edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Copeland Gordon: Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Copeland Gordon: Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18599] 
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
: 
 I would like to confirm that as the previous speaker said Part 1 “Amendments enabling indexation of duties on motor spirits by reference to diversion amounts” of the Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill is about indexing the excise duty on motor spirits for inflation. We have just heard a very interesting speech by a member who said that that is a dreadful thing to do that it bypasses parliamentary processes and that it is unfair and unjust etc. A number of National Party members were seeking the call and I invite them to say—as the previous speaker did not—whether they believe that the indexation of excise duty on motor spirits is wrong. Are they prepared to make a commitment here in the Chamber today that should they be fortunate enough to be elected later this year by the people of New Zealand as the new Government they will repeal that section of the legislation? If they are not prepared today to say that then it will be quite clear to everybody listening to and participating in the debate that that is just another bit of politicking. 
If indeed National members believe they will form the Government then it is about time they started to tell the people of New Zealand exactly what they will or will not do when they become the Government. My challenge to them is quite clear: if they want to repeal the provision they should get up and say so. 
 Secondly while I very much accept the praise and support of the National Party New Zealand First and ACT for the indexation of inflation brackets when it comes to personal income tax which is our policy and which we have clearly stated we will do if we have a hand in the next Government I would like those other parties to go a little further and say that if they are part of the next Government they will do that too—they will index the inflation brackets. It is all very well to come here and praise the policy of other parties; that is good it is a tribute and I suppose a compliment to the fact that the indexation of the tax brackets is obviously and patently necessary in any fair and just tax system. Otherwise without coming near Parliament the executive could increase the effective rate of income tax just by doing nothing and that is not good enough. It is something that we want to see changed. 
My simple request is to let the other parties take the opportunity to state what they intend to do about this bill that we are debating today should they be part of the next Government;
Vote: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Vote: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6301] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 27 
New Zealand National 27. 
Noes 90 
Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 93 in the name of Rod Donald to clause 9(1)(a) be agreed to.
Vote: Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:20952] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 53 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; United Future 8. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Vote: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13494] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put. 
Ayes 67 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 8; United Future 8. 
Noes 41 
New Zealand National 22; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Motion agreed to.
Vote: Care of Children Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Care of Children Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:16693] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 54 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 8; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 60 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 297 in the name of the Hon David Benson-Pope to Part 4 be agreed to.
Wilson Margaret: List Member Vacancy 
Wilson Margaret: List Member Vacancy 
[Volume:624;Page:19547] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have been advised by the Chief Electoral Officer that pursuant to section 137 of the Electoral Act 1993 Lesley Frances Soper has been declared to be elected a member of the House of Representatives in place of Jonathan Lucas Hunt. I understand that Lesley Soper is present and wishes to be sworn. Would she please come forward to the Chair on my right.
Naming and Suspension of Member 
Naming and Suspension of Member 
[Volume:620;Page:15466] 
Naming and Suspension of Member 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I name the member for grossly disorderly conduct and ask that he be suspended from the House. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Rt Hon Winston Peters be suspended from the service of the House. 
Ayes 105 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 13 
New Zealand First 13. 
Question agreed to. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters withdrew from the Chamber. 
PETER BROWN (Senior Whip—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sure you will clarify this for me but can you tell me how the Progressive party can vote one way or the other on an incident that has taken place in the House when its members are not in the House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Please read the new Standing Order which was changed last year. 
Question time resumed.
Vote: Border Security Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Border Security Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:13290] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 55 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Peter Brown be agreed to: 
to insert the following new clause: 
7D 
Section 40A of the principal Act (Customs and Excise Act 1966)—“Fees and charges relating to importation of goods”—is amended by omitting subsections (3) to (5) and substituting the following new subsections: 
(3)Before making a recommendation under subsection (1) in relation to any proposed regulations the Minister must: 
(a)do everything reasonably practicable on his or her part to consult with the persons or representative organisation likely to be substantially affected by the making of the proposed regulations; and 
(b)ensure that the parties involved have been given sufficient time and information to make an informed contribution. 
(4)Nothing in subsection (3) requires consultation in relation to specific fees or charges or the specific levels of fees or charges so long as the fees or charges set are reasonably within the purview of any previous consultation. 
(5)Nothing in this section requires a strict apportionment of the costs to be recovered for a particular function or service and without limiting the way in which fees or charges may be set a fee or charge may be set at a level or in a way that is determined by calculations that involve an averaging of costs or potential costs.
