edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Turei Metiria: Fiordland (Te Moana o Atawhenua) Marine  Management Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Turei Metiria: Fiordland (Te Moana o Atawhenua) Marine  Management Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:19865] 
METIRIA TUREI (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party has an amendment to clause 4 “Interpretation”. We want to ensure that the primary Minister responsible for the Fiordland (Te Moana o Atawhenua) Marine Management Act and for that area will be the Minister of Conservation not the Minister for the Environment—not that we have anything against the Minister for the Environment. In fact the whole reason why the Minister for the Environment is the primary Minister involved is simply that the Guardians of Fiordland’s Fisheries and Marine Environment got funding from the Ministry for the Environment to do the work it did. 
All other marine reserves are the responsibility of the Minister of Conservation. The Department of Conservation and the Minister have the greatest level of expertise and existing responsibility and know best how the marine reserves process works. They can see the whole marine reserves structure throughout the country as a single whole. There is absolutely no reason why the Fiordland marine reserves should be treated differently from other marine reserves in this country in any way. So we strongly advocate that the Minister of Conservation be primarily responsible for ensuring that the reserves are treated the same afforded the same level of protection and given the same respect and position as other marine reserves. 
Of course these marine reserves ought to have that same level of protection and respect throughout the community and from Ministers and from this House because this area is incredibly precious and valuable to the whole of the community. It is absolutely unique so it is entitled to the same level of protection. That is one of our major concerns with this bill as a whole—that so many of the provisions in it treat the Fiordland marine reserves as if they are different from others but they simply are not. 
We urge the Committee to support the amendment.
Pettis Jill: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Pettis Jill: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:21686] 
JILL PETTIS (Labour—Whanganui) 
: 
 Over there in the Opposition parties is Tony Ryall acting like Captain Mainwaring and Ron Mark from New Zealand First is like Colonel Klink: “I know nothing.” They are absolutely full of wind bluff and bluster. They are what one could refer to as “gonnas”: “I’m ‘gonna’ do this and I’m ‘gonna’ do that but when I had the opportunity what did I do? I did nothing.” The irony of the situation is that when those Tories were in Government for those 9 long years they attacked Housing New Zealand tenants at the airport and at the border when they were going overseas for the first and only time. One of my constituents only ever left the country because her family paid for her and she left New Zealand with NZ$20 in her pocket and she was stopped at the border and advised that her rent would go up for the 2 weeks she was away because she would not be occupying her Housing New Zealand property. Those mean horrible bullies attacked defenceless Housing New Zealand tenants—the poorest people in New Zealand—but did nothing about fines defaulters. They left them alone. It just shows what bullies they are and God forbid they should ever get the opportunity to be bullies again! However the people of New Zealand are far too intelligent to do that. 
This is a good bill and a positive aspect of it is that victims are more likely to get reparation. This is an excellent bill by a hard-working and competent Government.
Barker Rick: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — In Committee 
Barker Rick: Government Communications Security Bureau Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4391] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister of Customs) 
: 
 I have taken some advice on the matter. I am advised that the remuneration Act is not superseded until 1 April and until that time the bill as it stands has to reflect what is currently the law. It cannot do otherwise. We know it will change but we are dealing with it at this time. At some later stage when the law takes effect the wording will simply be changed as a consequence.
Dyson Ruth: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Procedure Referral to Health Committee In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled  Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure 
Dyson Ruth: 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:9972] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Associate Minister of Health) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Cullen Michael: Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 2) — Referral to Local Government and Environment Committee referral to the Local Government and Environment Committee Instruction to Local Government and Environment Committee 
Cullen Michael: Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 2) — Referral to Local Government and Environment Committee referral to the Local Government and Environment Committee Instruction to Local Government and Environment Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3496] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave that the Local Government and Environment Committee in its consideration of the Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 2) have power to consider and if it thinks fit adopt any amendments relating to the control and care of dogs. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any disagreement? There is not.
Vote: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:616;Page:11671] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 36 
New Zealand National 27; 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.
