edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Vote: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12208] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 50 
New Zealand Labour 40; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Noes 68 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Moana Mackey to clause 63 be agreed to: 
to omit “$6000” and substitute “$100”.
Vote: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12208] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 50 
New Zealand Labour 40; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Noes 68 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Moana Mackey to clause 63 be agreed to: 
to add the following subclause after subclause (1): 
(2)Section 93 is amended by repealing subsection (7).
Vote: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12206] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 50 
New Zealand Labour 40; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Noes 68 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 4; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Moana Mackey to clause 13A be agreed to: 
to omit this clause and substitute the following clause: 
13ARequiring key money prohibited 
Section 17(4) is amended by omitting paragraph (c) and substituting the following paragraph: 
“(c)any sum required to be paid by the tenant to or at the direction of the landlord in respect of any fee or other charge for services rendered by any solicitor or letting agent relating to the grant or assignment of the tenancy is prohibited:”.
Tisch Lindsay: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12204] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Before I call Moana Mackey I just ask that the level of discussion around the Chamber be lowered. It is very difficult to hear what speakers are saying.
Heatley Phil: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Heatley Phil: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12196] 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY (Minister of Housing) 
: 
 On the matter of charging letting fees I think the Committee should note that up until recently real estate agents had the exclusive right to charge letting fees. They lost that right. All the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill does is allow all agents not only real estate agents but also other property managers to charge letting fees. The ability for them to do it as recommended by the majority of the Social Services Committee will reduce the size of letting fees through increased competition. 
In fact I think what will happen is we will find that a whole lot of agents will not charge letting fees at all just as they have not charged them for decades. That is why we are levelling the playing field by allowing everyone to do it. If they do that is up to them; they will have to provide the service that goes with it. If they do not then they provide a point of difference which as I said has been in existence for many decades now.
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12175] 
12. 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Transport 
: What recent reports has he received about concerns with transport systems? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport) 
: 
 I receive many many reports in the transport area some of which highlight ways in which our transport systems can be improved. For example in response to an earlier question I referred to the KiwiRAP report which I launched this morning. Another example is the briefing that I received yesterday from the Civil Aviation Authority in regard to a television story showing security issues with airline electronic checking procedures. I am pleased to report to the House that the airlines are taking immediate steps to rectify those problems and the Civil Aviation Authority is currently following that up to ensure it is satisfied with those corrective actions. 
Darien Fenton 
: Does the Minister have concerns about the Civil Aviation Authority statement that having someone check in bags without boarding the plane in the TV3 sting was the most worrying aspect of the incident and why was the Minister not aware of this potential security breach? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I think it is safe to say that just about everybody who uses the transport system was unaware of this potential security breach. My role has been to ensure that the breach once recognised was acted on very quickly and I have ensured that that is the case. The Civil Aviation Authority is responsible for improving the security arrangements with airlines and it has been working with the airlines since this issue came to light in the last couple of days. My understanding is that a corrective action will be in place very soon. 
Darien Fenton 
: Can the Minister confirm to the House that the journalist who checked herself in using his name referred to herself as Joyce Stephen; if so has he encountered this sort of confusion before? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: If I refer back to primary school I think yes it has occurred from time to time. Also it is fair to say I have checked in at times and people have gone looking for Mrs Joyce instead of Mr S Joyce.
Tremain Chris: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Tremain Chris: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12192] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I seek leave for the Committee stage of the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill to be taken as one question with unlimited calls. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.
