presented to the court this Friday week could have been obtained as a result of a breach of the privileges of this House. That will have implications for that evidence in another place. I seek your indication that you will give this matter the highest urgency because action will have to be taken if this documentation was taken as a result of a breach of this House’s privileges. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will give this matter the highest urgency possible and report back to the House.
Hunt Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hunt Jonathan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:610;Page:7353] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before I call the member the Minister has advised me that she wishes to give a slightly longer answer than usual.
Cullen Michael: Urgent Debates Declined — Influenza—Vaccination Programme 
Cullen Michael: Urgent Debates Declined — Influenza—Vaccination Programme 
[Volume:624;Page:19166] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 The House will be in an interesting position later on today when it does the third reading of the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill and the bills therefrom. There are 23 separate questions to be put all of which could be individual votes which will all no doubt be almost exactly the same for each bill. That would almost certainly take more time than an urgent debate on this issue. I would therefore like to suggest to the House that it might be appropriate to take leave to take the 23 votes as one vote and to hold an urgent debate on this issue which would actually I think be a more useful use of Parliament’s time.
Cullen Michael: Care of Children Bill — Instruction to Committee Procedure In Committee 
Cullen Michael: Care of Children Bill — Instruction to Committee Procedure In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16628] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 There has been some discussion between the parties and I understand that there is agreement on the procedure to be followed. I therefore seek leave for the questions on the amendments to Part 2 of the Care of Children Bill set out on Supplementary Order Papers 292 293 and 294 be taken in the following order before any other amendments to the provisions proposed to be amended each with a personal vote: firstly the amendment to clause 37 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 294 in the name of Murray Smith secondly the amendments to clause 35 and new clause 37A set out on Supplementary Order Paper 292 in the name of Judith Collins and thirdly new clause 37B set out on Supplementary Order Paper 293 in the name of Judith Collins. I understand that if those amendments fail there is a further amendment moved by Mr Dail Jones that should also be taken as a personal vote. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none.
Jones Dail: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Jones Dail: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21406] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 The National Party members keep on making the speech about the reference to the Treaty of Waitangi in this agreement so I look forward to the National Party opposing the legislation as New Zealand First is doing. That is clear New Zealand First policy. I am pleased the National Party is supporting New Zealand First policy and I hope it will take that to the final conclusion and vote against the bill. I am reminded of the famous expression of the Rt Hon Winston Peters: “You can steal my horse but you’ve got to be able to ride it out of town.” National Party members are trying to steal our horse in saying that they oppose the reference to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. Now they have to ride it out of town as well by voting against the bill. Can they do that? I do not think they can.
Business of Select Committees — Reporting Dates 
Business of Select Committees — Reporting Dates 
[Volume:617;Page:13321] 
Business of Select Committees 
Reporting Dates 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Earlier I sought leave for the Health Committee report on the Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill to be extended to 30 July 2004. I understand now that the member has been able to check that the Health Committee unanimously supported that move. So I seek that leave. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none.
Hughes Darren: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Hughes Darren: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:608;Page:6000] 
12.  
DARREN HUGHES (NZ Labour—Otaki) 
 on behalf of  
CLAYTON COSGROVE (NZ Labour—Waimakariri) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Agriculture 
: What support is the Government giving the agriculture and horticulture industries in developing an ag/hort human capability strategy? 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Associate Minister of Agriculture) 
: 
 The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry has facilitated the establishment of a pan-industry governance group and working-group to oversee agricultural and horticultural industry responses to labour-skill needs. Five hundred thousand dollars of Sustainable Farming Fund money has also been allocated to support the initial implementation of the strategy. 
Darren Hughes 
: What is the scope of that strategy? 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR 
: The scope of the strategy includes on-farm and near-farm human capability. That means the objective is to improve the recruitment retention and skills of farm labourers farm managers and farmers as well as the services they rely on such as shearers rural professionals and researchers. 
Hon David Carter 
: Is the Minister conscious of his own remarks yesterday in the Budget debate and in his subsequent press release when he said: “More than 80 percent of primary products grown here are exported. Getting into overseas markets at fair levels is hugely important for our farmers.”; and does he think that the Minister of Agriculture’s own comments in January this year when he accused the United States of “arm-twisting nations into backing a war with Iraq” are helpful for trade access? 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR 
: New Zealand does rely on trade. That is why the Government committed about $17 million extra to facilitate trade negotiations in the next few years.