Anderton Jim: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee Third Reading 
Anderton Jim: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21504] 
Hon JIM ANDERTON (Associate Minister of Health) 
: 
 I will give just a brief explanation. At least at the end of my explanation people will understand my position; I still do not understand National’s position even after I have heard that speech—and there have been a number of such speeches. The first thing is that this is a Government measure not a member’s bill. The Government and other parties in this Parliament are bringing this bill before the Parliament. The bill concerning the alcohol age limit was a member’s bill that was a conscience issue for Parliament and let me remind the member who raised the issue that plenty of evidence out there plenty of studies nationally and internationally show the serious effect of alcohol on young people. Benzylpiperazine as has been indicated is a new substance in terms of its use by ordinary people. [ 
Interruption 
] 
It was a cattle drench—that is true—and people probably did not have any idea that someone would sell cattle drench as a party pill. But they are now doing that—and guess what? The Government has commissioned studies and research on benzylpiperazine and when that research comes back it may well be that it will show there is no problem whatever. However it may well be that the research will show more problems than we even know about. If there are such problems and if the recommendations of the expert advisory committees and researchers are that we should take further action then we will. So that is the difference between alcohol and benzylpiperazine research. 
The evidence is in on alcohol in my view and in the view of a lot of other members in this Parliament; we are waiting for the other evidence. The Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs advised us to make a precautionary stand and it suggested making that stand for the age of 18. It suggested the age; I did not. We have had the age of 18 for alcohol and in the minds of many people in this Parliament—and in the minds of many people outside it; in fact in the minds of the majority of New Zealanders outside it—that experiment of lowering the drinking age failed. So we are now addressing it and we cannot be blamed for doing that. Seventy percent of New Zealanders actually agree with us so if National members are saying that that is a bad thing they can make my day twice. If they are saying they cannot make up their minds on this bill they can make my day again.
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
Brownlee Gerry: Business Statement 
[Volume:615;Page:11581] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 Noting that the progress on the Government’s legislation in the last 4 weeks has been particularly slow can members expect a long dose of urgency at some stage during the next parliamentary session and would the Leader of the House be able to indicate whether he would have support for that urgency to go beyond the standard 6 o’clock on Friday night?
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:626;Page:21201] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I have consulted my colleague the Minister of Maori Affairs. He has told me that the term can be regarded as derogatory and therefore I withdraw and apologise. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Thank you and I thank the member for raising it.
Mahuta Nanaia: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 2) — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Mahuta Nanaia: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 2) — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:616;Page:11699] 
NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Tainui) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
Motion agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Ian Ewen-Street to clause 10(1) be agreed to: 
to add to paragraph (b) of section 265A(1) the following new subparagraph: 
(iii)In the case of fishers who have paid levies before 1 October 2003 but have since left the industry that the pro-rated values of their underspent levies be refunded to them in cash on or before 30 June 2004.
Turei Metiria: Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Turei Metiria: Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:16212] 
METIRIA TUREI (Green) 
: 
 I would like it to be noted that I did in fact shout out “Yes” but in the ensuing hilarity obviously no one noticed that. So there was at least one vote in favour of the motion.
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17929] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments be agreed to. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9. 
Amendments agreed to.
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH 
Vote: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH 
[Volume:610;Page:7874] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 71 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 48 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Motion agreed to.
Donald Rod: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — Second Reading 
Donald Rod: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:3930] 
ROD DONALD (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I took the call for this speech well before Mr Parker. According to your schedule we are No. 10 in the speaking order and this is the 10th slot. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Because someone has spoken out of order the next call goes to the Labour Party. 
ROD DONALD 
: It is not my responsibility for Labour to seek the call at the right time.
Swain Paul: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 7 to Minister 26 July 
Swain Paul: Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 7 to Minister 26 July 
[Volume:627;Page:22131] 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 On Tuesday 26 July in answer to a supplementary question to question No. 7 I gave figures relating to the number of backlog cases investigated by the fraud and investigations unit of the Immigration Service. I have since been advised that those figures were not correct. I will provide the correct figures to the member and to the Clerk’s Office as soon as they come to hand.
Simich Clem: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Simich Clem: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:615;Page:10858] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I thank the member— 
David Benson-Pope 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.
Vote: Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14042] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That schedule 4A as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 83 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 36 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Schedule 4A as amended agreed to.
Samuels Dover: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
Samuels Dover: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:14568] 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS (Minister of State) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16151] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 76 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Noes 44 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Amendments as amended agreed to. 
