edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Vote: Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Vote: Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9969] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill be now read a second time.  
Ayes 68 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Bill read a second time.
Vote: Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Vote: Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9948] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill be now read a first time.  
Ayes 68 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Bill read a first time.
Hawkins George: Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Hawkins George: Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9945] 
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Labour—Manurewa) 
: 
 The previous speaker Colin King did not last very long. None of the National members have. When the National members are dealing with legislation that takes away democracy they do not want to talk about it very much. That is what that Government is all about. Here we are pushing through—bulldozing—under urgency the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill about which the public will not have a say. There will not be any select committee hearing where the people of Canterbury can have their say. That opportunity has been taken away from them by a Government that is rushing this legislation through. Of course what it is doing is taking away the democratically elected people and it is doing that in such a fashion that we begin to think that this Government sees this as an easy step. 
I think back to the process that was used in Auckland. Back in May 2009 the Auckland reorganisation legislation was foisted upon us. The Government did that under urgency and the House sat until the weekend to pass the legislation through all stages. This is the Government that said it would listen to people; this is the Government that was going to take notice of people. But all of a sudden the National members have become an arrogant lot. 
Nicky Wagner 
: Nah.
Wagner Nicky: Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Wagner Nicky: Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9947] 
NICKY WAGNER (National) 
: 
 I support the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill. I support this bill because there is no doubt that the management of water in Canterbury is a significant issue where we need to do better. I support this bill because Environment Canterbury has been unable to manage water effectively and efficiently for the past decade. Everybody—even Trevor Mallard—knows that there is a real problem here. 
I would just like to respond to Ruth Dyson’s cherry-picked quotes from the review group’s report. Let us look at its conclusion: “the Review Group has concluded that ECan’s performance on water policy and management issues (allocation and quality) falls well short of what is essential.” Here I differ from some of the others as I have an insider’s point of view to Environment Canterbury because I was a councillor there until I came to Parliament and I know how hard everyone there works to do their jobs effectively and how much they want to manage water well. But I also know the frustrations and the difficulties that they have had over many years to try to get a water plan in place and I know how incredibly difficult the task of managing water is without the legislative tools needed to do a good job. 
I support this bill because it gives the Canterbury Water Management Strategy formal legal status. It requires the commissioners to give formal recognition to it in their decisions. The Canterbury Water Management Strategy is a grassroots collaborative catchment-based community process that I believe is the way forward for Canterbury. It is the best tool for managing competing interests and for getting the best use of water both for the environment and for the economy and this bill recognises that tool. 
Environment Canterbury was crucial in bringing the Canterbury Water Management Strategy together and has therefore helped to set the framework for future work. I support the introduction of temporary commissioners chaired by Dame Margaret Bazley because I believe that it is the only way to break the deadlock over water in Canterbury and to move forward positively. It is now up to all the stakeholders and those interested in water to be part of the process and to ensure that we the people of Canterbury manage the resource wisely and well. 
The aims of this bill are firstly to protect the environment that sustains our future and secondly to use the resource intelligently to underpin the social and economic well-being of the people of Canterbury. I would just like to ask members on the other side of the House how anyone can argue against that.
Vote: Social Assistance (Future Focus) Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Social Assistance (Future Focus) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9926] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Social Assistance (Future Focus) Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 65 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5;United Future 1; Maori Party 1 (Turia). 
Noes 57 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Maori Party 4 (Flavell Harawira Katene Sharples); Progressive 1. 
Bill read a first time.
Power Simon: Business of the House 
Power Simon: Business of the House 
[Volume:661;Page:9927] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for there to be question time at 2 p.m. on Wednesday 31 March and 2 p.m. on Thursday 1 April 2010 and for questions to be lodged in the normal manner pursuant to Standing Order 372. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There being none that is agreed to.