Benson-Pope David: Aquaculture Reform Bill — First Reading 
Benson-Pope David: Aquaculture Reform Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:619;Page:15127] 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Minister of Fisheries) 
: 
 I move  
That the Aquaculture Reform Bill be referred to the Primary Production Committee for consideration that the committee present its final report on or before 29 November 2004 and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time during a sitting of the House except during questions for oral answer during an evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House and to meet outside Wellington during a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 191 193(a) and 194(1)(b) and (c). 
referred to Primary Production Committee
Business of Select Committees — Meetings 
Business of Select Committees — Meetings 
[Volume:615;Page:11495] 
Wednesday 3 March 2004 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business of Select Committees 
Meetings 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the Law and Order Committee to meet in Australia from 7 to 13 March and to adopt such procedures and practices as are considered suitable for the conduct of its business. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be not.
Mallard Trevor: General Debates 
Mallard Trevor: General Debates 
[Volume:609;Page:6570] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I withdraw. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I call the Hon Matt Robson.
Paraone Pita: Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Paraone Pita: Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:627;Page:21918] 
PITA PARAONE (NZ First) 
: 
 Again on behalf of New Zealand First I want to say that the title is quite clear. The bill is about a particular claimant group. The title identifies the name of the claimant group and that is really what is needed from a title. 
The previous speaker Gerry Brownlee said that this bill gives some rights to the claimant group that are not available to other New Zealanders and I accept that he is quite right to raise his concern about that. But this bill is about Nga Rauru Kitahi’s claim; it is a settlement between them and the Crown. However we do express some concerns about some of the entitlements that it gives this claimant group that are not available to other New Zealanders and that should signal to the Government and therefore the Crown that care and thought should be given when considering future claimant settlements that come before this House. 
In terms of the commencement again I ought to say that there may be a technical reason why the bill cannot come into force until the day after the royal assent is given but this claimant group has waited a long time for this settlement to take place. Although some people may consider that an extra day is not too long I think that if it were technically possible the bill should come into force the moment the royal assent is given. 
On behalf of New Zealand First I say we support clauses 1 and 2.
Kedgley Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Kedgley Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:610;Page:7652] 
12.  
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
 to the  
Minister of Broadcasting 
: Does he have any concerns about Television New Zealand Limited considering commercial sponsorship of  
One News 
 especially in light of Television New Zealand Limited’s charter obligation to provide independent impartial and in-depth news and current affairs? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Broadcasting) 
: 
 No. By law I am prevented from having any involvement in TVNZ’s gathering or presentation of news and current affairs. TVNZ has advised me that there are no plans for commercial sponsorship of  
One News 
. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Is he aware of any stories critical of Mitsubishi Motors that have aired on the  
Holmes 
 show since Mitsubishi Motors began to sponsor it and does he agree that conflict of interest issues that call into question the independence and impartiality of news and current affairs programmes are inevitable when corporates sponsor them; if not why not? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: No I am not though I would have to confess that I do not watch the  
Holmes 
 show every single night of the week and yes I do agree that corporate sponsorship is inappropriate in news. 
H V Ross Robertson 
: Is Television New Zealand using any charter funding for news and current affairs programmes? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I am aware that Television New Zealand uses no charter money for news and current affairs. That is something that it fully agrees with itself—it wants to maintain complete impartiality. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Given the Minister’s statement that he agrees that there are conflict of interest issues and that it is inappropriate for corporates to sponsor news programmes does he agree that that also pertains to current affairs which the charter states must be equally independent and impartial and will he be calling for a review of all sponsorships of current affairs programmes in TVNZ? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I am not aware of any sponsorships in those areas. I am aware people advertise during that period of time but that is quite different.
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:624;Page:19320] 
11.  
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister for Courts 
: What initiatives has he undertaken to assist developing understanding of the courts and justice system for students? 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister for Courts) 
: 
 Today I launched an educational website called Access to Justice. That can be used in secondary schools as part of a social studies course and civics programme. It has information about how our courts work how legislation is developed and what happens when someone goes through the courts. I have also publicised open court days that are being held throughout New Zealand. 
Moana Mackey 
: Is the site relevant only to teachers and students? 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: No I encourage all to take advantage of the website as it clearly sets out the structure of our justice system gives examples and shows the principles that underpin our justice system. With knowledge people will have confidence in our justice system. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Is the House to understand from this question that the Labour Government is proud of the fact that an increasing number of young people have come to have an understanding of the courts and justice system; if so is that the reason why this Government is so soft on crime George Hawkins is still the Minister of Police crime is out of control and an increasing number of young people every year get to obtain a developing knowledge of our courts and justice system? 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: I am pleased to say that this Government has taken firm action on justice issues. When the previous National Government was in power the maximum sentence a person could get for life was 10 years. Now the minimum period for parole is 33 years in some cases. The number of people in jail has gone up. This Government has taken tough action on crime. It is important that people have an understanding of how our justice system works.
