edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
King Colin: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKing Colin: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13993. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]COLIN KING (National—Kaikōura): I moveThat the question be now put.
Roy Eric: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13981. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): I will review the debate as we go along and make a decision accordingly.
Lees-Galloway Iain: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13981. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Although it is not in order to question your decision to accept a closure motion as you did for Part 2 I would like to ask your advice about how you are going to approach Part 3. Part 2 was an extremely substantive part of the Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill and yet we managed only an hour’s debate on Part 2. Part 3 is an equally substantive part of this bill. This is a bill that is of significant public interest and in which there is significant interest from the Opposition benches in debating it part by part. I would like to take some advice from you about whether you are going to consider giving Part 3 a little bit more substantive debate than you did for Part 2.
Vote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13981. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat Part 2 as amended be agreed to.Ayes61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes58New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 2; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Part 2 as amended agreed to.The result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 61 Noes 57.
Vote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13981. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendment be agreed to.Ayes56New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Noes63New Zealand National 59;Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment not agreed to.
Vote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13981. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes58New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 2; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Amendments agreed to.The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 370 in the name of Clare Curran to insert new clause 35A be agreed to.
Vote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13980. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the question be now put.Ayes61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes58New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 2; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 366 in the name of the Hon Amy Adams to Part 2 be agreed to.
Hutchison Paul: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHutchison Paul: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13980. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua): I moveThat the question be now put.
Simpson Scott: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSimpson Scott: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13979. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): I moveThat the question be now put.
McKelvie Ian: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMcKelvie Ian: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13978. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): I moveThat the question be now put.
Vote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13967. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat Part 1 as amended be agreed to.Ayes61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes57New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 12; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 3; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Part 1 as amended agreed to.
Vote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13966. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes54New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 12; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Noes64New Zealand National 59;Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendments not agreed to.
Vote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13966. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the amendments be agreed to.Ayes61New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes57New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 12; New Zealand First 7;Māori Party 3; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Amendments agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 370 in the name of Clare Curran to clause 3 be agreed to.
Vote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13966. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party vote was called for on the questionThat the question be now put.Ayes64New Zealand National 59;Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes54New Zealand Labour 33; Green Party 12; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1; Independent: Horan.Motion agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 366 in the name of the Hon Amy Adams to Part 1 be agreed to.
Wagner Nicky: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWagner Nicky: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13966. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]NICKY WAGNER (National—Christchurch Central): I moveThat the question be now put.
Tisch Lindsay: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13966. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Robertson Grant: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13966. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): I seek leave of the Committee to table a letter from theNZRise group of companies that is relevant to Part 1 of the Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill around the definition of “network operator”.
Mitchell Mark: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Mark: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13962. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney): I moveThat the question be now put.
McKelvie Ian: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMcKelvie Ian: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13958. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): I moveThat the question be now put.
Tisch Lindsay: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13953. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): The member will sit. I am giving a general view of how over the next period of time this is a very narrow debate on terms. We are on Part 1 and we will concentrate on Part 1.
Mallard Trevor: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13953. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I feel like you might be admonishing me for the comments I made in my speech. I was asking the Minister whether these devices—
Tisch Lindsay: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTisch Lindsay: Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13953. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Before we move on I remind members that we are on Part 1. Although there is some [Interruption]—I will comment on this. Although it is always a little bit interesting to bring some humour in we are on Part 1 and we will concentrate our efforts on Part 1.
Carter David: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Application for Urgent QuestionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Application for Urgent Question[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to ask an urgent question of the Prime Minister. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is.
Robertson Grant: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Application for Urgent QuestionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Application for Urgent Question[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): I seek leave of the House to ask the Prime Minister an urgent question asking whether he will stand down John Banks.
Carter David: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Application for Urgent QuestionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Application for Urgent Question[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have ruled on the matter. The member is now challenging that ruling. That is disorderly. That is the sort of disorder that gives me no choice but to ask the member to leave the Chamber.
Robertson Grant: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Application for Urgent QuestionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Application for Urgent Question[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I believe that this is a matter of—
Carter David: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Application for Urgent QuestionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Application for Urgent Question[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have heard enough from the member. Urgent questions must relate to something that must be dealt with immediately and could not wait until question time tomorrow. To my mind that could wait and I refer the member to Speaker’s ruling 182/5.