Heatley Phil: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Heatley Phil: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12195] 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY (Minister of Housing) 
: 
 I take this call to clarify the purpose of the Government’s two Supplementary Order Papers. The first proposes minor technical amendments to improve and streamline the implementation of the bill. More specifically it separates certain intertwined provisions of the bill so that they may be brought into force via separate commencement orders as envisaged by clause 2 to ensure that parties have sufficient time to prepare for their new rights and obligations. The bill provides for administrative and Tenancy Tribunal forms to be updated and approved by the chief executive of the Department of Building and Housing rather than by regulations. It updates the Tenancy Tribunal’s jurisdiction to mirror the new process for dealing with abandoned goods as proposed in clause 42. It removes the requirement but retains the ability to prescribe a fee for providing a debtor’s address details to the District Court for enforcement purposes. It provides for the form of notices filed with the District Court—for example a notice of appeal—to be governed as is the case under other legislation by generic court rules rather than separate regulations. Although the aforementioned changes are minor in nature collectively they will aid clarity reduce unnecessary regulation and facilitate improvements to the administrative processes over time in response to feedback from users. 
The second Supplementary Order Paper proposes minor consequential amendments to the bill that reflect the recent enactment of the Unit Titles Act which was passed obviously before this legislation. We would have had to make other changes had the reverse been the case. 
Both Supplementary Order Papers are consistent with the policy intent of the bill and the changes recommended by the Social Services Committee. I assure members that the Supplementary Order Papers I am tabling today are worthy of support. They have no policy impact except to make the legislation more streamlined and understandable by those who use it. I urge members’ support. I will be happy to respond to members’ queries in due course.
Anderton Jim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Anderton Jim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12169] 
6. 
Hon JIM ANDERTON (Leader—Progressive) 
 to the  
Attorney-General 
: Is it Government policy to grant customary title in the entire Northland coast from Mangonui up the cape and down to the Hokianga Heads? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 No. It is the Government’s policy to determine each application for customary title on its merits assessing the facts of each case and applying the tests that will be set out in the statute. 
Hon Jim Anderton 
: Has the Minister seen Professor Margaret Mutu’s statement in the  
New Zealand Herald  
today with regard to the coastline pictured in the  
New Zealand Herald 
 that “we own it”; if so what has he done to show the rest of New Zealand that we all own it? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: No I have not read the article. 
Hon Jim Anderton 
: Will the Northland claimants be making their claim for title to the courts or to the Government? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: It is a bit early for that. 
David Garrett 
: Would the granting of customary title over all or part of Ninety Mile Beach enable the Maori owners to prevent four-wheel driving and tour buses on what would then be Maori-owned foreshore and seabed? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: I would not have thought so. 
Hon Jim Anderton 
: If the Minister cannot tell the House at this point in time who will be making the decision on any claim to ownership how can he rule out in any way at all that the claimant might get title to the whole coastline? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: Well no one will be making any claim as at this time because the law has not been passed yet. When the law is passed there will be an opportunity for interested parties—be they iwi or in some cases hapu—to enter into negotiations with the Crown or to exercise the court option that was taken away from them by the Government of which that member was a senior Cabinet Minister in 2004. 
Hon Jim Anderton 
: As the Minister is blaming the previous Government for this how will he resolve the new Treaty agreements that will be created when people form an expectation that they own the coastline as stated in the  
New Zealand Herald  
today because he refuses to rule out their title to it while he is reassuring other New Zealanders that “title” in this case does not mean “title”? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: In my previous answer I did not blame the previous Government. I set out the facts of the situation. The facts are that when the law has been passed we can then deal with negotiations and court applications if there are any and they can be determined on their facts. 
Hon Jim Anderton 
: I seek leave to table the definition of title in the  
Oxford English Dictionary 
 which states that it is a right or claim to the ownership of property. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? [ 
Interruption 
] Did I hear objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Young Jonathan: Motor Vehicle Sales Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Young Jonathan: Motor Vehicle Sales Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12176] 
JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) 
: 
 This Motor Vehicle Sales Amendment Bill makes vehicle traders accountable and provides consumers with redress through the Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal. The Motor Vehicle Sales Act promotes and protects consumer interests. We want to create an environment of confidence and informed choice for consumers. This bill is in line with the National-led Government’s efforts to reform regulations cut red tape and reduce compliance costs. Reforming regulations is one of National’s six policy drivers to boost the long-term performance of the economy create jobs lift incomes raise living standards and provide the high-quality public services that Kiwi families need. 