Copeland Gordon: Wellington City Council (Te Aro Reclamation) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Copeland Gordon: Wellington City Council (Te Aro Reclamation) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:619;Page:14631] 
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
: 
 I thoroughly endorse the comments made to the House just a few minutes ago by Jim Peters. It is our sole job here in Parliament really to remove the historical impediments that relate to this piece of land. I hope that we will do that in just a couple of minutes. Beyond that the good people of Wellington are quite capable of making decisions about what its future should be. I doubt very much whether the pontifications of the Greens and other people who have tried to give a bit of a steer as to what they should do are very relevant. As Keith Locke himself pointed out a local body election is looming. I think we should simply get on and make this the law. This bill will have the support of the United Future party. 
Bill read a third time.
Sowry Roger: Speaker’s Rulings — Stranger in the Lobbies—President of Council of Trade Unions  
Sowry Roger: Speaker’s Rulings — Stranger in the Lobbies—President of Council of Trade Unions  
[Volume:620;Page:16104] 
Hon ROGER SOWRY (National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I wonder whether you could do the House the courtesy of advising the House who the member was because I think that the House deserves to know that. Members got into difficulty earlier on today when they did not know who it was. I wonder whether you could do that now.
Brown Peter: Land Transport Management Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Brown Peter: Land Transport Management Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:613;Page:9689] 
PETER BROWN (Senior Whip—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Is the point of order relevant to the vote? 
PETER BROWN 
: Earlier on—I think you were in the Chair at the time—I picked up on the chairperson going from National Party member to National Party member. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: No no— 
PETER BROWN 
: Let me finish. My point of order is serious. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Will the member please be seated. It is not a point of order about the vote. I thought the member had a point of order— 
PETER BROWN 
: Well I am challenging the vote because New Zealand First has had only calls that I have taken. My colleagues here sought the call. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: No that is not a correct point of order.
Vote: Building Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Building Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:611;Page:8437] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Building Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 106 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 6; United Future 8. 
Noes 8 
ACT New Zealand 8. 
Bill read a first time and referred to the Government Administration Committee.
Mahuta Nanaia: State Sector Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Mahuta Nanaia: State Sector Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7365] 
NANAIA MAHUTA (NZ Labour—Tainui) 
: 
 I rise to make a brief contribution to the third reading of the State Sector Amendment Bill. I just want to highlight that one of the important elements of the bill is to limit costs to the taxpayer of compensation for technical redundancies. This is to ensure that taxpayers’ money is used more efficiently. That part of the bill finds that where employees are offered a substantially similar position at the transfer of the department on no less favourable terms and conditions of employment no redundancy compensation will be paid. If that is not common sense I do not know what is. I support this bill.
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8099] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Noes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 103 in the name of Dr Lynda Scott to omit clauses 53 54 and 54A be agreed to.
Volunteers Employment Protection Amendment Bill — Instruction to Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Volunteers Employment Protection Amendment Bill — Instruction to Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee 
[Sitting date: 19 June 2003. Volume:609;Page:6413. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Volunteers Employment Protection Amendment Bill 
Instruction to Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 Further to the discussions with various party whips and the Business Committee I seek leave for Standing Order 256 to be suspended to permit the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee in its consideration of the Volunteers Employment Protection Amendment Bill to have authority to consider and if it thinks fit adopt the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 66. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There appears to be none.
Prebble Richard: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Prebble Richard: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:608;Page:5262] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 I do. I think members of the committee must know the answer. I seek leave for any member of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee to answer my question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is.
Carter Chris: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
Carter Chris: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15436] 
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Hunt Jonathan: Speaker’s Rulings — Replies to Questions for Written Answer 
Hunt Jonathan: Speaker’s Rulings — Replies to Questions for Written Answer 
[Volume:609;Page:6121] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Yesterday I undertook to give consideration to replies to questions for written answer that are now conceded to be inaccurate. As I told the House yesterday Speaker’s ruling 142/3 makes it clear that anyone giving inaccurate information to the House should clear up the error as soon as he or she realises it has occurred. That obligation applies even though the member may not have all the information needed to clear the matter up fully at the time the error is appreciated. It is still incumbent on the member to take the first opportunity to acknowledge the error with a promise of a full correction in due course. It is not sufficient for a Minister to acknowledge an error only in answering further questions. Where there is an error the Minister should lodge with the Clerk a further reply indicating that it is believed that there are errors in identified replies and promising to lodge fully corrected replies in due course. I expect all Ministers to follow that course.
Burton Mark: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Burton Mark: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10616] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Minister of Defence) 
 on behalf of the Minister for the Environment: I move  
That the Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill be referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee for consideration that the committee report the bill finally to the House by 15 March 2004 and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting—except during questions for oral answer—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 193 and 196(1)(b) and (c). 
 referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: There is an amendment in the name of the Hon Ken Shirley to the motion to omit the words “15 March 2004” and to substitute the words “30 June 2004”.