Carter Chris: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Carter Chris: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4660] 
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 I rise to support this bill. It meets the commitment made by the Labour-led Government in 1999. It follows a very extensive review and consultation process which considered the impact of parallel importing on the creative industries. It is an excellent bill and I support it.
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:615;Page:11516] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 Again I seek leave to table this judgment by Judge Durie in the Kershaw case and although it is totally unprecedented in tabling the judgment we in New Zealand First make no comment at this time on it. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table the judgement. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Members Sworn 
Members Sworn 
[Volume:624;Page:19547] 
Members Sworn 
Madam Speaker administered the Oath of Allegiance to Lesley Soper who then took her seat in the House.
Samuels Dover: Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Bill — Second Reading 
Samuels Dover: Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:623;Page:18499] 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS (Minister of State) 
:  
A te mea tuatahi maku ki te mihi atu ki te runanga me nga whanaunga o Ngati Awa mo tenei ra whakatau i ta koutou pire te pire o te runanga. Kei te mihi atu noki ki nga kaiwhakawa o te pire i runga o te Komiti Maori o te Whare Paremata. 
[ 
First and foremost I acknowledge the runanga and relations of Ngati Awa today in respect of their bill the runanga bill. Acknowledgments also to those of the Maori Affairs Committee who deliberated on the bill 
.] 
I am just acknowledging Ngati Awa— 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Do you want it interpreted? 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS 
: I can translate my own Maori just in case somebody does not understand what I am talking about. It is better for me to translate it using my Ngapuhi dialect. I was acknowledging the role of Ngati Awa and also the support of the members of the Maori Affairs Committee. 
It was indeed interesting for me to listen to what the Maori affairs spokesperson of the National Party said. He was encouraged by the fact that the lead-in to the bill is printed in Maori. I remember some of his comments when we were debating the takutai foreshore fisheries bill about anything being printed in Maori. He saw it as something that was separate he saw it as discrimination and I am glad he has seen the light. I have to hand it to Ngati Awa: finally we see Gerry Brownlee seeing the light in terms of Maori issues. I hope that in the future that same light will shine upon him and I hope it is 240 volts not just 12 volts so that everybody can see him! But I am encouraged by his contribution in support of this bill. 
I want to be brief also. I do not think we have to go blah blah to go round and round in circles and play political games about this bill. So I am suggesting that if the National Party supports it let us get on with the business and actually empower this bill tonight. Kia ora tatou.
Vote: Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12358] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 35 
New Zealand National 26; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 84 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: An amendment to clause 13 in the name of Rodney Hide is out of order as the question has already been decided. 
There is an amendment to clause 14 in the name of the Hon Peter Dunne. In accordance with the leave granted this will be a split party vote. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Peter Dunne to clause 14 be agreed to: 
to add the following new subclause: 
(2)Section 37 of the principal Act is amended by repealing subsection (2) and substituting the following subsection: 
(2)It is a condition of every off-licence granted to the holder of a club licence that liquor be sold or supplied pursuant to the off-licence only to— 
(a)any member of the club; or 
(b)any member of any other club with which the holder of the licence has an arrangement for reciprocal visiting rights for members of the club.
Vote: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Holidays Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16053] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 2 be agreed to. 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand Labour 51; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 59 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 8; Maori Party 1; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Part 2 agreed to.
Hughes Darren: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hughes Darren: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:615;Page:11595] 
12.  
DARREN HUGHES (Labour—Otaki) 
 to the  
Minister for Rural Affairs 
: What further help is the Government providing to the communities affected by floods? 
Hon JIM SUTTON (Minister for Rural Affairs) 
: 
 The Government has announced that it will match dollar for dollar all funds raised by nationwide flood relief appeals by the end of this month. The Government has already donated $890000 to mayoral relief funds and local councils for upfront emergency costs. Central and local government will be the major source of funding for the restoration of public infrastructure. The Government will make a major contribution to the reinstatement of viable agricultural enterprises upon which both the regional and national economies depend. The size and exact form of that contribution cannot yet be determined. 
Darren Hughes 
: Is that all the help that people in flood-damaged areas can expect? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: No. The Government is working through the necessary decisions as quickly as possible for the flood-affected regions. That is a huge area. It is a major undertaking and I am proud of the efforts being made by dedicated public servants and volunteers from the community and of the generous contributions from ordinary New Zealanders. The contribution of the Government will be commensurate with the clear desire of the public to extend a helping hand to fellow New Zealanders in their time of need. 