The general purpose of this bill is to amend the Motor Vehicle Sales Act 2003 to improve its workability and transparency. By way of background the Act introduced a new compulsory registration regime for motor vehicle traders and new disclosure requirements for used motor vehicles. A review reported back in 2006 some areas that required amendment and those changes form the basis of this bill. The amendment bill suggests changes to the registration of motor vehicle traders to information disclosure and to the Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal by amending the process for traders renewing their annual registration and by reducing compliance costs associated with making annual statutory declarations as part of registration renewal. The bill also closes a loophole preventing the automatic banning of traders whose registration has lapsed but who are subsequently convicted under the Act for misconduct while registered. 
The bill removes the requirement for a private seller to display a consumer information notice when selling a vehicle through a car market. However the recommendation of the Commerce Committee is that clause 7 be amended to make it clear that the Motor Vehicle Sales Act requires motor vehicle traders to display a consumer information notice when displaying or offering for sale a used motor vehicle physically or when displaying or offering for sale a used motor vehicle over the Internet when a contract to buy the motor vehicle can be entered into online. That is to distinguish between Internet advertisements that offer the ability to enter into a contract to buy the vehicle online and therefore should display a consumer information notice and advertisements that are effectively classified advertisements for which the provision of a consumer information notice would be an unnecessary and onerous requirement. 
These measures will bring improvements to the bill. As I said before this bill is in line with National’s commitment to reduce regulatory compliance costs. At the same time it promotes and protects consumer interests in order to create an environment of confidence and efficiency by making vehicle traders accountable and providing consumers with redress through the Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal. Thank you.
Kaye Nikki: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Kaye Nikki: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12169] 
7. 
NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) 
 to the  
Minister of Transport 
: What reports has he received on the safety ratings of New Zealand’s State highways? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport) 
: 
 I am pleased that this morning I had the opportunity to release in conjunction with the Automobile Association the KiwiRAP star rating report. For the first time New Zealanders have access to a comprehensive star-based rating system that shows the relative levels of safety built into our State highways. The report provides a regional breakdown of the prevalence of key safety features found on our State highways and shows that roughly 68 percent of vehicle kilometres travelled are on 3 or 4-star roads with about 33 percent on 2-star highways. 
Nikki Kaye 
: What is the Government doing to improve the safety of State highways? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: The Government is taking a number of steps to improve the safety of State highways including the major step of progressing the work on the roads of national significance. Upgrading this roading infrastructure will include retrofitting safety improvements and installing separate carriageways through our busiest high-volume rural highways. These seven roads carry high levels of traffic including freight and it is important that they are safe to use. Upgrading them will not only raise their star rating but help save lives and reduce injuries. 
Nikki Kaye 
: How can drivers use this information to protect themselves on the road? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: Improving the safety of New Zealand’s roads and encouraging safer driving are key parts of the Government’s Safer Journeys strategy. Drivers should use the ratings to educate themselves about the relative safety of the roads they drive on and adjust their driving behaviour accordingly. We all need to take responsibility by being aware of conditions and adjusting our driving and our speeds. KiwiRAP can help drivers make the right choices to stay safe on our roads.
King Annette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
King Annette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12175] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
:  
I seek leave to table one page from Budget 2009 and one page from Budget 2010 regarding Vote Social Development and showing that the training incentive allowance has been cut from $29 million under the previous Labour Government to $17 million in the latest Budget and is estimated to be as low as $13 million by 2013— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member has made a statement but she knows that all members have the Budget documents. There is absolutely no need to table them.