Power Simon: Urgency 
Power Simon: Urgency 
[Volume:661;Page:9926] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the introduction and passing of the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill and the Immigration Amendment Bill; the passing through their remaining stages of the Dairy Industry Restructuring (Raw Milk Pricing Methods) Bill and the Regulatory Improvement Bill and any bills into which any of those bills may be divided; the third reading of the Unit Titles Bill; and the first readings of the Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill and the Commerce Commission (International Co-operation and Fees) Bill. 
The Government is moving to accord urgency for the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill to empower Government-appointed commissioners to provide the governance and leadership necessary to rapidly address longstanding systemic institutional and governance issues within the Canterbury Regional Council Environment Canterbury. It is responsible of the Government to provide certainty for Environment Canterbury councillors and staff; consequently according urgency to this legislation is the most appropriate action. 
The Dairy Industry Restructuring (Raw Milk Pricing Methods) Bill provides certainty and clarity regarding future pricing methods to be applied to regulated raw milk that Fonterra is obliged to provide to independent processors prior to the beginning of the 2010-11 dairy production season. 
The Immigration Act 2009 Amendment Bill corrects errors in the drafting of the Immigration Act 2009 and it needs to be passed as soon as possible to allow necessary implementation work to be undertaken and to ensure that the will of this House is not frustrated. 
The Government’s intention is that a bill to improve the regulatory framework will be an annual occurrence and as the current bill was not able to be passed last year the Government would like to move to advance it so that the progress of regulatory reform becomes continuous. 
The Unit Titles Bill should progress under urgency as the review of the 38-year-old Unit Titles Act has been ongoing for the last 5 years and this bill is a small but integral part of the package of solutions the Government is looking at for people who are living in leaky apartment bills. The Act is outdated and is inadequate to deal with the creation and management of developments such as apartment blocks in today’s housing market. 
Noting the Regulations Review Committee’s finding regarding the undesirability of the deferred commencement of the new section 92A that was part of the Copyright (New Technologies) Amendment Act 2008 the Government would like to refer the Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill to a select committee as soon as possible. 
Finally advancing the Commerce Commission (International Co-operation and Fees) Bill is another step towards the fulfilment of a single economic market with Australia as enunciated by the Prime Minister in his statement to Parliament at the beginning of the year. 
Motion agreed to.
Bennett Paula: Social Assistance (Future Focus) Bill — First Reading 
Bennett Paula: Social Assistance (Future Focus) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9926] 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 I move  
That the Social Assistance (Future Focus) Bill be considered by the Social Services Committee 
 that the committee report finally to the House on or before 30 July 2010 and that the committee have the 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 and to meet outside the Wellington area during a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 187 189(a) and 190(1)(b) and (c).  
Motion agreed to.
Chadwick Steve: Points of Order — Urgency Motion—Leave to Correct Votes 
Chadwick Steve: Points of Order — Urgency Motion—Leave to Correct Votes 
[Volume:661;Page:9930] 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK (Junior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to correct the votes of Labour and Progressive on the urgency motion. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: There was not actually a party vote; the vote was on voices. So there is no record to correct and I think we could say that the seeking of leave is out of order.
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9893] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Prime Minister) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a Labour Party postcard with mining hats on it. These postcards were dropped in mailboxes in Wellington— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is this a genuine document? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: Yes it is. It is out of a mailbox.
Hughes Darren: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hughes Darren: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9893] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 The Labour Party would be happy to give consent to that provided that the Minister could tell us whether it was delivered to his home in Dipton or— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I invited that; I blame myself for this loss of order. I am troubled though. I do not think I am about to put leave to table a postcard. I do not think it is in the spirit of documentation that provides the House with information.
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9901] 
11. 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
 to the  
Minister of Research Science and Technology 
: What recent announcements has he made about changes aimed at ensuring New Zealand gets the best from its Crown research institutes? 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP (Minister of Research Science and Technology) 
: 
 Yesterday the Prime Minister and I announced the Government’s response to the Crown Research Institute Taskforce. In short the Government will be implementing all the major recommendations of the taskforce. In particular it will give the institutes a longer and more strategic focus which will be of great value to New Zealand business and to New Zealand science. 