Simon Power 
: Will the Minister apologise to Shane Whaitiri who today waited for an hour for the Minister to arrive to survey an estimated $1.6 million worth of losses to his potato crop and who was phoned 10 minutes before the Minister was due to arrive and told that he would not be attending as arranged? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: I was not aware that the member was a National Party activist but nevertheless— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will ask the Minister just to answer the question. 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: This morning I visited the flood-damaged area. My journeys around it became delayed because many people are suffering considerably and more time than had been expected was needed to deal with them in a decent human way. That meant that the itinerary had to be cut short. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: Will the Minister be gracious enough to confirm that the dollar for dollar - matching proposal announced yesterday was one that United Future proposed to his colleague the Minister of Finance early last week and that has been the subject of consideration ever since that time? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: I am happy to confirm that the situation is as the member suggested and that many other members have also urged the Government to act with generosity.
Pettis Jill: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
Pettis Jill: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4230] 
JILL PETTIS (Junior Whip—NZ Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: No not just yet.
Connell Brian: Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Connell Brian: Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:16213] 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: This is an important issue. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: The member will be seated.
Tisch Lindsay: Maritime Security Bill — Third Reading 
Tisch Lindsay: Maritime Security Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12219] 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 I want to say two things. I sat on the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and I want to acknowledge the contribution of the officials and advisers. I was always fully informed of the information that was made available and I congratulate them on a very informative presentation of the facts and information that was asked for. National is happy to support this bill as previous National speakers have said during this debate.
Vote: Third Readings 
Vote: Third Readings 
[Volume:612;Page:9390] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Sentencing Amendment 
Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 110 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Bill read a third time.
Election of Speaker 
Election of Speaker 
[Volume:624;Page:18953] 
Tuesday 8 March 2005 
Madam Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Election of Speaker 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have to report that accompanied by members I waited upon Her Excellency the Governor-General at Government House on Thursday 3 March when I addressed Her Excellency as follows: 
May it please Your Excellency: 
In obedience to Your Excellency’s request the Members of the House of Representatives in the exercise of their undoubted rights and privileges have proceeded to the election of a Speaker and as the subject of their choice I now present myself to you and submit myself for Your Excellency’s confirmation. 
To which Her Excellency replied as follows: 
Madam Speaker:It is with much pleasure that I confirm the choice that the House of Representatives has made in your person. 
I congratulate you on your election to this distinguished office marking as it does the appreciation of the House of Representatives of your impartiality and ability. 
I have further to report that I also addressed Her Excellency as follows: 
I humbly thank Your Excellency for your confirmation of the choice made by the Members of the House of Representatives of me to be their Speaker. 
I desire to repeat my respectful acknowledgment to the House of the high honour it has done me in electing me to be its Speaker.
Vote: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20262] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 1 be agreed to. 
Ayes 111 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 9 
ACT New Zealand 9. 
Clause 1 agreed to.
Smith Nick: Urgent Debates — Government Proposals for Seabed and Foreshore 
Smith Nick: Urgent Debates — Government Proposals for Seabed and Foreshore 
[Volume:611;Page:8046] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (NZ National—Nelson) 
: 
 During the course of Dr Cullen’s contribution he denied that the Prime Minister had said that the Government would legislate for Crown ownership. I seek the leave of the House to table an article in the  
New Zealand Herald  
of 24 June. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that article. Is there any objection? There is.
Cullen Michael: Urgency 
Cullen Michael: Urgency 
[Volume:622;Page:17685] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I move  
That urgency be accorded the passing through their remaining stages of the Aquaculture Reform Bill the Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) the Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill the Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill and any bills into which those bills may be divided; the first reading of the Resource Management and Electricity Legislation Amendment Bill; the introduction and first reading of the Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill; Government notice of motion No. 1; the first readings of the Overseas Investment Bill the Securities Legislation Bill the Taxation (Base Maintenance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill the Education Amendment Bill the Coroners Bill the Gambling Amendment Bill and the Fiordland Marine Management Bill; the passing through its remaining stages of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill; and Government notice of motion No. 2.  
The motion is moved in order to complete the Government’s programme before the House rises for the summer adjournment.