Roy Eric: Motor Vehicle Sales Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Roy Eric: Motor Vehicle Sales Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12159] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Before I call the next member it might be helpful if members of the House acquainted themselves with the rules for debate on a second reading. They can be found in Speakers’ rulings 105/5 to 106/6. The rules may exclude members talking about the names of their cars.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Holidays (Football World Cup) Amendment Bill—Leave to Debate 
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Holidays (Football World Cup) Amendment Bill—Leave to Debate 
[Volume:664;Page:12162] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave for the House to set aside 1 hour before it rises today to debate and if it sees fit pass all stages of the Holidays (Football World Cup) Amendment Bill. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action? There is objection.
Vote: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12157] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 110 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3 (Flavell Sharples Turia); Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 11 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 2 (Harawira. Katene). 
Bill read a third time.
Dean Jacqui: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Dean Jacqui: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12151] 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) 
: 
 The Malaysia - New Zealand Free Trade Agreement represents significant opportunities for New Zealand and although it is my pleasure to follow on from the contribution of the Green member on green economics I have a slightly different view. That might be because I am a rural-based MP who represents the farming sector. 
Here is my take on this free-trade agreement. Dr Kennedy Graham gave us three to four points so I will give a couple. First New Zealand is a small country in a large world. Second New Zealand’s economy relies on exports. 
Dr Kennedy Graham 
: No it doesn’t. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: Yes it does. Third New Zealand’s primary produce makes up a huge proportion of total New Zealand exports. Fourth about half of those exports go into the ASEAN region. So for me at least it follows that free-trade agreements—and this one in particular since we are speaking to the Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill—represent significant opportunities for us in New Zealand. 
This agreement follows on from the free-trade agreements with China and Hong Kong. Those bills were debated and passed in the House last night. They represent a huge opportunity as well as do free-trade agreements with ASEAN countries for primary producers of New Zealand. 
Specifically speaking to New Zealand’s major goods that are exported to Malaysia I mention kiwifruit. It has been spoken of often in this debate but I believe that it bears mentioning again. Currently kiwifruit exports incur a 15 percent tariff from Malaysia. That tariff will go and it will become duty-free by 2012—only 2 years away. That is only one and a half growing seasons away. If that is not exciting for the kiwifruit growers of New Zealand then I do not know what is. I think it is exciting. Based on the latest figures New Zealand’s kiwifruit exports to Malaysia have grown by— 
Hon Member 
: Heaps. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: The member opposite just said the word “heaps”. That was the kind of simplistic term used by Labour members. However we can be slightly more precise. Members opposite may say that New Zealand’s kiwifruit exports to Malaysia have increased “heaps” but I think it bears repeating that it has increased by 173 percent to be more precise. That is very impressive. Meat wool dairy—that excludes liquid milk—fish and forestry retain their duty-free access as products and are bound in so that Malaysia cannot reapply tariffs on New Zealand agricultural exports. 
Speaking as a representative of a rural electorate where agriculture is incredibly important I can only repeat my congratulations to the Minister of Trade Tim Groser for his good work in negotiating this free-trade agreement with Malaysia which was not easy. Again it represents huge opportunities for New Zealand. We should be grateful to the Minister and grasp this opportunity with both hands. With those few words I commend this bill to the House.
Tisch Lindsay: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Tisch Lindsay: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12149] 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Before I call the next speaker I say that the member made an unparliamentary remark earlier on. I do not know whether he realised it but I just ask the member to be very careful with some of the language. I did not pull him up at the time but I just mention that. I am sure it was unintended and I am not asking to take it further.
Vote: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12142] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clauses 1 to 5 be agreed to. 
Ayes 110 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3 (Flavell Sharples Turia); Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 11 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 2 (Harawira Katene). 
Clauses 1 to 5 agreed to. 
Bill reported without amendment. 
Report adopted.
Nash Stuart: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Nash Stuart: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12141] 
STUART NASH (Labour) 
: 
 I enjoyed Tim Groser’s contribution to the debate. There is no doubting his competency experience and ability to represent New Zealand’s best interest when overseas and that is very good. But I would like to ask the Minister of Trade one political question. There were advantages in having a Minister of Trade like Phil Goff sit round the Cabinet table because Phil Goff understood the politics of politics. He knew when to push hard he knew when to pull back he knew whom to talk to he knew whom to massage and he knew when to get money. 