Colin King 
: Has the Minister received any reports about these changes? 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: Yes. Feedback has been very positive. Business New Zealand noticed that businesses would be particularly pleased with the opportunity to collaborate. I would also note that the Labour Party said yesterday: “Giving the Crown research institutes a clear directive to strive for breakthroughs to benefit New Zealand will be a key part of our economic transformation.” and of course that is exactly what these reforms will do. 
David Shearer 
: Even given the changes to the Crown research institutes does he accept that achieving a step change in the economy requires substantial new investment in research science and technology in the 2010 Budget and what assurances can he give the scientific community of that new funding? 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: I guess the questioner will have to wait for the Budget. 
Colin King 
: What other initiatives are under way to better support science? 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: There have been a number of initiatives. For instance last year there were significant increases in funding for the Health Research Council the Marsden Fund and the Crown Research Institute Capability Fund. Of course we appointed the Chief Science Adviser to the Prime Minister and we established core priorities and there is more to come.
Dyson Ruth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Dyson Ruth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9898] 
8. 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: Does he stand by all his statements about health services? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) 
: 
 Yes including the statement that Labour had culled 30000 people from hospital waiting lists. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: How do his statements relate to the concerns expressed by Kathy James clinical adviser Health Care Aotearoa who says that “Vulnerable patients will get sicker and more will go to hospital under proposed funding cuts for family-doctor groups”? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The Government has been quite clear: we want to support front-line services in general practice and we will be moving resources in order to increase the subsidies for general practitioner visits. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: How can he justify spending $6 million preparing business cases for integrated family health centres—his flagship policy—when the primary-care network covering most of Auckland has just ditched those centres in its proposal? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: The Government inherited a situation where the previous Government had made very little progress in implementing the primary health care strategy. So this Government is seeking to do that; it will provide better more convenient services for New Zealanders. 
Nicky Wagner 
: What other front-line services are improving? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: Front-line services are improving in many parts of the public health service. They are particularly helped by the 1100 extra nursing personnel in the public health service. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: How does he explain to the people of Palmerston North Feilding and Levin that despite Nathan Guy’s advocacy their 24-hour district nursing service is under threat the diabetes lifestyle centre is under threat sexual health services are under threat and the STAR 3 rehabilitation centre for people under 65 is due for the chop as well? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: Despite the Government increasing MidCentral District Health Board’s budget by $26 million this year the Government has inherited significant challenges with that district health board. There are a number of options on the table and decisions are still to be had but I am determined that the people of that area should have certainty about their services and that the district health board should not career into financial crisis.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer—Ministerial Responsibility 
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer—Ministerial Responsibility 
[Volume:661;Page:9887] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I ask you to make a considered ruling in relation to Speaker’s ruling 145/6 which relates to ministerial responsibility for answering questions. In particular I want you to rule on a written question that the Office of the Prime Minister has twice turned down as not having responsibility for which relates to a letter the Prime Minister wrote as Prime Minister to 350000 New Zealanders. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I hear the honourable member. Another issue arose recently while the Deputy Speaker was in the chair around a discrepancy between an oral answer and a written answer. It is quite difficult for us to follow up these issues without the detail being down in writing. It has taken quite a lot of research to follow up that previous point of order. I am not saying there is anything wrong with what the member is asking but I ask him to put it in writing for me so that I can consider the detail of what he is seeking and act on that. It is not a matter for the House to consider right now; it is a matter for me to consider. I am very happy to do that.