The question was put that Part 1 as amended be agreed to.
Mapp Wayne: Civil Union Bill — Second Reading 
Mapp Wayne: Civil Union Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:622;Page:17404] 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (National—North Shore) 
: 
 Who should decide? I believe that that is the fundamental question raised by this conscience issue. Should it be the 120 members of Parliament or should it be the people of New Zealand? I believe that when put like that the answer is clear: it should be the people of New Zealand. 
Our democracy is evolving. In the early 1990s there was the initiative for citizens initiated referenda. I was one of those who advocated that reform when I was the chair of the policy committee of the National Party in Auckland. It is now time to move this issue forward. The people of New Zealand ought to have the right to decide whether there should be civil unions whether brothels should be legalised whether the drinking age should be 18 or 20 and whether they want casinos in their communities. Those are things about which people can use their common-sense and life experience to make the decisions. They are questions that are readily capable of being put forward as referenda. 
As a matter of practice before I cast my vote I always conduct a scientific poll based on the electoral roll of the views of the North Shore electorate. On this issue the results were clear: 56 percent were opposed to creating the institution of civil union 34 percent were in support and the balance had yet to make up their minds. Many MPs will argue that we are here to exercise our judgment not merely to act as delegates. On most issues that is correct. But there are particular issues—and conscience issues more than any others—that generate huge interest in the community. All of us in the House have received literally thousands of letters and emails on this issue and that is testament to the depth of concern that the public has on this matter. The public is quite capable of making an informed decision and it is time that this Parliament gave the public that right. Ultimately only we as lawmakers can extend our democracy in that way. 
I envisage that these questions would be decided by referenda at the time of each general election to ensure maximum participation. We might expect one or two at each election. That is now commonplace in many states in the United States and it is a developing trend in Western democracies. It is time that we caught up. Clearly procedures would have to be worked out but they are ultimately matters of detail. 
Ultimately the question is simple: are we prepared to advance our democracy and let the people decide these issues directly? It seems to me that the answer is obvious. If we believe in the democratic principle we will allow the people to make their decisions on these issues at the time of each election. That is how we develop our democracy not by our assuming some superior approach as members of Parliament when in fact it is time to trust the common-sense judgment of our fellow citizens New Zealanders.
Vote: Judicial Matters Bill — Second Reading 
Vote: Judicial Matters Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:12812] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendments recommended by the Justice and Electoral Committee by majority be agreed to. 
Ayes 63 
New Zealand Labour 52; Green Party 9; Progressive 2. 
Noes 56 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; United Future 8; ACT New Zealand 7; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Question agreed to.
Wilson Margaret: Motions — Auckland Mosques—Attack 
Wilson Margaret: Motions — Auckland Mosques—Attack 
[Volume:627;Page:22029] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Thank you. I have noted those matters that have been raised in the context of the point of order. I shall put the matter again and then members will either agree or not agree but they will not debate the matter. Is there any objection to the motion being moved? There is no objection.
Ward Mike: Architects Bill — Second Reading 
Ward Mike: Architects Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19915] 
MIKE WARD (Green) 
: 
 The bill does not prevent anyone from designing a building; it prevents people from being misled into believing that those who are not suitably qualified to design buildings get the job of doing so. That is the purpose of this bill and it makes good sense. Designing a building is more than just putting up something that looks good; it also has to work. Some buildings that owners have had built in recent times indicate that the protection they might expect from local authorities and building inspectors is not necessarily there. Therefore going to an architect who has suitable qualifications makes very good sense. 
Architects have the task of designing those most enjoyable spaces in our community—and we do not have enough of those kinds of buildings—making sure that people know when they go to architects that they are architects that they have been trained and that they know not just how to make things look good but how to make them work and to be weatherproof as well and that is important. 
A couple of interesting points have been raised and I guess they have been raised with the other parties as well by an architect in Auckland—that is relating to the idea that the term “architect” needs to be more clearly defined. The reason is that architects not only draw up plans for buildings; there are other sorts of architects such as software architects landscape architects financial architects etc. who also draw up plans relating to buildings. It is perhaps important that that is made clear in the Supplementary Order Paper. 