I will bring up again what I have mentioned a couple of times. Although the agreements we have debated today and last night and also the China free-trade agreement are no doubt exceptionally good for this economy I have some slight concerns that we do not have the processes in place to allow the 97 percent of small to medium enterprises that may have the ability to scale up and look at export markets to do so. I am worried that we do not have the tools in place to allow that to happen. As mentioned our whole trade focus has changed. It used to be Eurocentric and now it is pretty much focused on Asia. Fifteen percent of our exports now go to Europe but it used to be nearly 100 percent. Mr Groser knows those figures a hell of a lot better than I ever will. 
In the 2009 Budget National cut the funding of New Zealand Trade and Enterprise by $101 million over the next 4 years. As Mr Groser will be aware the Labour Government increased New Zealand Trade and Enterprise’s funding for market development assistance from $6 million to $54 million and it is now just under $10 million. Although I do not doubt Mr Groser’s absolute ability skill and competency around the trade negotiation table I ask whether he feels that he has the confidence of his caucus colleagues or the skills and experience round the Cabinet table to now stand up and fight for the money that is necessary for our companies to take advantage of these free-trade agreements. What I would have liked to see in the Budget was not a cut to the funding of New Zealand Trade and Enterprise or to anything related to trade development; it would have been great to see a massive increase in funding because as the Minister of Finance has said New Zealand is an export-led economy and he hopes that New Zealand will drive its sustainable growth through export growth. So the rhetoric does not quite match the action. 
I do not know whether the Minister has time or is willing to answer those questions but that is a concern I have.
Groser Tim: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Groser Tim: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12140] 
Hon TIM GROSER (Minister of Trade) 
: 
 Very briefly on that point there certainly have been specific studies on the CER which was our first free-trade area agreement. Off the top of my head I cannot give Dr Graham references but most certainly I have written some myself and read many others. In respect of more recent free-trade agreements there was a long period between drinks; our second free-trade agreement after the one with Australia in 1982 was the one with Singapore and I recall that it was concluded in 2002. I doubt whether it is profitable to try to examine the near-term effects of any specific free-trade agreements because they will be bound up in a general analysis of the impact of removal of tariff protection. The removal of tariff protection comes from a variety of different sources: from Uruguay round commitments from unilateral liberalisation and from free-trade agreements with Singapore Thailand and eventually—when this bill is passed and we assume the House will pass it—Malaysia. I think it would be impossible for any economist to disaggregate the effects of the removal of tariff protection. The studies will show the effects on the New Zealand economy of the removal of it but I think it is highly unlikely that we will see a disaggregated analysis other than in respect of the CER agreement with Australia firstly because of the significance of that agreement and secondly because of the longevity of that agreement.
Graham Kennedy: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Graham Kennedy: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12140] 
Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green) 
: 
 I am saddened to hear the discouragement from Mr Grant Robertson about the morris dancing. I now have to advise the House that no invitations will be issued to anybody for that. I add that from time to time there is a touch of Handel and Fauré in there between bouts. 
I will not take up much of the time of the Committee. I have just two queries to make if I may and I address them to the Minister in the chair the Minister of Trade. I thank him very much for his answers. He missed one and Grant Robertson touched on it a moment ago: the environmental and labour protocols. I ask the Minister to forgive me if it has been provided in the past; I have not noted it. Could we perhaps please have from the officials for the benefit of members of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee a list of the meetings held under both environment and labour protocols under each free-trade agreement since the beginning of each agreement with details of when they met where and if possible transcripts or at least a report. 