Brownlee Gerry: Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Brownlee Gerry: Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18907] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I almost do not like to do this but I think that I must. The Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Bill which is designed to set up the receiving authority for the Ngati Awa claim has a commentary attached to it in both English and Maori. Much like the bill that we dealt with yesterday the Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill there is a little difficulty with the two translations. In fact we are on the same ground again. It is not a translation. There are 13 paragraphs in the English commentary and 15 in the Maori commentary. Now the member might say that they are split. We have a right to know that what is in place in one translation fits with the other. My understanding was that the Office of Treaty Settlements had indicated that bills like this would have those translations done appropriately. 
I am sure that someone will stand up and say cleverly that this is not actually an Office of Treaty Settlements issue because it is a private bill brought by an outside organisation appropriately for consideration here. But what we should have if we are expected to support this legislation is the same rules applying to the settlement bill—and to any bill for that matter—and that we are led to believe will now be the convention: that the two translations do fit with each other appropriately. I notice that although this is a private bill we have officials from the ministry here. Therefore the Government influence and involvement in the preparation of this bill is pretty obvious and I think that it would be inappropriate for us to deal with this today while there are these translation difficulties.
Mahuta Nanaia: General Debates 
Mahuta Nanaia: General Debates 
[Volume:611;Page:8545] 
NANAIA MAHUTA (NZ Labour—Tainui) 
: 
 The Hon Lianne Dalziel is a hard-working conscientious Minister of Immigration. If anyone can fix it the honourable Minister of Immigration can. Can she fix it? Yes she can! She is a good Minister of Immigration. She is just one of many Ministers who represent a talent on this side of the House. That is more than I can say for that side of the House. I am a little bit concerned— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. I am having difficulty hearing her speech. I want silence. I do not mind the odd interjection but not running commentaries. Members should look at Speaker’s ruling 51/5 which states that a running commentary is out of order. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. When I was speaking there were all manner of interjections from Mr Mallard the visiting fish-seller from Wanganui and all manner of people and I never protested or objected. We are long way away from that member. Really if a member cannot hack it in this Parliament he or she should find a new job. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. While I do not agree with the exact words or the tone of what Winston Peters the right honourable member from Tauranga has just said. I think it would be fair to say that the member was doing very well and there was not a problem. Members down in this part of the House could hear her pretty well.
Business Statement 
Business Statement 
[Volume:617;Page:12911] 
Thursday 13 May 2004 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business Statement 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 Next week in the House the Government will seek to make progress on the Visiting Forces Bill the Mercenary Activities (Prohibition) Bill the Secondhand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill and the Border Security Bill. Wednesday of course is members’ day. 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 Recalling a bold headline of a couple of weeks ago I ask the Minister to indicate when the Civil Union Bill might be brought before the House. 
Hon MARK BURTON (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I expect the bill to be tabled within the next few weeks.
Parker David: Border Security Bill — In Committee 
Parker David: Border Security Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:13297] 
DAVID PARKER (Labour—Otago) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Franks Stephen: Registered Architects Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Franks Stephen: Registered Architects Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19932] 
STEPHEN FRANKS (ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. When the Clerk calls: “Any other votes?” is that the time that a member who wants to have a vote recorded personally and separately from the party vote would speak up? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Was it within the member’s ACT vote? 
STEPHEN FRANKS 
: No it is just that Mrs Pettis made a speech against this Supplementary Order Paper before the meal break and I thought that with 51 votes cast hers might have been the missing Labour vote. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: No that is not a point of order. The parties call it.
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:608;Page:5469] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Since you asked for one apology and got two would you like to clarify what statements we withdrew? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No the member knows that that is being facetious and he is very very close to being asked to leave. I will not have any more from him today. That is his final warning.
Peters Jim: Dog Control Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Peters Jim: Dog Control Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:613;Page:9866] 
JIM PETERS (NZ First) 
: 
 In looking at Part 1 clauses 3 and 4 I point out that the Local Government and Environment Committee was guided by the fact that we had before us a survey of territorial authorities on dog control issues—both the interim report in March and the final one in June. In that survey the adequacy of the 1996 Act was in question. Some sections were agreed to by the councils but they were divided over whether the Act had adequate powers for identifying potentially dangerous dogs preventing incidents involving the same owner preventing dangerous dog incidents and seizing dangerous dogs. 