Dyson Ruth: Tabling of Documents — Clinical Training Agency—Number of Nurses Recently Employed 
Dyson Ruth: Tabling of Documents — Clinical Training Agency—Number of Nurses Recently Employed 
[Volume:661;Page:9887] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 On 18 March in answer to an oral question the Minister of Health replied that 1100 more nurses had been employed since he became Minister of Health. You will recall Mr Speaker that there was some debate about the source of that information. I sought for the Minister to table the information if it was an official document. The Minister said in the House that he was referring to the ministry— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am listening carefully and I am struggling to ascertain the issue of order that the member is seeking to have me consider. So far it is litigating information which is not a valid point of order. I will listen a moment longer but I must hear the point of order. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: I seek leave to table the most recently available data outlining the number of nurses employed in the New Zealand workforce. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: What is the source of that document? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: It was prepared for the Clinical Training Agency Ministry of Health and was published in 2009. It covers the years to 2008 and is the most recent data available. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9900] 
10. 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Conservation 
: Does she think the Department of Conservation should have an advocacy role for conservation at any public forum or in any statutory planning process? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 The department should and does have an advocacy role and this is generally provided for in section 6(b) of the Conservation Act 1987—namely “To advocate the conservation of natural and historical resources generally:”. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Given that as of her press conference with Gerry Brownlee 8 days ago the Minister of Energy and Resources can decide whether diggers will be allowed on schedule 4 land is it not the reality that she now has no control of her portfolio? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: No. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Does she share the concerns of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment interviewed on Radio New Zealand National yesterday about the adequacy of the consultation process over mining schedule 4 land; and does she agree with the commissioner that sharing her decision-making power with the Minister of Energy and Resources is like letting the Minister of Forestry decide whether to cut down trees in national parks? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: Access to the conservation estate cannot occur without the Minister of Conservation’s signature. It cannot occur now and it will not occur in the future. However the question of access is addressed in the discussion paper. It is a discussion paper and if the member has any concerns I suggest he make a submission on the consultation paper. Submissions close on Tuesday 4 May at 5 p.m. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Will she advocate for the hundreds of people who rallied in front of the House at lunchtime to send her a message that once land has schedule 4 protection it is not up for trading to her more powerful caucus colleagues? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: I have already had a delegation from that protest march in my office straight after the protest and I suggested to them as I suggest to that member that this is a discussion paper and that input is welcome. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Will she advocate for the 1.5 million people of the Auckland region who have no immediate access to a national park and did she advocate on their behalf against mining Great Barrier Island and the Coromandel rather than simply doing as she was told by her higher-ranked Cabinet colleagues? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: I am not quite sure whether that member understands English but this is a discussion paper— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You have made other rulings about terms of abuse and I invite you to reflect on that answer. It was not an answer to the question. It was a straight question and it received a barrage of abuse. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Oh that it were a straight question! 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: As explained the document is a discussion paper. It is inviting submissions. We will see those submissions when the consultation is over and we will make decisions if any accordingly.
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — European Parliament—Delegation for Relations with Australia and New Zealand 
Smith Lockwood: Visitors — European Parliament—Delegation for Relations with Australia and New Zealand 
[Volume:661;Page:9887] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that a parliamentary delegation for relations with Australia and New Zealand from the European Parliament led by Mr Richard Ashworth MEP is present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish that the delegation be welcomed.
Urgency 
Urgency 
[Volume:661;Page:9926] 
Urgency 
Hon SIMON POWER (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the introduction and passing of the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill and the Immigration Amendment Bill; the passing through their remaining stages of the Dairy Industry Restructuring (Raw Milk Pricing Methods) Bill and the Regulatory Improvement Bill and any bills into which any of those bills may be divided; the third reading of the Unit Titles Bill; and the first readings of the Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill and the Commerce Commission (International Co-operation and Fees) Bill. 
The Government is moving to accord urgency for the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill to empower Government-appointed commissioners to provide the governance and leadership necessary to rapidly address longstanding systemic institutional and governance issues within the Canterbury Regional Council Environment Canterbury. It is responsible of the Government to provide certainty for Environment Canterbury councillors and staff; consequently according urgency to this legislation is the most appropriate action. 
The Dairy Industry Restructuring (Raw Milk Pricing Methods) Bill provides certainty and clarity regarding future pricing methods to be applied to regulated raw milk that Fonterra is obliged to provide to independent processors prior to the beginning of the 2010-11 dairy production season. 