My second and final point is that he mentioned that truckloads of studies were done within New Zealand about the effect of free-trade agreements on the domestic economy. I would have intuitively assumed that to be the case. I just offer the view that I made two inquiries on the number of studies. One inquiry was with a senior economist from a university. He consulted with his colleagues and the answer was none. That came as a surprise to me. The second time I asked was within the committee. I asked officials and I was told no but there was an Asian Development Bank report pertaining to Europe and the USA which is why I mention the comments. If there are such studies specifically—it may be a matter of definition—on the effect of free-trade agreements on the domestic economy in New Zealand then on a purely factual basis I personally and perhaps other colleagues would benefit if the Minister and his officials would be good enough to give us a bibliography. I certainly will explore it. Thank you.
Hayes John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hayes John: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:664;Page:12174] 
11. 
JOHN HAYES (National—Wairarapa) 
 to the  
Minister of Conservation 
: What progress has been made regarding establishing the Game Animal Council? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 I have received the final recommendations on the process for setting up the New Zealand Game Animal Council from the Game Animal Council Establishment Committee. I am very pleased to see that the hunting sector is working together to improve hunting opportunities and I acknowledge the assistance of the Hon Peter Dunne on this matter which forms part of the Government’s confidence and supply agreement with United Future. The Government will consider very carefully the recommendations and their effects on all interested people before making a formal response in the next few months. 
John Hayes 
: What are the recommendations in terms of the groups that should be represented on the council? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: The report recommends that the council include an independent chair together with representatives of recreational hunters commercial operators iwi farmers and the Government. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: Does the Minister agree with the President of the New Zealand Deerstalkers Association that the Game Animal Council will “foster improved communication and collaboration between government commercial interests and recreational hunters.”; if so can she point to situations where that type of cooperation and collaboration is already happening perhaps on a smaller more local scale? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: Yes. I believe this process has already led to greater collaboration and communication amongst the hunting sector; there are some great community initiatives—for example the wapiti programme in Fiordland and Stewart Island. Indeed the Department of Conservation has employed a hunting adviser to improve its services to hunters.
Groser Tim: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Groser Tim: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12141] 
Hon TIM GROSER (Minister of Trade) 
: 
 I say very briefly and not in the spirit I am sure in which the member asked the questions yes I am afraid shock waves are going through the New Zealand Public Service as a result of the election of the National Government because the truckloads of money that have been pouring through the front door in the last 9 years leading to an increase in core Government expenditure of some $30 billion has stopped. Public servants are now experiencing the shock waves caused by having to be asked to do more with less. In respect of the idea that we do not follow up on these free-trade agreements because New Zealand Trade and Enterprise has somehow switched off I will be sure to make a point of personally inviting Mr Nash to the next New Zealand Trade and Enterprise - Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade seminar on free-trade agreements. I opened two seminars last week in which we did exactly as Mr Nash was proposing.
Goodhew Jo: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Goodhew Jo: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12125] 
JO GOODHEW (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I seek leave of the House for this debate to be taken as one question—a wide-ranging debate with unlimited calls. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is everybody clear? Is there any objection? There is no objection. Leave is granted.
Vote: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12125] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 110 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 42; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3(Flavell Sharples Turia); Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 11 
Green Party 9; Maori Party 2 (Harawira Katene). 
Bill read a second time.
Calder Cam: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Calder Cam: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12119] 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to rise and speak briefly on the second reading of the Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill. It is the sinews of trade that bind the world together and the sinews of trade that allow countries to have a relationship that means they are likely to maintain friendly relationships rather than unfriendly relationships. An ability to communicate between countries is enhanced by trade between those countries. 
It was a source of great surprise to me that in the world’s best economic conditions under the last administration—conditions unsurpassed in decades—the tradable sector declined year after year after year. This means that in terms of the goods we sell overseas to allow us to provide the services we need here at home for our people to protect our most vulnerable and to provide world-class services in medicine and education we were not doing as well as we could. 