The term also applies to registered architects. Apparently 40 percent of architects do not register as architects and that is something that needs to be addressed. The Greens support this legislation. It does give a reasonable level of protection.
Peck Mark: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Peck Mark: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5414] 
MARK PECK (NZ Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Power Simon: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Power Simon: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:15204] 
SIMON POWER (Senior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Whilst I do not wish to contest your ruling under Standing Order 138 I invite you to peruse Standing Order 137(3) which states: “The Speaker may accept a closure motion if in the Speaker’s opinion it is reasonable to do so.” You have already indicated to the Rt Hon Winston Peters that you thought his request to seek leave for a second contribution to this debate was reasonable. In fact I believe the exact phrase was “not an unreasonable request by the Rt Hon Winston Peters.” That being the case I invite you to rule under Standing Order 137(3) that as you have already indicated that a not unreasonable request was made by Mr Peters you will allow his request for a further contribution. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Again I thank Simon Power for his contribution on this issue. Of course under Standing Order 137(3) the Speaker may accept a closure motion if in the Speaker’s opinion it is reasonable to do so. At the time I was of the opinion that it was reasonable to do so. I took the closure motion. There was a lot of noise. Unfortunately that sort of thing happens in this Chamber but I have now taken the closure motion and there the matter rests.
Duncan Helen: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Duncan Helen: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:625;Page:20154] 
5.  
HELEN DUNCAN (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of State Services 
: What reports if any has he received on changes to the number of staff employed in the public service? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of State Services) 
: 
 I have seen a report from Dr Brash stating that without policy analysts and information one cannot make good decisions. I have seen another report from John Key stating that the Government employs too many policy analysts. If when in Opposition they cannot come up with a policy on how to make policy it is no wonder that no one trusts them. 
Helen Duncan 
: Can the Minister advise the House how many Government employees would need to be sacked in order to reprioritise $200 million in spending? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: There are a number of ways of looking at it. If one took lower-paid public servants such as social workers Work and Income case workers call centre operators and customs officers then 5000 people would be sacked to make Don Brash’s $200 million in reprioritisation. But of course if it were higher-paid people such as teachers or nurses one would have to sack only 3500 Government employees. Don Brash said he would cut $200 million. He should tell us which ones he would sack. 
John Key 
: Does the Minister realise that the hiring binge being undertaken by the State sector is adding to the skill shortage and wage inflation being felt by the private sector and is this not one of the reasons that Dr Alan Bollard rated today when he indicated that interest rates will rise in June for the eighth time this year; or does this Minister not care about borrowing rates that New Zealanders are paying? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Dr Bollard unlike his predecessor does not make statements like that. 
John Key 
: I seek leave to table Dr Alan Bollard’s statement in which he made that comment today—unusual as it is—between monetary policy statements. 
Document not tabled.
Swain Paul: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Swain Paul: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:12980] 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 I have seen withering attacks in this House before and I am not looking at one just at the moment. Looking at a couple of things the speakers have raised firstly there is an issue about the importance of victims in this legislation. I want to point out that victims have their own Act. It is called the Victims’ Rights Act which was introduced by this Government. It is specific legislation that was not in place when the previous National Government was in power. 
I come now to clause 6(1)(c) which is about the issue of rehabilitation and I see that the National Opposition spokesperson made a speech recently about the importance of drug and alcohol rehabilitation. But some issues were raised at the Law and Order Committee as I understand it about risk and that is why clause 6(1)(c) has been amended in Supplementary Order Paper 213 on page 5 to include the words “… where appropriate and to the extent practicable within the resources available …”. That phrase is specifically designed to address the issues that that member raised so I hope the debate will be a little bit sharper more focused and more withering—honouring the promise made by Mr Ryall at the start.