The Immigration Act 2009 Amendment Bill corrects errors in the drafting of the Immigration Act 2009 and it needs to be passed as soon as possible to allow necessary implementation work to be undertaken and to ensure that the will of this House is not frustrated. 
The Government’s intention is that a bill to improve the regulatory framework will be an annual occurrence and as the current bill was not able to be passed last year the Government would like to move to advance it so that the progress of regulatory reform becomes continuous. 
The Unit Titles Bill should progress under urgency as the review of the 38-year-old Unit Titles Act has been ongoing for the last 5 years and this bill is a small but integral part of the package of solutions the Government is looking at for people who are living in leaky apartment bills. The Act is outdated and is inadequate to deal with the creation and management of developments such as apartment blocks in today’s housing market. 
Noting the Regulations Review Committee’s finding regarding the undesirability of the deferred commencement of the new section 92A that was part of the Copyright (New Technologies) Amendment Act 2008 the Government would like to refer the Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill to a select committee as soon as possible. 
Finally advancing the Commerce Commission (International Co-operation and Fees) Bill is another step towards the fulfilment of a single economic market with Australia as enunciated by the Prime Minister in his statement to Parliament at the beginning of the year. 
Motion agreed to.
Points of Order — Urgency Motion—Leave to Correct Votes 
Points of Order — Urgency Motion—Leave to Correct Votes 
[Volume:661;Page:9930] 
Points of Order 
Urgency Motion—Leave to Correct Votes 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK (Junior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to correct the votes of Labour and Progressive on the urgency motion. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: There was not actually a party vote; the vote was on voices. So there is no record to correct and I think we could say that the seeking of leave is out of order.
Business of the House 
Business of the House 
[Volume:661;Page:9927] 
Business of the House 
Hon SIMON POWER (Acting Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for there to be question time at 2 p.m. on Wednesday 31 March and 2 p.m. on Thursday 1 April 2010 and for questions to be lodged in the normal manner pursuant to Standing Order 372. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There being none that is agreed to.
Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer—Ministerial Responsibility 
Points of Order — Questions for Written Answer—Ministerial Responsibility 
[Volume:661;Page:9887] 
Points of Order 
Questions for Written Answer—Ministerial Responsibility 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I ask you to make a considered ruling in relation to Speaker’s ruling 145/6 which relates to ministerial responsibility for answering questions. In particular I want you to rule on a written question that the Office of the Prime Minister has twice turned down as not having responsibility for which relates to a letter the Prime Minister wrote as Prime Minister to 350000 New Zealanders. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I hear the honourable member. Another issue arose recently while the Deputy Speaker was in the chair around a discrepancy between an oral answer and a written answer. It is quite difficult for us to follow up these issues without the detail being down in writing. It has taken quite a lot of research to follow up that previous point of order. I am not saying there is anything wrong with what the member is asking but I ask him to put it in writing for me so that I can consider the detail of what he is seeking and act on that. It is not a matter for the House to consider right now; it is a matter for me to consider. I am very happy to do that.
Tabling of Documents — Clinical Training Agency—Number of Nurses Recently Employed 
Tabling of Documents — Clinical Training Agency—Number of Nurses Recently Employed 
[Volume:661;Page:9887] 
Tabling of Documents 
Clinical Training Agency—Number of Nurses Recently Employed 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 On 18 March in answer to an oral question the Minister of Health replied that 1100 more nurses had been employed since he became Minister of Health. You will recall Mr Speaker that there was some debate about the source of that information. I sought for the Minister to table the information if it was an official document. The Minister said in the House that he was referring to the ministry— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am listening carefully and I am struggling to ascertain the issue of order that the member is seeking to have me consider. So far it is litigating information which is not a valid point of order. I will listen a moment longer but I must hear the point of order. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: I seek leave to table the most recently available data outlining the number of nurses employed in the New Zealand workforce. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: What is the source of that document? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: It was prepared for the Clinical Training Agency Ministry of Health and was published in 2009. It covers the years to 2008 and is the most recent data available. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Visitors — European Parliament—Delegation for Relations with Australia and New Zealand 
Visitors — European Parliament—Delegation for Relations with Australia and New Zealand 
[Volume:661;Page:9887] 
Tuesday 30 March 2010 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Visitors 
European Parliament—Delegation for Relations with Australia and New Zealand 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have much pleasure in informing the House that a parliamentary delegation for relations with Australia and New Zealand from the European Parliament led by Mr Richard Ashworth MEP is present in the gallery. I am sure members would wish that the delegation be welcomed.