Robertson Grant: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Application for Urgent QuestionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Application for Urgent Question[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have made an application to you to ask an urgent question in relation to whether or not the Prime Minister will stand down John Banks now that the District Court has decided that he will stand trial for knowingly filing a false electoral return. I believe that this is a matter that should warrant an urgent question. Mr Banks is about to stand trial and under Speaker’s ruling 183/2—
Carter David: Urgent Debates Declined — TeKōhangaReo National Trust Board—AuditText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Urgent Debates Declined — TeKōhangaReo National Trust Board—Audit[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from the Hon Shane Jones seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the decision by the Minister of Education and the Associate Minister of Education to order an audit into inappropriate spending at TeKōhanga Reo National Trust Board. The decision to conduct an audit is a particular case of recent occurrence involving the administrative responsibility of the Government. However not every such decision will occasion an urgent debate. There must be an element of urgency for the matter to take precedence over other business. Although the decision to conduct an audit is an important step in the Ministers assuring themselves that public funding is being used appropriately the audit will take some time. I am not convinced that the matter warrants the setting aside of the business of the House today. The application is therefore declined.
Hipkins Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13924. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) to theMinister of Education: Is she satisfied that she is fulfilling all of her legal obligations under the Education Act 1989; if so why?Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education):Fakalofalahi atu Mr Speaker. Yes particularly as I have today announced that over $400 million is to be invested in secondary schools in the greater Christchurch area.Chris Hipkins: Did she instruct the Ministry of Education to provide all schools being proposed for closure or merger in Christchurch with all relevant information so that they could have informed input into the consultation process required under the Education Act 1989; if not why not?Hon HEKIA PARATA: The recent judgment onPhillipstown School focuses on the specific sections of the Education Act relating to consultation. As this judgment is still within the appeal period and one or other of the parties may appeal it would not be in the public interest for me to comment. However all consultation information provided to schools can be found on the Ministry of Education website.Chris Hipkins: Is she giving consideration to appealing the High Court’s ruling overturning her decision to mergePhillipstown School and Woolston School; if so on what basis?Hon HEKIA PARATA: The recent judgment onPhillipstown School focuses on the sections of the Education Act relating to consultation. As this judgment is still within the appeal period and I and one or other of the parties may appeal I will continue to consider my options and take advice. It would not be in the public interest for me to comment.Chris Hipkins: Did the High Court rule in favour ofPhillipstown School’s request for the merger decision to be overturned; if so does she expect the school to appeal the decision that it won or is she just using her own indecision about whether or not to appeal the case as an excuse to avoid answering questions on yet another botch-up that she has made as a Minister?Hon HEKIA PARATA: There is no indecision. As a responsible Minister I am considering options taking advice and not commenting at this time in case one or other of the parties appeal during this period. It would not be in the public interest for me to comment.Chris Hipkins: Did the courts earlier rule that her decision to close Salisbury School in Nelson lacked common sense and amounted to “an abrogation of the responsibilities involved in making a decision”; if so how many more times do her decisions need to be overruled in court before she will actually start to genuinely listen to the feedback that communities are giving her?Hon HEKIA PARATA: I cannot comment on the specifics of the first judgment because I do not have it in front of me. In terms of listening I can point the member to the consultation information provided on the Ministry of Education website and the member will be able then to review all of it.
Foster-Bell Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13920. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National) to theMinister of Justice: What recent steps have been taken by the Government to make it easier to resolve cross-border disputes between New Zealand and Australia?Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice): Last week the Attorney-General of Australia and I launched new trans-Tasman proceedings arrangements between New Zealand and Australia aimed at making a court case between parties located on different sides of the Tasman more like a court case between people in the same country. The new laws will give businesses and individuals greater confidence when operating across the Tasman. It will be easier to start proceedings against a party in the other country require people to give evidence and enforce court decisions in the other country. This is another important step in developing closer economic relations between New Zealand and Australia.Paul Foster-Bell: How will these arrangements make it easier for conducting trans-Tasman dealings?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: We have one of the most open economic social and trade relationships in the world. Last year total trade between our countries was $25.5 billion. Increasing internet use ease of access to Australian markets and the speed of doing business today mean we need to have confidence that our legal systems will support trans-Tasman relationships and business contracts. From 11 October this year people have been able to ask for their cases to be heard in their own countries. They will be able to appear before a court in the other country by video or audio link and they will be able to manage or suspend enforcement of a wide range of civil court judgments from the other country.