Vote: Prostitution Reform Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Prostitution Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6192] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 12 
Adams 
Copeland 
Smith M 
Awatere Huata 
Dunne 
Smith N 
Carter J 
Ogilvy 
Te Heuheu 
Teller: 
Choudhary 
Samuels 
Alexander 
Noes 103 
Anderton (P)  
Dyson (P) 
Kelly (P) 
Robson (P) 
Ardern (P) 
Eckhoff (P) 
Key (P) 
Roy 
Baldock (P) 
English (P) 
King 
Scott (P) 
Barker  
Ewen-Street (P) 
Laban (P) 
Shirley (P) 
Barnett 
Fairbrother (P) 
Locke (P) 
Simich (P) 
Benson-Pope 
Field (P)  
Mackey (P) 
Smith L 
Beyer (P) 
Fitzsimons (P) 
Maharey (P) 
Sowry 
Bradford 
Franks 
Mahuta (P) 
Stewart (P) 
Brash (P) 
Gallagher 
Mallard (P) 
Sutton (P) 
Brown (P)  
Goff (P) 
Mapp 
Swain (P) 
Brownlee (P) 
Gosche  
Mark 
Tamihere (P) 
Burton (P) 
Goudie 
McNair (P) 
Tanczos 
Carter C (P) 
Gudgeon (P) 
Newman (P) 
Tisch (P) 
Carter D (P) 
Hartley 
O’Connor (P) 
Tizard (P) 
Catchpole 
Hawkins (P) 
Okeroa 
Turei(P) 
Chadwick 
Heatley (P)  
Paraone (P)  
Turia (P) 
Clark (P) 
Hereora 
Parker 
Turner 
Coddington (P) 
Hide (P) 
Peck (P) 
Ward (P) 
Cosgrove (P) 
Hobbs (P) 
Perry (P) 
Williamson (P) 
Cullen (P) 
Hodgson (P) 
Peters J (P) 
Wilson (P) 
Cunliffe (P) 
Horomia (P) 
Peters W (P) 
Wong (P) 
Dalziel (P) 
Hughes 
Pillay (P) 
Woolerton (P) 
Donald (P) 
Hunt (P) 
Power (P) 
Worth (P) 
Donnelly (P) 
Hutchison (P) 
Prebble (P) 
Yates 
Duncan (P) 
Jones (P) 
Ririnui (P) 
Teller: 
Duynhoven 
Kedgley (P) 
Robertson 
Pettis 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: We come now to amendments in the name of the Hon Phil Goff on Supplementary Order Paper 91 defining operators of the business of prostitution and providing for them. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 91 in the name of Hon Phil Goff to insert new Part 2A the amendments to clauses 2 and 4 to insert new clause 4AA and amendments to clauses 6 9J 9K 9L 9N 9S and 10 and to insert new clause 10A be agreed to.
Chadwick Steve: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Chadwick Steve: Motor Vehicle Sales Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4766] 
STEVE CHADWICK (NZ Labour—Rotorua) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Beyer Georgina: Counter-Terrorism Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Beyer Georgina: Counter-Terrorism Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9343] 
GEORGINA BEYER (Labour—Wairarapa) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Vote: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Vote: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:11753] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 84 
New Zealand Labour 52; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 36 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 8; Independent: Awatere Huata. 
Bill read a third time.
Vote: Charities Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Charities Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19959] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 34 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Noes 84 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 357 in the name of the Hon Judith Tizard to Part 1 be agreed to.
Vote: Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Vote: Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6863] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 47 
New Zealand National 26; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 8. 
Noes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Brent Catchpole to clause 14 be agreed to: 
toomitfromnewsubsection(2)(a)(b)and(c) of section 47 thewords“constitutesormayconstituteacontraventionof” and substitute the words “contravenes or will contravene”.
Parker David: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Parker David: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6270] 
DAVID PARKER (NZ Labour—Otago) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Beyer Georgina: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Beyer Georgina: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20029] 
GEORGINA BEYER (Labour—Wairarapa) 
: 
 I am pleased to take a brief call on the Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) in the Committee stage. I first of all acknowledge what Ron Mark said in his speech and refer to some of the matters he raised. I have to say that I agree with him regarding rape. I am certainly glad that we had the possibility to include the transgender and sexual reassignment provisions in the bill regarding that issue. I did take a universal view that rape was rape whether by bodily penetration or with an object but there is a difference between rape and sexual violation in the law. I was informed at the Law and Order Committee that sexual violation still held the same punitive penalties; it is just the title that differs. So I did obviously end up supporting that view although I was uncertain about it at the time. 