Mackey Moana: Unit Titles Bill — In Committee 
Mackey Moana: Unit Titles Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9875] 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
: 
 I am happy to take a call on the title and commencement of the Unit Titles Bill. Certainly the Labour Opposition is keen to see this legislation progressed as quickly as possible. The commencement cannot come soon enough as far as we are concerned. However I would make the point that this bill was reported back from the Social Services Committee some time ago. 
Given this legislation’s importance it is disappointing that it has taken as long as this for it to come back to the House. In fact we moved through this legislation with utmost haste at the select committee. We made sure we considered it properly but we were very very mindful that we needed to get the bill back to the House as quickly as possible. It is disappointing that it has now sat on the Order Paper and not been progressed. Certainly in terms of the commencement we hope that we will be debating the third reading of this bill next week and that it will not disappear into the ether again like it did after the select committee deliberations and after its second reading. 
I can think of no better title for this bill than the Unit Titles Bill. I think that that sums it up. This legislation will update a very important area of our law and one that has not been updated for a very very long time. The bill clarifies and streamlines the laws around unit title development. It will make it easier for body corporates to know exactly what they need to do and it will make it easier for them to plan for what they need to do. The bill should be progressed as quickly as possible. 
Clause 1 agreed to. 
Clause 2 agreed to. 
Bill reported with amendment. 
Report adopted.
Street Maryan: Unit Titles Bill — In Committee 
Street Maryan: Unit Titles Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9868] 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 I take a call on the particular clauses in Part 2 of the Unit Titles Bill that deal with bodies corporate—that is clauses 80 and following. I address them because that issue was one of the inspirations I suppose for some of the amendments to this legislation in the first instance when it came to the previous Labour Government out of the review that had been called for by us in 2003. By the time the legislation emerged and the review had been conducted in a comprehensive way and then considered carefully it was very clear from the numbers of submissions and representations from people that the experience of those who were locked into body corporate arrangements—apartments in Auckland and elsewhere—had proliferated over the last 10 or so years. These people having been locked into those body corporate arrangements found themselves held hostage by the requirements for bodies corporate to make unanimous decisions and the movement of everybody jointly in order to receive any benefit from joint decision-making. 
The counting of votes is outlined in clauses 84 and 85. I do not need to rehearse the words on the page; suffice it to say that in circumstances where one party in the body corporate held out against improvements that were going to benefit everybody because that party had to shoulder an equal portion of the financial burden of that improvement then nobody could benefit because of that party’s holding out. These provisions in the bill we are currently debating are useful improvements. Although there are still protections around bodies corporate that relate to the number of people who must be present in order for a general meeting of the body corporate to be quorate and that require that a majority must be voting in an ordinary resolution in the body corporate one really important change is that special resolutions of a meeting of the body corporate do not require 100 percent agreement but may be passed by 75 percent of the eligible voters. Only the vast majority is now required so no longer is it possible for people to be held hostage by recalcitrant members of a body corporate who do not see the collective good as something to which they should contribute. This is an improvement and it is significant when we think of the numbers of apartment blocks that have proliferated in the last decade in particular in Auckland. It now becomes essential that we have this kind of provision which is a wee bit more flexible. 
The other two clauses that I wish to refer to in this part are to do with the long-term maintenance plan and the long-term maintenance fund. The Minister who was in the chair earlier the Acting Minister of Housing referred to these clauses in his opening comments and they are very sensible. They are important improvements because again they relate to the duration of somebody’s investment in one of these multi-unit apartment buildings.