This bill the Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill will boost innovation and improve export access to one of the key markets in Asia to which New Zealand exports. This agreement with Malaysia is an important part of National’s focus on free trade and on improving access for our exporters to world markets—a priority that the Prime Minister mentioned in his speech to Parliament in February. It is only as I said before by lifting our economic performance through selling our goods and services overseas that we can create jobs boost incomes and improve living standards here in New Zealand. 
More than 70 percent of New Zealand’s trade is within the Asia-Pacific region and at this stage I pay tribute to the excellent work done by our Minister of Trade Mr Tim Groser who has been travelling all over the world and opening up markets for our products all over the globe. There will be greater certainty and opportunity— 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Tireless and relentless. 
Dr CAM CALDER 
: He is tireless and relentless as another extremely well-performing Minister Mr Ryall has observed. 
There will be greater certainty and opportunity for New Zealand businesses in future trading and investment in Malaysia. There are potential longer-term gains from regional integration. I give just a few details: 95 percent of New Zealand’s exports to Malaysia will be duty-free from day one—95 percent. On full implementation this agreement will amount to duty savings of over $10 million a year for our exporters. I commend this bill to the House.
Katene Rahui: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Katene Rahui: Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12113] 
RAHUI KATENE (Maori Party—Te Tai Tonga) 
: 
 I was pointing out before the break that one of the Maori Party’s concerns about free-trade agreements is that a consequence of the global market is that businesses and workers including Maori may be forced to produce their goods at the lowest cost by taking production offshore resulting in job losses at home with people buying overseas goods rather than those made in New Zealand. It should not be forgotten that in April of this year we had some 20000 Maori job seekers who could have benefited from employment opportunities. Unemployment creates stress on the whanau and relying on benefits for income diminishes the ability to manaaki. Yet on the other hand Maori enterprises increasingly want to play their part as a significant export earner for New Zealand. We know also that more support is required that would increase the capability for Maori taking their assets to the world. Presumably Dr Sharples’ mission to Shanghai will help to achieve that. 
We question how workers in both New Zealand and Malaysia will be treated with regard to workers’ rights and minimum standards on labour issues. I ask whether the free-trade agreements will comply with our basic employment law and our moral code. For Maori the expression of manaakitanga towards others means that we ensure respect for the health and safety of all workers yet we cannot ignore the fact that there are opportunities for Maori to leverage their assets to increase economic prosperity internationally. Every economist will tell us that the transfer of assets following Treaty settlements continues to build a platform for iwi-led economic development. 
The Maori Party has been genuinely conflicted about free-trade agreements. We are concerned about their impact on the situation for Maori and on the sovereignty of the nation in the wider sense. We are concerned to see that low work standards and low wage rates are not introduced into New Zealand. We worry about what the agreements mean in the larger context of human rights and indigenous rights. We will be scrutinising the effects of free-trade agreements upon the environment but we also recognise the significant opportunities that might emerge for Maori to utilise their resources expertise and knowledge to open up opportunities in the international market place. 
Accordingly although we initially opposed this bill at its first reading for the subsequent readings of the Tariff (Malaysia Free Trade Agreement) Amendment Bill our votes will represent the diverse viewpoints that both characterise our constituents and should be considered in further debates. Thank you.
Points of Order — Holidays (Football World Cup) Amendment Bill—Leave to Debate 
Points of Order — Holidays (Football World Cup) Amendment Bill—Leave to Debate 
[Volume:664;Page:12162] 
Points of Order 
Holidays (Football World Cup) Amendment Bill—Leave to Debate 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave for the House to set aside 1 hour before it rises today to debate and if it sees fit pass all stages of the Holidays (Football World Cup) Amendment Bill. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course of action? There is objection.
Vote: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11088] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Bill read a first time.
Vote: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Vote: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11107] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill be now read a second time. 
Ayes 67 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 3; United Future 1. 
Noes 52 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9. 
Bill read a second time. 
Result corrected after originally being announced as Ayes 67 Noes 53.