I will just refer to Mr Richard Worth who—kindly or not—raised the issue of my member’s bill the Human Rights (Gender Identity) Amendment Bill. He seems to be going on with this mantra about cross-dressing. I would remind the member that decades ago now it used to be against the law for men to wear women’s underwear. That was absolutely ridiculous; the law is long gone from the statute book of this country. I have known people who were arrested for that. I know of transgender people who used to have to go to Mojo’s drag nightclub in Auckland dressed as a man they could dress as a woman and do their entertainment show there and they had to change back into men’s clothes again when they left. That is absolutely ridiculous. The Government of the day obviously thought so 30 or 40 years ago and it repealed the law. The way that Mr Worth made reference to cross-dressers with that real “Ew yuck!” flavour to it really shows just how minimal his knowledge of cross-dressing is. 
Of course one thing I remind the Committee of is the famous photograph of a former member of the National Party John Banks—who now hopes to be the leader of the ACT party—in his tutu when he was a Minister in this Parliament I understand. He was a great example but would we have wanted him discriminated against for doing that? Some may say “Yes”. There was also a very celebrated police commissioner by the name of Rob Moodie who wore kaftans. He was celebrated and famous for it. That could be termed cross-dressing. Should he have been discriminated against? No I do not think so. 
Anyway I will not continue on that line because it is a little off the bill. But I look forward to the debate when my Human Rights (Gender Identity) Amendment Bill has its first reading hopefully after the next election.
[Volume:619;Page:15078] 
In debating the Misuse of Drugs (Industrial Hemp) Amendment Bill it is significant that it is in the name of Nandor Tanczos. I have some advice on this occasion for that member. He should make sure that his time in Parliament is not publicly associated with one word: “cannabis”. That man has come into Parliament and said quite publicly that he wants to have cannabis legalised and now he is associated with another piece of legislation—to allow the industrial use of cannabis sativa for the production of oils creams fibre etc. I say to that member that he needs to be aware of the difficulty of being a single-issue member of Parliament. In the brief time that he may still be here he needs to take the opportunity to widen his horizons and be prepared to debate more than one issue.
Benson-Pope David: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Benson-Pope David: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:16347] 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Minister of Fisheries) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson—one brief point if I may. I think it is very important especially after that last comment to stress that this procedure has not been used in any way to provide secrecy or to cover up the voting. It seems to be a most efficient way of allowing people to differentiate rather than having to ring the bells and take up hours and hours of members’ time. As I invited Mr Brown last time I am sure if he were to write to the whips they would be more than happy to raise that with their caucuses and let him know absolutely who voted which way. I do not think there is an issue there for each individual whip to call. But I would just like to repeat the invitation I made to him 2 weeks ago.
Mahuta Nanaia: Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Mahuta Nanaia: Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:21638] 
NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Tainui) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Peters Winston:  
Peters Winston:  
[Volume:607;Page:4109] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I understand that the Business Committee decided this morning that there would be a debate but I also understand that you closed that discussion with the view that there would be no interruptions or interjections during that debate. I want to bring the Speaker’s ruling related to that to your attention. It states that interjections during a debate are out of order unless they are rare and reasonable. I would think that at the very least all members of Parliament have a right to make their views known—albeit within the Standing Orders and Speakers’ rulings. In my view it is wrong to put out a prescription beforehand—and given what I heard happened at the Business Committee I think that that is what you were about to do. We have waited months for this debate and now on the brink of war we are about to have it. In this climate members are entitled within the Standing Orders to have a normal usual debating environment.
Robertson H V Ross: General Debates 
Robertson H V Ross: General Debates 
[Volume:611;Page:8551] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: If it is an official document he can table it. Would the member like to clarify the situation? 
Hon Harry Duynhoven 
: I do not think the member can— 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: The member offered to table it and I am now asking him to table it. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Would the member care to table the document?
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Urgent Debate—Local Government Elections 
Brownlee Gerry: Points of Order — Urgent Debate—Local Government Elections 
[Volume:620;Page:16099] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave of the House for an urgent debate. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: On what subject? 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I am pleased you asked. It is very clear from the answers given by the Minister for Local Government that for some time in the future we can expect major cities to be without governance we can expect hospitals throughout the country to be without governance we are likely to have to have special legislation in the House— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member has indicated roughly the subject of the debate. Please be seated. Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is.