Brownlee Gerry: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
Brownlee Gerry: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
[Volume:661;Page:9852] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That the House establish a committee to consider and report to it on such legislation concerning the referendum on the electoral system and reform to the electoral finance regime that may be referred to it; the committee to consist of 12 members to be nominated by parties to the Speaker as follows: New Zealand National 4 New Zealand Labour 3 Green Party 1 ACT New Zealand 1 Maori Party 1 United Future 1 and Progressive 1; and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting except during oral questions; during any evening on a day 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 outside the Wellington area during a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 187 189 and 190(1)(b) and (c).  
The bills that are referred to at the start of that motion are both very important bills that come under the general heading of constitutional bills. The MMP referendum which is to be held following the passing of the legislation to enable it will choose a new electoral system for New Zealand and it is important that all of the parties in this House at least have an opportunity to form the bill so that New Zealanders can make the best possible choice for the sort of electoral system that we have in the future. Reform of the electoral finance regime is something that affects all politicians and the general public and it is very very important that we have as much consensus as possible about how those arrangements are to be in place in future. They have been controversial in the past as all of us in this House know. I can report to the House that my colleague the Hon Simon Power the Minister of Justice has been working constructively with parties in the House to ensure that this process will work extremely well. 
I make reference to the latter part of the motion which empowers the select committee to meet at various times outside those provided for in the Standing Orders. It is not intended that this committee will operate in a way that is disrespectful either to the Parliament or to the legislative process. The provisions that are here are largely to accommodate the smaller parties which would have difficulty in getting members to this committee when they were committed to other select committees at the same time. The point has been well made that we do have adequate time particularly during adjournments for this committee to go about its work to ensure that as many New Zealanders as possible have their say on these bills. With those few comments I indicate our party’s support for this motion.
Upston Louise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Upston Louise: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9848] 
10. 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
 to the  
Minister for Climate Change Issues 
: What progress has the Government made in reversing the deforestation over the past decade and what further reports has he seen on future forestry intentions? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Climate Change Issues) 
: 
 I am pleased to report that the latest forestry data show a small gain in New Zealand’s forest area for 2009. This contrasts with significant losses in 2008 2007 and 2006. The principal reason for the turn-round has been reduced deforestation. This has dropped from a peak of 20000 hectares to 3500 hectares in 2009. I am also encouraged by the survey’s results released today which show low deforestation intentions into the future of only about 2000 hectares per year. There are also positive signs for new planting with 4000 hectares of new planting last year which is more than double that of 2008. This trend is positive and shows that confidence is coming back to the forest sector. 
Louise Upston 
: How does this latest data on forestation compare in a historical sense? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: New Zealand’s plantation forest area has consistently grown with major spurts in the 1930s the 1970s and the 1990s. However there have been only three years since records began when there was net deforestation those years being 2006 2007 and 2008. The net gain of 500 hectares last year is small but the fact that we are back on a growth path after 3 years of significant deforestation is encouraging. I am also encouraged that forester intentions indicate there will be net gains of 4700 hectares this year 5700 hectares next year and 7700 hectares in 2012. 
Louise Upston 
: What reports has the Minister seen on the impact of the emissions trading scheme on deforestation intentions into the future? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The report released today is very clear that New Zealand would be losing significant forest area without the emissions trading scheme legislation. The survey indicates that the deforestation rate would be more than three times higher than it is or about 8000 hectares per year. The Government has gone to considerable effort in its moderation of the emissions trading scheme to more than halve the cost for consumers and for industry but to retain the full price signals to the forest sector and this latest data on foresters’ intentions is showing the positive results that this policy is delivering.