The policy in clause 3 is one that the committee felt could be realised out in the council world. We felt there needed to be more rigorous enforcement but the way in which it is done is still left in the hands of the local council. The policies that the councils are required to plan seemed to us to be reasonable. In particular clause 4 is an improvement. It requires the councils to report back on their dog control policies and we hope the Department of Internal Affairs’ template check of best practices will go with that. The end result for the councils will be a reporting system that is known by their ratepayers and residents and that is an improvement on that which is there at the present time. 
Since the committee reported back I have talked to several councils about the bill. They are in agreement that some of them need to do better. They are also very conscious of the fact that there is a cost issue as well. My last point is that it may very well be that when they look at the requirements in clauses 3 and 4 that the legislation in its final form will set out for them they will realise that the common good factor that has been called for by the people out there with regard to their demands for better dog control means that responsible dog owners should not be the only ones to pay the cost of meeting the requirements of this policy. In their planning for 2004-05 the common good factor should mean that the cost comes from the general ratepayer as well as from the revenue received from responsible dog owners. 
On behalf of New Zealand First I support both clauses 3 and 4 in Part 1.
Cullen Michael: Appropriation (2003/04 Financial Review) Bill — First Reading 
Cullen Michael: Appropriation (2003/04 Financial Review) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:622;Page:17436] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I move  
That the Appropriation (2003/04 Financial Review) Bill be now read a first time. 
Bill read a first time.
Tisch Lindsay: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Tisch Lindsay: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:609;Page:6347] 
12.  
LINDSAY TISCH (NZ National—Piako) 
 to the  
Minister for Racing 
: Will the racing industry continue to have access to grants from gaming-machine trusts and what advice has he received about the effect on racing clubs throughout New Zealand of ending access to these grants? 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Minister for Racing) 
: 
 A number of racing groups have advised me that there could be a negative impact on racing clubs if they are no longer allowed to apply for grants from gaming machines. The Government is aware of these concerns. This House will decide whether the racing industry can continue to apply for gaming-machine grants when it considers the Responsible Gambling Bill. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: Is the Minister prepared to accept an estimated $6 million loss of funding to the racing industry if clubs cannot access grants from off-site gaming machines and charitable trusts with the result that many racing clubs may go bankrupt; if so why and how will racing clubs replace the $6 million? 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR 
: Our officials are seeking to verify the statements that have been made in the media concerning the potential loss from the benefits that clubs have. Early estimates are that those figures are somewhat overinflated. 
Tim Barnett 
: What has the Government done to promote the long-term viability of New Zealand racing? 
Hon Annette King 
: Heaps! 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR 
: As my colleague says heaps! On 1 August 2003 the new Racing Act will come into force. The Act simplifies racing administration by establishing a single statutory body the New Zealand Racing Board to take over the combined functions of both the Racing Industry Board and the TAB. The industry has been waiting a long time for this and we are very pleased as a Government to carry out its wishes in progressing the racing industry into the future. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: How does the Minister reconcile his statement in the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 of 15 June that he was working hard to ensure that any provisions in the new Responsible Gambling Bill were beneficial to racing when further in the article he stated that he could give no assurances to the industry that it would continue to have access to grants from gaming machines? 
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR 
: I am always working hard on behalf of the racing industry. The industry itself is aware that it cannot guarantee into the future that it will always have access to the money from non-casino gaming machines.
Yates Dianne: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
Yates Dianne: Television New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3827] 
DIANNE YATES (NZ Labour—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Event: Members Sworn 
Event: Members Sworn 
[Volume:624;Page:19547] 
Members Sworn 
Madam Speaker administered the Oath of Allegiance to Lesley Soper who then took her seat in the House.
Bradford Sue: Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Bradford Sue: Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18605] 
SUE BRADFORD (Deputy Musterer—Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I had not intended to do this but because this has happened I would like to point out that like our colleague Mr Copeland the Green Party states in its minority report that it supports the increase to the level of duty on motor spirits which is a clear indication of support for the— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: I remind members that they are debating points that could be brought up during the discussion of the Committee of the whole House. They are not points of order.
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8173] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 47 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Noes 68 
Labour 52; Green Party 8; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 111 in the name of Heather Roy to new section 42(3) in clause 225 be agreed to.