Horan Brendan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHoran Brendan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13919. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.BRENDAN HORAN (Independent) to theMinister of Energy and Resources: Does he stand by all of his recent statements?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Energy and Resources): Yes.Brendan Horan: After saying onCampbell Live that there were eight deep-water wells in New Zealand is the Minister concerned that he may have misled New Zealanders over safety concerns when the deepest operating well is only 125 metres deep virtually a puddle compared with the 2 to 3 kilometre depths proposed off the South Island?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: No that is not correct. There have been eight deep offshore wells drilled in New Zealand’s history as I said onCampbell Live.Brendan Horan: Is the Minister concerned that there have been 2590 earthquakes recorded byGeonet along the east coast of the South Island since 2008; and will theMinister take personal command of one of the three 8-metre oil recovery dinghies when the inevitable disaster occurs?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: With the greatest respect to the member linking earthquakes to any of these sorts of things has no basis in science.David Shearer: Does he think that the people of Hawke’s Bay and the Wairarapa whose power prices have risen by $108 will agree with his statement that “we have a system that delivers what New Zealanders want … at a competitive price.”?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Yes.
Carter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13916. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can I ask for a little less interjection and barracking from the left-hand side of the House. Would the member please read the question again.
King Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKing Colin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13916. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]COLIN KING (National—Kaikōura): What recent announcements has the Government made about investment in the National Science Challenges? [Interruption]
Dunne Peter: Motions — Man Booker Prize 2013—EleanorCattonText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDunne Peter: Motions — Man Booker Prize 2013—EleanorCatton[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13912. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future): On behalf of United Future I want to join with other speakers in congratulating EleanorCatton on winning the Man Booker Prize forThe Luminaries. Her history has been rehearsed. She is one of the youngest winners born the year the last New Zealand author achieved this significance.The Luminaries is a phenomenal piece of work at 832 pages long. If you heard Eleanor’s acceptance address earlier today you would have got a sense of the flow of the novel from just the very way in which she spoke and described some of the influences that led her to write about gold and pounamu about the West Coast and about the particular situation of the South Island of New Zealand.The great tribute to her is that a very specific regional novel comes out as the best in the world. When you look at the competition the various other authors all with established reputations whom she was up against the challenge was an almighty one and she succeeded. Not only is she young but she is a very new novelist.The Luminaries is only her second novel. To achieve this success this early bodes extremely well for her future.It is a great occasion for this Parliament to celebrate a New Zealander’s success in the literary field. As the Prime Minister said we do it regularly for sportspeople. This is an important occasion in its own right. It deserves to be recognised and Eleanor deserves to be awarded the accolade of being our best writer someone we can be proud of someone whose success we welcome and appreciate and someone whom we wish extremely well for the future in her career.Motion agreed to.
Peters Winston: Motions — Man Booker Prize 2013—EleanorCattonText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Motions — Man Booker Prize 2013—EleanorCatton[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13912. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): It should have been this case for the America’s Cup but it did not happen. Congratulations to EleanorCatton for winning the most prestigious literary award in the world and becoming the youngest winner in the history of the Man Booker Prize. We join in the adulatory comments of other speakers in this House. It was said once that the trouble with being a publisher is that too many people with half a mind to write a book do so which explains half the political autobiographies we read around the world. This is not the case withThe Luminaries Eleanor’s second novel—Hon Bill English: We’re waiting for yours.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: No when I write a book it will be a best seller. If you are kind to me I will leave out the part about you which will double its publication if I let it go—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Do not bring the Speaker into the debate.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: This is not the case withThe Luminaries. Eleanor’s second novel was described by the judges as a dazzling piece of work. Eleanor is an inspiration to all Kiwi writers. Let us hope we see more young Kiwis aspire to her astonishing success.