Brownlee Gerry: Speaker’s Rulings — Parliament Buildings—Media Access 
Brownlee Gerry: Speaker’s Rulings — Parliament Buildings—Media Access 
[Volume:625;Page:20303] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Those arrangements seem to me to be rather complex. I am wondering whether we will have pointsmen in place to ensure the smooth flow of traffic across that particular bridge and whether there might be a proposal at some point to walk members of Parliament through the area in order to point out the various parts where they can expect not to be interviewed.
Vote: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
Vote: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
[Volume:624;Page:19193] 
A personal vote was called for on the question  
That the Deaths by Accidents Compensation Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 76 
Anderton(P) 
Duynhoven   
Laban(P) 
Samuels(P) 
Barker(P) 
Dyson(P) 
Locke (P) 
Shirley(P) 
Barnett (P) 
Ewen-Street(P) 
Mackey J (P) 
Simich(P) 
Benson-Pope(P) 
Fairbrother(P) 
Mackey M 
Sowry(P) 
Beyer   
Fitzsimons(P) 
Maharey(P) 
Sutton(P) 
Bradford(P) 
Gallagher(P) 
Mahuta(P) 
Swain(P) 
Burton(P) 
Goff(P) 
Mallard(P) 
Tamihere(P) 
Carter C (P) 
Gosche(P) 
Mapp(P) 
Tanczos(P) 
Chadwick(P) 
Hartley(P) 
Mark(P) 
Tizard   
Choudhary(P) 
Hawkins(P) 
McCully(P) 
Turei   
Clark(P) 
Hereora(P) 
O'Connor(P) 
Ward(P) 
Coddington(P) 
Hide(P) 
Okeroa(P) 
Williamson(P) 
Cosgrove(P) 
Hobbs(P) 
Parker(P) 
Wilson(P) 
Cullen(P) 
Hodgson(P) 
Peck(P) 
Wong(P) 
Cunliffe(P) 
Horomia(P) 
Pillay(P) 
Yates (P) 
Dalziel(P) 
Hughes 
Rich(P) 
Donald(P) 
Hunt(P) 
Ririnui(P) 
Donnelly(P) 
Kedgley(P) 
Robertson(P) 
Duncan(P) 
Key(P) 
Robson(P) 
Teller: 
Dunne(P) 
King(P) 
Roy(P) 
Pettis   
Noes 44 
Adams   
Copeland(P) 
Ogilvy(P) 
te Heuheu(P) 
Alexander(P) 
Eckhoff(P) 
Paraone(P) 
Tisch 
Ardern(P) 
English(P) 
Perry(P) 
Turia(P) 
Baldock(P) 
Field(P) 
Peters J (P) 
Turner(P) 
Brash(P) 
Franks   
Peters W (P) 
Wang(P) 
Brown (P) 
Goudie(P) 
Power(P) 
Woolerton(P) 
Brownlee(P) 
Gudgeon(P) 
Prebble(P) 
Worth(P) 
Carter D (P) 
Heatley(P) 
Ryall(P) 
Carter J (P) 
Hutchison(P) 
Smith L (P) 
Catchpole   
Jones (P) 
Smith M (P) 
Collins(P) 
McNair(P) 
Smith N (P) 
Teller: 
Connell   
Newman(P) 
Stewart(P) 
Scott   
Bill read a third time.
Vote: Registered Architects Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Vote: Registered Architects Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19932] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 34 
New Zealand National 27; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Noes 84 
New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Maori Party 1. 
Amendment to the amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 354 in the name of the Hon Chris Carter to Part 2 be agreed to. 
A party vote was called for on the question that the amendments be agreed to.
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Vote: Television New Zealand Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:3758] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 47 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 7. 
Noes 69 
Labour 52; Green Party 9; United Future 8. 
Amendment to the amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Katherine Rich to new clause 10 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 57 in the name of the Hon Steve Maharey be agreed to: 
to omit subparagraph (viii) from subclause (2)(b).
Tisch Lindsay: Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tisch Lindsay: Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17821. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
LINDSAY TISCH (Junior Whip—National) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I might have missed this. I know that earlier on you said that Gordon Copeland’s Supplementary Order Paper amendments were vetoed. Does that relate to his amendments to clause 2 on Supplementary Order Paper 284? I do not know that you covered that clause. You talked about Part 5 and now we are talking about clause 2. I am interested to know whether the veto covered those amendments as well. If not we should be voting on them.