Fairbrother Russell: Corrections Bill — First Reading 
Fairbrother Russell: Corrections Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4699] 
RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (NZ Labour—Napier) 
: 
 It would be a travesty for this bill to be seen as a prisoners’ rights bill. That is the way it has been portrayed by my friends in the Opposition. We have heard it already from Mr Tony Ryall and Mr Edwin Perry. There cannot be defined roles for prison officers unless we know what they are there for. For 10 years under that Government there was anarchy in our prisons as prison officers bumbled their way around endeavouring to apply sentences properly. I speak as someone who has acted for over 20 officers before judges and juries the Employment Court and the Employment Tribunal. They have been doing their best but without any help and without the nasty cynicism of Judith Collins who tries to find her way around the prison system. The only prison door she would have been through would have been a peephole. 
Judith Collins 
: You big liar! 
RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER 
: I have to say— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Would the member sit down. The member will stand withdraw and apologise. 
Judith Collins 
: I must say that I do—. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: No The member does not need any other comment. She should just withdraw and apologise. 
Judith Collins 
: I withdraw and apologise. 
RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER 
: This bill sets out the rights of prison officers as they go about bringing about reform in our community. It is not good enough to close one’s legislative mind to what is happening in those prisons; we have to address the problems there. This bill addresses those problems and empowers prison officers to do their job properly and complete their responsibility to our community.
Vote: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
Vote: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5579] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 9 
Noes 105 
Amendment not agreed to. 
Green Party 9. 
Labour 52; New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 6; United Future 8. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Jeanette Fitzsimons to insert new clause 82A be agreed to: 
82AScope of enforcement order 
Section 314(1) of the principal Act is amended by adding the following paragraph: 
(g)suspend or cancel a resource consent if any provision of sections 93 or 94 is contravened.
Vote: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Vote: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10616] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Noes 60 
New Zealand Labour 52; United Future 8. 
Abstentions 9 
Green Party 9. 
Amendment not agreed to.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:618;Page:14459] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 Can the Leader of the House indicate whether we are likely to have further periods of urgency during this 3-week sitting?
Vote: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
Vote: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:613;Page:10007] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the question be now put 
Ayes 61 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 9. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Motion agreed to.
Peters Winston: Business Statement 
Peters Winston: Business Statement 
[Volume:616;Page:11989] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 Given that Easter is soon to be upon us and that for the umpteenth time nothing has been done in respect of giving the local community a chance to trade on Easter Sunday can I ask Dr Cullen whether the Government intends to give that legislation any priority at all?
Burton Mark: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Burton Mark: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:623;Page:18822] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 I want to pick up on one or two points that members have made. The member who has just resumed his seat and the Hon Georgina Te Heuheu both raised this issue of who is Ngati Awa and hapu. Firstly to reassure my Tuwharetoa colleague this settlement deals with Ngati Awa. In no way does it attempt to generalise—that would be improper. But for the same reason it is fitting and appropriate that the definitions that have been arrived at in the end sit properly both definitionally and finally with Ngati Awa themselves. 
I would like to share with members something that Professor Mead supplied to us 10 days ago. I am happy to circulate the document and I am sure he would be happy for me to do so. I found it helpful and I think one or two other members might as well. He said in paragraphs on this subject and I am paraphrasing: “Ngati Awa has adopted a more open and inclusive attitude towards the establishment of hapu. More importantly how Ngati Awa determines its internal structures is a matter for itself to decide. There is no one classical iwi model to follow.” 
He goes on to say: “In Ngati Awa’s case we have recognised the dynamic nature of hapu. They grow they split up they become absorbed by others they decline they die and some live again.” He concludes: “It is not an easy matter for a new hapu or a revived hapu to become accepted by the other hapu of Ngati Awa. The major hurdle that each must pass is the unanimous acceptance of all the hapu of Ngati Awa. The mandate comes from the combined hapu. The runanga merely ratifies the application. Having achieved that major requirement each is bound to establish a marae-like base and be able to carry out normal functions. A hapu or runanga marae shows evidence of a clear move to meet the requirement of establishing a base. What Ngati Awa has done as part of its reconstruction and development policies is to rebuild itself so as to be in a better position to face the future.” I want to acknowledge that I think that is a positive and admirable way forward as defined by Ngati Awa for itself. 
I shall just to move to Mr Franks’ view. He raised questions about Ngati Awa governance. Indeed the reference he seeks is on page 28 of the Minister’s Supplementary Order Paper which we have already passed. There is reference at the bottom of the page to the Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Bill which of course is a member’s bill. It is required to be so because it deals with the private good of Ngati Awa and has no other general application. Therefore it is fitting and necessary that it be a member’s bill. We are seeking to manage of course and with Parliament’s cooperation I am sure we will the orderly introduction and passing of the legislation in sequence so that we have an orderly transition and the passing of the legislation.