Delahunty Catherine: Motions — Man Booker Prize 2013—EleanorCattonText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDelahunty Catherine: Motions — Man Booker Prize 2013—EleanorCatton[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13912. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green): I rise to support the motion on behalf of the Green Party. This is wonderful news—once again a woman from Aotearoa New Zealand has won the Man Booker Prize and at 28 years of age. There are 832 pages of vibrant intricate and experimental writing inThe Luminaries which likeKēriHulme’s magnificent opusThe Bone People extends the definition of creative literature and takes the prize. Although she was born in Canada EleanorCatton came to New Zealand when she was 6 years old and is rightly counted as a Kiwi. I am really looking forward to reading this. I was particularly captivated by theNew Zealand Herald’s description of the plot: “a great big glorious story of shipwrecks and swindlers opium addicts and prospectors secret caches of gold stitched into gowns fate and fortune greed hope and desperation.”—just like Parliament really only based in Hokitika.The Green Party salutes this young writer for winning what is possibly the most prestigious literary prize in the world and adding her name to the list of writers from Katherine Mansfield onwards who have taken Europe by storm. This book must have been a marathon to write so Eleanor should be recognised as both an athlete and a writer. Once again a writer has written about our history and identity in a manner that has universal meaning mystery and delight. Congratulations EleanorCatton and may every Kiwi author be inspired by her success.
Cunliffe David: Motions — Man Booker Prize 2013—EleanorCattonText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCunliffe David: Motions — Man Booker Prize 2013—EleanorCatton[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13911. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Leader of the Opposition): I rise on behalf of the Labour Opposition to support the motion. Today a young Kiwi has made history and we are all so proud of her for that. I join the Prime Minister parties from across the House and Kiwis everywhere in congratulating young Kiwi author EleanorCatton on winning literature’s most prestigious Man Booker Prize. From the very beginning of what was originally called the Booker Prize there was just one criterion. The prize would be for the best novel in the opinion of the judges. Forty-two years later that is still a key sentence in the rules and that is exactly what EleanorCatton has produced.Who better to sum up Eleanor’s wonderful work than the judges who saw fit to bestow upon her this fantastic prize? They not only praised the work as a whole but saw a maturity in the text that belied the author’s age stating: “you read every sentence and you are astonished by its knowledge and its poise.” They added that it was “a dazzling work” “luminous” and “vast”.Eleanor now joins a list of the world’s greatest writers that includes names such as Iris MurdochSalman Rushdie Margaret Atwood KingsleyAmis and of course our ownKēri Hulme. There are some wonderful parallels in two other Booker Prize winners. Eleanor’s win comes 28 years after New Zealand’sKēri Hulme won the same prize for theThe Bone People in 1985 the year Eleanor was born.Kēri Hulme is of course a proud West Coaster andThe Luminariesis set in Hokitika. [Interruption] Yes Damien—Hokitika a fact our own MP for West Coast - Tasman Damien O’Connorwas quick to jump on. That is indicative of what prizes do for authors and also for their home their places that inspire their work.But EleanorCatton has been quick to point out what it is that New Zealand has given her too. She is a graduate of the International Institute of Modern Letters at our own Victoria University. This is the programme that BillManhire established which has produced a number of great New Zealand writers including Emily Perkins Barbara Anderson LaurenceFearnley and of course Elizabeth Knox.The Luminariesis also published by Victoria University Press and today we should also acknowledge Fergus Barrowman who is the publisher at Victoria University Press.Today Eleanor has become a wonderful young ambassador for New Zealand an inspiration to young writers and a source of enormous pride. We congratulate her warmly.
Key John: Motions — Man Booker Prize 2013—EleanorCattonText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKey John: Motions — Man Booker Prize 2013—EleanorCatton[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13911. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): I seek leave to move a motion without notice in recognition of New Zealand author EleanorCatton for winning the Man Booker Prize.Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There appears to be none.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I moveThat this House congratulate EleanorCatton on winning the Man Booker Prize. This is a hugely significant achievement on the international stage for a New Zealander. The Man Booker Prize is literature’s most sought-after prize. It is made even more extraordinary by the fact that EleanorCatton at 28 years of age is the youngest ever author to receive the prize. In fact she was born in the same year that the last and only other New Zealand authorKēri Hulme won the Man Booker Prize in 1985 withThe Bone People. Today’s win will be a tremendous boost for young New Zealanders in the arts. The judging panel said that EleanorCatton’s winning novelThe Luminaries at 832 pages “requires a huge investment of time from the reader but the dividends it offers are astronomical”.New Zealand generally celebrates our sporting successes on the international stage with enormous vigour. We should be celebrating this success today with equal enthusiasm as it is a truly remarkable achievement. It also comes at the same time that young Auckland musicianLorde currently holds the No. 1 US chart spot for her song “Royals” at just 16 years of age. It is exciting and inspiring that our ambassadors in the arts and culture who right now hold the attention of the world are fiercely intelligent and ferociously talented young women. Their successes are testament to their skills and hard work and an inspiration for all New Zealanders.
Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Application for Urgent QuestionText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePoints of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Application for Urgent Question[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Points of OrderQuestions for Oral Answer—Application for Urgent QuestionGRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have made an application to you to ask an urgent question in relation to whether or not the Prime Minister will stand down John Banks now that the District Court has decided that he will stand trial for knowingly filing a false electoral return. I believe that this is a matter that should warrant an urgent question. Mr Banks is about to stand trial and under Speaker’s ruling 183/2—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have heard enough from the member. Urgent questions must relate to something that must be dealt with immediately and could not wait until question time tomorrow. To my mind that could wait and I refer the member to Speaker’s ruling 182/5.GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I believe that this is a matter of—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have ruled on the matter. The member is now challenging that ruling. That is disorderly. That is the sort of disorder that gives me no choice but to ask the member to leave the Chamber.GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): I seek leave of the House to ask the Prime Minister an urgent question asking whether he will stand down John Banks.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to ask an urgent question of the Prime Minister. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is.
Urgent Debates Declined — TeKōhangaReo National Trust Board—AuditText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeUrgent Debates Declined — TeKōhangaReo National Trust Board—Audit[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13929. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Urgent Debates DeclinedTeKōhanga Reo National Trust Board—AuditMr SPEAKER: I have received a letter from the Hon Shane Jones seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the decision by the Minister of Education and the Associate Minister of Education to order an audit into inappropriate spending at TeKōhanga Reo National Trust Board. The decision to conduct an audit is a particular case of recent occurrence involving the administrative responsibility of the Government. However not every such decision will occasion an urgent debate. There must be an element of urgency for the matter to take precedence over other business. Although the decision to conduct an audit is an important step in the Ministers assuring themselves that public funding is being used appropriately the audit will take some time. I am not convinced that the matter warrants the setting aside of the business of the House today. The application is therefore declined.
Macindoe Tim: Sittings of the HouseText is subject to correctionMacindoe Tim: Sittings of the House[Sitting date: 04 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15284. Text is subject to correction.]TIM MACINDOE (Junior Whip—National): As it is 1½ minutes to 10 and we have made good progress tonight I seek leave for the House to rise at this point.
Macindoe Tim: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is subject to correctionMacindoe Tim: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 04 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15283. Text is subject to correction.]TIM MACINDOE (Junior Whip—National): I moveThat the question be now put.
Yang Jian: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — In Committee Third ReadingText is subject to correctionYang Jian: Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Bill — In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 04 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15280. Text is subject to correction.]Dr JIAN YANG (National): I moveThat the question be now put.
Dean Jacqui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is subject to correctionDean Jacqui: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15208. Text is subject to correction.]9.JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) to theMinister of Defence: How have recent New Zealand Defence Force exercises contributed toward the Government’s goal of developing a Joint Amphibious Task Force?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Defence): The New Zealand Defence Force recently completed Exercise SouthernKatipō one of the largest military exercises ever conducted—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I just need to stop the family chatter that is occurring between both sides of the House. Could the Minister please start his answer again?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: The New Zealand Defence Force recently completed Exercise SouthernKatipō one of the largest military exercises ever conducted in New Zealand. This involved 2200 military personnel from 10 countries. The exercise tested the New Zealand Defence Force’s ability to mount a medium-scale amphibious operation involving maritime land and air assets. I am pleased to advise the House that the exercise demonstrated that the New Zealand Defence Force has made great progress in building amphibious capability and remains on track to have a fully operational joint amphibious task force by 2015.Jacqui Dean: What is the value to New Zealand in the New Zealand Defence Force developing a joint amphibious task force?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: TheDefence White Paper 2010 placed a greater focus on security within our own region. Accordingly the Defence Force turned its focus towards developing the capability to deliver humanitarian assistance and respond to security situations in the South-west Pacific. The ability to deploy land forces across large stretches of ocean by sea or by air and sustain those forces once there is therefore crucial to the New Zealand Defence Force.Jacqui Dean: What capability upgrades has the Government invested in to help deliver the joint amphibious task force?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Recognising that amphibious operations would require strength and capabilities the Government has committed to a number of capability purchases including a new fleet of medium and heavy operational vehicles capable of being deployed in medium and high threat environments and an increased number of upgraded Seasprite helicopters with a range of upgraded avionics communications radars weapons and other systems on board that are superior to the existing fleet.