Hunt Jonathan: Corrections Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Hunt Jonathan: Corrections Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:13158] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I want to assure the member that I will give this further consideration and come back on the matter.
Cunliffe David: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Cunliffe David: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13019] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of State) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
.
Hide Rodney: Urgent Debates — Member for TamakiMakaurau—Standing Down as Minister 
Hide Rodney: Urgent Debates — Member for TamakiMakaurau—Standing Down as Minister 
[Volume:621;Page:16239] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 In the interests of openness and transparency I seek leave to table the police caption sheet against John Tamihere. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Motions — Tsunami Boxing Day—Expression of Condolence 
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Motions — Tsunami Boxing Day—Expression of Condolence 
[Volume:623;Page:18150] 
JEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 On behalf of the Green Party I would like to add our tribute to the people of those six countries who have lost their families their homes and in many cases their lives. Our thoughts have been with them ever since Boxing Day. The tragedy reminds us of the enormous forces of nature and of the need to be respectful of them. 
I am very proud as a New Zealander of the efforts ordinary New Zealanders have made to contribute to the aid effort. I am proud of the efforts our Government has made to send aid. 
I just want to tell one little story that I think illustrates the attitude of many New Zealanders to this tragedy. I was rung by a constituent in the Coromandel who said to me: “I’ve just come back with my Indonesian wife. I’ve been over there for a few years. I’ve got a little boat that’s tied up in Java. It’s capable of carrying 2 tonnes of water backwards and forwards along the coast. I want to go back and take water to those people. I know the coast. I know the language. Who can I get in touch with so that I can go and help?”. He had plenty of other things to do in his life but he wanted to put them on hold and go and make a difference. Many many other New Zealanders have felt like that too. I want to pay tribute to all of them.
Brownlee Gerry: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Brownlee Gerry: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18724] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I move  
That the Speaker be recalled 
.
Roy Heather: Wellington City Council (Te Aro Reclamation) Amendment Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Roy Heather: Wellington City Council (Te Aro Reclamation) Amendment Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:618;Page:13870] 
HEATHER ROY (ACT) 
: 
 As a Wellington-based MP I am happy to rise on behalf of the ACT party to speak in favour of this bill and I am pleased that it is getting the support of the entire Committee. In fact it is a case of the sooner the better with this bill. It is terrible that the Wellington City Council has in fact been hamstrung by central government on an issue that is a local one and it is quite right and proper that this bill should come before the House and be passed with a good deal of haste. 
I note that some amendments have been made to the bill since its introduction and Ms Kedgley has just spoken about the Local Government Act and the amendments that have been made in that regard. I think that the Wellington City Council has always been very good at consulting its constituents and there will be change here either with or without the amendments to the Local Government Act pertaining to this bill. I think that the council should be left to go about its business as it thinks fit and selling this piece of land without having to go through hoops as the original Act indicated that it should have to is totally inappropriate. The council should be able to make its own decisions in a democratic process which it has shown itself to be very good at. So I just want to take this short call to express ACT New Zealand’s support of this bill and its hasty passage through the Chamber.
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17929] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That Part 7 as amended be agreed to. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9. 
Part 7 as amended agreed to.
Dunne Peter: Points of Order — Taito Phillip Field—Proxy Vote Personal Explanations—Interjections Privilege—Hon Matt Robson 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dunne Peter: Points of Order — Taito Phillip Field—Proxy Vote Personal Explanations—Interjections Privilege—Hon Matt Robson 
[Sitting date: 21 February 2007. Volume:637;Page:7535. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Last week the House received a report from the Privileges Committee in which the Hon Matt Robson was required to tender an apology to this House and to me. None has been forthcoming to me so far. I just wondered whether one had been delivered to the Speaker’s office and what steps were being taken to ensure that it is actually obtained. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have written to Mr Robson and I am awaiting a reply.
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
Vote: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17940] 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 70 
New Zealand Labour 51; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2. 
Noes 49 
New Zealand National 27; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 9. 
Amendment agreed to.