Swain Paul: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Swain Paul: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:12978] 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Corrections Bill that it take the bill part by part. 
Motion agreed to.
Cosgrove Clayton: General Debate 
Cosgrove Clayton: General Debate 
[Volume:627;Page:22066] 
CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. During Dr Smith’s dissertation he alleged that my colleague Ruth Dyson had misled the House. He used those words. I think we will find them in  
Hansard 
. It has now been proved that she did not. He may be suffering from “Blumsky-itis” and cannot remember but I think he should withdraw and apologise. He did say that Ms Dyson had misled the House. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Please be seated. I am sorry but the member has exacerbated the situation by making a personal reflection against Dr Smith. I think the score is one all and there the matter ends.
Robertson H V Ross: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
Robertson H V Ross: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:613;Page:10005] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Thank you Mr Worth. I refer members to Standing Order 139 and also Speaker’s ruling 54/2. Standing Order 139 states: “If the Speaker accepts a closure motion a question is put on the closure and decided without amendment or debate.” The question now is that the question be now put. As many as are of that opinion will say “Aye” and to the contrary will say “No”. A party vote called for?
Brash Don: Motions — Confidence Motion—Government 
Brash Don: Motions — Confidence Motion—Government 
[Volume:617;Page:12540] 
Dr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 I move  
That this House has no confidence in the Government. 
A party vote was called for on the question that the motion be agreed to.
Vote: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21415] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 8 
Green Party 8. 
Noes 110 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Keith Locke to clause 7 be agreed to: 
to add to paragraph (d) of section 15D after the word “obligations” the words “such as but not limited to—” and the following new subparagraphs: 
(i)the extent to which the imports have been made by forced labour child labour or women who are paid less than men for the same work; or 
(ii)the extent to which the imports have been made in unsafe and substandard working conditions; or 
(iii)the extent to which the imports have been made without reasonable environmental standards.
Burton Mark: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Burton Mark: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:623;Page:18816] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 Was that not amazing? We went from a debate in which I may not have agreed with every word of Dr Mapp’s speech but I found it—I am in agreement in this one regard with Mr Franks—a considered reasoned and useful contribution for us to think about to a bunch of slogan-slinging across the Chamber from Mr Franks. That is a sad reflection but it perhaps explains well how the ACT party got to where it is in the polls. 
I will make two quick responses. Firstly I think it is important to note in relation to the historical references Dr Mapp referred to that we should remember the tribunal heard and considered extensive evidence. The conclusion was reached at the end of that process that the historical record showed the iwi was not in effect in rebellion. That was the conclusion reached. The Crown considered that conclusion. It took further advice from Crown Law and in the end it agreed that indeed the iwi was not in rebellion. That was not a flippant or an ill-considered view. I guess history will always be revisited and debated but I think it is important to put on the record of this Parliament that it was a considered conclusion and that it therefore forms a fundamental part of why the apology is phrased as it is. 
Secondly there are a multitude of reasons for the references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. I will not indulge myself and I am sure the Labour whips would not enjoy it if I did but let me at least make one practical reference. Under the Treaty of Waitangi Act—[ 
Interruption 
]—I say to Mr Franks the tribunal is charged with making recommendations on plans relating to the practical application of the treaty and determining whether certain matters are inconsistent with the principles of the treaty. Quite simply therefore in the interests of finality the Crown needs to refer to treaty principles in legislation and to ensure that all relevant claims are being settled. To fail to do so would simply be to leave the door open to reinvestigating claims relating to treaty principles.
Donald Rod: Obituaries — Pope John Paul II 
Donald Rod: Obituaries — Pope John Paul II 
[Volume:624;Page:19549] 
ROD DONALD (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 On behalf of the Greens I join with other parties in expressing our condolences to all members of the Catholic Church on the death of their spiritual leader. Our thoughts are with the many many people who are grieving his untimely passing. It must however be noted that although much has been said about the many many achievements of Pope John Paul II he also took controversial positions on a number of issues that have caused concern both within his Church and within the wider community. We wish Cardinal Tom Williams well in his task of helping to choose the next pope and we hope whoever is selected will embrace the liberation theology that was the hallmark of previous popes.