Hughes Darren: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — First Reading 
Hughes Darren: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:663;Page:11071] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is a technical point about the bill. The regulatory impact statement that is referred to in the explanatory note of the bill contains a reference to a website and I am advised that the website address that is in the explanatory note does not actually connect to the regulatory impact statement. It can probably be fixed very quickly from an information technology perspective but it is the Minister for Regulatory Reform’s— 
Hon Member 
: Is this a point of order? 
Hon DARREN HUGHES 
: It is a point of order about the bill. We need to have the information. If the Minister in charge of the bill could see to that it would be great. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: It is not a point of order in relation to the order of the House. I think that the member having raised the point someone will now address it.
Bennett David: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Bennett David: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11084] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I congratulate the Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister today on an excellent Budget. It has been well received by the public and the commentators of New Zealand. It is a Budget that shows leadership in the economic and the political fields that this country has lacked for many years. I bet members that the headlines in the  
Sydney Morning Herald  
will read “Why haven’t we got a John Key and a Bill English to take our country forward?” like this country has been taken forward today. People around the world will be looking at New Zealand as an example of how to build a stronger country of how to create economic management and of how to have reform in our tax system which has been long overdue. It seems crazy that in this place Labour with its position of looking after the downtrodden and those on low incomes did nothing about property investors for 9 years. They did nothing about that and it came only to us. We had to make that change to taxation which delivered the right incentives for New Zealanders. 
I look forward to the young people of New Zealand knowing that they need to get an education that they need to work hard and that the opportunities are there. We will give them the rewards. We will make it worth their while to do the right things in life. That is the signal and the incentive this Budget sets. 
I thank our coalition partners because they see the big picture. They do not see the small petty-mindedness of what one needs to do to win elections; they see that we need to build a stronger people so that we can have a stronger country and that their success will be our success in building that country in the future. We look forward to that. This is a tremendous day for New Zealand. It shows that we can get out of recession quicker than we thought that we can create tax change that is meaningful and that delivers the future and that we can look after our public services and health and education which need investment. This is a great day for New Zealand a great day for National and something that all New Zealanders can be very proud of. Thank you.
Hughes Darren: Urgency 
Hughes Darren: Urgency 
[Volume:663;Page:11067] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. As the Leader of the House has moved that the bill be introduced under an urgency motion which is the impact of the vote we are about to have Opposition members have not had a chance to see the legislation. I wonder whether the Leader of the House could indicate to us the implementation date for the tax changes in the legislation so we can get a sense of how urgent it is that we pass the legislation over the next 2 days. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: He is not required to do that under Standing Orders. It is a reasonable request but one he does not have to respond to. It looks like he has chosen not to so I will put the motion and the member can vote accordingly.
Vote: Urgency 
Vote: Urgency 
[Volume:663;Page:11067] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That urgency be accorded. 
Ayes 69 
New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 53 
New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; Progressive 1. 
Motion agreed to.
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
Brownlee Gerry: Urgency 
[Volume:663;Page:11067] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
: 
 Speaking to the point of order— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: I am quite happy to respond. The Government has the right to determine whether a motion should be accorded urgency. Under Standing Orders it has to give reasons. It has done that. There is no debate about that. I will now put the motion. [ 
Interruption 
] I must remind the House that there is to be no comment during voting for two reasons. One is that we need some accuracy about recording the vote. The second is that no member of this House will vote under duress of comment. In the past people have been ejected for such behaviour. I remind the House—it is just a cautionary note—that votes will be taken in silence.
Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — Procedure 
Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — Procedure 
[Volume:663;Page:11039] 
Thursday 20 May 2010 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Appropriation (2009/10 Supplementary Estimates) Bill 
Procedure 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I hereby present the Supplementary Estimates of Appropriations for the Government of New Zealand and supporting information for the year ending 30 June 2010 (B.7). 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That paper is published under the authority of the House.