Heatley Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is subject to correctionHeatley Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15205. Text is subject to correction.]7.Hon PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) to theAssociate Minister for Social Development: How is the enhanced information sharing between the Ministry of Social Development and Inland Revenue delivering on the Government’s promise to crack down on welfare fraud?Hon CHESTER BORROWS (Associate Minister for Social Development): Our enhanced information-sharing between the Inland Revenue Department and the Ministry of Social Development is working well. Since it began in March this year the ministry has identified and put a stop to more than 5300 benefits that people were not entitled to and corrected another 3000 who were not receiving correct support. Those 5300 were costing the taxpayer a bare minimum of $56 million per year. Although it is great to see these people getting back into work they should not have been taking money they were no longer entitled to.Hon Phil Heatley: How does this enhanced information-sharing fit with other new measures the Government has introduced to prevent detect and punish welfare fraud?Hon CHESTER BORROWS: The key aim of the package of reforms that this Government introduced earlier this year is to stop welfare fraud as soon as possible. I am pleased with the results of our information sharing as it is allowing us to catch fraud we might otherwise have missed and stop illegitimate benefits early before the debt really mounts up. This perfectly complements other preventive measures such as streamlined investigation processes greater scrutiny of beneficiaries who have previously ripped us off and providing follow-up support to new sole parent support beneficiaries.Hon Phil Heatley: What is the intention behind trialling home visits to check in with new beneficiaries receiving sole parent support?Hon CHESTER BORROWS: We recognise that for those receiving a benefit dependent on their relationship status navigating the benefit rules can be challenging. Although most do it successfully those who do not end up taking money that they are not entitled to and can be left with a massive debt and a fraud conviction at the end of the process. The intention behind trialling a number of methods of contact including offering to meet at their home is to look at the best way to keep in touch with sole parent beneficiaries at a time when we know that their circumstances frequently change at 14 weeks to 16 weeks after starting to receive the benefit. There is no sinister intent. This should be a check-in and not a checking-up.
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is subject to correctionHutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 04 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15205. Text is subject to correction.]6.Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) to theMinister of Health: What improvements in health services are shown in the latest health targets results?Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health): The latest health targets results have recently been published and they show continuing improvement with record numbers of patients benefiting from surgery and 91 percent of 8-month-olds immunised. These improvements in getting elective surgery mean that over the last 5 years on average 8000 more patients a year have been treated. These latest results also show that 93 percent of emergency department patients were seen treated or discharged within 6 hours. This is the best winter emergency department result since the targets began. These better health services are the result of the hard work of our health professionals helped by the average extra $500 million a year this Government has invested into our public health service.Dr Paul Hutchison: What reports has he received on emergency department patients benefiting from information technology advances?Hon TONY RYALL: There are some exciting information technology advances that are improving emergency department clinicians’ ability to provide better patient care. In the Wairarapa District Health Board the Waikato District Health Board and the Canterbury District Health Board with the patient’s permission emergency department clinicians are able to access a summary of the patient’s primary-care information held by their general practitioner. This includes the medicines they are on their lab results and any other problems the patient may have. This technology gives the emergency department clinicians the opportunity to act much more quickly knowing they have up-to-date data they can trust and more important the patient does not have to tell their story umpteen times to every clinician they meet.Hon Annette King: In light of that answer and if there are such positive results by district health boards in meeting his health targets why has he dumped the chair of the Canterbury District Health Board Mr Bruce Matheson whom people in the district thought was doing an excellent job and is it because the relationship with him has been tested by Mr Matheson’s strong advocacy for the people and services in Canterbury?Hon TONY RYALL: No.Hon Annette King: I seek leave to table a document from the Canterbury District Health Board from board papers public excluded which states the relationship with Wellington has been tested—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The document has been well described. Leave is sought to table that particular document. Is there any objection? There is objection.