Hughes Darren: Business Statement 
Hughes Darren: Business Statement 
[Volume:661;Page:9833] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I thank the Leader of the House for the notice of next week’s business before the Easter adjournment. I signal to him what I spoke to him about earlier today: I have now had a chance to speak to other Opposition parties about the desire of the Business Committee to progress the Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill. The Opposition is very keen to cooperate with the Government to get that bill through. I notice that he referred to Wednesday’s being a members’ day. If he was prepared to seek leave for us to take the Committee stage of that bill on the Wednesday ahead of members’ orders for that particular day it would facilitate a third reading before we rise on Thursday as a tribute to Lady Raiha Mahuta which many members are keen to have.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:661;Page:9833] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 When the House resumes next week it is the Government’s intention to advance the Regulatory Improvement Bill the Education Amendment Bill and other first readings on the Order Paper. Wednesday 31 March is set down to be a members’ day. On Thursday 1 April the House will rise at 5 p.m. for the Easter break.
Bennett David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Bennett David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9837] 
3. 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What recent reports has he received on the economy? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 Today’s Statistics New Zealand release of the GDP figures for the December quarter shows that the economy grew by 0.8 percent. That is the third consecutive quarter of growth. The data suggests that the recession which began in early 2008 bottomed out in the first half of 2009 and since then the economy has grown again at a moderate rate. This is consistent with a range of other indicators and broadly mirrors the pattern of New Zealand’s trading partners. The lift in the economy will create jobs though it is likely to be some time before we see a sustained drop in unemployment. That is why it is important we convert this early start to recovery into a permanent lift in growth rates. 
David Bennett 
: What challenges does the economy face? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: Despite some early signs of recovery the economy faces numerous challenges. These include a fragile global recovery serious imbalances in our own economy that have built up over recent years and an operating balance that remains in deficit. There are early signs of rebalancing: the last two quarters of last year were the first since 2003 when our internationally tradable sectors grew faster than our domestic sectors and for the first time since March 2000 Government administration has not grown over a full year. 
Stuart Nash 
: Given that this Government has said that it stands for fairness and equity how will tax rate alignment and a significant reduction in the top marginal rate for the 8 percent of Kiwis earning over $70000 directly benefit the 70 percent of New Zealanders earning under $40000? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The member should wait to see how the tax package comes together. I reiterate a point I have made earlier in the House. The Government is looking to extend the tax base to raise more tax from property. By and large that property is owned by higher-income New Zealanders. It is not yet clear whether higher-income New Zealanders as a group will end up paying more tax in total when we include extra property taxes. 
David Bennett 
: How is the Government tackling the challenges the economy faces? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: One way we have been tackling the growth in Government administration is to put a lid on Government spending and I am pleased that that is showing through in the figures released today which show that the balance of the economy has shifted slightly in that the productive and export sector actually grew in the last 6 months of last year and the Government sector shrank somewhat.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:661;Page:9833] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 That offer of cooperation is very well received by the Government. I think discussions about exactly how the week pans out are perhaps best left until Monday next week.
King Annette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
King Annette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9836] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to have my question held over until the Prime Minister is available. He has been off the radar this week. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to have this question deferred. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is objection.
Parker David: Tabling of Documents — Mining in Conservation Areas—Licences Granted 
Parker David: Tabling of Documents — Mining in Conservation Areas—Licences Granted 
[Volume:661;Page:9833] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to table a list of all of the mining licences granted under the previous Labour-led Government for national parks and other schedule 4 areas. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection. [ 
Interruption 
] Do I take it that the member was actually seeking leave to table a blank piece of paper? 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: Yes that is the number. It has been misrepresented by National. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I ask the honourable member how his behaviour today is consistent with the Standing Orders of this House and with good order in this House. He led the House to believe that he had a document. A blank piece of paper is not a document. I take a very dim view of grandstanding like that by use of points of order and it will not be tolerated.
Smith Nick: Tabling of Documents — Mining in Conservation Areas—Licences Granted 
Smith Nick: Tabling of Documents — Mining in Conservation Areas—Licences Granted 
[Volume:661;Page:9833] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 I seek leave of the House to table a real document: an access agreement dated 22 May 2006 between the then Minister of Conservation Chris Carter and a mine in the Paparoa National Park that was approved by the Government of that time. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Mr Speaker— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Does the member wish to seek further advice?